Tolerance is another one of those words that through misuse or over-simplification of usage has suffered greatly in this modern age.
What does tolerance mean to you?
Well, according to the media, one is either tolerant of homosexuals : never questioning their acts, never considering that they may be wrong or may have difficulty producing offspring, never denying that we are all inherently homosexual, etc. or you are intolerant: homophobic: in complete and utter, irrational, fear of homosexuals.
Regarding religion you are either tolerant: accepting that all religious viewpoints have exactly the same validity and that it doesn't even matter what you believe at all so long as you are happy! or you are intolerant: believing that Christians should be fed to the lions, that Jews should be blown up for daring to live on their own land, that all Moslems are terrorists, that God is dead, that there is no God, that no one should be allowed to speak in a religious way unless they are being given last rites before being executed for same and/or believing that your way is so all far absolutely right that it completely stripped other people of the power to believe in anything other than what is filth and lies unless they come groveling to you and accepting conversion. Those are the choices!
Let's look at the definitions of those words, though, vis a vis our good friends at Merriam Webster Online:
tolerant:
1 : inclined to tolerate; especially : marked by forbearance or endurance
tolerate:
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -at·ed; -at·ing
Etymology: Latin toleratus, past participle of tolerare to endure, put up with; akin to Old English tholian to bear, Latin tollere to lift up, latus carried (suppletive past participle of ferre), Greek tlEnai to bear
1 : to endure or resist the action of (as a drug or food) without serious side effects or discomfort : exhibit physiological tolerance for
2 a : to allow to be or to be done without prohibition, hindrance, or contradiction b : to put up with
intolerant:
1 : unable or unwilling to endure
2 a : unwilling to grant equal freedom of expression especially in religious matters b : unwilling to grant or share social, political, or professional rights :
and just for fun:
phobic: see phobia
phobia:
: an exaggerated usually inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of objects, or situation
homophobia:
Function: noun
: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals
Now, here's a fine pickle: if someone is in fear or aversion of homosexuals to a significant degree but they are religious, is it lawful to say that they are homophobic? Isn't that a form of religious intolerance to make that statement? Maybe it's the path they chose and if all paths are fine to take, then homophobia is a-okay with all other persons who wish to also be given their freedoms. Right?
Sure, except that makes no sense at all, just like a lot of P.C. behavior!
Here is the truth: To be intolerant is not to be phobic, though to be phobic is to be intolerant. It's a matter of degree. You go "Oh I love green peas." and I go "Oh man, they make me hurl. I cannot sit here with you while you eat them." and ta da!: I am now intolerant. Does it mean I think the green peas are secretly planning on attackng me in the bathroom and inserting themselves into me through whatever orifice they can access? No it does not! If it did, I would be phobic!
The word homophobia doesn't even make sense, by the way: animals are homophobic: they are in fear of man! An alleged homophobe is not in fear of man; they are in fear of being seen in a bad light, being rejected by God, admitting their own desires and giving in or discipling themselves further so as not to give in.
The key word is "irrational" and it applies to the rest: irrational fear, irrational discrimination. If you don't want your children to be homosexual and you discourage other children who are homosexual from being alone with them, it is not irrational: it's good common sense. It's the same good common sense a parent would hopefully use in regards to anyone who might be sexually attracted to their children. It's irrational if you stalk them in school and demand they keep their gaze towards the ceiling at all times so that they don't inadvertantly catch a glimpse of your child's leg.
Why is that irrational? We've seen your child! No one wants it now, no one will be sexually attracted later! It's a face only a mother could love on that one, so, if you are a man, congratulations: you've been outed: report to the clinic: your surgery is scheduled for 10:15 AM tomorrow!
No, that's not why! Come on: you know why! But even so it could be irrationally overprotective and not really homophobic at all. Maybe this parent would demand the same from any overtly heterosexual person of the opposite sex that happened to be in the locker room.
Why isn't the label "homophobe" related to men who want sex changes? Or homosexuals who fear their true nature, having been born with genitalia that is fit for using with genitalia of the opposite sex to produce offspring?
To assume that someone is intolerant because they do not like something, is only fair, at all, if you assume that intolerant is okay to be. Otherwise you are exhibiting a phobia related to people having freedom of choice and self expression
Tolerance doesn't mean "blindly accepting it all and never having your own opinion" and intolerance does not mean " blindly rejecting all of a person or religion based on the parts you find nasty and always insisting on your own way without allowing other people their rights".
Am I tolerant of other people's religions and sexual choices: yes I am. Because I know that they are there, these choices, and not everyone is going to make the same choice. It's life, the way it is, right now. I will work with homosexuals, Christians, Moslems, and occasionally homosexual Christians or homosexual Moslems in my life time, more than likely. They are all people and will be treated as such.
Am I intolerant? Yes I am. I am unwilling to endure some people's viewpoints, overt displays of mostly any sort of sexuality at all, racism, ignorance, or arrogance.But no, I'm not: I'm quite willing that all people have the same rights under the laws. But not because they are, or are not, homosexual or what have you! But, because each one of them is a person whom God saw fit to allow to have flesh, to give oxegyn to, to allow to eat his food, etc. and it's not my place to choose to treat them any differently than He gives example!
Most people are a mixture of tolerance and intolerance: that's not a bad thing: unless you let it carry you away!
Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)
|
|
read more blogs!
|
Blogs by HopelesslyHopeful:
|
|
missalex
|
May 4 @ 1:24AM
|
|
|
Tolerance is another word for avoidance, just my opinion.
|
|
sparechange64
|
May 4 @ 1:46AM
|
|
inevitably, there will be a million levels of tolerance versus intolerance
Most people prefer NOT-TO-BE forced to accept levels of tolerance out of their comfort zone - especially to be legislated ... forget who said it "You can't legislate morality" ...
however, even those who say you cannot legislate morality are in reality attempting to do just that-- legislate their morality. But, can you legislate morality? Of course you can. Our laws legislate morality every day. The question is not if morality can be legislated but whose morality will be legislated?
