dougochase
- 31 comments
- 0 likes given
- 5 likes received
Bio not provided
@APeene @godisloveIf you keep reading my posts you will see my rhetoric softened as people started to admit to the over use of the word homophobe. Ideas began to be exchanged respectfully, which is what I wanted all along. I admitted to the use of exaggeration to make a point. Looking back, it worked. The name calling stopped, and progress was made.
@chriszhill1 This was a little funny. I didn't actually laugh, but I did smile.
@Rob W @ThomasRoss @evan88 Rob, well done. Not only did you make your case very well, but you have appealed to me on a level that I must respect. This thing is between you and God. You have your own personal journey. God bless you very richly in your pursuit of Him in truth. We can agree to that perfectly. My salvation is also between me and God. I want to thank you for taking the time to relate to me on a level that I can respond to with mutual understanding. It takes time to write well, and I do not mean good style. I mean writing in a way to gain shared understanding. You have done that, and i am happy for it.
@evan88 You have spoken what I think others believe here in this post. I understand your perspective better. I won't "go there" with you on the scriptures. It is the center of my reasoning. It is not yours. But based on that alone, surely I am better equipped to comment on what a real christian is because of my respect for scripture. Again my point was making a distinction between real and unlikely christians, which I am certain the author does not appreciate. He uses the word like CNN would when describing armed conflict in Lebanon between Muslims and "christians'. I want to see their membership card- (only joking)
@evan88 Thanks, Evan for answering about the use of homophobe. I exaggerated on the JESUSPHOBE rant to make a point about name calling. It worked somewhat because now we are talking without name calling. Sure, you are right about not being against Jesus per say, but there are more than a few who stumble over "the cornerstone". Jesus is called the rock of offense. It is His very name that has offended since the beginning. Look at the controversies over military chaplains ending a prayer in the name of Jesus. In the name of God, or in the name of the Lord is not nearly as offensive as the very name of Jesus.
@Rob W @Ono @ThomasRoss Easily agreed to. To tell Mom and Dad, your kid brother whom you have cared for, then see the disappointment, rejection, fear, look of betrayal in their eyes... that must be very rough- something that will stay with you like perhaps PTSD, which I know a lot about in my field. I think you want me to acknowledge the pain of rejection from loved ones for whom homosexuals have depended on for their loyalty. I acknowledge that pain. Of course. Are we making progress? We are talking like one might at Dunkin Donuts.
@Ono @ThomasRoss Thank you for chipping in. We disagree.
@Rob W @Ono @ThomasRoss Thank you for the encouragement. On this other topic, Rob, (Aaahh, relief!) I have talked with many a combat vet, and somehow have a gift where they actually talk to me. I am privileged in that respect because many who talk to me have never talked to anyone else. The vet feels they will not understand, so why tell stories. My Dad was one of those. He only talked to me...quietly- looking off as he spoke softly. The stories I have heard...So noble, what heart! And what heartache. To some, what damage to them, their families, and to the families of those they killed There must be a stronger word than heartbreaking...yes. Men who have committed atrocities and war crimes, but under orders. I have heard testimony of veterans who believe in Satan and demons, but not God. Plunging a bayonet over and over into an enemy whom you just killed can give a soldier a spiritual experience that he will never forget, and wishes he never had. When evil not only surrounds you, but fills you, one can believe in demons before they believe in God. Mel Gibson gave this phenomena a dramatic interpretation when he tomahawks a British soldier over and over in full view of his children in the movie, The Patriot.
@CurtisBeauJackson good point about the mega churches. Agreed. And I also agree with your use of the word phobia in the context you used. I exaggerated a bit with JESUSPHOBE. I was attempting to treat the name calling as it deserves to be treated. I don't feel that need anymore. I think we are talking now, although I am ready to pull out. Perhaps another topic will surface that we can agree on...pulling out of Afghanistan, our national debt leaving us vulnerable to many dangers, Immigration oversimplified....etc. By the way, can you help me please? How do I add a person in the' to" box that is not included when I hit reply? thanks.
@ThomasRoss @cradleconvert I know about trolls through football message boards. Indianapolis fans get on the Boston Herald and just bash Brady to annoy us. Pats fans go on the Jets boards and do the same thing. It is funny that the first time you truly communicated was on the topic of trolling. Humor does help ease the tensions between groups that hold views so far apart, but as superficial as it may be, it is a welcome break from animosity. I would join in, but I have no sense of humor whatsoever. Nada. Zip.
