Omdat ons so besig is met Sonde is dit die ding waarop ons altyd eerste fokus. Dit is die manier hoe ons grootgemaak is. Daarom is ons eerste gedagte dat ons die Sonde moet aanspreek. As ons in die eerste plek so besig was met God se liefde, sou ons eerste gedagte sekerlik gewees het om God se liefde te verkondig. Hierdie artikel het my persoonlik weer laat dink
I've recently been invited to a couple of gay weddings. So -- what with being Christian and all -- I asked myself the famous question, "What would Jesus do?" (Which I don't too often ask myself, actually, since Jesus could, for instance, raise people from the dead and turn water into wine, whereas I can barely drag myself out of bed in the morning and/or turn water into coffee. Safe to say lots of His options are none of mine.)
Wondering what Jesus would do naturally enough led me to the New Testament. And therein I found these quotes:
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices -- mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law -- justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel." (Matthew 23:23-24); and
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to." (Matthew 23:13); and,
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are." (Matthew 23:15); and, last but hardly least:
"Love your neighbor as yourself," [said Jesus]. "There is no commandment greater than these." (Mark 12:31)
When I next went looking for anywhere in the Bible where Jesus says anything -- and I mean anything -- about homosexuality, I learned that Jesus spent about as much time talking about gays and/or lesbians as I spend talking about button collecting and/or sea horses: none. Of course, it's entirely possible that Jesus did say crucial things about homosexuality, but that when he did (curse the luck!) no one around him just then happened to have handy an ostrich feather, sappy stick, or whatever it was they used for pens back then. Which would make sense, actually. If you've spent any time at all reading the New Testament, you know that Jesus' disciples weren't exactly Johnnies-on-the-spot. They were just normal, everyday guys.
Kind of the whole point! Jesus most surely did love him some everyday people.
Throughout the New Testament, the only kind of people with whom Jesus consistently took frightful exception were the very "teachers of the law and Pharisees" we see him dressing down in the passages above. One thing that often gets lost in our considerations of Jesus is the degree to which he is exactly the wrong person to piss off. And you don't have to spend a lot of time in the New Testament before you understand that the only kind of people who seem to ever truly anger him are those who put religious dogma above what he most stood for, which was God's compassionate will.
Around Jesus you can whine, lie, shift your loyalties, be late, be greedy, be too ambitious, be stupid, be a coward, be a hypochondriac, constantly complain, fall asleep at every wrong moment -- you can do nothing right, and it won't in the slightest way seem to offend him. But you put dogma ahead of empathy? You transmogrify God's law into a justification for denying God's grace?
Then ... yikes, man. Then you've got yourself a problem no one wants.
I'm not exactly sure how we came to so often consider Jesus-formerly-known-as-The-Carpenter as a kind of a soft, dreamy, namby-pamby sort. (Not that there's anything wrong with that!) But it's hard to believe it was from the accounts of Jesus we have in the Gospels. That's just not the guy on those pages.
Jesus is scary when he's riled. And the only people who rile him are those who, in His name,set themselves up as sanctimonious judgers of others.
I think I better go to the weddings of my gay friends. I'm almost scared not to. In some of his parables Jesus wasn't exactly fortune-cookie clear, but he didn't even almost waffle about his "Love your neighbor as yourself." He very explicitly declared that the "first and greatest commandment."
If there's any wiggle room there, I just don't see it.
So I'll attend my gay friends' weddings, and I'll do so in the exact same spirit I'd expect them to
attend a similar function of mine. And if it happens that in the course of either of their weddings or receptions I find myself wondering if I'm doing the right thing, I'll be sure to remember the first miracle of Jesus' recorded in the Bible. It's when he turned water into wine. At a wedding.
"Throughout the New Testament, the only kind of people with whom Jesus consistently took frightful exception were the very "teachers of the law and Pharisees" we see him dressing down in the passages above"
ReplyDeleteMy ervaring van Jesus se doen en late is dat Hy 'n houding van "ek is 'n sondaar", "ek doen verkeerd en is vasgevang - help my" "I may be wrong" hoog op prys gestel het. Feit is, gays staan dikwels uit as die groep wat alles in die stryd werp om te bewys dat daar niks verkeerd is met hulle lewensstyl nie. Daarby bedoel ek nie almal van hulle nie, en natuurlik is daar baie ander heteroseksuele wat ook dit wat verkeerd is in hulle lewensstyl probeer "reg of normaal bewys".
In New York word daar jaarliks (dink ek) 'n gay-parade gehou. Die stadshoofde het hulle versoek om hulle broeke op te hou. Een kommentator het gevra: "nou waarom sou gays die enigste groep wees wat gevra word om hulle broeke op te hou?"