In his book, Original Intent, David Barton writes:
"The Founders believed the Bible to be the perfect example of moral legislation and the source of what they called, ‘the moral law.’ For nearly 150 years, the Courts relied on that moral law as the basis for our civil laws."
The Founding Fathers specifically chose a constitutional republic that has morality and religion as its basis. According to the Founders, and their chosen law book, Blackstone’s Commentaries, all human laws had to be checked first to make sure they were not in contradiction to God’s law, or as they called it, Divine Law:
(I know I'll get crucified for this one but ... ) homosexuality - whole other topic ... but scientifically (chemically) and/or psychologically a disease and Biblically (no matter what version) wrong ... but ... whole other topic ...
So ... while I agree that tolerance and intolerance should be practiced in regards to being sensitive to others ... doesn't mean I have to become best friends with it
|
|
canadianbbw
|
May 4 @ 2:14AM
|
|
Hi Hopelessly,
you have a sharp mind.
The way is to always ask questions, in my view..and the Lord (yes I believe in a Lord of us all) always says, "Ask me".
Tolerance to me means acceptance....if I tolerate you or your message or behaviour, I am, essentially, accepting you (meaning the general "you").
It does not mean agreeing...but...if need be, agreeing to disagree.
Tolerance...I take you as you are.
It is a practice that can prove very difficult....but tests OURSELVES and our capacities more than it says anything about another.
I have no issue with homosexuality, nor do I believe does God. Just my opinion.
Tolerate...I take you as you are.
As a former addict, it also has a baser meaning...that something about me (in this case, my body), can take this much..carry this much, proceed with this much.
|
|
sparechange64
|
May 4 @ 3:32AM
|
|
|
canadian - make no mistake that the Bible speak often about the WRONG of homosexuality ... GOD DOES NOT APPROVE
|
|
canadianbbw
|
May 4 @ 3:37AM
|
|
|
Yes, I'm fully aware of what you believe, thanks.
|
|
canadianbbw
|
May 4 @ 3:51AM
|
|
You know ...I apologize....I am sorry for that comment, forgive me.
Obviously I don't agree...but you have your beliefs....
you caught me at a weak moment.
No hard feelings please, and God bless
|
|
RomanticLibra106
|
May 4 @ 6:59AM
|
|
I'm heterosexual but I don't believe that people CHOOSE to be homosexual - they are BORN that way. They TRY to change their orientation and become hetero (or some do) only to discover it really can't be done.
To hate someone because they are homosexual or condemn them makes no more sense than condemning black people because they're black or Jewish people because they're Jewish.
I don't know about your God, but MY God loves everyone. JMO
|
|
furbean
|
May 4 @ 7:47AM
|
|
sparechange64... you can always be counted on, can't you... Jesus was tolerant of EVERYONE.... He didn't stay with the Jews.. He sought out the 'riff raff'... those who needed help and understanding the most... in fact, given the taboo of the day... (the town whore) HE was more understanding and tolerant than ANY ONE...
In my church this year, when that part of the Gospel was read, for the homily my Priest spoke of how after He made the comment, "May he who is without guilt, cast the first stone", He set about speaking quietly and writing things in the sand, waiting for someone to throw a rock... It's not specified what he spoke and wrote... but it's widely accepted that He began rattling off everyone else's 'shortcomings' and sins... and silently, they all dropped away, until no one was left in their company....
How fast would you have dropped away spare?
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 4 @ 10:06AM
|
|
|
As a former addict, it also has a baser meaning...that something about me (in this case, my body), can take this much..carry this much, proceed with this much.
Well, that baser meaning also applies to anything else! 
People tend to think one is "religiously intolerant" if one offers a different viewpoint and a clear cut plan of action. Because if you say you are right, then you are saying they are wrong since they don't think like you.
And they tend to think of "religous tolerance" as accepting it all and being willing to join in or agree with any of it.
But religious tolerance, for all the PC talk, is exactly what is missing in this country now because the tolerance comes in not making complaint about the window displays of persons of other beliefs and not trying to force them to give your beliefs equal display time in their window spaces.
It comes in walking by the man at the airport who is on his prayer rug and not pretending to kick him and not going "Alla alla ack bar" and giggling and throwing things at him. Which is something I saw people doing, unfortunately one of the people I had come to the airport with, when I was around 14. Which, at the time, I thought would be a pretty good reason to develop a prejudice against Americans if I was a Moslem.
Tolerance is not in letting go of your own viewpoint or in embracing someone elses: it is in not openly ridiculing them, not insulting them, not telling them they can't have a job because of what they are when it in no way affects their ability to to do the work: not persecuting physically, mentally, or emotionally.
Which, what my favorite Buddhist is saying, where people immediately interrupt what he's saying to correct him and tell him how wrong he is, that is a form of persecution. Not because they believe he's wrong, not because they want to tell him what they believe is right: it's a matter of doing it in a respectful manner and hearing what the other person thinks and feels .. and why.
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 4 @ 10:19AM
|
|
|
Tolerance is another word for avoidance, just my opinion.
Avoidance:
Pronunciation: &-'voi-d&n(t)s
Function: noun
1 obsolete a : an action of emptying, vacating, or clearing away b : OUTLET
2 : ANNULMENT 1
3 : an act or practice of avoiding or withdrawing from something
From the Thesaurus:
Entry Word: tolerance
Function: noun
Text: the capacity to endure what is difficult or disagreeable without complaining See PATIENCE
Entry Word: patience
Function: noun
Text: the capacity to endure what is difficult or disagreeable without complaining
Synonyms forbearance, long-suffering, sufferance, tolerance
Related Words acquiescence, resignation; passiveness, passivity; amenability, compliance, conformism, docility, obedience, subordination, tractability, willingness; discipline, self-control; submission, submissiveness
Near Antonyms defiance; contrariness, disobedience, insubordination, intractability, recalcitrance, resistance, willfulness
Antonyms impatience
Please to note the underlined word: long-suffering
(Galatians 5:22-23) 22 On the other hand, the fruitage of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, 23 mildness, self-control. Against such things there is no law.