@cradleconvert You have good arguments, but you are making people angry unnecessarily. " A gentle answer turns away wrath." But I do admit that almost any opposition to the homosexual community makes them angry. I have been incited on this page, but I realized that It did not sit well with my spirit. I had to adjust- change my tone. not get angry. You may choose to continue with your rhetoric. Sure. I understand. It feels like a fight, doesn't it? As for me, I do not try to actually win the argument because I do not think I am dealing with people who listen well or have respect for me. If I gain their respect, then perhaps they will listen better. There are some that will never respect me because I regard the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. We don't have much to say to each other. I know that I respect them, even if I do not respect their logic or evidence. I just try to be reasonable and make points that I feel are important to make. I do not see myself making much headway if my goal is to convince people. I believe that this particular forum is very ineffective in genuinely exchanging ideas rationally. A few squeak through, but it is not the norm for my posts. One person has answered my objection to the title. One.
@Ono @evan88 Thank you for responding calmly to my concern about the over use of the word homophobe. Thomas thinks it could be used more. OK. Now we can talk. We can disagree. Maybe understand each other a little. Maybe even earn or receive more respect. My goal is not to get along though, just as my goal is not to annoy, or judge. Soon I will leave because I established my point well enough. (article needs a title that reflects the noble acts of loving homosexuals. Leave the Christian bashing behind.) That no one agrees with me except one or two is not discouraging. I do understand your positions. I understood them before though. Nothing is new. Nothing has surprised me.
@ThomasRoss @evan88 Good point about the age of the earth and Christians trying to hold the literal 7 day interpretation and skip over some evidence. That hit me one day, when I realized that sand is made from the tumbling action of rocks. When you see and hear the tumbling motion of smooth small round stones churning in the turf, then view the ultra smooth sand, it feeds the imagination of how much time it took to make all that sand. However, you just pointed out that others have biases without commenting on what I labeled biases in this post. Saying that other people do it does not address what I have said. It isn't all that important, so skip it. Last time I looked into evidence for the gay gene, the science was bogus. 80's I think. I lost interest. I don't think I will become more interested either. In the same manner that I view homosexuals interpreting the bible to justify their behavior, I view the science community to have an identical bias. They are trying to find that gene... Looking for that gene, not observing, experimenting, adjusting theories based on factual findings... based purely on what is observed. Years ago, I was convinced that their observational capacities were skewed by the deep desire to find the gene, so as to justify the lifestyle. I arrived at this conclusions objective as I knew how to do. I don't see myself revisiting the science when I do not trust that scientific community.
@Ono @ThomasRoss Rob too... That is my main point. The title needs to be changed. I do not claim to understand how a homosexual feels when bullied. However, since you mentioned being bullied as antecedent for becoming more empathetic, I will comment there. If looking at that phenomena as a principle, I agree wholeheartedly. I was not bullied as a homosexual; therefore I am limited in my capacity for empathy when compared to someone who has suffered all the indignities. This supports your point. I was bullied terribly, but in another area, which if you did not experience, you like me would have less empathy. Experience does make the difference. I have tremendous empathy for a certain group because I suffered from them, and I of course have empathy for those they victimized. I was physically abused. Beaten. I hated myself for being so afraid and unable to fight back. To compensate, I worked out to excess strating at age 11. When I was 6 foot 2 inches, 205 lbs. I mastered self defense through mixed martial arts, and avoided bullies at all costs. I was very big, powerful, fast, and had a massive attitude toward bullies. I lived the fantasy of the weak becoming strong. I avoided bullies because I knew I was capable of snapping their necks 2 at a time. All this hatred of bullies dominated my life until I found a way to deal with my corrupt human nature through the cross of Jesus Christ. I did more than defend the weak. I grew to have compassion even on the bullies. I served 28 years in the Army, mostly as a chaplain assistant, dedicating my self to helping chaplains minister to those who do the killing and to those who are being slaughtered. My very dear father had the horrible job of using a flame thrower against the Japanese. 3 years of continuous combat. Let that sink in. He had to get used to their screams as they burned alive. This man took me to Fenway, Boston Garden, camping, coached little League, birthday parties in the back yard...but the war was never over for the man. He lost part of his humanity in that war. I am still dedicated to helping veterans recover, if they can even a little. And I have been an ambassador for peace in every war zone or mission. Your empathy for bullied homosexuals, I commend. Easy. Keep it up. Dan could have done it without bashing Christians.
