lexxy53

I'm a Christian...but don't agree with everything HELP

20 posts in this topic

So first of all (and I am not trying to be rude here) I would like to say that I am explicitly reaching out to people who are Christians (or Catholics). I am completely fine with anyone of any belief to reply to this, but I would prefer to get some answers from people who share my faith, I hope you understand :)

 

I am Christian. I believe that Jesus died for my sins, and that we must live our lives according to how he set us out to live them. 

 

I have never had any problem admitting that, yes, I suck as a human being, and that we all sin and need forgiveness in our lives, but there are just some things that I cannot agree with.

 

1. Living a homosexual life is a sin

 

Yes, I know being gay isn't a sin. And from what I've asked my pastor about, being in a gay relationship isn't actually a "sin" either, if you remain celibate. Now I can agree with this to a certain extent, in the sense that the majority of people are straight and seems to be the 'natural' inclination. But I just can't come to terms with the fact that living a homosexual life, or gay people marrying can be a sin. (I myself am straight)

 

2. The general role of women

 

Now I am perfectly fine being the traditional type of girly girl who wears her hair long and doesn't join the army, because that's just who I am. But why shouldn't women who want to go into the military be allowed to do so? Also, I don't understand why women shouldn't be allowed to be pastors/elders. Now again, I can accept the fact that men were, 'naturally' made to protect the women (in stature, strength, mentality, etc) but there are always going to be exceptions to this, and does this mean that those women just have to suffer through with this traditionally?

 

Neither of these things really apply to me daily, but what if one day I need to vote for some law about these and will have committed a sin by going with the things that goes against the things in the Bible? And what will I teach my children when they ask about this? Since a parent is responsible before God what they teach the child. I do believe that the Bible is timeless, and that just because we're in a different era, we can use that as an excuse. But I have seen different interpretations (especially on the gay issue) which have shown misinterpretations of translations.

 

This just has been a constant battle inside me, because on one hand I want to stand with whatever God believes to be right which means sometimes doing/believing the thing to do not always being what I myself want, but on the other hand I don't just want to follow blindly, but make decisions of my own accord.

 

Also, I really don't mean to offend anyone by what I'm writing here. These two issues have never wavered my faith because ultimately believing in Jesus is the most important thing and living a faithful live, but these things still burden me greatly and I'd like the answer of some fellow Christians. 

 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you considered that following the bible and following The Christ might, in fact, be two separate things?  Jesus was not furious with the sinners and even with Pilate handing Him over to be crucified.  He was, however, furious with the teachers of the law.  Hell, even IN THE BIBLE, Jesus is quoted to have said on a divorce issue: "Moses told you that because your hearts were hard.  I tell you..."

 

There's a lot more where that came from.  The canonized bible was certainly not constant throughout the common era.  And, for that matter, one need not even mistake translation.  Sometimes, people who don't know a thing about theology often quote things with, *ahem* bad theology.

 

I, for one, think that (*dons armor and shield again, heh*) think that bible inerrancy is nothing more than bible idolatry in disguise.  Lets think about causality here.  Humans were before the bible, period.  Yet, they knew of God and walked and talked with Him AS IT WAS BEING WRITTEN.  Otherwise, the bible would have no accounting of such experiences with Him.  Immediately this implies a changing bible as a logical progression of text most develop until canonization.  Sheesh, even God is before humanity (and as Omega, after humanity too).  Lets stop believing that the bible was nailed to the cross to save us and restore The Significance of The Christ and how He, not the bible, has saved us.  I think the bible can be useful, but it will NEVER be my "personal jesus," heh.

 

Perhaps you might ask Jesus, Himself!  He might actually answer you back like He did all those others you read about in the bible that a lot of inerrant idolators "thump" upon.

 

(*cringes for incoming potentially intense opposition*)

 

=)

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi lexxy!

These are very difficult subjects and I think the Bible can be very misinterpreted if not read carefully. I think is very important to discuss this issue with a pastor or for that matter Catholic priest to see how different or similar they think.

