How far should we go with enforcing sinlessness on non believers?

[Aardverk]

Influence is preferential,but anyone with a true desire to listen usually doesnt snap about someone shouting their mouth off when an opinion is being voiced.

Again, you are absolutely right. You may well influence someone 'with a true desire to listen' but you are more likely to alienate those who do not have a 'true desire to listen'.

It is entirely your choice who you want to communicate with. Do you want to 'preach to the converted' or try to educate others?

 

[Chris]

I have been a christian now for over 25 years and the one thing that is constant in my life I have seen is the way 2 types of people deviate in life practices and beliefs to converge later on.

One may follow the way of sinfulness and a rebellion against morality. This person often receives all the the things that go with this lifestyle choice they are fun things and also some pretty undesirable things but they always seem to go hand in hand.

Often it is is unstable or broken relationships and ill health or poor life choices that bring insecurity and misery later.

The other might follow a way of morality and disciplines, say like a christian that keeps a stable (hopefully happy) family and being a wise steward with given resources is financially independent and in a position of assistance either financially or moral support. (From my observation a lot of Christians and religious people of many sorts end up like this).

Now back to the converging I was discussing and it has happened to me many times and that is when things go wrong who do people turn to? They cling onto the one who is kind and stable for help and advice. They desperatly want the one who has answers they can see and has gentle way to help them.

You can say all you want to people and protest anything but the example you set and how your life is perceived by others is the loudest clearest message that could possibly be broadcast to anyone.

Things of an advice spoken in the past are amplified by the later realization of life's consequences because of ignored unknown advice.

That is the time when the words of Jesus have power like no other to change willing people to be in a better place.

It is when you have earned the right, not because you feel you have the right, to intervene as someones adviser in moral issues!

That is where I have had the best success guiding people towards knowledge of Jesus and hopefully faith. We area all different and different methods will suit different people. We are all part of the body but each part has different roles...

 

[Aardverk]

You can say all you want to people and protest anything but the example you set and how your life is perceived by others is the loudest clearest message that could possibly be broadcast to anyone..........

It is when you have earned the right, not because you feel you have the right, to intervene as someones adviser in moral issues!

Well said Sir!

 

[Elysian]

I think if we are going to oppose and force the public to abide by our ideology then just as all sin is equal then all people must be forced to stop all sinful activities. You see what I mean if you do for one why don't we do for all? Why don't churches unite and force night club closure because it hurts kids morally.

You're absolutely right. Conservatives, whether Christian or Muslim or whatever, are essentially the same: self-righteous, hypocritical, and bigoted. No wonder Jesus attacked such people while showing compassion to sinners.

 

[reba]

You're absolutely right. Conservatives, whether Christian or Muslim or whatever, are essentially the same: self-righteous, hypocritical, and bigoted. No wonder Jesus attacked such people while showing compassion to sinners.

self-righteous, hypocritical, and bigoted.

 

[ChristianNationalist]

You're absolutely right. Conservatives, whether Christian or Muslim or whatever, are essentially the same: self-righteous, hypocritical, and bigoted. No wonder Jesus attacked such people while showing compassion to sinners.

Strange words; how self-righteous, hypocritical, and bigoted of you. Glass houses my friend, glass houses.

 

[Elysian]

Strange words; how self-righteous, hypocritical, and bigoted of you.

Not at all. Just stating facts.

 

[childeye]

It should be well known that sinfullness cannot be forced out of an unbeliever. On the contrary it only adds more power to sin. Those promoting the concept that righteous behavior can be brought about through passing laws, are in contradiction to the New Testament. Such is what Paul called righteousness through the works of the law, wherein he states that righteousness is by grace through faith not by works, it is a gift of God. This desire to instill righteousness through the law is the telltale sign of those yet in bondage. And these in bondage will persecute the True Christians even though they say they believe in the Christ.

 

[phantom309]

Again, you are absolutely right. You may well influence someone 'with a true desire to listen' but you are more likely to alienate those who do not have a 'true desire to listen'.

It is entirely your choice who you want to communicate with. Do you want to 'preach to the converted' or try to educate others?

Well,you offer a humorous analogy here.Those who refuse to listen by nature are alienating themselves.If I offer respectful,objective truth and someone is offended by that,then theres nothing I can do..no middle ground to approach.They have decided themselves to shut it out.Which brings about the focus of my above statements.We should not slink around,fearful of offending someone or worry that were not being "tolerant" of other views.Thats obviously a severe double standard these days.Say what you have to say,with confidence and shut out the criticism.Because no matter how we approach a topic on Jesus we are criticized,as further evidenced by this very conversation.