@ThomasRoss Your tone is improving, as is mine. That is progress. We just disagree about Dan's familiarity with christians. I read it very carefully no glossing. I stand by what I said.
@evan88 Evan. We are all sinners. I am not pointing out sins. Jesus summarized all sin in John 16 as "not believing in him" That covers all sins. You go too far, when you say you are not a sinner. Whether you are a homosexual or not, you would be a sinner. Homosexuality is grouped in with many other sins in Leviticus, but I will not attempt to reason that out with you. there are some who have attempted to refute me on grounds of the OT being different from the NT,and other arguments, but I find their perspectives biased toward their behavior. It is as though they study the bible to justify their position, and not to "search the scriptures...that they testify of ME, and you are unwilling to come to me that you may have life." John 5 It should all come down to seeing Jesus revealed in scripture, then coming to Him for what is life indeed. The banter here is unedifying.Not one person yet has engaged me in a substantive way. Please be the first.
@ThomasRoss The article should have had a title that reflected the main intent of supporting those who are bullied- loving them. The title is off, Thomas. That is my point, and I am correct when I say he bashes christians. If he had not bashed them, I would have no interest in commenting at all. I am not familiar with any such bashing. You also made no comment on the over use of the word homophobe, which is what I get from people who cannot form an intelligent argument. I can say that I do not know one single christian who bullies LGBT, and I know hundreds of what I call real christians. Again, my extremely lucid point is that the author does not know a real christian, and don't think he has met one. He needs a new title about bullying/accepting/supporting/loving, You think you know me well enough to think I am a bully/? Nah... I fight the bullies. You would like that about me. My tone is not adversarial either. I just wanted to put a stop to the homophobe tags. Calling me a homophobe is weak, and when it is repeated inanely over and over, it smacks of bullying in itself... To the author: leave the bashing of christians out of the discussion. Perhaps he used it intentionally, knowing that it is inflammatory and would illicit a great response. If that is the case, he was right, but he is not honest. gotta go. will check back tomorrow.
@APeene @godislove You are right. We do not have to agree. We do not. We are at peace. Trust that your science is better than the familiarization you got about the bible in that World Religion class. They probably treated the Bible as a book like the other two you mentioned. All books of religion differ very much from the Bible, though. All the rest give you a set of rules to live by whereby one can achieve ....fill in the blank. The bible tells the story of what God did in Christ to save you because you cannot save yourself. WAY different. And I will bet my paycheck (I'm retired) that you did not learn that critical distinction in the class. Hey good luck and God bless you.
You use worse case scenarios as proofs. It is bad science. Darwin did the same. His science was horrendous. God made them male and female, in His image he made them. Done. The oddities are just that. They do not explain away our natural male and female creation. You search for the bi-sexual gene and you look foolish. "professing to be wise, they became fools." You have mountains of evidence that we are created male and female, but you go off on a trail so small to discover something that is not there. Me thinks you are attempting to justify a behavior, not be a good scientist.
@ThomasRoss @CurtisBeauJackson It is not as easy as just going out there and trying to be like Jesus, and that makes you a christian. If that is all it took, then why did He have to die and be raised from the dead? No one has the righteousness to follow Jesus in the strength of their own human character. The Law of Moses demonstrated how we are all disobedient and condemned. But God shut us all in disobedience so that He might show mercy to all.
through the propitiation of Christ. Our hearts are not capable of loving God with all the heart, soul, and might. (Good Samaritan story) God solved that problem by making available to us new hearts. In brief, it is the heart of Jesus through the gift of the Holy Spirit that enables a person to imitate Jesus. I John connects love with obeying His command to love, knowing God and doing His will, but it happens through the holy Spirit who must be received. This is the testimony, it says. He who HAS the Son has life. And it follows that if we say we believe in Him, we should walk as He walked. That is I John 3:16- not to be confused with John 3:16. One does not imitate Jesus without receiving Him in the heart by the Holy Spirit. Then the heart as the power to walk as He walked. If it is not this way, if it is the work of man, then place the 10 commandments in the hands of Jesus on Mt. Sinai and take Him off the cross and back in His grave.