On homosexuality, it is a sin as you said committing homosexual acts as opposed to just being gay; However, only God can judge us and if gays committed homo acts but during their life they were good human beings helping the needy, elderly and so on, then I think they might have a good shot of being forgiven. Now, understand the position of the Church. If they accept homosexuality, than they might open pandora's box for other subjects. The same goes for contraceptive products. The Church doesn't allow the use of condoms for example, but 99% of Catholics use them. If they condone the use of condoms, people might interpret it as it's ok to be promiscuous. It's just a precautionary measure. In California the speed limit is 65 mph but everyone drives 75 or 80 and the police knows this, and yet they allow it to a certain extend. Drivers ask, why can't they set the limit at 75? Because then, everyone will drive 85 or 90 and those are dangerous speeds.

On the roll of women, I'm more traditional when it comes to a woman's job. I like them to work but jobs that will not deviate her from house shores. I read an article that since women joined the workforce such as the business sector like CEOs, etc. Women adultery increased by at an alarming rate. I think a child needs a mother more than a father and I think is better for women to have the men go out and bring home the bacon. It has to be a balance. Extreme on either side of the spectrum is what causes problems. Hope this helped.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's nearly three in the morning over here, and I should be in bed. This is what I get for checking the Forums so late at night, I guess. Now my stubborn little brain won't let me sleep until I reply  :)

 

Okay, let me have a go at answering your questions...

 

 

1. Living a homosexual life is a sin

 

Yes, I know being gay isn't a sin. And from what I've asked my pastor about, being in a gay relationship isn't actually a "sin" either, if you remain celibate. Now I can agree with this to a certain extent, in the sense that the majority of people are straight and seems to be the 'natural' inclination. But I just can't come to terms with the fact that living a homosexual life, or gay people marrying can be a sin. (I myself am straight)

 

 

I agree with the stuff you've mentioned so far - it's definitely not a sin to be gay, nor is it a sin to love someone of the same sex. Heck, we read in the Bible about David, who loves Jonathan more than he loves his wife. That's pretty similar to the Ancient Greeks and their teachings about types of love - they were fine with sexual relationships between the same sex, but they believed that non-sexual, platonic friendship was the highest form of love, because unlike a sexual relationship, you're not really "getting" anything from the other person. You're just with them because you love them, not because of sexual pleasure. (You can, of course, have friendship AND a sexual relationship, but they wouldn't consider that to be any better than a purely platonic friendship)

 

When it comes to sexual relationships between people of the same sex, the Catholic Church's teaching is very consistent. It's just a matter of what sex is for, looking at Natural Law. We're body and soul creatures, and God made us with a design. For example, if someone asked, "Why is getting drunk a sin?" you can answer, "Because God gave us a mind so that we can act rationally, and getting drunk impairs our rationality." Or, "Why is lying a sin?" - "Because God gave us speech for the purpose of communicating truth, and when we lie we're deliberately communicating error." That kind of thing.

 

So Catholics would say that likewise sex was made by God with a purpose - it unites husband and wife in a one flesh union, and does so in a way which is ordered towards the creation of life. That's pretty complex, so to break it down a little...

 

When they have sex, husband and wife become one flesh. That's not just an elegant way of saying that they're physically connected. If you think of the systems in the body (nervous system, digestive system, cardiovascular system etc.) they're all complete in and of themselves. They all act to benefit the person's body and keep them alive. The only exception to this is the reproductive system, which is incomplete and has no benefit to the person at all...until they have sex. When husband and wife have sex, what you get the two halves coming together to make a completed system, which does work, and does benefit them. There's the physical and emotional pleasure, and even physical benefits - for example, we know that there are endorphins in semen which are absorbed into the wife's bloodstream after sex, the husband's body acting to strengthen the wife's just as he strengthens his own body. It's almost as if they're not two creatures any more, but just one - Catholic teaching would say that that's exactly what happens.