Please, again, to note the underlined word: long-suffering.
Tolerance is an attribute that a Christian should strive to obtain; but first they should understand what it means so that they are not striving in the wrong direction.
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 4 @ 10:48AM
|
|
|
So ... while I agree that tolerance and intolerance should be practiced in regards to being sensitive to others ... doesn't mean I have to become best friends with it
Uhm.. I don't believe I in anyway, shape, or form implied tolerance was that .. in fact, tolerance is not that. Tolerance is not even necessarily "being sensitive" . It's 'being sensitive" that is the problem.
If someone asks you "Do you approve of Judaism" and you don't ,the answer should be a very clear "No."
It shouldn't be "No, so now I'm going to kill you/lock you up/gouge your eyes out/ eat your liver/ report you for being a liver biter" or etc. And it shouldn't be "Oh, I understand that Judaism is one of the paths to higher divinity and acceptance of our inward spiritual needs..." or some very politically correct crap that means nothing (and which is avoidance, yes!).
It should just be "No." And they should just deal with that answer because they asked the question!
However, if someone is actively practicing Judaism you shouldn't go over to them and knock them over and tell them they are denying you the right to freedom of religious expression because to you that means they aren't allowed to do that! You should just not do it yourself, if you think it's wrong.
If someone comes to your door and asks you if you want to know something and you don't, the answer is likewise "No." or even "No, thank you." You don't have to listen, and you certainly don't have to shoot them.
Most of the reason people are angry about people doing that is an issue with their own self esteem, I think; and a fear of just expressing their own viewpoint and answering the questions as asked.
"May I share this scripture with you?" It's a simple question and it's a simple answer "Yes." or "No." or maybe, possibly "Not right now (,thank you). Perhaps tomorrow or the next time you are about."
Q: "Do you believe in God?"
A:"Yes, I do but I don't really feel like hearing your opinion on the subject right now, thank you. I just got home from work and want to shower."
A: "No."
A: "Yes because I was raised as a Protestant and I'm sticking to it so please
don't waste your time or mine. In fact, put me on your 'don't call' list. Thank you."
A: "Yes. Do you?"
A: "Listen, I think it's great what you're doing but I'm not in a mood to listen. It would waste my time."
A: "Yes, but I'd rather die, thank you."
A: "Not sure but I'm a Buddhist and not interested in discussion Christianity."
A: "I'm feeling very evil right now and unable to listen. Don't even bother asking me questions or trying: I really am quite evil and in a mood to do nasty things. But .. ... may I get you a drink of water?"
A: "Yes I do because the Bible says at John 1:1..."
A: " I absolutely do not want to answer that question. Go away!" *SLAM*
All perfectly valid answers that do not require a long bout of pretending to believe something you don't or acts of violence. They are questions, not persecutions. Unless the person shows up with a gun, points it to your head, and then asks if you believe in God; but that's a totally different subject.
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 4 @ 11:11AM
|
|
|
"The Founders believed the Bible to be the perfect example of moral legislation and the source of what they called, ‘the moral law.’ For nearly 150 years, the Courts relied on that moral law as the basis for our civil laws."
That's because they came from a Christian based society and most of them knew the Bible fairly well. They didn't always follow it, but they did understand the gist of the ideals and Christianity, not by so many who practice it wrongly but by actual tenents per the Holy Scriptures, is amazingly tolerant.
(Romans 2:1) 2 Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are, if you judge; for in the thing in which you judge another, you condemn yourself, inasmuch as you that judge practice the same things.
(1 Corinthians 13:4-7) 4 Love is long-suffering and kind. Love is not jealous, it does not brag, does not get puffed up, 5 does not behave indecently, does not look for its own interests, does not become provoked. It does not keep account of the injury. 6 It does not rejoice over unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth. 7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
(Galatians 5:25-26) 25 If we are living by spirit, let us go on walking orderly also by spirit. 26 Let us not become egotistical, stirring up competition with one another, envying one another.
(1 Thessalonians 5:14-15) 14 On the other hand, we exhort YOU, brothers, admonish the disorderly, speak consolingly to the depressed souls, support the weak, be long-suffering toward all. 15 See that no one renders injury for injury to anyone else, but always pursue what is good toward one another and to all others.
(Matthew 12:31-32) 31 “On this account I say to YOU, Every sort of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the spirit will not be forgiven. 32 For example, whoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the holy spirit, it will not be forgiven him, no, not in this system of things nor in that to come.
(Matthew 18:21-22) 21 Then Peter came up and said to him: “Lord, how many times is my brother to sin against me and am I to forgive him? Up to seven times?” 22 Jesus said to him: “I say to you, not, Up to seven times, but, Up to seventy-seven times.
(Mark 3:28-29) 28 Truly I say to YOU that all things will be forgiven the sons of men, no matter what sins and blasphemies they blasphemously commit. 29 However, whoever blasphemes against the holy spirit has no forgiveness forever, but is guilty of everlasting sin.”
(Luke 17:1-4) 17 Then he said to his disciples: “It is unavoidable that causes for stumbling should come. Nevertheless, woe to the one through whom they come! 2 It would be of more advantage to him if a millstone were suspended from his neck and he were thrown into the sea than for him to stumble one of these little ones. 3 Pay attention to yourselves. If your brother commits a sin give him a rebuke, and if he repents forgive him. 4 Even if he sins seven times a day against you and he comes back to you seven times, saying, ‘I repent,’ you must forgive him.”
