Saturday, March 10, 2007,8:16 PM
Moral vs. Social Reform
This past week I was involved in a very interesting conversation with a man who emailed me regarding the emerging church. More specifically he was genuinely curious about the movement and was hoping to find an answer to a question that he hadn't really seen addressed. He wanted to know what was emergent's stance on abortion. For privacy's sake, I won't quote his email, just my responses, but I should say it was a nice (not extreme or overly emotional) dialogue. Although, I am not exactly in a position to speak for Emergent (but this is an open an organic conversation, right?), here's the main part of my initial response.

First, I should make it clear that the emerging church is not a denomination with a set of beliefs or doctrines. It is a conversation that is very ecumenical in nature. There are churches that self identify as emerging but which are also part of various denominations and so abide by the beliefs of those groups. There are groups like Emergent Village or Emerging Women that exist to serve those involved in the conversation but who don't promote a particular set of beliefs. For example, at our upcoming Emerging Women gathering we have women from at least 15 different denominations attending. Many of us involved in this conversation hold tightly to certain sets of beliefs, and some people even publish books under the label emerging or Emergent that detail their particular beliefs. This of course causes disagreements and discussion, but people are not excluded from the conversation because of a particular belief. It makes some people uneasy to discover that there is no central emerging denomination with a concrete set of beliefs. They want to know exactly what THE emerging church thinks about ___________ issue (abortion, homosexuality, predestination, tongues, Eucharist, ...). But the reality is that there are a number of opinions on those issues and all of those are expressed in the emerging church conversation.

At my church (which identifies with the emerging conversation), we agree to disagree on issues. These are not issues of salvation, but part of what comes with the journey of the Christian faith. So all people, whatever their opinions, are welcome. I would say most of us are opposed to abortion, one guy I know insists that abortion doctors should receive the death penalty. Others support abortion in various forms and there are women there who have had abortions. I will of course promote my beliefs on the issue, but not in a way that hurts or excludes those who think differently.

All that said, I think there is a lot of work being done by those who call themselves emerging to help stop abortions. Many emerging Christians support universal healthcare so that women don't have to fear a life of debt and extreme medical bills if they keep their child. Welfare reform, raising the minimum wage, and support systems for single moms are also topics of concern. Gender equality is another major cause so that in countries where women are currently considered inferior they will no longer be aborted for failing to be male. Also teaching equality so that women are respected by men and not just viewed as sex objects to be used or pawns that must submit is a way to address the underlying causes of abortion. Those who support life want to do so throughout a person's life - in the womb and out of it. They realize that loud protests that condemn abortion are ineffective in actually lowering the number of abortions. They want to come alongside the women contemplating abortion and help them have that child. That means addressing social issues like poverty and healthcare, being there as incarnations of Christ's love to those women, and helping fix a broken system. Those aren't loud newsworthy ways to address the abortion issue and they take way more time and effort, but I see a lot of it happening in the emerging church and I applaud those who care about following Christ that much.

I hope this helps answer some of your questions.

Shalom


In his response to what I wrote there, he pointed out that the things I mentioned had to do with social reform. He wondered what the emergent church was doing about moral reform relating to the dignity of life. I responded -

Thanks for the reply. I have a couple of thoughts on your question.

I do hear a lot of talk in emerging church circles about the dignity of life. This is a moral issue that relates to abortion as well as other issues like war, the death penalty, poverty, AIDS, sex trafficking, fair trade, and immigration. So the conversation is broader than just abortion even though that is obviously a major part of it. We are all children of God - made in his image - born or unborn, male or female, young or old, Iraqi or American. All life is precious and worth defending. This is a constant point of conversation in the emerging church.

But I think you would confuse most emerging church people by trying to draw a distinction between moral and social reform. Most emergents see social reform as a moral issue - it is how our words, theology, and ideas gets fleshed out. There is of course room for discussion of ideas (sometimes too much of this in my opinion), but its meaningless unless we give it feet and put our words into action (faith without works is dead and all that). So to impose a moral judgement on a person (abortion is wrong) without being there to help her have a dignified life is hypocritical. Morality is way more complicated than that. These are real people in real situations that need help. Most of them know abortion is wrong, many of them know sex before marriage is wrong, but they don't see a way out of the system. So changing the system, showing love, and doing all that social reform stuff is how moral reform gets done for most emergents.

