Does Jesus Really Inform Christians Political Positions?

[Strider324]

More for discussion than debate -

I've recently been in a number of online discussions about the FRFA. Ostensibly, many Christians base their approval of these laws on their 'deeply held religious beliefs'. In the course of these discussions, I began to ask a simple question to those who feel justified in denying services, benefits, rights, whatever, to the LGBT community:

What does Jesus say about it? And I swear, they absolutely will not answer this question - no matter how many times I have asked it. They talk about the homophobia of Paul. Yeah, I get that. Not my question. They talk about the homophobia of the OT. Again, not the question.

Can anyone explain why Christians have absolutely nothing to say when it comes to what their Lord and Savior says about acceptance, related to the FRFA?

[Goat]

More for discussion than debate -

I've recently been in a number of online discussions about the FRFA. Ostensibly, many Christians base their approval of these laws on their 'deeply held religious beliefs'. In the course of these discussions, I began to ask a simple question to those who feel justified in denying services, benefits, rights, whatever, to the LGBT community:

What does Jesus say about it? And I swear, they absolutely will not answer this question - no matter how many times I have asked it. They talk about the homophobia of Paul. Yeah, I get that. Not my question. They talk about the homophobia of the OT. Again, not the question.

Can anyone explain why Christians have absolutely nothing to say when it comes to what their Lord and Savior says about acceptance, related to the FRFA?

It seems to me that many if the issues people bring up as 'strongly held religious beliefs' were not an issue 2000 years ago, and therefore nothing was said, one way or another.

The RFRA's often have some very odd consequences that people just didn't think of.

http://reason.com/blog/2015/04/24/sex-c ... lle-church
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts ... as-passed/

[Starman]

[Replying to post 1 by Strider324]

Why do Christians "have absolutely nothing to say" about your subject?

1. It doesn't matter what is said in answer, you and your atheist friends will
deny, reject, demean, and smear it, without exception.

2. Christians appear to be greatly outnumbered in this forum because of the
vile conduct and intolerance of atheists.

3. The Scriptures say, "Go from the presence of a foolish man."

4. Wisdom exceedeth folly as far as light exceedeth darkness.

5. Demanding that someone do what you order him to do is oppression.
You call such oppression "homophobia." If a Christian went into a bakery or restaurant owned by an atheist, and the atheist said, "We don't serve Christians," the Christian would take his business elsewhere, not throw a hissy fit and file a lawsuit.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 3 by Starman]

Another Moderator will address the rule infraction reported for your post. I respond here as a debater.

Why do Christians "have absolutely nothing to say" about your subject?

Evidently because Jesus said nothing about homosexuality? Rather than openly acknowledge this Christians may prefer to evade and escape – as often happens when honest answers would cast unfavorably on their "arguments" or positions.

Are there any statements attributed to Jesus that specifically refer to homosexuality?

1. It doesn't matter what is said in answer, you and your atheist friends will
deny, reject, demean, and smear it, without exception.

Rather than use that excuse as evasion, provide the chapters and verses in which the words of Jesus condemning homosexuality are quoted.

2. Christians appear to be greatly outnumbered in this forum because of the
vile conduct and intolerance of atheists.

Correction: Vile conduct and intolerance are not permitted in these debates. Each post has an "infraction report" (exclamation point button top right).

3. The Scriptures say, "Go from the presence of a foolish man."

Here it often happens that "a foolish man" leaves of his own accord or violated Forum Rules consistently enough to be suspended or banned. A list of people on Probation, Suspension or Banishment is available at http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... m.php?f=23 Note the distribution of theistic position represented.

4. Wisdom exceedeth folly as far as light exceedeth darkness.

Wisdom is based upon knowledge of the real world.

Folly typically ignores real world conditions and events.

5. Demanding that someone do what you order him to do is oppression.

Religionists take note and refrain from demanding that people do what you order concerning sexuality, marriage, abortion, teaching of creationism, etc.

You call such oppression "homophobia."

That is often the correct term – defined (Merriam Webster) as: "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals". Do you prefer another term that means the same thing?

If a Christian went into a bakery or restaurant owned by an atheist, and the atheist said, "We don't serve Christians," the Christian would take his business elsewhere, not throw a hissy fit and file a lawsuit.

Of course no Christians "throw a hissy fit" when they feel "discriminated against" if not allowed to inflict their religious beliefs where unwelcome. They always just go elsewhere. Right?

[Zzyzx]

.

What does Jesus say about it? And I swear, they absolutely will not answer this question - no matter how many times I have asked it. They talk about the homophobia of Paul. Yeah, I get that. Not my question. They talk about the homophobia of the OT. Again, not the question.

Can anyone explain why Christians have absolutely nothing to say when it comes to what their Lord and Savior says about acceptance, related to the FRFA?

