Jump to content

Why I chose my LGBTQ daughter over the Evangelical Church


DKW 86

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, homersapien said:

That's a hell of a way to show your love.  :no:

So, if your son or daughter abandons their  children and souse, goes off with another person, that is okay? You going to love the  sin she/he committed? I sure we would all love our child, but hate what they have done and the damage it has created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply
20 minutes ago, homersapien said:

That's a hell of a way to show your love.  :no:

You can't conceive of any situation where someone you love is involved in something that you believe to be harmful to them and/or others, something you can't agree with morally, or some such and yet you choose to love them anyway?  Do you believe that to love someone you must affirm and accept every belief, behavior, or way of living they engage in (and conversely that if you cannot accept those beliefs, behaviors or ways of living, you must also hate them as a person?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HVAU said:

I think we may need to shut the Political boards down lest we all end up eternally damned the subterranean lake of fire.

Might not be a bad idea.👿🚒

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

For some, it would be. The church I came from years ago has or had many strange "man imposed" beliefs.

1) All females had to wear dresses in the building. in the early 90s when i first attended, they had ushers that would walk a woman wearing jeans, slacks, pantsuit out to the car. No BS. They have since changed all that but now I work with a church that is actively seeking those that were damaged by those crazy churches and getting them back into a real loving church. 

2) Smoking, drinking, a skirt with even a modest 2-3 inch slit in it was enough to get you dragged in front of the pastor. 

3) Mandatory tithing. This included a visit with the staff with your W2s in hand and reconciliation of your giving record.

There are those churches out there that are this crazy.  

 

There are indeed.  I grew up on Navy bases overseas, and while my parents profess to be Christian (as does the rest of my family), my sisters and I were never made to attend church services.  When Dad retired from the Navy and brought us "home" to southwest Georgia, we were promptly swarmed by well-intentioned neighbors who wished to invite us to their church.  The two large local Baptist churches were basically as you describe.  My first thought on encountering such a thing as a teen in the early 90's was:  "why would people ever willingly subject themselves to this?"  The air of the place reminded me more of detention in school than it did anything associated with the word fellowship.  A message of love and salvation does not resonate very well when the environment has the aura of a prison.  I was a long-haired dude with earrings, that talked like a yankee, and listened to the Devil's music.  I was not welcomed at all.  I cannot imagine what it would have been like had I happened to be gay too.

I would not blame my rejection of Christianity exclusively upon such churches, but they were definitely a contributing factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Strychnine said:

 

I would not blame my rejection of Christianity exclusively upon such churches, but they were definitely a contributing factor.

Churches don't create Christians. Professing Jesus and accepting Him into your life does........and changes your life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screen Shot 2019-01-09 at 12.59.43 PM.png

You know at some point, you should 'put up or shut up'.  This weak sauce where you just give kudos or facepalms but never have to articulate a thoughtful response has run its course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And for the record, this is a choice icanthearyou has made for going on two years, not any sort of restriction on his posting imposed by me or anyone else here.  He was suspended for a day back in April 2017 for taking personal shots at me instead of putting forth arguments in a thread.  When he did it again after I told him to knock it off, I issued a warning and gave him a day off.  He got in a snit about it and decided not to acknowledge the warning and just emojis his way through the forums now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

And for the record, this is a choice icanthearyou has made for going on two years, not any sort of restriction on his posting imposed by me or anyone else here.  He was suspended for a day back in April 2017 for taking personal shots at me instead of putting forth arguments in a thread.  When he did it again after I told him to knock it off, I issued a warning and gave him a day off.  He got in a snit about it and decided not to acknowledge the warning and just emojis his way through the forums now.

 

Back when he did post, personal shots were not his general method of responding.  I am having a hard time imagining the kind of thread that would have gotten you two to that point.  What was it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Strychnine said:

 

Back when he did post, personal shots were not his general method of responding.  I am having a hard time imagining the kind of thread that would have gotten you two to that point.  What was it?

Here 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and for the life of me, I really can't understand why it bothers people so much. It's pretty benign. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, HVAU said:

have you studied the manner in which the books of the Bible were written and assembled/unified?

I have, at an academic level. What are you getting at? 

Please note: My inquiry is genuine. I am not looking to throw "jabs." I do enjoy these discussions in a civil manner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Strychnine said:

Back when he did post, personal shots were not his general method of responding.  I am having a hard time imagining the kind of thread that would have gotten you two to that point.  What was it?

It was on abortion.  And I agree, it was not his general method of responding, which made it all the more surprising and disappointing.  But I am not in the habit of suspending anyone simply for disagreeing with me on an issue.  I will discuss and debate anyone willing to engage on an issue, no matter how much of a hot potato it is.  Ask homersapien or AUDub because we've had some doozies over the years.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AUDub said:

...and for the life of me, I really can't understand why it bothers people so much. It's pretty benign. 

I believe this is the first time I've said anything about it and he's been doing it for just shy of two years now.  But today I just decided to call him out on it.  At some point you need to do more than smirk your disapproval and put forth something resembling a considered thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I have, at an academic level. What are you getting at? 

Please note: My inquiry is genuine. I am not looking to throw "jabs." I do enjoy these discussions in a civil manner. 

