Charles Barkley: Conservatives...they're really just fake Christians (1 Viewer)

[Pure Energy]

At least Charles has a great stroke:

http://www.youtube.com/v/s50K65PNeBU&rel=1<object height="355" width="425">

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/s50K65PNeBU&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="355" width="425"></object>

 

[BullDawg]

"And I think these Christians, first of all, they're not supposed to judge other people. But they're the most hypocritical judge of people we have in the country. And it bugs the hell out of me. They act like they're Christians. They're not forgiving at all."

Ayep. Methinks some are missing his point entirely (pre-judging maybe?). The so-called Christian Right, standing high and mightly upon their ivory towers, playing God with their judgments of hellfire and damnation...and they ain't no bettah.

What did Christ say about throwing the first stone?

"Christians" and "conservatives" seem to have a habit of forgetting that passage of Scripture.

 

[Saintman2884]

UH Bull, he is still departmentalizing and using certain supposed sentiments about conservatives and Christians but I don't think I fall into Sir Charles says about what I believe and adhere too in terms of religious beliefs and political doctrine. And it is not always true in many people. He is being totally outrageous and using half truths and cliches to make a total statement. Thats dangerous thinking mate but maybe its human nature to do so. After all their are certain biblical passages where Jesus actually cursed certain cities in the Middle East that would not conform from its wickedness and in fact wept at the fate of the city of Jerusalem because it was going to be punked by the Romans legions under Titus in AD 70. the Romans never understood the Jewish nation, they respected them for their history and their written laws, but to them they were a backward strange to figure people that always were looking down on their Roman rulers.

But thats another story for another thread, Bulldawg

 

[Dave]

Ayep. Methinks some are missing his point entirely (pre-judging maybe?). The so-called Christian Right, standing high and mightly upon their ivory towers, playing God with their judgments of hellfire and damnation...and they ain't no bettah.

What did Christ say about throwing the first stone?

"Christians" and "conservatives" seem to have a habit of forgetting that passage of Scripture.

I agree, but his statement lumps any right wing christians in with the far right "religous right."

 

[ra]

......

On a side note, I wish I could put people into categories and departmentalize people like he says all conservatives do and or claims too and that which he is doing kind of now.

.......

Yeah. You'll never have to worry about that.



Yeah.

 

[SaintJ]

I agree, but his statement lumps any right wing christians in with the far right "religous right."

Technically yes, but if you've listened to him enough over the years I doubt he meant to include everyone possibly lumpable. Nobody parses their statements that carefully unless they're running for office, or remotely give a **** what people think if they don't like it, and for Charles words are sort of a volume business anyway, rather than a house of custom craftsmanship.

On the other hand, he was firing at a target-rich environment.

 

[StChadwick]

He used the words, "they're not forgiving at all." Whom is he saying has asked for forgiveness? Charles Barkley did not utter one word of asking for forgiveness, only to reiterate his staunch position against mainstream christianity stances, while at the same time couple a whole group of people into one category. What happen to not judging people Charles? Christianity is all about forgiveness and if they arent then they're not true to Christ's message, but the part often missed by people quoting that phrase is you have to ask for it and show in your deeds that you will stop the offense(s). As the scripture also says concerning the woman caught in adultery, "Go your way. From now on sin no more." Without it there is no forgiveness.

As for the words dont judge, the word judge is probably not the best word in the sense we use it now. The Greek word there is krino and means to distinguish, decide by implication, to try, condemn, or punish. So, when Jesus was speaking of not judging someone, it was about condemnation. In other words, we don't decide who is going to hell. That judgment is left to Him alone. No one can judge someone's motive only their actions. For example I can judge someone's running a red light as wrong but I dont know why they did it, maybe there's a woman in labor, etc. In the Old testament people were stoned to death for cutting firewood on the sabbath so what are we complaining about?Our civil law is based on judging, what sense does a faith have if it doesnt have concrete rules contained to know and teach right from wrong? If it were that simple of exclusive nonjudgement in every action then there would have been no reason for the remainder of scriptures and Church for 2,000 years. MUST always be read in context.

 

[BullDawg]

He used the words, "they're not forgiving at all." Whom is he saying has asked for forgiveness? Charles Barkley did not utter one word of asking for forgiveness, only to reiterate his staunch position against mainstream christianity stances, while at the same time couple a whole group of people into one category. What happen to not judging people Charles? Christianity is all about forgiveness and if they arent then they're not true to Christ's message, but the part often missed by people quoting that phrase is you have to ask for it and show in your deeds that you will stop the offense(s). As the scripture also says concerning the woman caught in adultery, "Go your way. From now on sin no more." Without it there is no forgiveness.