I'm sure other would answer this differently, but this has been my experience and exposure in this area.


This whole distinction (or lack thereof) between moral and social reform has been bugging me the last few days. I keep wondering, is it even possible to have moral reform without social reform? Doesn't living out our faith necessitate action? I too often do live the life of the mind and don't put action to my words as often as I should. So I'm thinking through what this looks like - any thoughts?

Labels: ,

 
posted by Julie at 8:16 PM ¤ Permalink ¤


19 Comments:


  • At 3/10/2007 09:50:00 PM, Blogger Tim Hallman

    Would you say that moral reform and social reform differ in degrees...moral reform is more personal and social reform is more public/other-centered. In one sense, moral reform would seem to be social reform when enough moral persons engage their society. In another sense, social reform is only reforming if it is moral.

    So for issues like abortion that need reforming, it is both/and - both moral reforming of our hearts (in our response to the issue) and the moral reforming of the individuals instituting/practicing abortion; and social reforming, reshaping a society that makes a place for children of mothers who don't want the child for whatever reason, or reshaping of society so that scared mothers of an unwanted pregancy can receive the community they need to raise up their child.

    Just some thoughts. Good post.

     
  • At 3/11/2007 10:28:00 PM, Blogger Mike Clawson

    Tim, I think you missed Julie's point. I think the idea was that there should be no distinction between moral and social issues. Social issues are moral issues.

    But I get your point. I think it's mainly a matter of semantics. The distinction you seem to be making is between individual morality and social morality. But both are still morality.

    One might also ask what the point of individual morality is if it is not expressed socially. If morality fundamentally has to do with relationship - i.e. how we treat others, whether we are dealing with them in love, then how could you possibly have personal morality that isn't also social? What would that even mean?

     
  • At 3/12/2007 03:53:00 AM, Blogger Searching For a Meaning

    I must agree with Julie's factual analysis of what is an emotive topic.

    The path of life is enriched from those that we meet and learn from.

    Every good wishes from Scotland.

     
  • At 3/12/2007 10:41:00 AM, Anonymous molly

    Good thoughts... I think I agree...social issues are moral issues.

     
  • At 3/12/2007 10:53:00 AM, Blogger Julie

    Tim - thanks for your comments and question.

    I agree that there is personal and public reform. I would say that both are moral and that the point of personal morality is to help make the world a better place. Too often I see people use personal morality as a matter of pride (see what a good person I am) and condemnation (they aren't as good as me). The point in promoting morality becomes forcing people to think think you instead of loving and caring for others. Morality gets reduced to a set of beliefs one intellectually assents to instead of a way of life one lives.

    And while heart change is good (compassion and love are prerequisites for working for change) to think that that is all that needs to happen in the abortion issue ignores a lot of the complexities. Like I mentioned initially - a lot of people who get abortions believe it is "immoral" and choose abortion because they love the baby (they love it to too much to subject it to the life of abuse and poverty they are stuck with or to give it away to a potential child abuser, or to subject it to a life of condemnation by the church for being a bastard - heaven seems like the best option). I don't necessary agree with the logic, but often abortion is the moral choice for some people.

    So if we really love these women and love these children (and not just the concept), we have to see that morality and social reform are really intertwined. A moral system must be worked for in order to make other moral choices possible.

    So when people are out there showing love, trying to make the world a better place, and trying to fix a broken system they are working for moral and social reform. Holding a sign or screaming at women that they are evil and wrong promotes an idea and has nothing to do with love and true morality.

     
  • At 3/12/2007 11:30:00 AM, Blogger elman

    I think abortion should be done if the mother will die should she continue pregnancy. But the question should have been, how to prevent abortion. Even in the old days, abortion is prevalent and the Lord hates it too!

    Proverbs6:

    16 There are six things the LORD hates,
    seven that are detestable to him:

    17 haughty eyes,
    a lying tongue,
    hands that shed innocent blood,

    18 a heart that devises wicked schemes,
    feet that are quick to rush into evil,

    19 a false witness who pours out lies
    and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.

    I say, reform should first be done in the religious aspect, which I say begin at the grass roots. All has been said and done, truly, others would even want to legalise abortion and the like. Therefore, enough is enough. Let us not debate on Moral vs Social reform but rather:

    2 Chronicles 7:14-22 (NIV)

    14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 15 Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place. 16 I have chosen and consecrated this temple so that my Name may be there forever. My eyes and my heart will always be there.