Think what he's getting at is that many evangelicals/Christians (and from other faiths too) don't understand how their religious texts truly came to be in the first place.  Like you, I love the academic side of different religions.  Find it fascinating.  But it's arguable that those pursuits have also pulled me away from having any religious beliefs whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Think what he's getting at is that many evangelicals/Christians (and from other faiths too) don't understand how their religious texts truly came to be in the first place.  Like you, I love the academic side of different religions.  Find it fascinating.  But it's arguable that those pursuits have also pulled me away from having any religious beliefs whatsoever.

Always sorry to hear that from anybody. I'm not a preacher but John 3:16 is a pretty clear beginning. Hard to dispute the words of Jesus himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I have, at an academic level. What are you getting at? 

Please note: My inquiry is genuine. I am not looking to throw "jabs." I do enjoy these discussions in a civil manner. 

The books were compiled by various people or people's to serve various  functions, sometimes more historical, sometimes more legal and sometimes specifically spiritual.  Many of the books are represented, at surface level, to have been written by a specific person, which was often not the case.  Often books were written many years after the events which they described by people that were not present.  Dfferent versions of the same books exist as well.

Just which books are accepted as belonging to the sacred canon also varies significantly.  Some of the canonization processes leading to the Christian version of the book Bible been viewed as having political consideration as well as spiritual.

What I'm getting at is making the claim that one's sacred text is the one true word of God, even from the divinely inspired perspective, becomes tenuous when the manner in which the canon was compiled is considered.  That tenuous status increases when one considers the other people claiming, just as vehemently, that their book, not the Bible, is the one true word.  

More to the point of the thread, maybe people should back off from their damnation talk, because faith does not covey some provable wisdom of the afterlife.  None have a knowledgeable authority in that subject.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, HVAU said:

The books were compiled by various people or people's to serve various  functions, sometimes more historical, sometimes more legal and sometimes specifically spiritual.  Many of the books are represented, at surface level, to have been written by a specific person, which was often not the case.  Often books were written many years after the events which they described by people that were not present.  Dfferent versions of the same books exist as well.

Just which books are accepted as belonging to the sacred canon also varies significantly.  Some of the canonization processes leading to the Christian version of the book Bible been viewed as having political consideration as well as spiritual.

What I'm getting at is making the claim that one's sacred text is the one true word of God, even from the divinely inspired perspective, becomes tenuous when the manner in which the canon was compiled is considered.  That tenuous status increases when one considers the other people claiming, just as vehemently, that their book, not the Bible, is the one true word.  

More to the point of the thread, maybe people should back off from their damnation talk, because faith does not covey some provable wisdom of the afterlife.  None have a knowledgeable authority in that subject.

 

John 3:16 was a direct quote of Jesus and in essence confirmed by the disciples from being with him first hand. The choices are simple........choose death as the end or live for eternity with God. I sincerely hope you reconsider your choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Always sorry to hear that from anybody. I'm not a preacher but John 3:16 is a pretty clear beginning. Hard to dispute the words of Jesus himself.

I'm not here for a theological discussion, but many of the church's foundational teachings have roots in ancient Egyptian religions and pagan thought (including the virgin birth).  It's pretty fascinating stuff.  I've read the Bible.  I grew up in the church and know the teachings well.  I just also understand that there have been many religions before Christianity and many others that came along around the same time as well.  We'll never know which is right while on this earth.  That's why it's called faith :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

I'm not here for a theological discussion, but many of the church's foundational teachings have roots in ancient Egyptian religions and pagan thought (including the virgin birth).  It's pretty fascinating stuff.  I've read the Bible.  I grew up in the church and know the teachings well.  I just also understand that there have been many religions before Christianity and many others that came along around the same time as well.  We'll never know which is right while on this earth.  That's why it's called faith :)

How many new ones since Jesus came and gave a simple path. Yes you still have to have faith but I had rather have faith and be wrong than to be wrong for sure. Having spent most of my life with NASA  I am swayed as much by what we can now see billions of years in the universe as I am by the written word. All that didn't happen by chance IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HVAU said:

More to the point of the thread, maybe people should back off from their damnation talk

I can get on board with you there  HV. I have never been comfortable with or felt anyone should judge another as going to hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

John 3:16 was a direct quote of Jesus and in essence confirmed by the disciples from being with him first hand. The choices are simple........choose death as the end or live for eternity with God. I sincerely hope you reconsider your choice.

So says the Bible, but not everyone believes the Bible is the one true word of God, and so far the only reason to accept it as such presented in this discussion has been because the Bible says so.  In other words "the Bible is the truth because the Bible says it is the truth."  Hopefully you can see the error the logic of that argument, and I'm certain you wouldn't accept such an argument from somebody of another faith.

I'm not advocating abandoning your faith, I certainly would not.  I'm simply recommending that we recognize the hubris we are applying when we claim we know divine truths that grant us authority to condemn others to eternal pain and anguish for violating a social norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

And for the record, this is a choice icanthearyou has made for going on two years, not any sort of restriction on his posting imposed by me or anyone else here.  He was suspended for a day back in April 2017 for taking personal shots at me instead of putting forth arguments in a thread.  When he did it again after I told him to knock it off, I issued a warning and gave him a day off.  He got in a snit about it and decided not to acknowledge the warning and just emojis his way through the forums now.

Seems pretty harmless to me. I regularly get the "face slap" from a few, totally predictable posters. I just ignore it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Seems pretty harmless to me. I regularly get the face slap from a few predictable posters. I just ignore it.

I am actually curious to hear ICHY's perspectives, but I also appreciate that every participant here has a unique online persona.  ICHY is the hermit quietly mumbling his discontent when he feels so compelled.  That's not so bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...