 

As for the sexual act itself, it's physically ordered towards the creation of new life. If you look at it, it's literally firing baby-making ingredients into a baby-making factory at high speed (that's my non-Viewer Discretion explanation, I guess). Now, babies don't always get made in these factories - sometimes it's the wrong time of the month for making babies, and sometimes there's something wrong with the factory machinery or the baby-ingredient firing gun (yeah, this analogy's getting weird, I'll stop now). But you can see why the Church teaches what it does about the purpose of sex - that's how the sexual act works. That's how the reproductive organs fit together, and there's an order to it all. The Church's teaching on same-sex sexual relationships being wrong is really just part of a wider teaching - that any sexual act that isn't ordered towards the creation of new life is wrong, regardless of whether it's two men, or two women, or a man and a woman, or whatever.

 

While I don't want to offend anyone here, I think the Catholic Church's teaching (and that of the Orthodox, and a few Protestant denominations) is a lot more consistent than most of the Protestant teachings on this. Most Protestant denominations are fine with married couples using contraception, or with them engaging in sexual acts other than sexual intercourse (I don't need to go into details, you know what I mean). I've yet to hear an explanation of why one is fine, but the other is not. If someone argues that it's wrong for two men to have sex because God intended sex for making babies, then how can they then argue that on the other hand, it's perfectly fine for a husband and wife to engage in the exact same sexual act? I'd say Catholic teaching is pretty consistent here. Even Martin Luther believed that contraception and contraceptive acts were wrong - he calls it "a most disgraceful sin", "far more atrocious than incest and adultery". John Calvin called it "a monstrous thing". Heck, I've never heard Catholic teaching as strongly worded as that...

 

The Church's teaching on same-sex marriage is really just an extension of that. Sex and marriage are intrinsically linked - sometimes you'll hear sex called the "marital act" (which I think is really cute), or sex referred to as "the marriage vows made flesh" (also cute). When you get married, you have to be open to having children, or it's not a valid marriage. Now, you might not be able to have children, but you've got to at least be able to have sex, and do so in a way which is ordered towards procreation. If you told the priest, "We're not open to having kids, and we're going to use contraception when we have sex to stop us from having any", then he won't let you get married, because the Church views such a marriage as being automatically invalid. You might as well tell the priest that you're not going to be faithful to each other, or you're not planning on staying together till death.

 

 

2. The general role of women

 

Now I am perfectly fine being the traditional type of girly girl who wears her hair long and doesn't join the army, because that's just who I am. But why shouldn't women who want to go into the military be allowed to do so? Also, I don't understand why women shouldn't be allowed to be pastors/elders. Now again, I can accept the fact that men were, 'naturally' made to protect the women (in stature, strength, mentality, etc) but there are always going to be exceptions to this, and does this mean that those women just have to suffer through with this traditionally?

 

 

I'm going to recommend this video on why Catholics believe in a male-only priesthood (mainly because if I tried to explain it here, I'd just be repeating the video). This is probably the most thorough explanation I've heard (it's a few years old now, but good arguments don't change, I guess).

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yueYbRsP920

 

As for the military, I'm not sure there's a rule against women being in the military per se. If the situation called for it, women might have to fight in a war (think of Mulan, where she has to step in to save her father's life). A lot of the work that takes place in the military, women could take part in without difficulty. But I think a lot of theologians would argue that it would be rather inappropriate to have women on the front-line killing other human beings. Men are naturally supposed to be protectors, whereas women were made to give life. All women are in a very real sense mothers, even if they never have children. We're mothers to our family members and friends, and we're all called to give spiritual life to others. Therefore, some would argue that it's against the very nature of a woman to be forced to take life. As I said, there are always exceptions to this (the obvious case is in self-defence or defending others), but I'd say that it's certainly more fitting for men to be out on the front-line. But as I said, it's not strictly speaking a rule.

