Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    I feel that some persecution exists, if you define persecution in
    rather broad terms. 
    
    For example.....having been on a couple of job intervies lately, I
    didn't talk at all about my church activities ( i.e. deacon) until the
    interviewer started talking about he/her church. Why? Not because
    religion is a taboo subject ( I like people to understand what my
    outside interests are...helps to sell yourself as a well rounded
    person). Rather, now a days, religion in general is shown only in a
    negative light so often in the media....priests that rape children,
    waco,etc.
    
    Marc H.

 The Bible does talk about persecution to come to Christians in the
 end times.  It has to start somewhere, and I believe we are seeing
 the beginnings of it today.  The very fact that the EEOC proposal
 regarding "religious harrassment" is even being considered should be
 enough for one to see this. 


 
 Jim

RE: Note 933.2 by JIM  "Friend will you be ready?" 

.The very fact that the EEOC proposal
.regarding "religious harrassment" is even being considered should be
. enough for one to see this. 

Can you enter the text of this EEOC proposal?

Thanks,

Jim

 If I can find it..





 Jim

My dictionary defines persecute as:

"To oppress or harass with ill treatment"

Now in some instances this can happen to any member of any identifiable group.
What I am interested in is if anyone can show any evidence of persecution, such
as systematic denial of employement or housing for being a Christian.

Steve

Note 933.5

>What I am interested in is if anyone can show any evidence of persecution, such
>as systematic denial of employment or housing for being a Christian.

That's kinda what I had in mind, too.

(The EEOC thing is gonna be a can o' worms.  Can someone wear a cross or
yarmulke at work, but disallow the swastika or symbols used by the KKK?)

Shalom,
Richard

    So verbal slander is not persecution... rejection and being shut out of
    group discussions are not persecution...  maybe not... but it sure is
    the beginning...and if t��hat EEO law gets passed... guess what that is
    when persecution will reach the level you are asking and that still
    will only be a stepping stone to more.

    I've been verbally maligned for my views, for actions I've carried out
    for the sake of my faith.  No, I don't consider the bad-mouthings I've
    gotten *alone* persecution.  But then, maybe I'm not "synsytyve" enough.
    
    Richard
    

re: Note 933.7 by Nancy "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" 

*  ...if that EEO law gets passed... 

EEO = EEOC?  Typo?  Will someone put words to these acronyms?

Thanks,

Jim

p.s.  is 'acronym' an effeminate word?

� EEO = EEOC?  Typo?  Will someone put words to these acronyms?

Equal Employment Opportunity (?) Commission

Jim()

    I worked in personnel for a while... we always shortened the acronym
    and just referred to EEO... the C part was just left off.  Same thing.

 In response to an earlier request, I am looking for the text of the 
 proposal.  I've seen summaries posted in various notesfiles, but I'm
 sure that wouldn't do.





Jim

    .12  When you do, would you start a new topic with it, please?
    
    Richard
    

 OK

re: .7

Then, by your definition, you would agree that atheists are persecuted? I wasn't
asking for a certain level, I merely pointed out that you can find individual
instances of persecution against any group. What widespread or institutionalized
examples can you provide?

BTW, I don't necessarily disagree with you here. Persecution can start in small
and insidious ways, and should be fought up front. But we need to be careful,
since one persons persecution can be another persons righteousness.

Steve

    .15
    
    I like that one man's persecution is another man's righteousness... and
    would agree with it.  The question is, then, is there an absolute
    morality?
    
    I say yes, you say no... I say tomatoe you say tomato! :-)

    I think it might be unfair to Steve to claim that he believes
    not in an absolute morality.
    
    Allow me to pose this as a question of absolute versus relative
    morality:  Is rape ever justifiable?  My guess is that most moral
    persons, whether Christian, atheist, or otherwise, would say, "No,
    absolutely never!"
    
    Richard
    

Re: .17 Richard

True, Richard, but rape is defined by the culture we live in, and even
within our culture not everyone agrees on what is and is not rape.  Even
though I personally believe that rape is wrong, I don't agree that it's an
example of absolute morality.

				-- Bob

    .18  Rape defined by culture, eh?  I have to confess, I wasn't aware of
    such a thing.
    
    What, if anything, might you agree is an example of absolute morality?
    