Perhaps the lack of an answer is due to the ABSENCE of statements by (or attributed to) Jesus regarding homosexuality.

Here, from an organization that proclaims that its objective is "Stand to Reason trains Christians to think more clearly about their faith and to make an even-handed, incisive, yet gracious defense for classical Christianity and classical Christian values in the public square" is an Apologetic position.

First, it’s not certain that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality. The Gospel writers didn’t record everything that Jesus said – only what they thought was important to their audience. Indeed, most of what Jesus said (and did) was never written down. John 21:25 says, “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.� It’s possible Jesus did talk about homosexuality, but the Gospel writers didn’t feel it was necessary to include it in their accounts.

Second, it’s clear what Jesus would have said about homosexuality if asked. Jesus was an observant Jew who, like all Jews living under the Old Covenant, was bound by the Mosaic Law. That’s why He often referenced it (e.g. Jesus references the two greatest commandments of the Law in Matthew 22:37, 39). Therefore, if He was asked what He thought about homosexuality, He would have cited the Levitical prohibitions (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13) that unequivocally state that homosexual behavior is a sin.

Third, Jesus did not speak about every immoral behavior. Should we infer that drunkenness, child sacrifice, and neglecting the elderly are appropriate since Jesus never said anything about them either? That’s absurd. Jesus addressed moral issues as they arose in conversation with His disciples, the crowds, and his opponents. Since there were no gay pride parades or organizations defending homosexual behavior at the time, it’s reasonable that Jesus wouldn’t be prompted to address the issue. And as mentioned earlier, not every discussion was documented by the Gospel writers.

Fourth, the argument that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality presumes that the words of Jesus are more authoritative than the words of Scripture elsewhere. But it is the Holy Spirit – God Himself – who inspired all of the Bible, including epistles like Romans, 1 Corinthians, and 1 Timothy where homosexuality is addressed. That means the black letters in the Bible are just as authoritative as the red letters. Moreover, Jesus and the Holy Spirit co-exist in the Godhead and have been in perfect and eternal communion from eternity past. Therefore, we can be confident that Jesus agrees with what the Holy Spirit revealed about moral issues in the Bible.

http://str.typepad.com/weblog/2012/01/d ... ality.html

Bold added to emphasize the weakness of "arguments" presented. "He might have said something but it was not recorded or maybe no one asked – and besides, the words of Jesus aren't more authoritative than other scriptures." (Therefore, the words of Jesus are no more authoritative than those of Paul/Saul – or presumably writers of the Old Testament).

Or, "Don't pay special attention to what Jesus said. He's just one of the crew and others have as much authority."

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 1 by Strider324]

Why do Christians "have absolutely nothing to say" about your subject?

1. It doesn't matter what is said in answer, you and your atheist friends will
deny, reject, demean, and smear it, without exception.

Leaving aside the rest of your post for the moment, let me prove you wrong. Not all his "atheist friends... without exception" will "deny, reject, demean, and smear it," whatever "it" is.

If you mean some of these silly RFP Acts, then you are dead wrong. They are just obvious attempts to appeal to a particular voting block without changing anything. Lets take the Indiana law as signed by the governor:

Indicates that the law related to adjudicating a claim or defense that a state or local law, ordinance, or other action substantially burdens the exercise of religion of a person: (1) does not authorize a provider to refuse to offer or provide services, facilities, use of public accommodations, goods, employment, or housing to any member or members of the general public; (2) does not establish a defense to a civil action or criminal prosecution for refusal by a provider to offer or provide services, facilities, use of public accommodations, goods, employment, or housing to any member or members of the general public; and (3) does not negate any rights available under the Constitution of the State of Indiana. Defines the term provider.

And it should go without saying that some state Act does not override the US Constitution.

As far as I can see this law does nothing except make some people feel good. It doesn't change anything. They can't violate the US or Indiana Constitutions, as much as they might want to. They couldn't before, and they still can't even if their warped idea about what Jesus wants tells them otherwise.

Therefore there is no reason to do or say anything. Nothing has happened except the passage of some empty words to make people who can't read think something they like happened. It gives State politicians a chance to stand up, pound their chests and say "See! See what I did for you!"

[dianaiad]

.

What does Jesus say about it? And I swear, they absolutely will not answer this question - no matter how many times I have asked it. They talk about the homophobia of Paul. Yeah, I get that. Not my question. They talk about the homophobia of the OT. Again, not the question.

Can anyone explain why Christians have absolutely nothing to say when it comes to what their Lord and Savior says about acceptance, related to the FRFA?

Perhaps the lack of an answer is due to the ABSENCE of statements by (or attributed to) Jesus regarding homosexuality.

Here, from an organization that proclaims that its objective is "Stand to Reason trains Christians to think more clearly about their faith and to make an even-handed, incisive, yet gracious defense for classical Christianity and classical Christian values in the public square" is an Apologetic position.