(Luke 23:39-43) 39 But one of the hung evildoers began to say abusively to him: “You are the Christ, are you not? Save yourself and us.” 40 In reply the other rebuked him and said: “Do you not fear God at all, now that you are in the same judgment? 41 And we, indeed, justly so, for we are receiving in full what we deserve for things we did; but this [man] did nothing out of the way.” 42 And he went on to say: “Jesus, remember me when you get into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him: “Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.”
(Acts 7:59-60) 59 And they went on casting stones at Stephen as he made appeal and said: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 Then, bending his knees, he cried out with a strong voice: “Jehovah, do not charge this sin against them.” And after saying this he fell asleep [in death]. . .
(Acts 8:1) 8 Saul, for his part, was approving of the murder of him. . .
Except for the last one, they are all words of tolerance. Yet, the last one too, for it is about a man who was intolerant and even phobic, I guess you could say, but who upon becoming Christian did not then stay intolerant and commence to persecute the Jews instead. No: he learned tolerance and humility and sought to teach, not to harm, those who believed differently.
Christians, people claiming to be Christian, do not always act with tolerance, but that is with what they should act and what the laws, what the Constitution and it's Bill of Rights, were made to reflect: the higher ideals of proper Christianity not by Protestant or Catholic or any other standards but by Biblical standards. Part of the reason for that being that a proper Christian would never persecute, revile, physically or mentally attack or abuse, someone of another sect, religion, faith, or lack of faith, and call it righteousness.
Therefore, if you see one that does it, you know they are being improper.
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 4 @ 11:33AM
|
|
|
(I know I'll get crucified for this one but ... ) homosexuality - whole other topic ... but scientifically (chemically) and/or psychologically a disease and Biblically (no matter what version) wrong ... but ... whole other topic ...
Perhaps it's a disease or perhaps it's a birth defect or perhaps it is a choice and willful behavior.
Whatever the case, when it comes to tolerance versus intolerance versus phobia it is not a whole other topic. Some homosexuals have religious beliefs regarding their sexual habits, some do not. But most of them do have beliefs, ways they chose to exercise their free will, or etc.
The Bible does not approve of homosexuality, but it does not approve of public harassment, physically attacking, or judging the worth of a person to God. You judge enough to know if you are going to be having sex, going dancing, or whatever with this person .. but yelling at people, hitting them with rocks, and such only makes them more defiant and less likely to listen anyway. Or dead, in which case they can't learn a thing that you think is right anyway.
So, yes, homosexuality is something one should be tolerant of, up to the point of not sabotaging someone's work, not punching them in the face, not following behind them in the street and making rude jokes, not telling them everything about them is worthless.
But, if you are a Christian, it is something to be intolerant of as in not allowing persons who practice it into your congregation.
And no, I don't believe homosexuals are born that way. Everyone that I knew that was homosexual or bisexual were first sexually molested, raped, drug addicts, alcoholics, or had some form of abusive relationship wherein their "lover" forced them, through threats of only loving them if they would do it, to engage in having sex with members of same sex for their amusement. They were messed up in the head, and I have never met one that wasn't attracted to heterosexuals and who did not engage in fantasy of a heterosexual nature.
In fact, when I was still the sort of person who would do this kind of thing, I had a lover for a while who was a homosexual man. His boyfriend was jealous of me from the start. If either one of them believed that they were just born that way and it was natural, one of them wouldn't have been my lover in the last place and one of them wouldn't have been jealous of a woman in the first place. And, by the way, the other guy, the boyfriend, who was so militantly homosexual .. tried to have sex with me when I was a teenager, more than once.
I think homosexuality is just part of the natural inclination of mankind towards worshipping it's own flesh rather than God and in seeking out the taboo. The heart of man is inclined towards evil .. so in that respect it is "natural" by one definition of natural but it is not what men and women's genitalia was made for and in that respect it is unnatural in their usage, as the Bible says.
But, it's not the only thing that qualifies!
See, there is only one race of humanoids on this planet : Man Homosexuals are not a race, they are still part of Man and they still function as Man, or dysfunction as Man in his imperfection. So, no, they are not born different than Man has been made, as a form of perfection. ISo even if they were born that way .. if someone is born different than Man is intended to be it is a birth defect, a sin .. missing the mark of perfection.
And we are all supposed to be striving towards overcoming our sins. Not reveling in them, tarting them up, and making television shows about the same.
You should be tolerant of people's sins, those that they do not create for themselves or that they do not understand as sins, and that is why you should not persecute the handicapped, the sexually abuses sluts and homosexuals of the world, etc. Because we all have sin, we all have birth defects which is provable because we all get old and die; some have more and some have less. So never hate someone for their sin, as God does not hate them for those sins or you either, but he does expect all of us to really put in a good effort to learn and to alter what we can of our sinning nature. And if we do that, really try, he will help.
|
|
diverdown512
|
May 4 @ 5:43PM
|
|
|
I don't know what it's like to be a woman, but I know exactly what it's like to be a man, and there is not incentive enough in the whole world to turn a heterosexual man gay. To choose to be gay would mean to choose to do things that we just find disgusting. I'm not talking strictly about sexual things, but things like cuddling with another man on the couch while watching a movie. If a man isn't born gay, he simply won't do it. If a man thinks and accepts that other men choose to be gay, he might have reason to question his own heterosexuality, and this might be where a lot of homophobia comes from. (If I drive a pickup truck, I can't be gay, right?). I know that it's hard to accept, but a certain percentage of people are born gay, just like a certain percentage of all mammal species are born gay. If Jesus didn't judge homosexuals (and I don't think he was ever quoted on the subject) them, then those that do are implying that their judgement is better than Jesus'. Homosexuality is a psychological anomaly. But polite society doesn't shun the autistic, the clinically depressed, or people with Altzheimer's disease. One day the gene for homosexuality will be found, and then all the gay bashers will have to find someone else to throw bricks at. As far as "tolerance" is concerned, I think that it implies that "I'm right, you're wrong, but I'll put up with you." As far as intolerance is concerned, it goes against everything that Jesus stood for. He, on the other hand, has the full authority to judge.