 

Anyway, I hope some of this helps. Most importantly, I'd just suggest taking your questions and whatnot to prayer. Talk to Jesus about it all.

 

(Wow, now it's nearly five in the morning. I talk a lot. I have only myself to blame.)

 

xxx

 

(Link to Martin Luther and John Calvin quotes)

 

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/birth-control

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty similar to the Ancient Greeks and their teachings about types of love - they were fine with sexual relationships between the same sex, but they believed that non-sexual, platonic friendship was the highest form of love, because unlike a sexual relationship, you're not really "getting" anything from the other person. You're just with them because you love them, not because of sexual pleasure. (You can, of course, have friendship AND a sexual relationship, but they wouldn't consider that to be any better than a purely platonic friendship)

 

 

I would debate that.

 

Lexxy, I won't be too long because you didn't ask for answers by non-Christians (which is understandable, given that we're not really qualified to answer :P) but if you're still willing to have them, here are my 2 cents. It sounds like you're having issues with the particular branch or denomination of Christianity you follow. You're clearly a Christian who holds Christian beliefs - what you're questioning is the "smaller" issues (well, I wouldn't call gender roles and homosexuality small, but they're small in comparison to your philosophy on the Divine and how the world came into being). The thing is, different denominations have very different stances on those issues. If you believe that the denomination you follow doesn't hold the right answers, I'd suggest exploring different ones. There are several that don't condemn homosexual relationships or have specific roles for women (here's a few).

 

I'm aware that some people consider such denominations to be non-Christian. Who knows if they're right - as I said, I can't judge. There are many ways of interpreting the Bible and different people will have different opinions on which one is true. Until we die, nobody will ever be 100% whether or not they were right. What matters is to get as close to that 100% as possible. If you feel there's a gap between what you're being told God is telling you and what you feel God is actually telling you, I'd recommend going with your God :) You need to find a denomination that you resonate with, that you believe to be Christian and aligned with what you believe to be God's message. Read the Bible, pray, listen to what other people have to say about those issues, do all those things you usually do when you need spiritual guidance. I hope that helps you find the answers you're looking for :)

 

(Sorry if my answer is too non-Christian, or simply not what you're looking for. I'll stand back now and let the actual Christians discuss!)

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lexxy, CrystalFaerie is definitely on to something. We all need to accept our epistemological limitations as humans. This is why religion gets so contentious - we want to know everything, and we all require less "evidence" to qualify our confidence.

 

As you explore your faith, you may loosen your knots on it, and appreciate the religion more generally.  What is God? How do you know God? Instead of getting wrapped up in all the contentious specifics: What does Christianity teach you about God?

 

When the issue of homosexuality has come up, and people assume I'm a bigot because I go to church, I tell them it's quite the contrary.  Because I am a Christian, I believe God is love. Thus, I am compelled to love everyone with empathy.

 

Empathy is key, and something lost in so much of organized religion. It's very easy to not have empathy for minorities and outgroups.  But I don't believe God is an a-hole, or a bigot. I don't believe God makes people they way they are so they can live in shame and be denied wonderful opportunities. And if anyone tells me that the "real" God deems homosexual relations sinful... I tell them we obviously believe in VERY different God's. Because my God is omnibenevolent.

 

Something to think about...

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for such extensive answers :) I really appreciate you all taking your time. I won't quote each person since I'm a bit short on time but I will reply here briefly. I have given a thought to all of your answers. I personally reject the belief that married couples shouldn't use contraceptives since I believe God gave us sex to also enjoy and celebrate one's love without having children. (Sorry Jegsy! :) ) so I'm sorry but I can't really accept that explanation about the gay sin. (Sorry again Jegsy!). You guys are right though that if people get too caught up in the little details of the Bible and forget the Big Picture we can become slightly shaky which isn't good. I'll pray upon this and hope for some further answers! :) thank you all for your time <3

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on what you know about scripture, do you really deep, down believe that homosexual behavior and women generally acting like men are pleasing to God?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Empathy is key, and something lost in so much of organized religion. It's very easy to not have empathy for minorities and outgroups. But I don't believe God is an a-hole, or a bigot. I don't believe God makes people they way they are so they can live in shame and be denied wonderful opportunities. And if anyone tells me that the "real" God deems homosexual relations sinful... I tell them we obviously believe in VERY different God's. Because my God is omnibenevolent.