Quite obviously were not talking about the already converted here.Ive talked to many people along the way and you have a few basic types.Most if they dont agree with what youre saying will play the part of the indignant victim,oppressed by your message and claiming to alienated as you say..and this is no matter how gentle you approach it.Some however are willing to listen,and have that genuine exchange.Those are ones we all enjoy talking to,regardless of orientation.They may still walk away with the same beliefs as when they came,but I enjoy talking to them no less.

Ive known an atheist for probably over 10 years.Over that time,weve had the theological discussions on his side and mine and everything in between.Never once,as mythical as it may sound,have we gotten angry,frustrated or mad at each other.Ive spoken to him just as I speak in here..without fear,worry,etc. and I think thats one thing he respects about me..I give him honest feedback and he does the same with me.The difference here is the fact that hes respectful and honest enough not to play the part of the oppressed/alienated atheist when I throw something on the table that he disagrees with.

The point of bringing that up is to say that if more atheists/unbelievers/unsure/confused/whatever people out there would throw aside their personal agendas and talk to us like people,I suspect there would be much less conflict.Those outside the church are always the first to slap blame on the christian,claiming unfair/hostile treatment,but in my 33 years I can honestly say Ive seen quite the opposite.

I once took the approach of being overly respectful,fearful to offend someone,etc.In recent years Ive taken another look at that and realized that if you dont have the confidence to stand behind what you believe,why should someone else believe it?They likely wont,added to the fact that many just see it as a sign of weakness and are quite willing to walk all over you at that point.Its laughable.

There is no way to please everyone and many are closed-minded to outside opinions.All anyone can do is offer conversation.Respect needs to be on both sides,not just one.

 

[Chris]

There is no way to please everyone and many are closed-minded to outside opinions.

if one walks fully in the light or fully in the darkness they can be blinded and not see things around them. We are called to walk in the light but I dont think to the point where we allow ourselves to be blinded to anything but the light or how could you see to help your brother up who is not in the light with you. If you are in a bright room at night you cant see into the darkness unless you shine some light on the darkness and step into it. Likewise how could you ever escape dark unless someone shines light into there. you would never know you are in dark unless you are shown light.

lol thats my metaphorical round about way of saying I agree with you and listening to others with an open mind illuminates you and them. You may find you are not as smart as you think you are and your answers and beliefs could improve..as I have many times.

The criticisms and questions of unbelievers have challenged me to know more about my faith.

 

[phantom309]

Oh I hear ya man,I think that happens to us all at various points.

 

[modernnihilst]

Some however are willing to listen,and have that genuine exchange.Those are ones we all enjoy talking to,regardless of orientation.They may still walk away with the same beliefs as when they came,but I enjoy talking to them no less.

The point of bringing that up is to say that if more atheists/unbelievers/unsure/confused/whatever people out there would throw aside their personal agendas and talk to us like people,I suspect there would be much less conflict.Those outside the church are always the first to slap blame on the christian,claiming unfair/hostile treatment,but in my 33 years I can honestly say Ive seen quite the opposite.

I quote these 2 points specificaly to bring up the point I have seen in my experience. If there was only this level of willingness to hold an open and respectfull conversation between Christians and non alike the world would be in better shape than it is in now. However it is not just the non Christians that have thier minds closed, I know from experience that the bible is a HEAVY book to be beaten about the head with. I guess the point I'd like to offer in counter to your points is that the blame does not lie on either side alone but to the extremes of both. Care to join me in the middle?

 

[phantom309]

I quote these 2 points specificaly to bring up the point I have seen in my experience. If there was only this level of willingness to hold an open and respectfull conversation between Christians and non alike the world would be in better shape than it is in now. However it is not just the non Christians that have thier minds closed, I know from experience that the bible is a HEAVY book to be beaten about the head with. I guess the point I'd like to offer in counter to your points is that the blame does not lie on either side alone but to the extremes of both. Care to join me in the middle?

Absolutely..not only is it easier on the nerves,but something actually gets accomplished that way.

Id be lying to you and myself if I tried to say that its all one-sided,which its not.A large part just depends on the specific person(s) in question at the time.

One thing I will offer as well is that for us,the bible is all we have to go on..the only compass we have to keep us straight so to speak.Thats why we keep a kung fu grip on it and most of the quotes and points we have come straight out of it.Its easy to see where one would feel bludgeoned by it at times in that regard.