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 4 @ 7:14PM
|
|
|
Yes, I'm fully aware of what you believe, thanks.
Fully aware ... fully aware ... FULLY aware? Not bloody likely, lady!
But, hey, go ahead, give it a shot: tell it all and let's see how close you get.
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 4 @ 7:17PM
|
|
|
You know ...I apologize....I am sorry for that comment, forgive me.
No offense taken, honestly.
Obviously I don't agree...but you have your beliefs....
you caught me at a weak moment.
No hard feelings please, and God bless
It happens. Thank you.
Agreement with me is not required. . agreement with God is. He's a stickler for details. But that's between you and He, not me and thee.
|
|
sparechange64
|
May 4 @ 7:32PM
|
|
canadian - of course no hard feelings ... just stating the fact that every regarded version of the Bible is unrelenting in the fact that It does NOT approve of such behavior
furbean - very interesting you address me, though you block me from posting comments on your blogs and send me "questionable" emails in reagrds to "your church"
However, as I explained before, I always try to respond "respectfully"
FYI ... Jesus was NOT tolerant of everyone ... in fact .. He showed us how anger can be a positive thing when He challenged those that would make a mockery of the temple ... Jesus also expanded on the commandments in the beatitudes ... stating many commandments and expanding them to "thoughts" ... doesn't sound too tolerant to me ... and ... not only this ... but ... your "priest (which is catholic or lutheran?) speaks words of wisdom ... however ... I regard catholocism as a near cult with their teachings of evolution (contrary to the Bible), purgatory (to name one of 700 issues), and SUPPOSED infallibility of the pope (sorry - no one is infallible) ... and ... you priest should also have told you about Ezekiel chapter 33 to start with (of course there is 2 chron 19 also and 2 thes 5)
8 "When I say to the wicked, 'O wicked man, you will surely die,' and you do not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require from your hand.
9 "But if you on your part warn a wicked man to turn from his way and he (K)does not turn from his way, he will die in his iniquity, but you have delivered your life.
and finally - please do NOT put me into the light of the holier than thou - I know very well of my faults and weaknesses ... doesn't stop me from pointing out the obvious
oh - and by the way - I am shocked you go to church, based on your emails to me ... and even more surprised you are directing your comments to me ... kind of hypocritical, don't you think?
now ... HH - "So, yes, homosexuality is something one should be tolerant of, up to the point of not sabotaging someone's work, not punching them in the face, not following behind them in the street and making rude jokes, not telling them everything about them is worthless"
I think I said that - if not, is what I meant
"But, if you are a Christian, it is something to be intolerant of as in not allowing persons who practice it into your congregation"
do NOT agree with you here ... in fact, the Bible is clear about such things ... in the old testament, they would be ostricized (spelling?) ... in the new - they would be counseled ... to a certain point, however, Mathew is clear about the disciplinary actions.
first the person is spoken to be a pier, then if they refuse to repent, they are spoke to by the pastor, and again ... refusing to repent, they are brought to the deacons ... and if they are still unwilling to repent and change their lifestyle ... they are brought before the church ... AND if they still reject it ... they are basically asked to leave and return upon repentence ... I do not want to make light of this since this process can take a year to go through as EVERY possible path is taken to HELP this person
since my comment is getting long - I will refrain from speaking about the physical and mental diseases of homosexuality - howerver, those sicerely interested can contact me
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 12:35AM
|
|
|
He set about speaking quietly and writing things in the sand, waiting for someone to throw a rock... It's not specified what he spoke and wrote... but it's widely accepted that He began rattling off everyone else's 'shortcomings' and sins... and silently, they all dropped away, until no one was left in their company....
????????????
This is not to argue, just to ask: chapter and verse, please, as I am not sure what you are talking about with some of what you said. The basic story I know; but not the writing in the sand and such.
|
|
furbean
|
May 5 @ 12:43AM
|
|
sparechange64 you must live a very sad excuse for a life... (though you really are a legend in your own mind...)
I deleted the comments you left on my blogs because they a) said absolutely nothing and b) were backed up by absolutely nothing... After deleting the second 'say nothing' response, I told you you had one more shot... you never even took that... and I stand by what I did/said... if you have nothing to say or add... but totally empty comments... then why should I let you clutter my blogs?
and I'm sorry but... anyone who would let people nail them to the cross til they die... without lifting so much as a finger about it... yeah... I think that qualifies as tolerant of everyone...
Again... your pictures here, show all these guitars... yet you are the most un-artistic uninspiring person I think I've ever encountered here... I would debate you until the cows came home but there's no satisfaction in it... I can't see how you can be anything but miserable... and you seem to like it that way... so why should I or anyone bother... unless or until you feel like being otherwise...
I told you before, I don't judge you... but you make it awful hard for anyone not to... and you seem to like to judge everything/one else...
I have nothing against you... I'm not even angry with you... you're too sad to observe for me to be angry with you...
I since posted my own blog on how you (or anyone) could improve your outlook...
See:
http://www.matchdoctor.com/blog_49102/Lighten_Up_People_Here_s_how.html
I wonder if you even tried... or if you ever will.
I really wish you well... because I can't imagine the emptiness your future holds... and that's my honest opinion of you my friend... From what I see, for being a musician.... you have absolutely no soul... and that's just so sad...
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 12:51AM
|
|
|
To hate someone because they are homosexual or condemn them makes no more sense than condemning black people because they're black or Jewish people because they're Jewish.