Something to think about...

I wish I could like this more than once! My thoughts on this issue can be summed up in this blog post written by a pastor:http://johnpavlovitz.com/2014/09/17/if-i-have-gay-children-four-promises-from-a-christian-pastorparent/

I found his words very moving, and only wish that the same level of tolerance, understanding and love could be shown to all people who feel ostracized by the church because of their sexuality.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes as mentioned this is a very interesting topic and one that must be carefully examined.

I'll try my best to answer your questions

#1

Homosexuality

Now this is gonna be a straight from the bible type answer.

Though I'll try my best to explain as best I know how and as the Holy Spirit leads.

Sex was created by God, as his blessing to us, it was an entirely graceful act.

Genesis 9:7

Being fruitful, ...

In that he still allows us to participate in the act of creation.

That being said I think this is some of disdain that God held against homosexuality.

Because sex was primarily given for the act of creation.

Though in 1 Corinthians 7 the idea is alluded to that sex is also good for the "comfort" of and strength of the marital union.

Now that being said some folks opine that the relationships between Jonathan and David, also Ruth and Naomi were homosexual.

And therefore this justifies the tolerance of homosexual behavior, by that they were part of Christ's bloodline.

Personally, I don't know I mean on the one hand as I stated above sex was created for procreation.

(And enjoyment by married couples)

And sexual sin, though similiar to many other sins is "a bit more significant" as pointed out in 2Corinthians 6:18.

Saying that all other sins are outside the body, and certain words that we've struggled to relate and translate to English.

Or some of us in mainstream "grace-filled" Christianity flat out ignore, some things in scripture are translated an abomination, or intolerable or that the Lord despises.

Yet if it was important enough to God to be called an abomination, shouldn't we as sons and daughters take heed.

Since all scripture is useful for teaching, ... 2 Timothy 3:16 and Isaiah 55:11

Now I'll speak from a human standpoint and "grace-filled" Christian man, who has fallen short of God's commands. Both prior to my birth, original sin and my own collection of sins that Jesus' body was torn for and he hung there upon that rickety old cross for. I can surely say as Paul laments in Romans 3:23 that I am in need of grace and forgiveness.

We all fallen short of God's standard, how much, only God the Judge can ascertain that.

Just as with breaking human law though, say you're driving down a road doing 35 in a 25mph speed zone.

That's breaking the law we would agree and the law reflects such.

Now if you were going 100mph in the same speed zone, the law also says this is breaking the law, correct?

However the penalty is just a 'tad bit more harsh', and we'd agree it should be.

I'll try to touch upon your second question.

First let's remember the culture we're speaking of and the time period(s) most of scripture was written in.

The two ladies I referenced above Ruth and Naomi, as we recall Naomi encourages Ruth to seek a husband as opportunity for widowed women and women in general at the time and in the cultural surroundings were slim at best.

Which I believe contradicts the claims I spoke of above about Naomi and Ruth having a lesbian relationship.

Naomi desired that Ruth should marry, if she were truly in love with her, as a partner she would not have had this desire.

There's another couple reasons, however I digress for the time being.

Also many men like to reference the scripture Paul spoke of in Ephesians about wives being in submission.

In 1 Corinthians 14 Paul states that women should be silent as the law says, correct.

I believe this phrase is taken out of context, as much of scripture is oftentimes unfortunately.

Paul was not as much of a bigot and sexist as the modern feminism movement has made him out to be.

Let's look at some of the women Paul thanks by name for their efforts.

First Lois and Eunice of course, they're Timothy's Mother and Grandmom, no mention of his father, but his grandmom and mother are credited with 'teaching him the scriptures'.