With that said,I can see where it would seem close-minded of us not to consider anything outside of it.At times Im sure that is the case,but much of it stems from wanting to stick to what the word outlines and not deviate from it as much as possible.

Also for clarity when I spoke about the double standard on tolerance,that wasnt intended to say that all fault for such lies in the other camp,Im not sure how that was taken.

Regardless of spiritual orientation a great many people lack a full understanding of the system they represent.This mixed with personal agendas and plain old human corruption is a tinderbox of emotion that doesnt take much to ignite.Mankind is flawed,no matter which side we hail from.

 

[Aardverk]

Those who refuse to listen by nature are alienating themselves. If I offer respectful,objective truth and someone is offended by that,then theres nothing I can do..no middle ground to approach.They have decided themselves to shut it out.Which brings about the focus of my above statements.We should not slink around,fearful of offending someone or worry that were not being "tolerant" of other views.Thats obviously a severe double standard these days.Say what you have to say,with confidence and shut out the criticism.

I have read your subsequent posts and recognize that you do actually appreciate the wisdom of following the middle ground. That is a good start.

If you offer your truth 'respectfully', you should have no problem. If you offer it 'without fear of offending' then most likely you will offend people - and that is not a good way of getting your message over. I am certainly not advocating that you 'slink around' but simply take into account the honestly held views of others. If you make a statement that they disagree with, why shouldn't they challenge you? If you don't listen to them, why should they listen to you?

Those who refuse to listen to you are not 'alienating themselves' phantom, they have almost certainly heard it all before. They may well have read the Bible many times along with dozens of ancient texts and come to a thoroughly considered view of their own. If you start telling them that they are wrong, it is you who are alienating them.

...... no matter how we approach a topic on Jesus we are criticized,as further evidenced by this very conversation.

If you think I am criticizing lack of consideration, hectoring, insulting behavior and the like (see the video of James the street preacher) you are absolutely right. I am advocating love, respect, consideration and tact. I can see from your words that you do understand the wisdom of that but I am still concerned that you said that we should not be fearful of offending anyone - I think we should.

 

[phantom309]

I have read your subsequent posts and recognize that you do actually appreciate the wisdom of following the middle ground. That is a good start.

If you offer your truth 'respectfully', you should have no problem. If you offer it 'without fear of offending' then most likely you will offend people - and that is not a good way of getting your message over. I am certainly not advocating that you 'slink around' but simply take into account the honestly held views of others. If you make a statement that they disagree with, why shouldn't they challenge you? If you don't listen to them, why should they listen to you?

Those who refuse to listen to you are not 'alienating themselves' phantom, they have almost certainly heard it all before. They may well have read the Bible many times along with dozens of ancient texts and come to a thoroughly considered view of their own. If you start telling them that they are wrong, it is you who are alienating them.


If you think I am criticizing lack of consideration, hectoring, insulting behavior and the like (see the video of James the street preacher) you are absolutely right. I am advocating love, respect, consideration and tact. I can see from your words that you do understand the wisdom of that but I am still concerned that you said that we should not be fearful of offending anyone - I think we should.

Well Im glad youre starting to see where Im coming from,it gives us a little elbow room to talk.

In your following statements,however,youre starting to lean towards that double standard again with the inclination that we should indeed slink a bit.If I conduct my entire conversation fearful that I might offend anyone then Ill never be able to state half of whats in the bible.Now this is not to say that I should carry a soapbox around to hop up on and come at people with a challenging attitude when I speak.At that point,Im inviting hostility and would be an idiot for expecting any less.

Also you stated that I should be respectful to the honestly held views of others.Fine,but what about them respecting mine?Should I not feel free to be honest and state my views?Here is where it begins to sound as if its fair to expect to be able to challenge my beliefs but Im supposed to sit lovingly by and be somewhat apologetic for offering something they dont believe in.We both know it doesnt work that way.

I believe the context on which were applying all this has changed too.You seem to have the impression of me approaching an unbeliever concerning salvation with the further impression that I would proceed to conduct the conversation very bluntly and with the attitude that the only right way is mine.You carry this further by placing me in the assumed role of declaring unfairly that someone is wrong for something,though the situation isnt even discussed or a fair approach taken as to why I would be wrong in that case.

I still dont agree with the alienation issue.If youre having a conversation with someone and they reach that point (provided things have respectful to that point)in which they shut you off,tune you out,and proceed to try to shut you down..then yes,they are alienating themselves.They are making the voluntary and conscious decision to do so.