As I have said before: 'Homosexual' is not a race or even an ethnicity; it's not a nationality; it's not a sex. It's a condition, illness, disease, aberration, choice, mental defect, physical defect, mutation, or willful act - you can choose any one of those you wish to, to describe it but it is definitely somewhere in those categories.
So it would not be like condemning black people because they are black .. it would be like condemning nymphomaniacs for unsafe sex practices and not respecting the boundaries of traditional relationship; or condemning psychotics for having deviant thinking patterns that have a tendency towards negative effect on societies; or condemning serial killers for killing in a repetitive fashion due to their own mental health issues.
In all cases, it is someone who is having a problem with self control due to some sort of imbalance and in all cases these are people who may not enjoy being helped by medications or therapy, who may choose to not employ those methods because they care more about their own personal comfort than the damage they do to others, yet they are all people who can be helped if they wish to be helped.
Nevertheless, to assume that homosexuals are condemned for the state of being homosexual is incorrect. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that if you have ever had the tendency towards wanting to have sex with people that are the same sex as you are then there is no hope for you and you will burn in hell.
It says that it is wrong and unnatural to do and to willfully sin in this manner will result in a chronic case of death. It is not that they are homosexual, it is that they wish to be and they practice it and often go about lying and saying God doesn't mind, despite what he said in his Holy Scriptures to the contrary.
Everyone has free will and anyone who wishes to use theirs in that manner is free to do so. But, they need to make a clear cut choice as God hates wishy-washy people and he hates people that twist his scriptures. So, if they wish to be homosexual they need to do so on their own terms and leave him to be God on his terms.. and his terms are that you are married and have sex with your spouse (man and woman and only one of each), or you are unmarried and have sex with no one at all .
I have had sex outside of marriage, in the past. I knew that it was aganst what the Bible says, that God did not approve, etc. I did it because I wanted to and at the time I didn't care. Which means I was, at the time, guilty of a great many sins .. but at least lying about God was not among them!
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 12:56AM
|
|
|
I don't know about your God, but MY God loves everyone.
My God loved everyone so much that he let his son die for them.. his son loved them so much that he went through being human for them, which as you know is sometimes most unpleasant and was for his own sake strictly unnecessary, and then he worked very hard teaching and putting up with slander, and then he was betrayed, and then he was tortured and humiliated, and then he died.
Imagine people like that daring to ask someone else to make the simple sacrifice of not having sex outside of heterosexual marriage! How could such as them even dream of Man making such a sacrifice?
|
|
furbean
|
May 5 @ 1:10AM
|
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful John 8:3 -11
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 1:12AM
|
|
|
canadian - make no mistake that the Bible speak often about the WRONG of homosexuality ... GOD DOES NOT APPROVE
Right you are!
(Deuteronomy 23:17-18) 17 “None of the daughters of Israel may become a temple prostitute, neither may anyone of the sons of Israel become a temple prostitute. 18 You must not bring the hire of a harlot or the price of a dog into the house of Jehovah your God for any vow, because they are something detestable to Jehovah your God, even both of them.
(1 Kings 14:24) 24 And even the male temple prostitute proved to be in the land. They acted according to all the detestable things of the nations whom Jehovah had driven out from before the sons of Israel.
(1 Corinthians 6:9-11) 9 What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of YOU were. But YOU have been washed clean, but YOU have been sanctified, but YOU have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.
(Jude 7) 7 So too Sod´om and Go·mor´rah and the cities about them, after they in the same manner as the foregoing ones had committed fornication excessively and gone out after flesh for unnatural use, are placed before [us] as a [warning] example by undergoing the judicial punishment of everlasting fire.
More on Sodom:
(Genesis 19:4-5) 4 Before they could lie down, the men of the city, the men of Sod´om, surrounded the house, from boy to old man, all the people in one mob. 5 And they kept calling out to Lot and saying to him: “Where are the men who came in to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have intercourse with them.”
(Genesis 19:9-11) 9 At this they said: “Stand back there!” And they added: “This lone man came here to reside as an alien and yet he would actually play the judge. Now we are going to do worse to you than to them.” And they came pressing heavily in on the man, on Lot, and were getting near to break in the door. 10 So the men thrust out their hands and brought Lot in to them, into the house, and they shut the door. 11 But they struck with blindness the men who were at the entrance of the house, from the least to the greatest, so that they were wearing themselves out trying to find the entrance.
(Leviticus 18:22) 22 “‘And you must not lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable thing.
(Romans 1:24-27) 24 Therefore God, in keeping with the desires of their hearts, gave them up to uncleanness, that their bodies might be dishonored among them, 25 even those who exchanged the truth of God for the lie and venerated and rendered sacred service to the creation rather than the One who created, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 That is why God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27 and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error.
This is under the Mosaic Law so it is not something which Christians should act upon to that extent but it still shows the feelings of God regarding whether he would approve or disapprove:
(Leviticus 20:13) 13 “‘And when a man lies down with a male the same as one lies down with a woman, both of them have done a detestable thing. They should be put to death without fail. Their own blood is upon them.
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 1:28AM
|
|
Ah yes, thank you furbean .. and this is a most excellent example of long-sufferingness (patience) and tolerance, both, too!
(John 8:3-11) 3 Now the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman caught at adultery, and, after standing her in their midst, 4 they said to him: “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of committing adultery. 5 In the Law Moses prescribed for us to stone such sort of women. What, really, do you say?” 6 Of course, they were saying this to put him to the test, in order to have something with which to accuse him. But Jesus bent down and began to write with his finger in the ground. 7 When they persisted in asking him, he straightened up and said to them: “Let the one of YOU that is sinless be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 And bending over again he kept on writing in the ground. 9 But those who heard this began going out, one by one, starting with the older men, and he was left alone, and the woman that was in their midst. 10 Straightening up, Jesus said to her: “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?” 11 She said: “No one, sir.” Jesus said: “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way; from now on practice sin no more.”
