Here is Pew Research survey of US Christians. Most are okay with sex between unmarried consenting adults.
1 Like
A Christian is called to obey authorityâŚany authority over him (say a boss, teacher, king, etc.) unless the direction is to sin, at which point he must obey God (whether by Spirit or by Word) above the human authority. This may cause the Christian to lose his job. The Christian that caves to save his job is not really following Christ. Suck it up and find a better job that doesnât cause you to sin. The bible says over and over that we are only responsible for our own personal behavior, to be an example and to live loving others. We are not called to make others do anything or impose morals or coerce other peoples children. Just live rightly and follow Jesus. The reward is eternal life, not better life on earth.
Then they are not really following the teaching of Jesus, and I would argue are not really Christians, they are hypocrites. Doesnât surprise me at all.
Yeah because itâs soooooo easy to find a jobâŚ
Care to join us in reality?
1 Like
I would rather be poor, jobless and following Christ with the promise of eternal life than compromising my morals, sinning frequently and banished to eternal death. Iâm playing the long game, jobs are easy.
Want your children to go hungry? Thatâs okay because of afterlife?
hy¡poc¡ri¡sy
/hÉËpäkrÉsÄ/
noun
- the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which oneâs own behavior does not conform; pretense.
Iâm being precise, not trying to offend anyone.
Well, nobodyâs an impartial judge there, and you certainly make that point very well with your strange selective list of things you donât like, which includes the decline in Lions Club membership (??!!). But yeah, these are much better and more ethical days than we have had before. The Orange Peril notwithstanding. I do have some cousins, in the Prusso-hillbilly wing of my family, who are still lamenting the departure of Joe McCarthy, but as much as they rage against modernity, the world just keeps getting better.
And the people who you are calling hypocrites may not think they are being hypocrites. Maybe they really are misinformed? But you are jumping straight to calling them a name with negative connotations. Whereâs that Christian charity?
1 Like
A person that claims to follow Jesus who teaches that adultery is wrong AND at the same time thinks adultery is OK is simply engaging in hypocrisy. Jesus in Matthew 23 calls the religious leaders of the time hypocrites over and over, not to be mean, but because they were being hypocrites. Seems pretty simple to me. If they donât know they are being hypocritical, then they are being ignorantâŚthat is being precise again, not name calling.
That wasnât the topic of that Pew
Christians disagree on teachings all the time. Just because someone disagrees with your interpretation doesnât mean they are hypocrites. Thatâs what Iâm saying. But you went straight to calling them that.
1 Like
Once again, nicer ways to put that
But it is up to me and other voters to rule what count as enforceable laws in a secular society. Otherwise whatâs to stop a Christian from ignoring any laws he/she doesnât like by claiming they violate his/her âChristian principlesâ? As I recall Kent Hovind tried that exact argument against the IRS. How did that turn out?
I see you ducked my questions about the Christian clerk refusing a marriage license for interracial couples and a Christian DMV worker refusing to give women drivers licenses. Were they too much on point for you to answer?
1 Like
?!?!
I donât get your point.
I was contrasting Tim Hortonâs view of what counts as a Christian principle and what someone inside the faith counts as a Christian principle. Tim Horton takes it upon himself to decide that some Christiansâ views are ânarrow personal interpretationsâ of Christian principles, but thereâs no reason why any Christian should care whether an unbeliever like Tim Horton thinks their view of the faith is ânarrowâ or not.
Each Christian tries to discern what faith requires, based on the sources of authority in his or her tradition: Bible alone (for many Protestants), Bible read through the lens of denominational Confessions (for some Protestants), Bible plus the teachings of the Church (Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox). And each Christian is striving not for some âpersonal interpretationâ, but to understand the teaching of Christianity correctly; personal whim, taste, preference, etc. â in short, being âarbitraryâ â have nothing to do with it.
Tim Horton says there are plenty of âdevout Christiansâ who have no problem with same sex-marriage, but of course the number depends very much on what one counts as a âdevout Christianâ. Iâm sure that huge numbers of members of the United Church of Christ or the Episcopalian Church are onside with same-sex marriage, but do they count as âdevout Christiansâ, given that on a whole range of classical Christian teachings (the Trinity, original sin, truthfulness and reliability of the Bible, etc.) they often express doubt or outright denial? Do they count as âdevout Christiansâ if they never engage in personal prayer, but simply regard Jesus as a moral ideal? Do they count as âdevout Christiansâ if they doubt that Jesus was divine or saved us from sin, but participate in community events to help the poor? It would be safer for an outsider like Tim Horton to say: âThere are plenty of people who call themselves Christians who have no problem with same-sex marriageâ-- and leave the question how âdevoutâ they are to insiders who have a better understanding of what âdevoutâ means, and what âChristianâ means.
No I donât. Christians take it upon themselves to personally decide what counts as âChristian principlesâ to them. In the U.S. you are free to worship however you want in the privacy of your own home and your own church. You do not have the freedom to extent that practice into areas where it harms others or violates othersâ rights. I notice youâre still dodging my questions about interracial marriage and drivers licenses too. What a surprise. 
LOL! Wouldnât be a conversation without someone squawking âif other Christians donât believe what I believe they arenât TRUE Christians!â 
1 Like
But when that society is the USA, not any old law, even if desired by the voters, will do. No law can favor one religion over another, or target one religion as false, or the like. The State must refrain from judgments of that kind. Further, what counts as too ânarrowâ an interpretation of Christian principles is not for the State to decide â nor for you. From the Christian point of view, the right question is not: is this interpretation of the faith narrow, or broad? The right question is: is this interpretation of the faith correct? And if it is correct, then, no matter how ânarrowâ it might seem to a non-Christian outside, itâs what the Christian has to go with. And if the State says, âNo, you canât go with that, you have to interpret your faith more broadly, or weâll make life difficult for you,â it is engaging in impertinent and unconstitutional intervention in religious life. Itâs none of the Stateâs business what the correct interpretation of Christianity is â nor is it any of yours.
And religious people donât get to pick and choose which laws they follow based on their personal religious beliefs. Not even TRUE Christians like you. 
Since when do you speak for the âChristian point of viewâ? Did someone appoint you Super-Pope? All I hear is Eddieâs personal opinion which he often confuses for DA ONLY TRUTH.
It is the stateâs business when your âcorrect interpretationâ has you break laws and harm others.
Which no one here is advocating, so your admonition is aimed at a non-existent conversation partner.
The discussion here is not about whether Christians should have the right to impose their views on others â everyone here agrees that they should not. The discussion has been about whether recent developments have threatened, or may threaten, the practice of Christian life, and hence may violate the separation of church and state.
LOL! The Eddie Defense. Deny what heâs been arguing for the last two dozen posts.
How about my questions on interracial marriage and drivers licenses? Youâre always so verbose yet you clam up on questions which highlight the hypocrisy. 
1 Like