    17 As for you, if you walk before me as David your father did, and do all I command, and observe my decrees and laws, 18 I will establish your royal throne, as I covenanted with David your father when I said, ‘You shall never fail to have a man to rule over Israel.’

    19 But if you turn away and forsake the decrees and commands I have given you and go off to serve other gods and worship them, 20 then I will uproot Israel from my land, which I have given them, and will reject this temple I have consecrated for my Name. I will make it a byword and an object of ridicule among all peoples. 21 And though this temple is now so imposing, all who pass by will be appalled and say, ‘Why has the LORD done such a thing to this land and to this temple?’ 22 People will answer, ‘Because they have forsaken the LORD, the God of their fathers, who brought them out of Egypt, and have embraced other gods, worshiping and serving them—that is why he brought all this disaster on them.’

    Allow me to link this to my blog for example. To God be the glory!

     
  • At 3/12/2007 12:24:00 PM, Anonymous Paul Johnston

    Is there not a hierarchy of importance when it comes to distinguishing morality from social reform? Does not the faith/moral inform the work/action?

    Defining the right moral posture is crucial to effecting the right social reform. Ignore morals or embrace bad ones and social reform can become a viciously relative non-sequiter.

    Didn't Hitler think "living space" for the Arayan people, was morally justifiable. Weren't world war and mass exterminations of peoples his means of social reform.

     
  • At 3/12/2007 03:20:00 PM, Blogger kent

    I do not know how to delink social and moral reforms. I also not know how to create a hierarchy for those reforms.

    Case in point is abortion which the gentleman brought up with you. How do you deliniate which are the social reforms and which are the moral reforms in terms living wages, exploitation of women, health care for women and children in poverty, affordable housing in safe neighborhoods, the role of fathers and sane sexual practices. How are any of those not moral? How are any of those not social? What is moral choice for the Christ follower when it come to responding to those who struggle with this issue? When does it then cross over to the social ramifications?

    To me, the attempt to separate social for moral, making them clean catagories repeates the mistake of the church in assuming we are in essence legos that we can be snapped together and pulled a part without any consequences. We are an organic whole, intertwined and ssytemically connected. To separate the social from the moral is not possible, unless it is does artificially.

     
  • At 3/12/2007 09:28:00 PM, Blogger Tim Hallman

    I suppose for all practical purposes, moral reform is social reform since people are interdependent, interconnected, intertwined. My personal moral choices/actions (or lack thereof) affect other people, thus the social dimension. Hmmmm....

    Your use of the word "system" struck me as odd. In light of how messy moral decisions end up being, how realistic is it to have a system?

     
  • At 3/12/2007 10:00:00 PM, Blogger Julie

    Thanks for the comments and discussion.

    Tim - I used the word system not to refer to a system of morals buy a system that is moral - an economic/political/global system that is moral in that it works for the good (as opposed to greed and power). Does that make for sense?

    Elman - prayer is good, but faith without works in dead. Our faith must have action and discussion is necessary to determine what action will be most effective. It is a way of being good stewards of what God has entrusted us with.

    Kent - thank you for the picture of how it is all connected. its a lot more complicated that some people try to make it out to be.

    Paul - I fully agree that people can have bad morals which lead to bad actions (I personally see the typical evangelical response to homsexuality or patriotism as such). But I really don't see how the hierarchy exists. People can do good actions (which are moral) even if they are not personally moral. But people can consider themselves moral (and force it on others) without being involved in any action (to which I have to question if they are really moral)

     
  • At 3/13/2007 05:41:00 AM, Blogger Tim Hallman

    Julie,

    Yes, your use of the phrase "moral system" makes sense. In reading more carefully what you wrote, I can see how carefully you wrote. Well said.

    Your suggestions for how to approach abortion is the most mature one I've ever read. Our church is currently helping support a crisis pregnancy center as one way to deal with the abortion issue. Your description of other ways has got me thinking of what else we can constructively do as a church.

    Thanks.

     
  • At 3/15/2007 11:44:00 AM, Blogger elman

    Julie, you said: "Elman - prayer is good, but faith without works is dead. Our faith must have action and discussion is necessary to determine what action will be most effective. It is a way of being good stewards of what God has entrusted us with."