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 1:33AM
|
|
|
By the way, just for the record, the main theme of this blog was not homosexuality or religion: it was to define the difference between the way some words are most often used and the way they should be used
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 1:46AM
|
|
|
.. in the old testament, they would be ostricized (spelling?) ... in the new - they would be counseled ... to a certain point, however, Mathew is clear about the disciplinary actions.
first the person is spoken to be a pier, then if they refuse to repent, they are spoke to by the pastor, and again ... refusing to repent, they are brought to the deacons ... and if they are still unwilling to repent and change their lifestyle ... they are brought before the church ... AND if they still reject it ... they are basically asked to leave and return upon repentence ... I do not want to make light of this since this process can take a year to go through as EVERY possible path is taken to HELP this person
Per the Old Testament, they would have been killed outright as unclean and polluting the chosen people of God.
Per the New Testament, persons with homosexual leanings might be counseled in order to help them but a person actively practicing homosexuality is a different matter altogether. Practicing is the key word in what I said. Thank you.
That would call for immediate disfellowshipping as it is not a matter of them thinking a wrong thought or having a poor attitude or a minor lack of self discipline. At which point, yes indeed, they might still be counseled. . might be .. if they want it and if they stop practicing homosexuality.
|
|
sparechange64
|
May 5 @ 2:47AM
|
|
furbean ....
your words are hypocritical ... I did not Insult or judge you - yet you pretend that you do not insult or judge ...
perhaps you should have someone else read your words ... maybe your priest ... perhaps you are so insecure with yourself that you feel like you need to lash out ... don't really know ...
whatever the case may be .... you have sought me out in a couple blogs now on purpose as some sort of attempt to confront me due to whatever insecurities you have with yourself, or perhaps a double standard based on what you have said here versus your own blogs and comments ... or maybe anger .... again ... don't really know ...
what I do know, is these will be the last words that will be directed at you as I refuse to play whatever game you are playing
|
|
KAOS2007
|
May 5 @ 2:51AM
|
|
|
Tolerance: Something I have very little of lately.
|
|
diverdown512
|
May 5 @ 3:34AM
|
|
|
By the way, Change, no Pope has ever claimed to be infallible. Once every 50 years or so, a Pope issues an infallible doctrine. Only then are his words claimed to be infallible. He is a man like any other, and recognized as such by all Catholics. As far as Creation is concerned, who did Cain marry?
|
|
furbean
|
May 5 @ 7:51AM
|
|
sparechange64 once again with regards to me, you remain off topic and don't back anything up... once again all you do is spout baseless opinions without any kind of constructive conversation...
I would HELP you! I would talk with you and help you find out why you are the way you are... You simply CAN'T be a happy person!
You call what I say hypocritical... but I'M THE ONE WHO'S HAPPY! (and believe me, I have no problem talking to/with priests...)
As for games... No, I don't play them... but I would ask you... If by chance someone would be 'playing games'.... wouldn't it be possible that their aim could at least in part be... your silence? Which brings you back to my point... Which is...
To be antithetical of ANY game... one must UNDERSTAND... what the game is... what the aim is... and how it's being played! You make no efforts to understand anything... period!
For all the words you spout... you actually say very little... or nothing at all.... More and more, those around you will see this... some will trounce you and not let up because they'll know they can.... Others will leave you alone completely... Still others... like me... would even be willing to help... but like an alcoholic... you have to admit you have a problem before anyone can help you...
You are like the Samurai parable of the enemy at tea... the tea is served flawlessly until it is poured in the enemies cup... then it overflows and runs everywhere.... The enemy asks... "What is the meaning of this!" and the one serving replies, "Your mind is like this teacup... It must be emptied before it can be filled again..."
You must empty your mind of all that clutters it before you can learn anything new... You've become so convinced that you 'know everything and are always right' that not only can you no longer learn... but you've forgotten the whole point...
and that, is what's so sad... and it really is....
sparechange64... no matter what you think of me, remember this... The beginner is the master... and the master, the beginner... (and I'm sure Jesus would agree as he always says, "Suffer the children" and goes on to say that one must have a sense of childlike innocence and wonder to enter the Kingdom of God...)
Children know it's ok to fall... it's ok to learn... and it's ok to Be Happy... and if you think I'm being subversive or hypocritical for telling you these things and being this way... then I feel even more sorry for you than I did before... (if that's possible)
but strangely... I remain just as tolerant... don't I?
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 9:59AM
|
|
|
If Jesus didn't judge homosexuals (and I don't think he was ever quoted on the subject) them, then those that do are implying that their judgement is better than Jesus'.
Interesting logic. Of course, Jesus was never quoted as saying anything about bestiality, either, so are we to assume he's for it? That he does not consider it a sin, just because some people are born with that odd sort of desire? Or does he consider it a weakness, a character defect, something harmful to the humans and the animals, unnatural, and in need of change vis a vis self discipline and adherence to God's will?
Jesus mentioned adultery, but not incest. Still most people would never assume he thought it was right for parents to have sex with their children!
Bestiality, homosexuality, adultery and incest are all spoken of as wrong in the Mosaic Law.
(John 7:49) 49 But this crowd that does not know the Law are accursed people.”
(Matthew 5:17-19) 17 “Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill; 18 for truly I say to YOU that sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for one smallest letter or one particle of a letter to pass away from the Law by any means and not all things take place.
19 Whoever, therefore, breaks one of these least commandments and teaches mankind to that effect, he will be called ‘least’ in relation to the kingdom of the heavens.
As for anyone who does them and teaches them, this one will be called ‘great’ in relation to the kingdom of the heavens.
Regarding Jesus and adultery:
(John 8:5) 5 In the Law Moses prescribed for us to stone such sort of women. What, really, do you say?”
(John 8:11) 11 She said: “No one, sir.” Jesus said: “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way; from now on practice sin no more.”