    Richard
    

I don't think absolute morality exists.  Morality is defined by human
beings, and what person considers moral another may not.

Of course the physical world imposes some constraints.  I might think it's
OK to have unprotected sex with strangers, but that won't prevent me from
dying of AIDS.  I might think it's OK to launch a nuclear war, but that
won't prevent world-wide destruction.

				-- Bob

    >I don't think absolute morality exists.  Morality is defined by human
    >beings, and what person considers moral another may not.
    
    Absolute Morality exists it's in God's Word...those of us who believe
    in the inerrancy of the Bible, have little problem believing there is
    an absolute morality.  
    

| <<< Note 933.21 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>


| Absolute Morality exists it's in God's Word...those of us who believe
| in the inerrancy of the Bible, have little problem believing there is
| an absolute morality.

	Nancy, I agree that there is an absolute morality. I do not believe any
human has full access to it. One example which helps prove this is those who
believe you must go to church EVERY Sunday or it is a sin. You have many who do
not believe this to be true as many go on Saturday evenings. 


Glen

RE:               <<< Note 933.22 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>


>	Nancy, I agree that there is an absolute morality. I do not believe any
>human has full access to it. One example which helps prove this is those who


 So, while we're trying to figure out what this absolute morality is, we 
 continue to kill each other in the streets, kill 1.2 million unborn children
 per year, see drug and alcohol abuse climbing, STDs, divorce, spouse abuse,
 chile abuse..too bad we don't have access to that absolute morality..it might
 help us in this mess we are in.


Jim

re Note 933.23 by CSLALL::HENDERSON:

>  So, while we're trying to figure out what this absolute morality is, we 
>  continue to kill each other in the streets, kill 1.2 million unborn children
>  per year, see drug and alcohol abuse climbing, STDs, divorce, spouse abuse,
>  chile abuse..too bad we don't have access to that absolute morality..it might
>  help us in this mess we are in.
  
        I think that you are making the point -- there is nothing
        special about a so-called *absolute* morality which would
        change any of these.

        Nearly all of the things that you mention are against the
        prevailing (but no claim to absolute) civil "morality". 
        Hardly anybody could be found to defend most of the above
        acts.  Probably most of those who commit the above acts
        wouldn't claim that they were moral acts.

        Certainly nobody who commits the above acts would claim "if I
        knew they were against an *absolute* morality, as opposed to
        a morality that didn't claim to be absolute, I wouldn't have
        done them."

        No, having a "law" -- or absolute morality if you will --
        does not bring righteousness.

        So you're right, we shouldn't waste time trying to figure out
        what this absolute morality is, and *you* shouldn't waste
        *your* time trying to convince others that there is an
        absolute morality.  It hasn't the potential to change the
        problems you cite.

        Your efforts should be go in other directions.

        Bob

re: Note 933.23 by Jim "Friend will you be ready?" 

> So, while we're trying to figure out what this absolute morality is, we 
> continue to kill each other in the streets, kill 1.2 million unborn children
> per year, see drug and alcohol abuse climbing, STDs, divorce, spouse abuse,
> chile abuse..too bad we don't have access to that absolute morality..it might
> help us in this mess we are in.

Sadly, there are amoral people in this world.  Jim, while I may not agree 
with every point you raise, I am in general agreement, and trust that you 
are a moral person.  

I've seen too many people (especially young people) interviewed.  Sixteen year 
olds who's goal in life is to make it to seventeen.  What a horrific comment 
that makes for our society.  What morals can a person have when they are 
frightened for their lives?

I think too often we strain gnats amongst ourselves while issues that we 
would heartily agree upon go unchallenged.  There are plenty of battles to 
fight, and I trust we in this notesfile do our genuine best to make this a 
better world.

Peace,

Jim

| <<< Note 933.23 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Friend will you be ready?" >>>



| So, while we're trying to figure out what this absolute morality is, we
| continue to kill each other in the streets, kill 1.2 million unborn children
| per year, see drug and alcohol abuse climbing, STDs, divorce, spouse abuse,
| chile abuse..too bad we don't have access to that absolute morality..it might
| help us in this mess we are in.

	Being melodramatic again Jim? We have things now that we think are bad.
We fight against them. It does not mean everything we fight for/against is
under the absolute morality, but it does mean that the for the culture we live
in that these things are either acceptable or not. By cutting through
misconceptions, interpretations, we have found that things that were once seen
as wrong really weren't. We change because we do not have absolute morality in
our grasp. Only God has that because being human we have free will.


