The sum of us: Rugby league hero Steve Mortimer proud of his son's gay union

[Woodsie]

Ah shucks, just look at all of the Bro love on here. What was this thread about again?

Good onya,

 

[Wombat Legacy]

Good old Rex
I didn't abuse anybody except you old mate. Because you are a grandstanding agitator and resort to twisting other people's posts to drive your petty agendas. To anybody that feels I abused them-I apologise profusely, most of my comments were tongue in cheek, although I am averse to sitting back and seeing ANYBODY pursued in an argument by a mob mentality. Especially people like @Technical Coach and @Ralphie who appear to me to be discriminated against because of their beliefs etc. I am not responding to you @Rex, because I know it would be wasted on somebody as dogmatic and unyielding as you. I hope I upset you-and given your diatribes against me, I have succeeded beyond my wildest dreams in outing you as a bigoted, muddling old fool. Rampaging Rex the great seer of our times, yeah, nah!

 

[Jerry1]

@Dan come on boot this somewhere else. It's not footy it's religious, poofter loving, poofter bashing anyone bashing. Divisive rubbish..

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Its a football thread Jerry, so just accept it. It's about how football folk, even greats of the game, have to decide how to react when their loved ones don't conform to macho norms. Credit to Steve Mortimer, I always thought of him as a second rate champ (behind our own Gibbsy) but now I think he is a true champ.
Jerry if you think the lives of footy folk have nothing to do with footy, then you are poorer for it, and just go play a computer game.
Having said that, I haven't read the last few pages!!!

 

[Rex]

Good old Rex
I didn't abuse anybody except you old mate.

See we do agree. You are engaging in abuse. And it seems we agree that your abuse is intentional, preplanned, systematic, and sustained. You have clarified that in your admissions.

How you present yourself is your business. How you represent yourself as a Christian in today's world is your business. If you wish to represent yourself - and Christians - to others as hateful, vile filled, vindictive then so be it.

You have actively, intentionally and repeatedly incited your group to engage in your systematic abuse. I have interpreted this as a sign of weakness from you, because it suggests you don't believe you can stand on your own two feet. Your clan of influence comprises yourself, plus:
@Ralphie,
@Technical Coach,
@highlandeagle, and
@Woodsie.

This five forms your "hit group" of abuse. You five posters comprise almost the entirety of the postings and ratings for the anti gay/anti mardi gras case in this thread. And it is notable that where-ever any of your group posts, others in that group give positive ratings (and does rarely anyone else). On first viewing, it appears that not one of your hit group of abuse has given positive ratings to anyone outside of your hit group. If there have been any, they have been extremely minimal.

It is notable that three of the posters in your hit group of abuse have named themselves as Christians (Ralphie, TC, and yourself). Based on their postings and ratings, the other two virtually certainly identify themselves as Christians. All of you five have actively engaged in personal abuse in this thread. I don't think anyone else has abused me (or anyone else) except you five. Your gang of five is representing not just themselves but Christianity. If this is how you wish Christianity to be portrayed, then so be it.

There is an alternative. For example, @pjayz is clearly strongly Christian. He and I disagree on a variety of matters, and the tone he has presented is respectful all the same. He presents modern Christianity in an entirely different light to your Christian Reform Group.

Edit: After 17 minutes Wombat Legacy has troll rated this posting. Perhaps he thinks no-one takes note of who rates?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

correction, the last 10 pages!!

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Uh oh, I just read the last couple of posts..

 

[Jerry1]

Its a football thread Jerry, so just accept it. It's about how football folk, even greats of the game, have to decide how to react when their loved ones don't conform to macho norms. Credit to Steve Mortimer, I always thought of him as a second rate champ (behind our own Gibbsy) but now I think he is a true champ.
Jerry if you think the lives of footy folk have nothing to do with footy, then you are poorer for it, and just go play a computer game.
Having said that, I haven't read the last few pages!!!

It divisive rubbish mate.. needs to be debated somewhere else.

 

[Wombat Legacy]

I am not reading your waffle-it is not meant for me anyway

 

[Rex]

Rex, as a Christian, I don't agree with the above at all. We could go all day back and forward about this. The bible is clear on what it defines as an appropriate relationship. The scriptures are written by God through men - both Old Testament and New. Paul was spoken to by Christ, regardless, the fact that he did not physically meet him has nothing to do with God's ability to use him and speak to him, or through him.