First, it’s not certain that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality. The Gospel writers didn’t record everything that Jesus said – only what they thought was important to their audience. Indeed, most of what Jesus said (and did) was never written down. John 21:25 says, “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.� It’s possible Jesus did talk about homosexuality, but the Gospel writers didn’t feel it was necessary to include it in their accounts.

Second, it’s clear what Jesus would have said about homosexuality if asked. Jesus was an observant Jew who, like all Jews living under the Old Covenant, was bound by the Mosaic Law. That’s why He often referenced it (e.g. Jesus references the two greatest commandments of the Law in Matthew 22:37, 39). Therefore, if He was asked what He thought about homosexuality, He would have cited the Levitical prohibitions (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13) that unequivocally state that homosexual behavior is a sin.

Third, Jesus did not speak about every immoral behavior. Should we infer that drunkenness, child sacrifice, and neglecting the elderly are appropriate since Jesus never said anything about them either? That’s absurd. Jesus addressed moral issues as they arose in conversation with His disciples, the crowds, and his opponents. Since there were no gay pride parades or organizations defending homosexual behavior at the time, it’s reasonable that Jesus wouldn’t be prompted to address the issue. And as mentioned earlier, not every discussion was documented by the Gospel writers.

Fourth, the argument that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality presumes that the words of Jesus are more authoritative than the words of Scripture elsewhere. But it is the Holy Spirit – God Himself – who inspired all of the Bible, including epistles like Romans, 1 Corinthians, and 1 Timothy where homosexuality is addressed. That means the black letters in the Bible are just as authoritative as the red letters. Moreover, Jesus and the Holy Spirit co-exist in the Godhead and have been in perfect and eternal communion from eternity past. Therefore, we can be confident that Jesus agrees with what the Holy Spirit revealed about moral issues in the Bible.

http://str.typepad.com/weblog/2012/01/d ... ality.html

Bold added to emphasize the weakness of "arguments" presented. "He might have said something but it was not recorded or maybe no one asked – and besides, the words of Jesus aren't more authoritative than other scriptures." (Therefore, the words of Jesus are no more authoritative than those of Paul/Saul – or presumably writers of the Old Testament).

Or, "Don't pay special attention to what Jesus said. He's just one of the crew and others have as much authority."

Actually, Z....er....

using your same logical thought train, one cannot claim that He supported the idea of homosexuality, either, since by your own statement, He didn't directly address it.

On the other hand, He DID address marriage: Mark 10: 2-10:

2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
3 And he answered and said to them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorce, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said to them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and join to his wife;
8 And they two shall be one flesh: so then they are no more two, but one flesh.
9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.

10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
11 And he said to them, Whoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, commits adultery against her.
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she commits adultery.


Now, it is true that if I walked to the edge of a river in the middle of a spring thaw runoff, and say that it is 'very full today," I am NOT addressing the idea that it is dry and there's nothing but rocks there, but the one idea does seem to preclude the other.

So, if it can be seen that Jesus did talk about marriage only in terms of male/female, of divorce in terms of male/female, then does He really have to say that marriage doesn't include same sex arrangements?

If Jesus defined marriage as "male/female," why does He need to say "marriage ain't male/male or female/female?"Doesn't that automatically follow, the way it would if He says that the river is full and running high, He doesn't have to say that it ain't dry?

Now...disclaimer...this post is about the logic train going on here, nothing else.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 7 by dianaiad]

That verse could be more talking about procreation in marriage. After all people don't literally join together, but their offspring are exactly half of each. He also does not prohibit other forms of marriage and the question being asked is can a man divorce his wife. It would not be pertinent to address other forms of marriage when the question is so specific.

[Danmark]

On the other hand, He DID address marriage: Mark 10: 2-10:

2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
3 And he answered and said to them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorce, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said to them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and join to his wife;
8 And they two shall be one flesh: so then they are no more two, but one flesh.
9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.

10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
11 And he said to them, Whoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, commits adultery against her.
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she commits adultery.

The key point seems obvious, and the rest is dicta.
The central point Jesus makes is that a man should not divorce his wife for trivial reasons, or more particularly because he's tired of her and wants a new, younger one.

[Zzyzx]

.

using your same logical thought train, one cannot claim that He supported the idea of homosexuality, either, since by your own statement, He didn't directly address it.

Agreed. Words attributed to Jesus do not address homosexuality – either to support or condemn.

On the other hand, He DID address marriage:

Words attributed to Jesus do address M/F marriage and do not address MM/F or M/FF or M/M or F/F marriage. Therefore it would be conjecture to say what his thoughts were regarding any of the latter. He may have opposed or may not have or he may have stated a position and the words were not reported. There is no way to know.