You also immediately associated me with the preacher in the link you provided,which to be honest is hasty on your part.Though Id like to be able to check him out Im currently working in a remote area with very slow satellite internet.Ill just take your word that hes one of "those guys" for now.Bear in mind,Im not a preacher or a political figure..Im just your average guy out here workin for a living.

Weve also gotten away from the context of my statement concerning the imbalance of tolerance also.Read back and refer to the examples I provided,which are barely scratching the surface in terms of things going on.I was speaking about atheists or other special interest groups attacking displays of faith,harassing students,etc.The same members of society who claim to want peace and tolerance in the same day will turn around and go demand that a christian display be removed or demand court action when someone dares initiate a public prayer in Jesus' name.

When I stated we should be unapologetic,note that I specifically stated we should be unapologetic about acknowledging God and confidently pursuing moral agenda.Youve seem to have applied this statement to a wide range of applications and seem to attach to it the attitude of "my way or the highway".This is not the original statement or intent,and I know full well things dont work that way too.

With all this said,the main source of conflict in any of these cases is where we stand.I firmly believe that the contents of the bible are absolute truth,while other nonbelievers of course stick to what they believe in.Its hard for both sides to be honest and noone get offended in the process.

For clarity I think we should all be able to state what we think about something,within reason obviously,and noone get all hostile.Its just senseless.When I speak about being an unapologetic christian this does not mean Im justified in bruising your brow with that big black book.It does mean that when things of morality arise or someone questions me on my beliefs I will give honest input and live my life accordingly no matter whos offended by it.Does this mean Im perfect..nope,but I have the right to my beliefs and opinion and will not live life afraid from one moment to the next of offending someone.

I spoke up concerning this due to the original post.Court action and legislation on our part is not an attempt to subdue or oppress,but preserve.We should not apologize for standing up for whats right.We should not apologize for taking a stand on whats right and wrong.We should not feel guilty for taking legislative steps to preserve the way of life that made this country successful.The other side engages in this practice very aggressively and we have the choice to sit idly by and watch our rights and considerations vanish or take action and give voice to our concerns.Ultimately,we should not be bashful to stand on what God says is/isnt appropriate.At some point,you have to fight for what you believe.

Ill also be starting another thread to follow this a bit more as we talk our way through things,just to help this one stay more on topic since we are kind of straying a bit.In light of our discussion Ill title it "Where do we find middle ground?",most likely in general discussion.

 

[Aardverk]

Well Im glad youre starting to see where Im coming from,it gives us a little elbow room to talk.
In your following statements,however,youre starting to lean towards that double standard again with the inclination that we should indeed slink a bit.

No, slinking is not necessary phantom but I don’t want to repeat myself too much.

I do not accept your charge of double standards but I could accept that I have misinterpreted your words to mean that you want to take action regardless of what the ‘sinner’ wants you to do. Think about the OP.

I still dont agree with the alienation issue.

I see that you do not. However, if you ‘preach’ in any form to an unwilling audience you WILL alienate them from Christianity. THAT is my meaning and warning..

I firmly believe that the contents of the bible are absolute truth,while other nonbelievers of course stick to what they believe in.

This is another area for great caution. It is not just non-believers who will disagree with you, there are hundreds of millions of Christians who do NOT accept that the contents of the Bible are all absolute truth. Are you intending to insult their beliefs too?

If the extremely passive approach would work,I would be all for it.It would mean less arguments,struggles and hassle for us all.We can plainly see that it does not.

Maybe you did not mean that you will therefore forgo the ‘passive approach’. I am sure you will understand however that I interpreted your words here to mean that you will therefore take ACTION instead.

If you wish to keep what you have intact,then inevitably you will have to speak your mind,and you will have to fight for it at times. Some people will never accept the truth as it is,no matter how you phrase it or candy-coat it.

Again, this sounds like a worrying call to arms against the sinners! Maybe you didn’t mean it that way.

I once took the approach of being overly respectful,fearful to offend someone,etc.In recent years Ive taken another look at that and realized that if you dont have the confidence to stand behind what you believe,why should someone else believe it?

Once again, this clearly sounds like you mean to take action regardless of what the ‘sinner’ wants.
I will accept your assurance that you are not intending to shove their sins down the unbelievers throat but I am sure you can see how your words can easily be interpreted as aggressive. The answer to the question you ask here is that you have to convince people by calm reason. No one with an average IQ, or above, is going to accept your views just because you have 'confidence in your beliefs'.

I will look out for your new thread and consider your views there.