    So, Julie, can you give me a verse in the bible that says that "prayer is good, but faith without works is dead"?

    I asked Julie because I think she is already sharing ideas against what is written in the Holy Bible.

    Please read this verse:

    2 Timothy 4:3-4 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

    Julie, may I ask again, is it not praying to God an act of faith? Please read again the verse I mentioned:

    2 Chronicles 7:14-22 (NIV)

    14 if my people, who are called by my name,

    will humble themselves and pray

    and seek my face

    and turn from their wicked ways,

    then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

    15 Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place. 16 I have chosen and consecrated this temple so that my Name may be there forever. My eyes and my heart will always be there.

    Julie, before you pray have you asked any of the following: Who are you God? How shall I pray? To whom shall I pray? How shall I pray? How long and when shall I pray? What shall I say in praying?What shall I think when praying?

    All I was saying is that moral vs social reform is nothing new when it comes to a debate, and it even existed in times of old. But have abortion to the most wicked example of it, been eradicated?

    What affirmative action can you get when you discuss a 'chicken or egg' topic?

    Julie said: "This whole distinction (or lack thereof) between moral and social reform has been bugging me the last few days. I keep wondering, is it even possible to have moral reform without social reform? Doesn't living out our faith necessitate action? I too often do live the life of the mind and don't put action to my words as often as I should. So I'm thinking through what this looks like - any thoughts?

    Julie mentioned too prior to the above that: "So to impose a moral judgement on a person (abortion is wrong) without being there to help her have a dignified life is hypocritical. Morality is way more complicated than that. These are real people in real situations that need help. Most of them know abortion is wrong, many of them know sex before marriage is wrong, but they don't see a way out of the system. So changing the system, showing love, and doing all that social reform stuff is how moral reform gets done for most emergents."

    Julie, may I ask again, how do you define morality, and help?

    How about its definition in the bible? Why do you think God gave conditions including seeking His face?

    You can see how a person would give his own perception and opinion about a subject without realizing that he has no basis at all but a man's pre-conceived ideas to be specific.

    What is the status quo? Why are women pregnant, even girls? Why are there men who abuse women? Why engage in pre marital sex or decide to have a baby when in fact you cannot feed yourself?

    The answer to this is found in the bible. Let us discuss the basics of morality in the bible. Read the verse I mentioned.

    I understand that Julie was just expressing her passion to help, especially with the abused women.

    Because of this passion she was even able to think and say that: "People can do good actions (which are moral) even if they are not personally moral. But people can consider themselves moral (and force it on others) without being involved in any action (to which I have to question if they are really moral)"

    But even if we consider her statement without accepting it, we must realize that Julie may be acting in good faith but does not necessarily mean that it is a moral thing to do!

    Even if we say that it is an affirmative action, we should have a basis. As she is claiming to be a Christian too, she should have realized that the reference to what is moral and divine guidance is found in the Holy Bible. The Holy bible should be primarily considered before having an affirmative action. Actually, consulting the holy bible is an affirmative action and an of act of faith.

    Isaiah 34:16 Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

    God gave conditions which include seeking His face.

    Isaiah 1:18-20 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. 19If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land: 20But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.

    Julie, yes, you have the passion for the truth and want to share it. And there is a saying that when you want to share something and if it is unworthy, keep it to yourself! When a blind man leads a blind, they will both fall into the ditch. I mean, make sure first if what you are preaching is the real truth. Abortion, homesexuality are issues of salvation and part of what comes with the journey of the Christian faith. And when you are walking in the way of God, you only have one thinking, one faith!

    As a christian, I will of course promote the Word of God and push it even if it hurts including those who think differently.

    Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

    So, I am saying this not to malign any person, or Julie but to say that when you refer to the Holy Bible you can even smell who is telling the truth or not:

    Ecclesiastes 10:1 — Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savor: so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honor.

    But when you refer to the book of the Lord, you are called blessed:

    Revelation 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

    Actually, there is no difference between lying and abortion. Let us go back to the versus I first mentioned from my first comment:

    Proverbs6:

    16 There are six things the LORD hates,
    seven that are detestable to him:

    17 haughty eyes,
    a lying tongue,
    hands that shed innocent blood,

    18 a heart that devises wicked schemes,
    feet that are quick to rush into evil,

    19 a false witness who pours out lies
    and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.