Secondly though of great importance of course is Phoebe, she's credited with hand delivering what many scholars consider to be one of Paul's most trusted letters and a favorite of modern day Christians, the letters to the Christian-jews in Rome.

He also is noted as calling her a deaconess and grateful of her efforts and risk to her own safety in having a church meeting in her own home.

Then there's these two women, from which not a whole lot is known about them, nevertheless they're mentioned which says a lot.

Tryphena, and Tryphosa who's names literally mean dainty and delicate, who were likely our equivalent of the "girly girls".

Yet here they are putting their lives at risk to further the gospel of Christ, being called "hard workers" by Paul in Romans 16.

These are just a few of the examples of the women who are appreciated and thanked by Paul.

God saw fit to use each of the beings he created, without Miriam, could Moses have lead the people out of slavery.

I say emphatically no way!

Why?

Without her taking her brother to the Nile river and waiting there for a suitable adoptive family to find him.

Remember she didn't hop in her convertible VW Golf turbo and take a leisurely ride down the river boardwalk.

She walked by some accounts the equivalent of 50 modern day miles and likely spent quite some time at the river bank.

And what of Mary, mother of Jesus, she was there about in her 2nd trimester and yet she travels on two accounts a distance of about 50 miles likely again walking all the way.

Though our traditional accounts of the "Christmas story" have Mary riding on a donkey with Joseph beside her.

However they were very poor, and if we recount the story of Christ riding into Jerusalem on donkey on that Palm Sunday.

Again he was riding on what, a donkey (or colt) as a triumphal King.

It's unlikely that Joseph a mere carpenter and doctrinal minister could afford such a luxury.

About the women in the military question, I'll try to answer it without taking up too much more of your time.

A woman's womb is the carrier of humanity we agree I'd think.

That being said, a woman can only have about one child per year, though a man (her husband) and remember this is during a time when polygamy was the norm, but you see where I'm going with this.

That the total number of men could decrease whereby the total number of women was a needed constant for the survival of a community/tribe/people/nation.

So during times of war the women, certainly the ones capable of bearing children were closely guarded treasure.

This is simply something, an idea I picked up in a biblical philosophy class.

It something to chew on though, whether you agree or not!

Anyhow enough of my ranting and tangent here, I hope I've answered your questions.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I could like this more than once! My thoughts on this issue can be summed up in this blog post written by a pastor:http://johnpavlovitz.com/2014/09/17/if-i-have-gay-children-four-promises-from-a-christian-pastorparent/

I found his words very moving, and only wish that the same level of tolerance, understanding and love could be shown to all people who feel ostracized by the church because of their sexuality.

This post you linked is beautiful and brilliant. And he makes a perfect point.

It's easy to say "Hate the sin, love the sinner", and feel very righteous. At the end of the day, one is denying someone opportunities because of how they were born - opportunities that matter to them. Whether this be through legal policy or simply the opportunity to be embraced and accepted.

This pastor made a very good point: one should not pray for a gay person in hopes of turning them "normal". It's a disgrace to God's creation.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2. The general role of women

 

why shouldn't women who want to go into the military be allowed to do so? Also, I don't understand why women shouldn't be allowed to be pastors/elders. Now again, I can accept the fact that men were, 'naturally' made to protect the women (in stature, strength, mentality, etc) but there are always going to be exceptions to this, and does this mean that those women just have to suffer through with this traditionally?

 

 

The way I think about this topic of the role of women has been refined through my experiences in life.  I do think the set up for men as protectors and leaders and women being submissive is very doable in an ideal world.  Where men always respect and love their wives just like the bible tells them to.  It would be easy for me to submit to someone like that!  Even natural.  But we don't live in that world.  We live in a world where men hurt women.  And women have to take a stand, be strong, and protect ourselves from harm.  We have to protect ourselves and our children from the very men that God designed to love and protect and lead us.  In God's ideal world and heaven, these things apply.  But in our fallen world, they don't unless you find a God-fearing man.  But, God understands we are not in his originally designed ideal world (before eve ate the apple).  God gives us women great strength, great intuition, and feistiness!  I believe we have to follow our own heart, our own spirit, if we want to serve in the army, we should!  We live in a world where we overcome, we fight for life.  God wouldn't put us in a situation where women have no rights.  God is not an oppressor, he is a refuge for the oppressed.