As to your point that the New Testament is largely written by others (outside of Paul), that never met Christ is also incorrect. Many other books of the New Testament were written by people who walked with Christ - John, Peter, Matthew, James and Jude (his brothers) - as for Mark and Luke - these two were not one of the 12 apostles; however, that does not mean that they never met Christ or heard him speak.

The bible is also clear on the fact that we are to love all people - that is true of heterosexuals and homosexuals. People who abuse anyone - gay or otherwise, who show hatred, commit physical abuse, or do not express the love of Christ to is not what being a Christian is about. That does not mean that we are to compromise our beliefs or to condone any form of sin - we do not, nor does God.

I can show love and care for a homosexual person and yet not support gay marriage nor the act of homosexuality. That may not resonate with you or others (and maybe it does), but it is showing that one can love a person without agreeing with their beliefs or actions. If this were not the case, and God did not hold this view then none of us would be loved by God as each and everyone of us has sin in their life.

I appreciate your views on things Rex; however, you have made some claims about the bible and Christianity that simply are not correct. Having said that, there are many people who claim to be Christian who display qualities that are anything but and unfortunately that causes a great deal of harm.

As has been mentioned by a few posters already, this isn't a footy thread anymore so I will leave it there.

1. My understanding is that the earliest accounts written were by Paul, who we agree never met Christ, sometime after 50 AD. And that the other accounts were written sometime after 75 AD. For the people who wrote these to have known Jesus, they would need to have been 100+ years old wouldn't they? Can you correct this or explain your thinking?

2. You've said "The scriptures are written by God through men - both Old Testament and New." That statement was drummed into to me soooo many times as a kid. And, for me, it never had any authentic or believable ring to it (unless you're to say something like God wrote ALL books ever through men). And are we to believe that God never wrote through men subsequently? And if He/She did, then why is the Bible not expanded? I could always see the motive in people wanting me to believe that, but never the logic. Can you explain why you believe that?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

It divisive rubbish mate.. needs to be debated somewhere else.

Move it to Welcome and Introductions, so new members know what they're in for?

 

[lsz]

Uh oh, I just read the last couple of posts..

Can you explain it to the rest of us?

 

[Brooke]

I am surprised each time I jump on Silvertails to see this thread has gone for as long as it has. I bet Isz would never have imagined in his wildest dreams it would have reached this length.
Just another reason I love Silvertails, never a dull moment.

 

[Rex]

Move it to Welcome and Introductions, so new members know what they're in for?

The science forum. The layman's guide to black holes.

 

[Pittwater Legend]

Have to agree with Jerry. This thread has gone way off the rails and has definitely run its course in the footy forum.

@Rex is a top bloke speaking up for a minority group that are unfairly treated for personal qualities that only affect themselves. Their daily plights are certainly much worse than that of a group of Christians who feel that their values are under attack. Rex is a smart guy who can keep rolling with the punches all day and the thread has degenerated into a small group taking pot shots at Rex and backslapping each other after each round.

FWIW, Ralphie and TC have made valid points about how they feel about homosexuality but unfortunately there is a fine line around the topic and it is very easy to cross. That is why Rex has engaged with them. Woodsie is a good bloke and a funny buggar to boot. He hasn't really put a foot wrong in this thread but has been drawn into the battle nonetheless.

 

[Rex]

Have to agree with Jerry. This thread has gone way off the rails and has definitely run its course in the footy forum.

@Rex is a top bloke speaking up for a minority group that are unfairly treated for personal qualities that only affect themselves. Their daily plights are certainly much worse than that of a group of Christians who feel that their values are under attack. Rex is a smart guy who can keep rolling with the punches all day and the thread has degenerated into a small group taking pot shots at Rex and backslapping each other after each round.

FWIW, Ralphie and TC have made valid points about how they feel about homosexuality but unfortunately there is a fine line around the topic and it is very easy to cross. That is why Rex has engaged with them. Woodsie is a good bloke and a funny buggar to boot. He hasn't really put a foot wrong in this thread but has been drawn into the battle nonetheless.

Thanks for seeking to bring the thread back on track Pittwater Legend. Your compassionate heart abounds and radiates beauty.

I am deeply sad this thread has been sidetracked from the crucial issue of the human impacts on the LGBT community of discrimination. I am also sad to be involved in that sidetracking. I just don't see another way atm of pushing beyond deeply conditioned stereotypical discriminatory views other than strongly challenging them and exposing them. Others much more skilled than I perhaps can. If so, I ask for your help. Not advice, help. I'll learn as best I can from your modelling (as I am currently seeking to do from many wise postings already made in this thread).

