Thoughts on "God and the Gay Christian"?

[Tassman]

Oh stop Tass. The Universal Declaration on Human Rights is arbitrary, invented and impotent. There are no "human rights" in a godless universe any more than there are rights for house flies.

Well we live in a "godless universe" and you can't prove otherwise. And the majority of nations have recognised The Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the right of international courts to prosecute perceived violation of human rights. Attitudes have changed and to deny this fact is to bury your head in the sand.

What is wrong with totalitarian rulers? After all that is exactly what we find in higher primate groups, and in most of human history. So it must have survival advantage?

Very true. Hence it's especially sad that having developed beyond such forms of governance many seek to revert to it. E.g. ISIS or Christian Reconstructionism. You haven't addressed the point that unquestioning obedience to a totalitarian ruler such as Yahweh or Hitler is NOT morality but merely blind obedience.

[Tassman]

Well for man, it came from using our will wrongly. Choice. For animals - who knows, there are two possibilities. Like we discussed in the past. But the point is, in your godless universe these are completely natural acts, and most likely helpful for survival.

It was also "natural" for our primitive ancestors to attribute agency to thunder, lightening and other natural forces, to worship them as deities and appease them with offerings in order to be spared their wrath. But we know better nowadays - well some of us do.

[JonathanL]

You haven't addressed the point that unquestioning obedience to a totalitarian ruler such as Yahweh or Hitler is NOT morality but merely blind obedience.

These aren't mutually exclusive.

[Starlight]

I read God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships by Matthew Vines recently so that I would have something to recommend to conservative Christians curious about how anyone could take the same high view of the Bible and be LGBT affirming.

Back when I was a bible-believing Christian I always believed that the best reading of the Bible was supportive of homosexuality, and I considered writing a book on the subject myself. I haven't read Vines' book, but the arguments of his that you've mentioned seem to be all the same kinds of arguments I have made myself in various internet forums over the years.

It's a lot easier to defend the institution of slavery from the bible than it is to defend an anti-gay viewpoint.

However, even though I don't think that the Bible itself endorses an anti-gay position, I still judge the Bible as morally guilty for being insufficiently clear on the subjects of slavery, homosexuality, genocide, segregation, racism, torture, the role of women, etc. A lot of harm has been done over the millennia by Christians with regard to those topics, and if the Bible had instructed Christians more clearly and/or more accurately on these various moral issues, a lot of that harm could have been prevented. For a holy book claiming to give moral guidance from an omniscient God, it does a pretty sucky job when it comes to being clear about some topics that have proven rather historically important, which apparently God didn't foresee.

[seer]

Well we live in a "godless universe" and you can't prove otherwise. And the majority of nations have recognised The Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the right of international courts to prosecute perceived violation of human rights. Attitudes have changed and to deny this fact is to bury your head in the sand.

Whose Attitudes? The Communists? The Hutus? ISIS? You can never know where the evolutionary process will lead Tass. To a more peaceful world with more freedom or a more violent world with less freedom.

Very true. Hence it's especially sad that having developed beyond such forms of governance many seek to revert to it. E.g. ISIS or Christian Reconstructionism. You haven't addressed the point that unquestioning obedience to a totalitarian ruler such as Yahweh or Hitler is NOT morality but merely blind obedience.

Tass, this completely irrational. There is no reverting. There is only what works for survival. And if totalitarianism and violence helps us cull the herd of the weak and meek then that is good for the survival of the species.

[seer]

It was also "natural" for our primitive ancestors to attribute agency to thunder, lightening and other natural forces, to worship them as deities and appease them with offerings in order to be spared their wrath. But we know better nowadays - well some of us do.

What do you mean - some of us? As far as I know atheists are still the minority worldwide. And don't blame us, after you said we don't have freewill - so it was the evolutionary process that created us to think and act this way.

[Adrift]

I still judge the Bible as morally guilty for being insufficiently clear on the subjects of slavery, homosexuality, genocide, segregation, racism, torture, the role of women, etc. A lot of harm has been done over the millennia by Christians with regard to those topics, and if the Bible had instructed Christians more clearly and/or more accurately on these various moral issues, a lot of that harm could have been prevented. For a holy book claiming to give moral guidance from an omniscient God, it does a pretty sucky job when it comes to being clear about some topics that have proven rather historically important, which apparently God didn't foresee.

