Christian Effectiveness
What is more influential, a "peaceful walk of protest" or the argument of this article? What is more likely to impact our governing officials? What is more respectful to this particular interest group (ie. the gay community)? What is better received by the secular public? WWJD?
posted by Vailgirl @ 12:56 p.m.
10 comments
10 Comments:
I'm curious to know where you got that article (ie: is it from a web-site or a published source?)
I don't know what the answer is to your question though cuz I still wrestle with it myslef. Apparently there's an "anti-gay rally" tomorrow downtown (as my school friends call it) (aka: rally for traditional marriage)
When they were telling me about it I found it hard to feel for either side really. Guess I'm just plain sick of the whole thing. Both sides have good and bad points; both sides have flawed reasoning.
Regardless of what happens politically, God's definition of marriage will never change. Jen
I aggree with you Jen, but I am always questioning I guess "the means" christians use.
Rachel Marsden is a writer for United Press International Editorials. She states extreme right-wing viewpoint. I got the article off her website. I just thought it was an interesting take on the stance the church is taking.
Very true and humbling Marc, Thank you! Jen
Well honestly I don't see why Christians cant' use a 'march' for something they believe in. Homosexuals do it too, don't they? Gay pride and all that? I didn't take part in it, but some people I respect did, and it sounded like it didn't go too badly. Some opposition showed up, but that's to be expected. I mean, I don't think the Christians had blowhorns or were demeaning anyone by being there, so I don't see the harm in it.
As Caroline alluded to, the march was considered by the public as an "anti-gay" march even if it was technically "pro-marriage". As much as the church community says the march is pro-something, they can't hide the fact that it is against a certain group of people and predujust. Regardless how "peaceful" the march is it is still an attack on a sector of man kind where the gay marches are celebrating their difference from the norm of society. Sometimes I think christians forget that as much as they may try and justify actions as "politically correct", society isn't going to see it the same way. I guess this is just another form of predujust, but maybe christians should be more aware of societies perception when planning their protesting activities.
I wonder how many people on that march have close friends or relatives that are homosexual. I know my stance on the christian viewpoint of homosexuality has changed drastically because of having gotten to know people with non-conventional sexual orientation. I aggree with Marc in that I hate the sin (as any other sin) and love the sinner. I just hope that I have portraied Jesus love to the gay community without compromising my christian beliefs. I am not saying I have it all figured out, but it hurts me to think of how the church has alread hurt the homosexual community so much!
Regardless Rachel Marsden's reputation, I wonder how true her point is that it is the liberals who are pushing for the new marriage law, and not the gay community.
A few more points:
I know my Christian friends still love me and don’t treat me any differently when I sin (even though I am not even remorseful about it most of the time). So how is the sin of homosexuality any different?
A lot of people on the “pro-marriage” walk would say that they love the sinner, but are their actions really demonstrating that?
I think it is really sad that in discussing my perspective of homosexuality with non-Christians, I usually have to disagree with the churches actions towards the gay community in order to get anyone to even hear my perspective. Basically I have to separate myself from the church to discuss a Christ-like viewpoint. Seems a little oxymoronic, doesn’t it? Every piece of predigest anti-gay propaganda that is inserted into the church bulletin makes me want to hurl. They are all so hypocritical and filled with discrepancy. I don’t think it is good enough any more for Christians to justify their actions by hiding behind a few verses in the bible and expect everyone to see their viewpoint. How is the church showing love to the gay community (if they are at all)? Wouldn’t having a loving presence within the community go a lot further? Shouldn’t the focus be more on mending the relationship then continuing to tear it apart?
Well, I posted a comment yesterday morning but it seems it got lost in internet-land! I'll try to reproduce my thoughts but I don't think they'll be nearly as forceful as they were yesterday.
Jen: your comment is the most profound statement I've heard in this whole debate. Very nice!
"Love the sinner hate the sin"–>I HATE this phrase! While in my christian infancy this was the phrase that I heard used for EVERY issue that was hard to deal with and that people didn't want to deal with. It's supposed to be the key to the whole issue but it's fraught with inconsistency and stupidity. Alone it makes perfect sense, right? However, in context it's completely awful. We are all sinners, right? No matter how hard we try we will never be perfect while on this earth so why is it that we use this phrase only when we can't figure out why homosexuals do what they do or why the murderer committed that heinous act or why the teenager got herself pregnant? Although it's meant to be a phrase of love and acceptance it really is a phrase of judgment and superiority!
Why do we single out the obvious sins like this? I would submit that it is the more silent sins – slander, lies, judgment, superiority, gluttony, etc - that are the more dangerous! Think about it. The obvious sins, people have no choice but to face what they're doing whereas the not so obvious can be hidden for a long time if we are clever enough and not dealt with and wreak havoc in silent but effective and very destructive ways.
Anyway, that's my beef with this whole issue. I think that the opposite of what I just said is true too - the silent witness can be the most powerful and effective force of change. However, I can understand the struggle that exists within the church in terms of saying something vs not saying anything. It would look bad if churches said nothing at all since the church is supposed to stand strong in the face of immorality in this world. It's just a shame that the voice that's heard the most because it's the loudest is the one that is the most out of touch.
By the way, in North America, just because people don't like your message and the public paints your message black DOES NOT mean you are being persecuted for Christ. I really don't think that what Christians face in NA can really be called persecution when "christianity" in its many forms comprises the majority here. (Just another beef: the whole, "we're being persecuted so our message must be right so let's keep on shouting out about the sinfulness of homosexuality"--UGH!)
So is homosexuality a sin or isn't it? It frustrates me when Christians are so 'gray'... sometimes things are just black and white, and when we make all these gray areas we just confuse people. Being gay is WRONG, according to Christian belief. That's it. And if the church wants to show the community what it thinks in a peaceful way, I don't see a problem with that. Now, I know the church has its own sins, but aren't we supposed to love it anyway? And the 'church' is basically made up of sinful people who don't have it all together, so you can't expect them to do everything right all the time. If the church wants to make their beliefs known, they have to risk offending someone... because it's inevitable. You can't please everyone ALL the time.
And as far as Gay Pride march not offending anyone because they're 'celebrating' rather than 'condemning'... that's BS. That march is very offensive to some people out there, don't delude yourself. I'm not saying they shouldn't do it, but like I said before - you can't please everyone all the time.
I just read a fictional christian novel with alot of truths in it... it dealt with secular humanistic terms and antichristian attitudes that twist eg. prolife into antiabortion. There is an ungodly adjenda out there that you deal with daily so Ican appreciate the sruggle you have but marrige definition change is over the line and needs to be defended .Love the sinner but not the sin...have you gay relationship but don't change the law and our future society for the worse for your children. yeah sin is sin but there is still a moral sense of adultery and ther isn't marches for people going around cheating on each other ...or you don't have gluttonous people lobbing there mp's to change the caloric count of food... let's not ignore and try to change facts and history as there are movements about so that we can't learn from past mistakes and be wise...by the way the auther is Randy Alcorn
Post a Comment
<< Home