 

I've also noticed that we tend to pick on statements in the bible (such as not getting a divorce).  I stayed married for FIVE YEARS because of this very fact.  Because I am a christian and want what God wants!  I was getting abused!!  But the pastors I talked to said the bible says stay married (and it does!)  But I came to a profound realization that this sort of marriage, the bible does not support, even though the bible does not explicably spell it out.  The bible talks about LOVE, and abuse is not love.  The bible tells husbands to love their wives.  So if they say, "I love you" does that mean they do?  Abuse is not love.   We all have a spirit inside of us.  We can follow our own spirit, it will not direct us wrong!  Because it is the spirit God gives us.  If something in the bible isn't sitting right with you, pray about it!  Sometimes you have to make overriding decisions that only you and God know about.  If you are a warrior AND a woman, I believe God will allow you and want you to fulfill your dreams and fight for our country or fighting for any passionate drive you have.  God plants those in our hearts as well. 

 

God doesn't want us to have a spirit of perfectionism.  "If I am a perfect christian, I'll have special honor in heaven."  That is not what Jesus taught AT ALL, but that's what us Christians do.   We aim for perfection, instead of love.

 

My two cents on Christianity.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. The general role of women

 

Now I am perfectly fine being the traditional type of girly girl who wears her hair long and doesn't join the army, because that's just who I am. But why shouldn't women who want to go into the military be allowed to do so? Also, I don't understand why women shouldn't be allowed to be pastors/elders. Now again, I can accept the fact that men were, 'naturally' made to protect the women (in stature, strength, mentality, etc) but there are always going to be exceptions to this, and does this mean that those women just have to suffer through with this traditionally?

 

 

I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Women are allowed to join all branches of the military (at least in America. I have no idea what your nationality is), but they have to meet certain standards - physical, mental, etc. The standards are not discriminatory, but if they're not met, you don't even make it to Basic Training. If you're talking personality wise, then you can still be a girly girl. But once you are in uniform, you are supposed behave accordingly and that goes for men as well. If you are talking about it women on the battlefield, well men & women in uniform largely disagree with the idea of women on the frontlines just on the physical limitations alone. That's not to say there are women doing things such as being a tank crew member (which is cool). Here is the list of jobs available for women in the military:

http://militaro.com/army-jobs-for-women/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your concerns may seem difficult to you. A Christian should be always growing in their walk with God. I'm not going to debate these issues, I think you already know the answers. You have to put your faith and trust in God. Just like a good parent knows what is best for their children. Now God is infinite times more good and is sovereign. It's about changing yourself to conform to God not trying to have God conform to you.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

homosexuality forbidden romans 1 : 26& 27

 

... for this reason God gave them over to degrading passions. their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. Likewise their men.. receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bible is the absolute word of God. If you reject God's word, then you are a rejecter.

If you accept everything the Bible says but live your own way knowing it isn't what God wants you to do, then you are a sinner.

 

I'm not trying to insult you. But if you really believe in Jesus and you don't agree with God's words, then you are a sinner, if you reject any verse in the Bible as a Christian, then you are a cultural Christian who only follows the doctrines that you think are right. If your thoughts contradict with God's words, then you believe that either:

 

- the Bible is not entirely the word of God

- or that Jesus is a prophet of some entirely different religion that became lost around the time of his death

 

You should tell your children that you either decide to live your own way despite believing in the 'truth', or that you don't accept several verses in the Bible if it really comes down to it. Because when your child grows up, he/she can consider you a liar and may lose complete faith in Christianity after reading about the truth in the Bible.