Jesus did not condemn the woman or encourage others to kill her. He showed that the way is to forgive the person and for the person to discontinue the sin. So, the same conduct, the same taboos, apply to Christians that applied to Jews, but the punishment for the sins are no longer exacted by the people because now Jesus is the judge of such matters as who shall live or die.
The Law was always for the people of God, though. Which is something that many persons fail to realize when they go about condemning people .. first they should realize it's not their place to condemn, second they should realize that an athest homosexual who lives two doors down is not their concern, unless it's their son or something. What is their concern if they are to be Christian, is to govern their own bodies, teach their children, spread the good news of the Kingdom, set a good example, and to give warning where it is needed.
I say that anyone who says they believe in the Christ who does not say that homosexuality is wrong has set the homosexuals up for death, and is far worse a sinner than the homosexuals who are exercising their free will but who are not lying about God to the detriment of Mankind. It is very unkind to give someone false peace of mind!
If a person wishes to sin, that is their business. Don't tell them that it's acceptable to God just to appear reasonable to other men. That is exactly the sort of nasty business that leads to the alleged "holy wars" in the first place: you compromise your beliefs and what do you have? You say "This part of the Bible is a lie, in all it's translations." and then expect anyone to believe the rest of it? It is hypocrisy.
Homosexuality is wrong; bestiality is wrong; incest is wrong; adultery is wrong; fornication is wrong and they are all punishable by death. But they are all done by people whom God loves and would rather see learn to do better things instead.
|
|
sparechange64
|
May 5 @ 11:29AM
|
|
quoting you
"Homosexuality is wrong; bestiality is wrong; incest is wrong; adultery is wrong; fornication is wrong and they are all punishable by death. But they are all done by people whom God loves and would rather see learn to do better things instead"
EXACTLY ... and ... either you believe it, or you make excuses
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 11:38AM
|
|
|
what I do know, is these will be the last words that will be directed at you as I refuse to play whatever game you are playing
*phew* That's a relief It's bad enough when people try to flame me on my blog, totally worse when they choose my blog as their battleground to start a flame war with someone else. lol
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 11:42AM
|
|
|
Children know it's ok to fall... it's ok to learn... and it's ok to Be Happy... and if you think I'm being subversive or hypocritical for telling you these things and being this way... then I feel even more sorry for you than I did before... (if that's possible)
Uhm.. I don't know what's going on here, but I do have to say from everything I saw the person this comment was about is not speaking in the manner you seem to think he is.
I don't agree with things he believes; but he is not the one I've seen trying to cudgel other people into believing things just as he does. That was someone else altogether, to the best of my knowledge.
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 11:46AM
|
|
|
EXACTLY ... and ... either you believe it, or you make excuses
Exactly, but you have to believe all of it: that the acts are wrong and that the people who do them are loved by God.
He waits for them to come to him and if you ridicule them, make them feel unwelcome, they will never do so and then that - driving them away - is it's own sin.
Loving someone is not the same thing as always accepting everything they do. Children make mistakes all the time and their parents love them anyway; but they have to learn as they grow.
|
|
furbean
|
May 5 @ 12:00PM
|
|
|
Matthew 5:43 - 47
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 1:12PM
|
|
Exactly, you lazy bean!
(Matthew 5:43-47) 43 “YOU heard that it was said, ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 However, I say to YOU: Continue to love YOUR enemies and to pray for those persecuting YOU; 45 that YOU may prove yourselves sons of YOUR Father who is in the heavens, since he makes his sun rise upon wicked people and good and makes it rain upon righteous people and unrighteous. 46 For if YOU love those loving YOU, what reward do YOU have? Are not also the tax collectors doing the same thing? 47 And if YOU greet YOUR brothers only, what extraordinary thing are YOU doing? Are not also the people of the nations doing the same thing?
For those that don't have a Bible, or not one on their computer or whatever, Bible Gateway is a great place for that. They do not have the New World Translation and I do take that as a form of prejudice on their part, but they do have many other translations, which is nice for cross referencing!
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 3:21PM
|
|
|
As far as Creation is concerned, who did Cain marry?
His sister, of course.
Ever notice Abram telling his wife Sarai to tell people she was his sister so they wouldn't kill him to get his wife? But he was a righteous man, God concluded a covenant with him, so he was not a liar. He was married to his half-sister.
The rules pertaining to incest being a sin and to what extent it was a sin or considered incest at all came with the Mosaic Law.
When Man was created their bodies were perfect and still perfect enough, for a while, to handle the problems associated with incest. You can put most brothers and sister together even now (though I hope you don't) and there will probably not be any problems from it, genetically speaking. But if you kept putting brothers and sisters or fathers and daughters or whatever together from the same family you'd end up with weaklings, idiots, and freaks more often than not.
So.. it's a shocking and inconceivable thing to some people that Cain would have married his sister. But, it was a shocking and inconceivable thing to Peter and Paul, for much of their life, that someone could eat a plate of oysters and still be clean in the eyes of their good friend Jesus.
Sometimes what is shocking or not has to do with current social standards or what is said to be a sin in the here and now, regardless of how innocent it seemed to the people at the time of it's happening
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
May 5 @ 3:26PM
|
|
|
Tolerance: Something I have very little of lately.
That's too bad, it really is Tolerance breeds contentment, for the person possessing it as well as the one receiving it. Plus, for those who are trying to offend by being overtly .. whatever it is they wish to be like .. it is quite frustrating and shocking, how they utterly fail to frighten, shock, or even get an undue amount of attention, and that can be just plain amusing!
|
|
sparechange64
|
May 5 @ 6:28PM
|
|
|
Mathew 7:1-6
|
|
furbean
|
May 6 @ 12:53AM
|
|
|
Matthew 7: 7 - 12 and... 13 - 14
|
|
|