Despite appearances, I regard Jesus Christ's words and actions very highly indeed. Not godlike for me, but very worth learning from, much like say Mandela or Gandhi.

Given that Christianity is aimed to be built on the teachings of Jesus (in my understanding), my instincts tell me that Christianity has a lot to be gained by refocussing on his words and actions - and relegating the rest to supplementary views of others, often impacted by the culture of the times. eg Stories he told (like the good samaritan aimed to break down stereotypes and open up compassion and understanding - very much like the stereotypes that abound now about say, Muslims and the LGBT community. Actions he took like mingling with the reviled tax collector were significant for similar reasons. Jesus' heart and courage comes through strongly in the stories he told and actions he took.

His sermon on the mount's "do unto others" (sic) mirrors the buddhist advice from 500 years earlier (Udanavarga 5:18) "Hurt not others with that which pains yourself". Just as "the love thy neighbour" advice mirrors the Hindu advice from the Hitopadesa in 3200 BC. These are perhaps timeless, universal truths that humans benefit from pondering?

In my view large chunks of Christians today totally ignore Jesus' advice in Matthew 7 by pointing fingers at, say, the LGBT community (it is a social custom to blame, not just a Christian one):
“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"

And despite appearances, and I don't expect them to understand this now, I do deeply respect those I've challenged and wish them the best. In my world, currently, to challenge, disrupt and disagree is very different to disrespecting.

The point I don't currently agree with is the removal of the thread from the Footy forum. To do that is to kill the thread. I understand the motives behind killing the thread. And to move past the worst, pulling out part way, when things get tough, doesn't work well in my experience.

 

[pjayz]

1. My understanding is that the earliest accounts written were by Paul, who we agree never met Christ, sometime after 50 AD. And that the other accounts were written sometime after 75 AD. For the people who wrote these to have known Jesus, they would need to have been 100+ years old wouldn't they? Can you correct this or explain your thinking?

2. You've said "The scriptures are written by God through men - both Old Testament and New." That statement was drummed into to me soooo many times as a kid. And, for me, it never had any authentic or believable ring to it (unless you're to say something like God wrote ALL books ever through men). And are we to believe that God never wrote through men subsequently? And if He/She did, then why is the Bible not expanded? I could always see the motive in people wanting me to believe that, but never the logic. Can you explain why you believe that?

Hi Rex,

1) Most of the other accounts were written between 60 - 75 AD, Jesus began his ministry around 28AD, at the age of 30. That does not mean that his followers were exactly the same age. Whilst the bible does state the ages of the apostles, it was common for Jewish boys to take on a Rabbi at the age of 15/16 onwards as their formal education back then finished at 15. Most scholars believe that aside from Peter who was estimated to be between 18-20 at this time (was married), to have been around 16-17.

This would make them between 76 - 92, James was written approx. 10 years earlier and Revelation 10 years later.

2)You said "And, for me, it never had any authentic or believable ring to it (unless you're to say something like God wrote ALL books ever through men)."
I don't get your logic here that God must inspire all of men's writings otherwise he can't have inspired any? Have you read some of the stuff that get's printed these days? ;-) Just as every person has reasoning behind doing one thing over another, so does God, and whilst we can have some understanding of what He does and why He does them, we are not going to understand everything.

You also said "And are we to believe that God never wrote through men subsequently? And if He/She did, then why is the Bible not expanded?"

I believe God does speak to people and sometimes through them, that does not mean that scripture needs to be added to - every book or series has an ending, and for God, He obviously wanted to end the scriptures where he did. Again, the fact that scriptures in the bible have been completed has no relevance as to whether they were written by God through men or not.

I believe for many reasons Rex, I see that these books written though many writers over thousands of years all tie together and point to the one God. You obviously do not and hold different views, and that is completely your decision/position which is fine.

 

[lsz]

I am surprised each time I jump on Silvertails to see this thread has gone for as long as it has. I bet Isz would never have imagined in his wildest dreams it would have reached this length.
Just another reason I love Silvertails, never a dull moment.

I am just here to drive the clicks...

 

[Ralphie]

I am just here to drive the clicks...

Chicks? Oh wait, my eyesight is not that great.

 

[pjayz]

And despite appearances, and I don't expect them to understand this now, I do deeply respect those I've challenged and wish them the best. In my world, currently, to challenge, disrupt and disagree is very different to disrespecting.

Hi Rex, Pittwater Legend and others - as a Christian, I am hoping you see that the above can apply to me also.

As mentioned before, the bible is clear that we are to love all people, and one can love a person without agreeing with their beliefs or actions.