 

About the male/female differences:

testosterone is what makes a man a man, it is what makes a man grow muscles and a strong mentality in times of need such as war. Men are thus better at: combating, physical work, surgery, mine-working, truck driving.

 

estrogen is what makes a woman a woman, it is what makes the woman; being able to have a child, to be passionate and emotional. Women are thus better at: child-care, psychology, therapy, interviewing, etc.

 

Being a man or woman does not make you better in a job than the opposite. Women are just more nurturing and this affects the job they choose. For example, during the war on independence my great-grandmothers grabbed a gun and died on the battlefield for my country. In times of need a woman knows to grab a gun.

And during the Greek invasion of Cyprus, they beheaded every male member from my family (my father's cousin) and left the women alone.

 

A woman can as perfectly be a soldier as a man. It's just that men are more in number due to the fact that they have more testosterone than women.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bible is the absolute word of God. If you reject God's word, then you are a rejecter.

If you accept everything the Bible says but live your own way knowing it isn't what God wants you to do, then you are a sinner.

 

I'm not trying to insult you. But if you really believe in Jesus and you don't agree with God's words, then you are a sinner, if you reject any verse in the Bible as a Christian, then you are a cultural Christian who only follows the doctrines that you think are right. If your thoughts contradict with God's words, then you believe that either:

 

- the Bible is not entirely the word of God

- or that Jesus is a prophet of some entirely different religion that became lost around the time of his death

 

You should tell your children that you either decide to live your own way despite believing in the 'truth', or that you don't accept several verses in the Bible if it really comes down to it. Because when your child grows up, he/she can consider you a liar and may lose complete faith in Christianity after reading about the truth in the Bible.

 

 

God gives us brains and two feet to walk our own journeys and to make our own choices and interpretations.  We are free beings, and that's how God created us.   Life is meant to be lived.  You sound like a christian robot to me and certainly not leading with love but by doctrine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God gives us brains and two feet to walk our own journeys and to make our own choices and interpretations.  We are free beings, and that's how God created us.   Life is meant to be lived.  You sound like a christian robot to me and certainly not leading with love but by doctrine. 

 

I'm not arguing about that. All I was trying to say is, isn't Christianity meant to follow every rule as described in the Bible if you say you are a Christian? Love is part of humanity in the first place, it's hard to think of a religion who does not want love, harmony and peace, I never made any reference about love in the first place. The real question is, what is the truth? Do you accept it or not?

I'm not even a religious person I don't believe in any verse of any religious book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to ask yourself if you honestly believe that the Bible is God's Word and every single sentence in it is from God and not man-made. If you believe it's from God, then do you feel that it's actually possible to not agree with something from God? If you believe it's man-made, then would that make it easier for you to disagree with something in the Bible?

 

I also advise you to talk with Christian scholars and learn as much about your religion as you possibly can far and beyond just Sunday school curriculum.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you find out homosexuality is wrong/right. What does that have to do with God's commandment to love one another?

 

You still treat them with love and respect. When the country tries to pass laws that hurt or reject them, you fight against it. When they tell you in happiness that they got married, you congratulate them. When they're sad because they're going through a break-up, you buy them a tub of ice cream or buy them a drink. When their parents disown them because they came out, you comfort them.

 

If homosexuality is seen as a sin and goes hand in hand as an excuse to be unloving, than it's better to be wishy-wishy and loving.

 

For the women thing, read up on Galatians 3, particularly verses 23-29. That is the best case scenario; the Utopia version of society which you'll be hard-pressed to find on Earth. And because their society doesn't exist and culture is so different from ours, I believe that's where people start seeing contradictions (don't quote me on that tho).

 

But if you can't find answers, there is the thing Jesus said how everything in the Bible is tied to loving God and others (Matthew 22:37-40). If any explanation violates that, then it's pretty damn likely it's not a part of Christianity.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now