Libs and individuals have zero relevance to what I’ve personally experienced. Their bland viewpoints bore me, and don’t stack up. I understand the Good News more from the sword than I ever did in a stuffy old building that I never wanted to be in. It’s at the core of why I’m able to laugh at things other characters insist on taking seriously.
We didn’t come into this existence, we came out of it. There is no separation between this shell and the entirety of the universe. It’s all us, we’re all saved, and we’re all going to be just fine. That’s why there’s no sense in judging.
The idea of different nations and languages and
cultures etc. was not Gods. These things came about due to the rebellion of Adam and Eve, and even then not immediately. It wasn’t until Babel that God scattered man and confused their language that we see the beginnings of nations… But as a Christian, I see things as very black and white. I see only two types of people in the world, saved and lost. That’s it.
Saved people come from all over the world. Collectively they are referred to in scripture as “the body of Christ.” We are already unified and need no government to further unify us. The rest of humanity is the lost people who also are all over the world. The problem is there are more lost people than saved people and saved people have to live among and follow the laws that are established by lost people, and they make horrendous laws and do lots of evil things that are contrary to Gods law and actually detrimental to their own survival.
You are right, there is nothing in scripture in which Jesus talks about the existence of any specific nation, but he has a lot to say about the state of mankind and society before he returns and quite honestly looking at things, I don’t think that’s too far away.
I’m not aware in today’s society where Christians are disallowing people from doing as they please. Quite the opposite, it is secular society that is in the majority and they are jamming their religion of secularism down the throats of Christians. It was Christians and pastors who were forbidden to hold church services (even in the seclusion of their cars) and many were arrested, at least in California. Meanwhile, the secular religious places like strip clubs were deemed essential and allowed to remain open during the unconstitutional Covid lockdowns. You and Jay Jay both are way off base here…
Again, you are right. While on earth Jesus did not advocate for a theocracy. However, he also called sin by its name and had some very harsh words for people sometimes himself.
It’s about humility. I always loved the saying, “He who exaults himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” Then there’s, as you noted, “Take the log out of your own eye before removing the speck from your brother’s eye.” I tend towards that view.
You should read Matthew 24. It is all prophecies given by Jesus. Again, I agree he didn’t specify that such and such will happen to future countries list, but he did give a list of things that would be occurring shortly before his return. These things are happening around the world, not just here in America, but since I’m an American, I don’t much care about the rest of the world. As America goes, so goes the world and clearly we are headed in the wrong direction.
We became a super power in a relatively short period of time. I believe it’s because God specifically had a purpose for America and had a hand in our rise. But we, like the rest of the world have turned our back on God, rejected his purpose, denied his existence and authority and thumbed our noses at his law and righteousness. As a result, he has left us to our own ways and we are paying a terrible price for our rebellion.
Scripture says not once, but twice in Proverbs “ There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” Of course, claiming the truth of this requires making judgments about the state of society which after all, is a product of our behavior.
A poster has said that judging is wrong, no one gets to decide who goes to Heaven or Hell. True, that decision is a personal decision between individuals and God and no one but God can make an infallible statement about any persons eternal destiny based just on their observable actions and words in their life. But Jesus did say You shall know them by their fruit, and since Jesus or the Holy Spirit do not produce rotten fruit, then it is a reasonable assumption that people who are producing rotten fruit are not under the influence of Christ or the Holy Spirit. While many people outright reject Christ, too many people don’t realize that Jesus must be a deliberate choice, made with an understanding of who he is, what he did on the cross and that he is the ONLY WAY to Heaven, and by doing so, they gain the kingdom and the previous rotten fruit begins to change.
Some people are drawn to Christ by the message of his love, but many people must accept the harsh reality of where they’re headed if they don’t repent, before they turn to Christ. Both are part of the gospel. Both were spoken of and taught by Jesus. Repentance is not optional, it’s a requirement for salvation. Churches that preach only love are not telling the whole truth…
Perhaps it means judge the behavior and not the person?
Let’s say my neighbor makes horrible wardrobe choices and has pink hair and just got promoted at work.
Wouldn’t it be less of an emotional drain on me as a human being to say I don’t like that individual’s style choices and move on? Who is it helping to say she’s (insert pejorative here), when that may not be true?
Might it not bewise to say how ishm her choice my circus or my monkeys
Might it not be more constructive for this woman’s husband to say hey, you’re in a profession al position let’s buy you some new clothes
Perhaps it’s also looking outside of the box and saying yeah the behavior is obnoxious, but maybe there’s a reason behind it, thus not condemning the individual?
I had a particularly mean neighbor when we rented. She was nasty to kids. She was in adult renters and owners faces.
It’s fun to call her the apartment witch and fantasize about her getting offed by Sir Lawrence Olivier’s Von Helsing character, like Frank Langella in Dracula, but does it help?
This woman was involved in a divorce she didn’t want and, except for two cats & a few ladies who would occasionally stop by to spend some time with her, appeared to be leading a lonely life.
Perhaps not judging is as my mother would put it: she’s more to be pitied than censored
“Allowed.” See, there’s that blatant hypocrisy again. How can you claim to love and promote liberty when you advocate restricting what other people can do or even call themselves? You can’t rail about Freedom of Religion while also saying that people must adhere to YOUR religious beliefs. That isn’t FREEDOM.
I think this is a good interpretation. We do make judgments on peoples behavior at a personal and societal level. So at what point is limiting peoples behavior appropriate? Or is all behavior equal and therefore should be overlooked, tolerated or condoned?
Are you saying there are no absolutes in the word of God. For example “ THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY” is pretty clear. So is declaring that behavior sinful wrong?
I’m not aware that anyone in the US is compelled to adhere to specific religious beliefs or practices. In other countries yes, but here? I do not advocate for a theocracy because their is no consensus on truth and theocracies always turn into tyrannies as a result. Do we then allow everyone to do as they please just because a secular law may also uphold a law laid out in a religious source?
On what do we base our secular laws and by what justo May we enforce them?
We base our secular laws on the human rights enshrined in the Constitution. Why do I need to explain this? We aren’t a theocracy. Just because YOUR beliefs say that a man lying with another man is an abomination, it does not meet the sniff test to allow the government to carte blanche violate others’ rights on your behalf solely because you think it’s icky and a detriment to society. We don’t legislate criminal violations based on morality. That’s what civil courts are for.
But the government DOES violate the rights enshrined in our constitution, and Libs are usually fine with that so long as the rights in question mostly affect Republicans and conservatives. Here’s the thing—- if rights are granted by man, then rights can be taken away by man. The enforcement or disobedience of those rights would simply be a matter of force.
Not only does the government violate our rights but they engage in immoral and often outright illegal ways to maintain their power to dictate OUR rights and simultaneously enrich themselves in the process.
Our government has become as corrupt as any in history, and ultimately that will lead to our downfall, as happened to Rome.
If society bases their legal system on the ever changing morality of contemporary beliefs, then the legal system itself will always be administrated by the whims of those in power and will become tyrannical, especially to those who dissent.
True, but there is a difference between “judging” and using judgment. We are called to use judgment frequently and correctly. Do you believe that exercising judgment is the same thing as judging?
The context of this thread is religious. Not secular.
There is no secular “judge not” dictum. (Except when someone doesn’t like their behavior being judged and tries to abuse scripture to shut up the other guy.)
