Rad note » The text in this entry originally came from another entry. It was moved here because the subject drifted far enough to warrant its own, separate entry-page.
At the end of this entry (that you are now reading) I provide a link to the exact spot from where this entry originated.
Here you go...
Some So-Called Christians Give Christianity a » Bad name
Speaking of the moral judgment of some so-called Christians, note that scripture says » "by their LOVE shall all men know."
Not by their vitriol. Or their cruelty. Or their nastiness.
So it seems that not everybody got the message. The memo.
Where's the mercy and compassion in 'God Hates Fags'?
Paul says that "the standard of sound words" are in » faith and love. (You know Paul.)
I see no love in the cry of '» God Hates Fags'. I see only judgment and hatred and condemnation and xenophobia.
<ignore this intentional body-text marker>
••• today's entry continues here below •••
This is Old Testament doctrine that he is spouting. New Testament doctrine says something very different. It's the kindness that does it, dude.
That is, of course, assuming that your intention is to bring people closer to God .. and not drive them further away.
Notice how Jesus himself called mercy one of the "weightier matters" of the law (.. along with justice and faithfulness).
» Fred Hates Fags | Where's the Love, Fred?
I want to say to this guy » "Dude, why dont you just admit that it is YOU who hates gays."
But I can't. Because he's dead.
When I think of words such as » thoughtful, kind, considerate, compassionate, merciful .. I do not think of Fred 'God Hates Fags" Phelps. Do you? Do you associate such words with him?
Fred has obviously never read the tenth chapter of Acts .. because, if he had, he would have known what Peter said » "God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean."
And if you read that chapter, you will see that God made a big deal about that.
» Some People Give Christianity a Bad Name
Some people give Christianity a bad name ..
.. which seems to be the theme of today's entry.
Consider here tangentially the concept of empathy. Because, for me, whether or not someone is capable of and shows (displays) empathy ..
.. seems to be a major dividing line. If you were making categories.
I am not talking about (merely) being nice.
Empathy is what allows you to be with somebody in their world and in their time of need.
I am talking about the thing that lets you feel what they feel.
And I have noticed that people who seem to lack empathy (true empathy) seem to want you to see and experience life based on their perspective ..
.. because they cannot experience yours. (Because they lack empathy.)
To tie this back in with Fred .. does it not appear to you that Fred lacked empathy?
And I see no harm in mentioning here that I would rank the Dog highly in this category. Just so we have some basic parameters by which to navigate. Very highly. Remarkably so.
For the lower bound along this metric .. I will leave it up to you .. to fill in. I am sure that you know someone who seems incapable to empathy. Incapable of feeling your pain. (Which is why they so badly want and need you to feel theirs.)
Certainly Fred lacked compassion for gays .. but I am talking about empathy here. And maybe the one caused the other.(?)
Anyway .. let's forget about Fred (cuz he's dead) ..
.. and focus our attention back on the Vatican.
The end. ■
You can return to the exact spot from which the text in this entry originated .. see » here.
<ignore this intentional text spacer>
<ignore this intentional bottom text spacer, too>
