Does WWGHA Even Understand Christianity?
If one is going to criticize the viewpoint of another, then one had best understand the opposing view thoroughly. As an example, you will note that I do not enter into Creationism/Evolution/ID debates. I don’t know enough about the three camps to participate intelligently, save for being able to articulate the difference between pure Creationism and ID.
Over at the Blog for WWGHA, in response to this article from a Christian pastor, Thomas opines:
It’s the “infinite wisdom” rationalization. God is too huge and awesome for pipsqueak humans to understand. Never mind that Christians claim to understand God all the time, for example by demanding that homosexuals be discriminated against or even stoned to death, or that foreskins need to be cut off baby’s penises, etc. Christians claim knowledge of all sorts of God’s thoughts, but strangely, the explanation for the atrocities and horrors that we see every day are just too complicated. (source)
It’s simply absurd to suggest that anyone is being inconsistent to say that we know some things about God, but not other things. It is absolutely possible to say you know a person, but not understand everything that they do.
With God, some of his commands are clear, while others aren’t. But to suggest I’m inconsistent when I say that we humans aren’t going to understand some things about God while being able to understand other things is asinine.
Second, let’s set two things straight with the Christian (mis)treatment of homosexuals. We are not “denying” anyone the right to marry. The very makeup of marriage excludes homosexuals. It is a divinely ordered institution of a man joining to a woman, and they become one flesh. Polygamy isn’t specifically prohibited in this fashion, but men can’t marry men and women can’t marry women under this paradigm.
It would be like me saying “My goal is to be the next Pope.” I’m not a practicing Catholic; therefore I’m excluded from consideration for that office.
Or, if I tried to win a Hispanic scholarship. I’m white. I can’t win a scholarship oriented to Hispanic students. It defies the intent of the scholarship and the rules of those who created it and put up the money.
Marriage is a joining of a man to a woman. Period. We can’t deny someone a right that does not exist.
On a personal note to the blog author: Thomas, please find me a Christian who, in the last 20 years, actually called for a gay man to be stoned to death. If you can’t, then please withdraw that ridiculous claim.
On the foreskin question, Christians actually were not circumcised. Christians are exempt from all practices under the Jewish law. Paul makes it explicit:
For circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law, but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision.So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical.But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. (Rom 2:25-29)
Though there is a clear advantage to circumcision in knowing the oracles of God (Rom 3:2), one shouldn’t seek it:
Only let each person lead the life that the Lord has assigned to him, and to which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches. Was anyone at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision. For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God. Each one should remain in the condition in which he was called. (1 Cor 7:17-20)
What if someone does get circumcised despite the warning? Then:
. . . Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. (Gal 5:2-6)
Circumcision is not a Christian phenomenon.
Okay, now that we’re done with rabbit trails, is there actually an argument or an indictment here worth answering?
Sort of. We’ll talk tomorrow.
Posted on August 9, 2012, in Apologetics, God, Marriage, Religion, Theology and tagged current-events, human-rights, infinite wisdom. Bookmark the permalink. 8 Comments.
John Thomas in 2011, for stoning a gay person to death.
Not what I asked for. I said:
I want someone CALLING for the stoning of gay people, not someone who went and did it. Preferably a public figure. A pastor if possible!
I do not want an individual acting on his own. I’m sorry that wasn’t clear.
This idiot has no idea what marriage is, or who is in charge of it.
Marriage has NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING to do with god or religion. It is a matter of the STATE, not religion. Since our 1st amendment forbids ANY law that respects an establishment of religion; any person who passes ANY law based on ANY religion is unpatriotic and a traitor.
Actually, it is YOU who has no idea what marriage is or who is in charge of it.
The government does not grant us rights. The government protects our inherent rights, regardless of where those rights originate. Marriage is a divine ordinance and the government’s duty is to protect it — not define or redefine it to suit a minority group.
Every single member of the westboro baptist church wants homosexuality to be a capital offense. Claiming that they aren’t really Christians won’t work, the only requirement for being a christian is believing in the divinity of jesus.
They aren’t Christians, and you are absolutely wrong about the “only requirement” for Christianity being the belief in the divinity of Jesus. There is a works-based component to Christianity. To think that all one has to do is profess faith in Christ is extremely shallow indeed.
Even if we exclude the anti-gay attitude, Fred Phelps still qualifies as a false teacher, embracing heresy (most notably hyper-Calvinsim).
So please give me a “Christian” who would NOT fall under the condemnation of 2 Timothy 3:1-9, please.
Pingback: The Indictment Among the Rhetoric « Josiah Concept Ministries
Pingback: Does God Really Have Mysterious Motives? | Christian Apologetics Alliance