    I say, reform should first be done in the religious aspect, which I say begin at the grass roots. All has been said and done, truly, others would even want to legalise abortion and the like. Therefore, enough is enough. Let us not debate on Moral vs Social reform but rather:

    2 Chronicles 7:14-22 (NIV)

    14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 15 Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place. 16 I have chosen and consecrated this temple so that my Name may be there forever. My eyes and my heart will always be there.

    17 As for you, if you walk before me as David your father did, and do all I command, and observe my decrees and laws, 18 I will establish your royal throne, as I covenanted with David your father when I said, ‘You shall never fail to have a man to rule over Israel.’

    19 But if you turn away and forsake the decrees and commands I have given you and go off to serve other gods and worship them, 20 then I will uproot Israel from my land, which I have given them, and will reject this temple I have consecrated for my Name. I will make it a byword and an object of ridicule among all peoples. 21 And though this temple is now so imposing, all who pass by will be appalled and say, ‘Why has the LORD done such a thing to this land and to this temple?’ 22 People will answer, ‘Because they have forsaken the LORD, the God of their fathers, who brought them out of Egypt, and have embraced other gods, worshiping and serving them—that is why he brought all this disaster on them.’

     
  • At 3/15/2007 12:00:00 PM, Blogger elman

    Now, why is there abortion, different definitions of morality, different means and ways of helping, abusive men, abusive women, abusive children, abusive pastors, false teachers, emerging churches:

    Consider this as an answer,

    2 Chronicles 7:14-22 (NIV)

    - are you God's people
    - who are called by His name
    - have humbled yourselves
    - and prayed
    - and seeketh His face
    - and turned away from your wicked ways?

    God said: "...then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 15 Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place.

    16 I have chosen and consecrated this temple so that my Name may be there forever. My eyes and my heart will always be there.


    17 As for you, if you walk before me as David your father did, and do all I command, and observe my decrees and laws, 18 I will establish your royal throne, as I covenanted with David your father when I said, ‘You shall never fail to have a man to rule over Israel.’

    19 But if you turn away and forsake the decrees and commands I have given you and go off to serve other gods and worship them, 20 then I will uproot Israel from my land, which I have given them, and will reject this temple I have consecrated for my Name. I will make it a byword and an object of ridicule among all peoples.


    21 And though this temple is now so imposing, all who pass by will be appalled and say, ‘Why has the LORD done such a thing to this land and to this temple?’

    This is an answer too when people ask about the wicked things that ever happened to them, even to the Gentiles:

    22 People will answer, ‘Because they have forsaken the LORD, the God of their fathers, who brought them out of Egypt, and have embraced other gods, worshiping and serving them—that is why he brought all this disaster on them.’

     
  • At 3/15/2007 12:46:00 PM, Blogger Julie

    elman - we obviously have different theological backgrounds, cultures, and philosophies of biblical interpretation (even if you don't believe those exist). I don't have time to engage with your opinions right now. You are of course entitled to your opinions and interpretations, but I find it rather rude to have people accuse me of "sharing ideas against what is written in holy bible." I have little patience with people who call anyone who doesn't agree with them a heretic, and it is even more difficult when those people are blind to their lenses and philosophical worldviews. If I have time, I might reply to your thoughts, but I'm doubting that this could ever be a worthwhile discussion.

     
  • At 3/15/2007 12:51:00 PM, Blogger Mike Clawson

    So, Julie, can you give me a verse in the bible that says that "prayer is good, but faith without works is dead"?

    Are you serious? You've never read the book of James? Try starting with James 2:14.

    Maybe you'd be better off if you'd actually read the Bible rather than just cutting and pasting long sections of it into someone else's blog as you accuse them of being a heretic.

     
  • At 3/15/2007 12:51:00 PM, Blogger Mike Clawson

    This comment has been removed by the author.

     
  • At 3/17/2007 03:01:00 AM, Blogger elman

    This comment has been removed by the author.

     
  • At 3/17/2007 03:09:00 AM, Blogger elman

    This comment has been removed by the author.

     
  • At 3/17/2007 03:18:00 AM, Blogger elman

    Hi mike, and julie

    This is what James 2:14,17(KJV) states:

    14What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

    17Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

    What does faith and works from the above verses mean anyways? Both is needed for salvation.

