tolerence?

[Patrick Foley]

Ron,

I think Jesus was more accepting of other people than most of his followers.
His greatest anger seemed to go out to merchants who mixed money with religion.
And there are possible alternatives to those you describe. For example,
possibly John (who was pretty wild at times in Revelations) may not have quoted
Jesus directly or interpreted correctly all he witnessed and heard about. I'll
leave those issues to biblical scholars.

Nor am I especially interested in homosexuality. Having been raised in a
segregated, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic country, I have been proud to see
the steps we have taken towards what Lincoln, Jesus, Gautama, Socrates and
Martin Luther King would surely have preferred. Any one of those guys probably
had his own hangups, but none, I think, would have accepted the status quo of
1950 United States.

I made my post as a patriotic American. The non-US citizens on this list need
to get some evidence that our country is not a collection of arrogant bigots
commanded by an incompetent simpleton. Otherwise they will hesitate to join us
on our next crusade against evil.

Almost on my way back to Quintana Roo,
Patrick Foley
patfoley at csus.edu


Ron Gatrelle wrote:

> Pat wrote:
>
> I know what you mean. Just imagine having to spend any time at all with
> Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Socrates, Gautama or Jesus! Their
> tediuous insistence on tolerance just goes way beyond what anyone should
> have to take.
> ________________________
>
> Jesus was forgiving yes, tolerant no.  He claimed to be the _only_ way,
> truth, and life.  He also stated to his fellow Jews (and the world) in John
> 8:24 that unless one believed that he was God they would "die in their
> sins" - go to hell.  He went even further in that section by saying in
> verse 47 that if anyone is truly of God they will hear (believe and follow)
> his treachings, and that those who do not, thereby demonstrate that they
> are
> not of God.   Not preaching here just setting the record straight.  Jesus
> was either a liar, a lunatic, or who he said he was.  He was a fanatic.
> Which is why the religious and political power-that-be of his day put him
> to death.
>
> Now, if someone stated that Jesus never addressed homosexuality directly
> (pro or con) they would be correct.  He did so only indirectly by
> references to the Mosaic law, which was, to say the least, not kind
> (tolerant) to that activity.
>
> As a leps list we all know this thread is way off topic, but one thing
> lacking in these responses is homosexual input of those of this
> orientation, drives, and fetishes.   So far all I have seen are
> heterosexuals  talking about it.  Now, I am not saying this should continue
> here.  I think it has gone far enough.  I am saying that to adequately
> address this subject matter it would take a whole lot of space and posting
> by folks who _are_ AND _have been_ in that lifestyle.  As tempted as I am
> to solicit more on
> this I suggest we all just let it go.  Find another list serve for this one
> (and not TILS-leps-talk :-).
>
>  Ron Gatrelle
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>


 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl