A little leaven

[Moonobserver]

This is prompted in part by older's recent recounting of his experiences with his family, but I've been thinking along these lines for a while. 

 

Christians place a lot of emphasis on purity and on not mixing the "pure" with the "impure". One of the expressions they use is the admonition found in 1st Corinthians 5:6 and Galatians 5:9, "A little leaven leavens the whole lump."

 

Many Christians who adore and idolize You-Know-Who because their preachers have told them that he's "God's man for the hour", try to justify looking past his less-than-godly demeanor by throwing out the line, "God uses imperfect people."

 

But what about looking more deeply than just *his* imperfections, to the effect they're letting his imperfections have on *them*? It's one thing to dismiss vulgarities because "God uses imperfect people", but it's another to go from regarding an "imperfect person" as a man of God to starting to treat him like he's a god himself. All the adoration they shower on him, their unthinking acceptance of his every word as infallible, their adoption of his crudeness and his callousness into their own actions are changes in THEIR behavior, not in his. 

 

So if they're going to tout biblical principles, maybe they should be encouraged to take a deep, close look at how this "imperfect person" is leavening THEIR lump.

[♦ Fuego ♦]

I received complete silence when I challenged serious believers I knew that backed him. Many reduce it down to winning more seats on the courts, and ultimately down to abortion. Nothing else that Jesus commanded meant anything to them (like feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, welcoming foreigners, not hoarding riches but giving to the needy).

 

[Moonobserver]

1 hour ago, Fuego said:

I received complete silence when I challenged serious believers I knew that backed him. Many reduce it down to winning more seats on the courts, and ultimately down to abortion. Nothing else that Jesus commanded meant anything to them (like feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, welcoming foreigners, not hoarding riches but giving to the needy).

 

That's why I think this issue should be brought up with them.

[ToHellWithMe]

You-Know-Who... xD

 

Anyway, I think those internal inconsistencies and hypocrisies are precisely why it's better to shut up about it. Nobody wants to be a hypocrite so don't go and try to show them how they are indeed hypocrites.

 

There's also the concept of "fun at parties" to consider. If someone nitpicks about everything, even if he points out what is strictly speaking hypocrisy, nobody is going to care and they're only going to find him annoying.

 

It's a different matter if they challenge you first. Only then should you remind them that you possess claws and won't fold easily, I think. It should work to encourage peace through mutually ensured annoyance. When they don't proselytize to you, you won't ask certain questions and vice versa.

[Moonobserver]

7 hours ago, ToHellWithMe said:

You-Know-Who... xD

 

Anyway, I think those internal inconsistencies and hypocrisies are precisely why it's better to shut up about it. Nobody wants to be a hypocrite so don't go and try to show them how they are indeed hypocrites.

 

There's also the concept of "fun at parties" to consider. If someone nitpicks about everything, even if he points out what is strictly speaking hypocrisy, nobody is going to care and they're only going to find him annoying.

 

It's a different matter if they challenge you first. Only then should you remind them that you possess claws and won't fold easily, I think. It should work to encourage peace through mutually ensured annoyance. When they don't proselytize to you, you won't ask certain questions and vice versa.

I'm not suggesting that we be a nuisance, but I do believe that we should rise to the challenge when it's presented. The more cracks we can put in the foundation, the more likely it is to crumble.