This is a strange thing to say, because, if it weren't for the Bible and Judeo-Christianity you'd never have come to your current views on these things. In a world where Christianity never existed, genocide, torture, racism, patriarchalism, segregation etc. would be considered quite normal. Just the way the world works. The Bible's description of events that you're calling genocide were extremely EXTREMELY common occurrences in the bronze age. From a 21st century Westerner's perspective, it might not seem so, but Israel was radically humane and progressive in warfare, and the treatment of foreign people compared to surrounding cultures in the Bronze Age Middle East. And it was precisely because of the radically positive treatment of slaves, women, and foreigners that Christianity was able to sweep through the Roman Empire. Christianity literally took root among women, slaves, and the disenfranchised because of its teachings on equality and love. Christians looked after the ill, and the impoverished, took in unwanted children who were exposed to the elements to die, and were such a force of good that they were impossible to ignore by Pagan Rome. It was because of the virtues and humanitarian efforts of Christianity that intellectual movements like Humanism were introduced to the world. Your progressive, 21st century view of morality is completely due to Christianity. If you were born in a different part of the world without the ethics and teachings provided the West through Christianity, you may be supporting the actions of ISIS...

[fm93]

This is a strange thing to say, because, if it weren't for the Bible and Judeo-Christianity you'd never have come to your current views on these things. In a world where Christianity never existed, genocide, torture, racism, patriarchalism, segregation etc. would be considered quite normal. Just the way the world works.

I certainly agree that mankind would've found a way to propagate genocide, torture, racism, patriarchalism, and segregation even without Christianity, and it's certainly true that some of the key figures in fighting against those evils of the human condition were devout Christians who did so on the basis of Christian principles. But it's also true that Christianity has been a key context in which people justified the practice of those things as well. And, well, I think the issue of whether parts of the Bible could've been made more clear is an appropriate one to raise. Consider for instance the objection that Paul chauvinistically tries to silence women as written in 1 Corinthians. The common apologetics response I've seen involves some technical argument about Greek rhetoric and some obscure Greek particle that indicates that Paul is actually quoting and then refuting an opponent. That may be the case, but how many people throughout the history of Western civilization have read that passage, and by percentage, how many such people do you think actually had the education and resources to know about Greek rhetoric and particles? Most people could not have possibly found this out, and they would be left to understandably believe that Paul, speaking on behalf of and thereby representing the decree of the God of the universe, really was forbidding women to speak in churches. Thus, I do think this is an issue that apologists ought to deal with more thoroughly.

Additionally, I have an urge to point out the amusing observation of how seer gives your post an amen in apparent support, yet he himself has shown support for torture, racism, patriarchalism and segregation.

And it was precisely because of the radically positive treatment of slaves, women, and foreigners that Christianity was able to sweep through the Roman Empire. Christianity literally took root among women, slaves, and the disenfranchised because of its teachings on equality and love. Christians looked after the ill, and the impoverished, took in unwanted children who were exposed to the elements to die, and were such a force of good that they were impossible to ignore by Pagan Rome. It was because of the virtues and humanitarian efforts of Christianity that intellectual movements like Humanism were introduced to the world. Your progressive, 21st century view of morality is completely due to Christianity. If you were born in a different part of the world without the ethics and teachings provided the West through Christianity, you may be supporting the actions of ISIS...

And today Christians in the Western world are known for being and doing the opposite. How far the church has fallen.

[seasanctuary]

And it was precisely because of the radically positive treatment of slaves, women, and foreigners that Christianity was able to sweep through the Roman Empire. Christianity literally took root among women, slaves, and the disenfranchised because of its teachings on equality and love. Christians looked after the ill, and the impoverished, took in unwanted children who were exposed to the elements to die, and were such a force of good that they were impossible to ignore by Pagan Rome. It was because of the virtues and humanitarian efforts of Christianity that intellectual movements like Humanism were introduced to the world. Your progressive, 21st century view of morality is completely due to Christianity.

And the inheritors of this morally progressive Christianity are the affirming Christians of today. I look forward to the moral gains in the world these Christians will cultivate.

[seer]

Additionally, I have an urge to point out the amusing observation of how seer gives your post an amen in apparent support, yet he himself has shown support for torture, racism, patriarchalism and segregation.