Glen

 re .26




 Okee dokey

    -1
    
    Geez Jimbo... :-)
    
    I'd say you all have fine grasp on the symptoms, but what do you think
    is the core issue in society today?

    re .21
    
    If you believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, then you can find many
    innerrant remarks in Paul that state that absolute morality DOES NOT
    EXIST.  Paul is a great situational ethicist.  He states that it is not
    the action itself that is significant but the cause of the action and
    the result of the action.
    
    All actions that proceed from faith, he states are good.
    All actions are good if they are for building up the community, the
    Body of Christ.  All actions that do not build up the Body of Christ
    are not good.
    
    Patricia.

    The definition of rape is very much cultural.
    
    The Bible supports the rape of slave women and the use of women
    captured in War as sexual objects.
    
    The bible supports the giving of one's daughters to be rape for the
    hospitality of male strangers.
    
    The Bible supports the giving of one's wife to gain political
    favor.(Abraham and Sarah).

re: <<< Note 933.30 by POWDML::FLANAGAN "Resident Alien" >>>
    
    >The Bible supports the giving of one's wife to gain political
    >favor.(Abraham and Sarah).
    
    Patricia, I don't claim to know the bible as well as you, but wasn't
    Sarah sent back to Abraham when the king discovered that she was
    Abraham's wife.  And didn't the king claim that he sent her back
    because he didn't want to invite the wrath of God?  I always read that
    to mean that God moved the heart of the king because God did not
    approve.  Maybe I'm reading too much into it?
    

    Debby,
    
    Actually my knowledge of the old testament is limited.  I will have to
    reread this section.
    
                                    Patricia

    .32
    
    Debby you are correct about Abraham and Sarah.

    re: 32 L& 33
    
    The implications of Debby's interpretation though is still that it was
    OK for Abraham to offer Sarah, deceitfully in order to receive
    political favor and it would have been wrong for the king of Egypt to
    accept Abraham's gift even though he did not know that Abraham had lied
    to him.
    
    What does this say about absolute morality.  
    
    Was it OK for Abraham to Lie?
    Was it OK for him to offer his wife?
    Was it OK for Lot to offer his daughters?
    
    What is the acceptable standard of absolute sexual morality authorized in
    this "innerant" document.
    
    Patricia

    .34
    
    I don't know how get the implied it was okay... it was wrong and
    Abraham was wrong.  God doesn't have two morals.  If it were wrong for
    the King to receive her, it was wrong for Abraham to give her.  Abraham
    was a sinner too.

    Is there anywhere that Abraham is called to responsibility for his
    "sin" or shows any remorse for It?  How do you conclude that it was
    viewed as wrong for Him?
    
    I felt bad for the poor King as I read the passage.  
    
    Patricia

    .36
    
    What was the consequence of Abraham's sin...???  Was there any hardship
    for Abraham and Sarah after this?  Was Sarah not barren?
    
    I see nothing implied that his sin was okay.  Absence of a recorded
    judicial action, does not mean there was none.
    
    God says in His word that a man must reap what he sows... This was also
    true for Abraham.
    
    

    Where is it indicated that Sarah's barreness was punishment for
    Abraham's lie, deceptions and sexual immorality?
    
    Where is there any indication that what Abraham did is wrong?
    
    In this passage I only remember the King having any clue as to the
    rightness or the wrongness of the deed.
    
    Patricia

A bunch of notes back Richard mentioned that it might be unfair to say that I do
not believe in an absolute morality, and he is right, it might be unfair :^)

On the other hand, I don't believe that there is an absolute morality, I pretty
much agree with what Bob said about the subject. 

My own view of morality is fairly simple, although it is just as full of gray
areas as anyone elses (including the 'inerrant' bible). Basically it is the
libertarian view. Anything is OK up to the point of 'initiation of violence'.
Once an act passes over that line (ie. someone initiates violence against
another), it becomes immoral. Again, there are many gray areas that I would be
happy to discuss, but the overview is fairly easy to see and easy to keep.

Steve

    .39
    
    You had stated it before... at least I remember it. :-)
    
    Thanks for answering,
    Nancy