    I was asking Julie if she can give me a verse in the bible that says that "prayer is good, but faith without works is dead"?

    Because julie said: "Elman - prayer is good, but faith without works in dead. Our faith must have action and discussion is necessary to determine what action will be most effective. It is a way of being good stewards of what God has entrusted us with."

    But from her last answer, I think, she really does not want a discussion when she said: "If I have time, I might reply to your thoughts, but I'm doubting that this could ever be a worthwhile discussion."

    But if it is not her intention, then let me continue.

    Yes, our faith must have action and discussion is necessary to determine what action will be most effective. It is a way of being good stewards of what God has entrusted us with. Who is that "us" as steward? Is it that word "us" as steward, are those who called by God to pray to him and seek His face, etc.?

    I recall that prayer is part of the conditions given by God found at 2 Chronicles 7:14-22 (NIV) and not prayer alone. But rather there is a set of conditions given by God, which is also to seek his face. When you seek his face, is not that you need to seek His righteousness,and His kingdom?

    Now God's righteousness is the basis for affirmative actions and morality. Aren't this post about moral vs social reform? So, let us consult the bible not our pre-conceived ideas.

    The world was shaped by ideologies of people and look what the status quo now? Like watching Harry Potter. Some people who are hypocrites said that it is bad, but I watched it too! And since I am studying the bible, I am able to distinguish if that story is an abomination to God or not. But then again, how about the kids watching it? Can they decipher or distinguish the satanic portion of the story, or the moral? What moral does the movie imparts to kids, and even adults who thinks like kids? What will happen if their minds linger on the satanic portion of the story and perceive it as a natural thing to do?

    Julie, have you distinguished it?

    Like eating chocolates, do we need to enforce to stop it since too much of it can cause diabetes? How about eating it during pregnancy, can it lead to abortion or irregular development of the fetus?

    Ofcourse, what do I know about chocolates if I have no basis for such claim?

    What is my basis to enforce morality when I have no basis what is good and bad?

    What is my basis for me to say otherwise in connection to what Julie claims like Abortion, homesexuality are not issues of salvation, but part of what comes with the journey of the Christian faith. But does the bible really says that those are not part of salvation? Homesexuals or gays, lesbians, can we stop them liking their same sex. Is is not natural for a gay to like his or her same sex? For example, when you force a gay man to like a girl, is it not like forcing men to like men and women to like women? We have a saying in Filipino male gay, "kikidlat at bubuka ang lupa kapag hinalikan ko ang babae"; in english "I will be strucked by lightning and be eaten by the earth if I kiss a girl"

    But what can we advise gays? It is normal to like same sex but it is abominable to God if they go beyond it because we are going beyond our nature, the purpose of us being a man or being a woman.

    She added that she will of course promote her beliefs on the issue, but not in a way that hurts or excludes those who think differently. I say a claim like this is a hyprocrite one. Even Jesus Christ said to this type of people

    John 8:42-49

    42Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. 43Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me? 47He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God."
    48The Jews answered him, "Aren't we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?"
    49"I am not possessed by a demon," said Jesus, "but I honor my Father and you dishonor me.

    People tends to get hurt when they are criticized.

    Going back to the other verses I mentioned from my first comment, is it not lying tounges and the hands that shed an innocent blood(abortion) is part of the seven things God detests? If you think you are told to be a liar, search yourself, of what you said, of what ideology you are imparting, is it biblical? Does it conforms to the morality mentioned in the scriptures?

    And since I was not asking mike, who might have just read up to that line that states my question, and the comment of julie, I do not wonder why he talks like that.

    By the way Julie, it is you who coined yourself a heretic, not me. It is your interpretation. And that was just my point.

    It is best to know God first and His righteousness so that we can distinguish what is moral, what is bad and good. By doing this, we know what the true love, charity that we can share with others as our society moves forward to Gods righteousness.

    You cannot say that you love the abused women when you yourself does not yet known its meaning. God is love. Know God first, His righteousness and His kingdom.

    But if you will insist of your own righteousness and promote it, how will you learn of the truth?

    I hope you can consider this perspective. And it is really up to the God of heavens to consider your affirmative actions made outside the church of God, mentioned by Paul in the Holy Scriptures.

    Daniel 12:
    9And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.
    10Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

     

Links to this post:

Create a Link

--------------