So persoonlik dink ek 'n mens moet na hierdie sigbare "lewenshouding" kyk. Ek dink nie dit is so veilig vir ons om iemand te oordeel as 'n "fariseer" nie (dws sy hart sommer so te beoordeel) - vir Jesus was dit moontlik ja natuurlik.
Iemand sou kon vra waarom Jesus by Saggeus aan huis gegaan het.
ReplyDelete'n Mens moet eers vra waarom Saggeus vir Jesus wou sien?
Omdat hy begin twyfel het oor homself, oor sy skelmstreke, oor
of hy nie dalk verkeerd was/is nie? Persoonlik dink ek dit is hierdie
positiewe reaksie op Saggeus se hartondersoek/twyfel en soeke na Jesus wat
vir Jesus 'n "serious liking" in hierdie ou gegee het.
Iemand sou kon vra waarom Jesus by Saggeus aan huis gegaan het.
ReplyDelete'n Mens moet eers vra waarom Saggeus vir Jesus wou sien?
Omdat hy begin twyfel het oor homself, oor sy skelmstreke, oor
of hy nie dalk verkeerd was/is nie? Persoonlik dink ek dit is hierdie
positiewe reaksie op Saggeus se hartondersoek/twyfel en soeke na Jesus wat
vir Jesus 'n "serious liking" in hierdie ou gegee het, of hy nou gay was of nie.
Jesus en die huwelik. Dit is die vraag. Het Jesus die Ou Testament . . dat hy die vrou as hulp vir die man geskape het en dat hulle die aarde moes bewoon en vermeerder, herroep met 'n ander opdrag? Verander die Bybel as mediese navorsing nuwe feite, wat weer later anders bewys kan word,na vore bring? Ek is nie 'n kenner nie, maar die Genesis - opdrag geld, want Paulus gee vir ons duidelike opdragte vir die huwelik. Ek lees nie daar dat mans aan 'n ander man onderdanig moet wees nie. Dit beteken nie dat homoseksuele persone verwerp word nie. Dit beteken uit my perspektief, dat die huwelik slegs tussen mans en vroue voltrek kan word. Jesus het sy humeur verloor met mense wat dit wat hy as heilig beskou, wêrelds maak!
ReplyDeleteDag almal.
ReplyDeleteGaan kyk bietjie die dvd; :The Bible tells me so"
Dit sal dalk bietjie julle oë laat oopgaan...
Jesus het almal lief en niemand het die reg om namens hom te wil JUDGE nie.
Gay of nie, almal is GELYK in God se oë.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete... en as julle vrae het, my e-pos adres is maverickg01@gmail.com
ReplyDeleteDit stel my bitter teleur as sommige mense so oop en bloot kan sé hoe God werk. Gaan lees die Bybel weer, en lees dit in die konteks waarin dit geskrywe was.
So Gerrard beskou jy die Bybel as God se Woord? En dink jy dat as iemand iets uit die Woord neem en die mensdom (nie die persoon nie) waarsku teen hulle gedrag omdat hulle uit liefde nie wil hê dat ander verlore gaan nie, dat dit JUDGEMENT is?
ReplyDeleteLiefde, liefdevolle dissipline en teregwsying gaan hand aan hand. Moet ons net oor die "liefde" gedeelte praat? Of moet ons die Woord in balans bestudeer en verkondig?
Natuurlik het Hy almal lief. Beteken dit dat almal maar kan leef soos hulle wil en dat niemand moet tereggewys word nie, niemand moet van die gevolge vertel word nie? Is dit liefde? Of verwar jy teregwysing met JUDGEment?
Daar is vandag baie mense wat met verwyte rondloop omdat niemand hulle tereggewys het nie, niemand die moeite gedoen het om in jou naaste se oomblikke van swakheid 'n Woord van waarskuwing en lig te spreek nie.
Maar vandag word dit genoem JUDGEMENT, en die duiwel verkneukel hom daaraan! En hy sê vir sy makkers: "I like it when a plan comes together!"
Ek moet sê, Jona sou gehou het van hierdie "God het almal lief" verskoning. Hy moet net vir God gesê het: "Maar God, jy het mos almal lief! Hoekom moet ek nou 'n klomp mense gaan JUDGE?"
Maar aan die ander kant, ek het ook al geleer dat mense wat teregwysing verwar met JUDGEMENT is mense wat nie die Jona storie glo nie.
Die wat die Woord SOOS 'n KINDJIE aanvaar, sy lewe daarvolgens inrig met 'n sondebelydende houding van "dit is nie meer ek wat leef nie maar Christus (my Here) wat in my leef" - diesulkes sal 'n Goddelik geseende lewe ervaar en die ewige lewe daarby.
Seems to me some people, after all, are more equal than others.
Maar fok jou ook... Skynheiligheid staan my nie aan nie.
Delete