I mean, come on, if a person goes through their entire life and never meets a decent Christian, there has to be a bigger reason than “they never went to church.”

Someone may have been very nice o you and you do not know they are a christian. They may have let you go in traffic, go ahead in the supermarket, overlooked an insult you threw their way. They may have saved your dog from traffic or help your kid at school or kept them from a dangerous person in a public place.

especially those who do not attend church)

might be your best clue as to why you only see certain christians.

That’s kind of a cop-out on the part of Christians, if you ask me. Do Christians (or at least decent ones) only exist in church? Do they never live in the same neighborhoods as gay people? Do they go to separate supermarkets? I mean, come on, if a person goes through their entire life and never meets a decent Christian, there has to be a bigger reason than “they never went to church.” Because I’m pretty sure Christians aren’t supposed to sit in their buildings and wait for the world to come to them. I’m kind of reminded of the sermon I listened to several years ago where the pastor talked about good Christian friends who lamented they didn’t know any unfortunate souls they could help. The pastor pointed out more than one family that lived within blocks of these good folks and suggested that “not knowing them” indicated a problem.

I grant you, there are also those cases where some people are so hostile towards Christianity that the moment they find out someone is Christian, they discontinue any further contact or turn nasty until said Christians wander away. So I’m not saying it’s strictly a Christian problem. But still…

I am aware you are different people

“Tim” and I are different people. I’m not sure that everyone is recognizing that. I always use my full name when commenting here.

Perhaps it would be better to call him Tim and me Timothy and keep a distinction.

I do not share Tim’s opinions about the nature of Christianity or what is authentically Christian. They seem, to me, to be contrary to the tone of early Christian writing and to the evolution of thought among the founders of the faith.

I would argue that Christianity – in its earliest stages, at least – was quite the opposite of eliminationist. When there was conflict between dietary requirements and inclusion, Peter had a vision and out went the dietary requirements. When circumcision – the very sign of God’s covenant with man – came in conflict with inclusion, out went circumcision.

And I find it perplexing that non-Christians seem to think that the good-news was about Hell. I find it even more perplexing when Christians agree.

To me it seems pretty obvious that the good-news was about the fulfillment of (elimination of adherence to) the Law of Sin and Punishment, not that the Law had been slightly revised to have new rules. The news that God wanted personal relationship rather than rules-following was pretty good, I think.

But that’s just me.

Have you considered that the separation to the left and to the right and the subsequent damnation may apply to people like Lively and Phelps?

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

“Eliminationism”…so now you are using Lively’s trick, only now Christians are the Nazis and God is Hitler.

Yowsa.

No doubt studying the bible is a practice in interpretation and etymology. However, for me, the separating process is left up to God. It really is not my place to judge who is more closer to understanding God. I think we all miss the mark. And yet, we all try to pursue understanding everyday. every moment. I won’t argue your interpretation and simply state – that your particular scriptures you use to support your elimination theology is interpreted differently by me. And in the end, it is God who decides who stays and who goes.

Mary and Teresa, I am glad to hear that you are not eliminationist, but to the extent you are not, then that makes you less authentically Christian than Scott Lively. Eliminationism is at the heart of Christianity. Ultimately, the reason one needs to be “saved” by Christ is because the default outcome is separation, followed by removal either to permanent eradication or eternal torture. The gospel or “good news” is that you can be cleansed of sin and escape hell. But that only underscores that in the Christian moral universe, human beings are separated into camps, the saved and the unsaved. The former go to heaven where they, for some reason, spend eternity praising God (even though God is omniscient and thus already has perfect knowledge of how wonderful He is). The latter burn in hell. Matthew Ch. 24:

” 41Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.”

It is ironic indeed that Lively tries to portray gay people as Nazis regardless of their actual political or moral views, when he worships a God who explicitly promises a Dr. Mengele-style selection process (“You to the right, you to the left”) followed by the burning of those on the “left hand,” i.e., the vast majority of humans who ever lived.

I mean that his views most accurately reflect Christian principles as set forth in the Bible, which are fundamentally grounded in eliminationism.

Timothy, perhaps you could expand on this a little more, if you will. I don’t find Christian principles at all eliminationist, but rather invitational. I suspect your life choices have made you, in a sense, an eliminationist. Anyone who disagrees with your view, you would prefer to disregard … perhaps, eliminate.

Are you talking about moral choices? All of us, no matter what source we use, make life choices based on what we view as right or true. We often don’t take to kindly with those that oppose our view. In that sense, we compare, compete, etc.; ultimately to eliminate. It’s quite difficult to get past that. Sometimes we shouldn’t.

I think this statement speaks for itself, and I offer it with no comment other than the reminder that Mr. Lively is a respected source of information among conservative Christians in this country and abroad

I know that the members of my bible study do not respect this man. To sustain a radio show, you need very little money, very little folks to follow you. Lively has lost a lot of his credibility in the last few years. He has a rope, he is “hanging” himself – albeit very slowly.

By that, I don’t mean that he has won a popular vote among Christians. I mean that his views most accurately reflect Christian principles as set forth in the Bible, which are fundamentally grounded in eliminationism

If that is your interpretation of the bible then so be it. The face of christianity as I know it to be founded in strict christianity is NOT about eliminating people. It is about grace and being welcomed into the family and body of Christ, sins and all.