Why are you lying?

[Starlight]

This is a strange thing to say, because, if it weren't for the Bible and Judeo-Christianity you'd never have come to your current views on these things.

That is completely and utterly unprovable one way or the other. It is impossible to even begin to speculate what the present-day world would look like without Judaism & Christianity (& Islam that resulted from both).

From a 21st century Westerner's perspective, it might not seem so, but Israel was radically humane and progressive in warfare, and the treatment of foreign people compared to surrounding cultures in the Bronze Age Middle East.

No. If anything, Israel was typically more brutal than it's neighbors. Of course, that does vary throughout the Bible.

I was looking at the life of David recently. In 1 Sam 30, the Bible makes clear that the Amalekites killed no one when they raided David's town, but when David strikes back he kills almost every last man (his usual policy - 1 Sam 27:9). Whereas when David captured cities, he engaged in genocide against civilians (2 Sam 8:2 & 1 Kings 11:15) and mass torture (2 Samuel 12:31 / 1 Chronicles 20:3).

Christians looked after the ill, and the impoverished, took in unwanted children who were exposed to the elements to die, and were such a force of good that they were impossible to ignore by Pagan Rome.

Yep, I agree with this. As square_peg mentioned, it would be wonderful if the Church was still known for their good deeds, rather than the opposite.

It was because of the virtues and humanitarian efforts of Christianity that intellectual movements like Humanism were introduced to the world.

Sure, most intellectual movements build on what came before them. But if it hadn't been Christianity that it was building on, then it would have been something else.

There were various moralistic movements in ancient Greece, and in ancient Rome, long before Judaism/Christianity had affected them - we don't owe the basic concept of morality or thinking about morality to the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Unfortunately we do owe the basic concept of persecuting gay people to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition: As historical surveys make clear, the vast majority of civilizations throughout history have been fairly tolerant or accepting of gay people except those influenced by Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions. There is nothing comparable in the historical record of other cultures to the death penalty for gay sex that Christians have assumed is present in Leviticus 18 & 20.

Your progressive, 21st century view of morality is completely due to Christianity.

As I mentioned in the morality thread in this forum, empirical research across cultures has found that treating people well is the one thing that is universally agreed to be a part of morality. Progressive morality has been almost solely concerned with throwing out add-ons brought by Christianity rather than inventing anything new.

If you were born in a different part of the world without the ethics and teachings provided the West through Christianity, you may be supporting the actions of ISIS...

I'm not religious, so it seems unlikely I would support a religious movement.

But yeah, no matter where you go in the world, religions seem to try to make it there business to distort the basic universal morality of treating other people well and instead introduce additional rules and complications that they claim is 'moral' and 'what God wants'. And insofar as the ideas that religions teach that result in people not actually treating others well, we can say those religions are immoral. Christianity's own record on the subject is spotty: There's plenty of good stuff (love others as yourself etc), and plenty of bad stuff (slavery, genocide, homosexuality, rights of women etc). The sheer fact that it is a religion makes it morally dangerous because people can stand up and say "God told me X" which distracts people away from the universal morality of treating others well and makes people start acting out of potentially very complicated moral reasoning.

[fm93]

Why are you lying?

I'm not. Any of these posts look familiar?

"Waterboard Feinstein!"

"I think the European white race and culture is the best most advanced culture/ race in history. The most prolific race when it comes to science, invention and political structure, ideals. Far surpassing any other race known to man."

Or approvingly quoting sexist remarks like ""Feminism was established as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society"?

Or the many posts essentially implying that bakeries should be segregated between gay couples and straight couples?

[shunyadragon]

This is a strange thing to say, because, if it weren't for the Bible and Judeo-Christianity you'd never have come to your current views on these things. In a world where Christianity never existed, genocide, torture, racism, patriarchalism, segregation etc. would be considered quite normal.

I the Christian world e have known these things are quite normal.

[Starlight]

What do you mean - some of us? As far as I know atheists are still the minority worldwide.

Atheists now outnumber Christians in quite a few Western countries.

[MaxVel]

And the inheritors of this morally progressive Christianity are the affirming Christians of today. I look forward to the moral gains in the world these Christians will cultivate.

What do you mean? How do you define 'moral gains'?