As for the words dont judge, the word judge is probably not the best word in the sense we use it now. The Greek word there is krino and means to distinguish, decide by implication, to try, condemn, or punish. So, when Jesus was speaking of not judging someone, it was about condemnation. In other words, we don't decide who is going to hell. That judgment is left to Him alone. No one can judge someone's motive only their actions. For example I can judge someone's running a red light as wrong but I dont know why they did it, maybe there's a woman in labor, etc. In the Old testament people were stoned to death for cutting firewood on the sabbath so what are we complaining about?Our civil law is based on judging, what sense does a faith have if it doesnt have concrete rules contained to know and teach right from wrong? If it were that simple of exclusive nonjudgement in every action then there would have been no reason for the remainder of scriptures and Church for 2,000 years. MUST always be read in context.

My point...and I'm assuming Barkley's point as well...is that "Christians" (the quote is obviously there due to the self proclamation rather than any real evidence to support their claims) just love to play God and proclaim condemnation. If Christ were walking around today he would be proclaimed a heretic for keeping the company he did while proclaiming to be holy. Oh wait...that already happened didn't it?!? Yes...yes it did.

Alas, history repeats itself does it not?

What "concrete rules" are there outside the Roman Road? Didn't the Apostle Paul stringently warn about such "rules"?

I doubt ole Charles is very worried about anyone pointing to him and saying he's the pot calling the kettle black. He's already on record as saying he's not a role model. He's not trying to act like he's perfect. Can the "holier than thou" crowd say the same? That is my point.

Christ warned about judging unless one is willing to be judged by the same criteria. I wonder how many Christians who love to play the condemnation game will fare when their lives are put up against those very standards. I suspect it won't be a pretty picture.

 

[Pure Energy]

He used the words, "they're not forgiving at all." Whom is he saying has asked for forgiveness? Charles Barkley did not utter one word of asking for forgiveness, only to reiterate his staunch position against mainstream christianity stances, while at the same time couple a whole group of people into one category. What happen to not judging people Charles? Christianity is all about forgiveness and if they arent then they're not true to Christ's message, but the part often missed by people quoting that phrase is you have to ask for it and show in your deeds that you will stop the offense(s). As the scripture also says concerning the woman caught in adultery, "Go your way. From now on sin no more." Without it there is no forgiveness.

As for the words dont judge, the word judge is probably not the best word in the sense we use it now. The Greek word there is krino and means to distinguish, decide by implication, to try, condemn, or punish. So, when Jesus was speaking of not judging someone, it was about condemnation. In other words, we don't decide who is going to hell. That judgment is left to Him alone. No one can judge someone's motive only their actions. For example I can judge someone's running a red light as wrong but I dont know why they did it, maybe there's a woman in labor, etc. In the Old testament people were stoned to death for cutting firewood on the sabbath so what are we complaining about?Our civil law is based on judging, what sense does a faith have if it doesnt have concrete rules contained to know and teach right from wrong? If it were that simple of exclusive nonjudgement in every action then there would have been no reason for the remainder of scriptures and Church for 2,000 years. MUST always be read in context.

Very good post....to expand the highlighted point a bit.

My take is most people mistake setting the bar with judgment. A secular example as an analogy...if a driver exceeds the posted speed limit say 78 in a 35, most would agree that using the term Speeder isn't out of line and the driver was in the wrong for exceeding the posted speed limit ((barring red herrings for the sake of this example such as a stuck gas pedal, medical emergency, etc.). However, putting this example into the "Barkley context", it would be wrong to label this person a Speeder (because it's considered judgment) and what we as a Country should do is increase the speed limit in order to accommodate this person's driving habit or abolish all speed limits in order that no one can be accused of Speeding.

The overwhelming majority of Christian Religions in the U.S. agree that innocent Human life should be respected and protected and that the traditional Family is a critical underpinning of a healthy society/culture. I'm at a complete loss to understand why Christians such as Charles Barkley classify the support of these tenets by fellow Christians as hypocrisy.

 

[BullDawg]

Very good post....to expand the highlighted point a bit.

My take is most people mistake setting the bar with judgment. A secular example as an analogy...if a driver exceeds the posted speed limit say 78 in a 35, most would agree that using the term Speeder isn't out of line and the driver was in the wrong for exceeding the posted speed limit ((barring red herrings for the sake of this example such as a stuck gas pedal, medical emergency, etc.). However, putting this example into the "Barkley context", it would be wrong to label this person a Speeder (because it's considered judgment) and what we as a Country should do is increase the speed limit in order to accommodate this person's driving habit or abolish all speed limits in order that no one can be accused of Speeding.

The overwhelming majority of Christian Religions in the U.S. agree that innocent Human life should be respected and protected and that the traditional Family is a critical underpinning of a healthy society/culture. I'm at a complete loss to understand why Christians such as Charles Barkley classify the support of these tenets by fellow Christians as hypocrisy.

Nope. There is a distinct difference between recognizing sin and condeming the sinner. And I quite honestly find the comparison between sin/eternal damnation and a speeding ticket to be a stretch. It serves to gloss over the gross hyprocisy via minimization.

 

[SaintJ]

My take is most people mistake setting the bar with judgment. A secular example as an analogy...if a driver exceeds the posted speed limit say 78 in a 35, most would agree that using the term Speeder isn't out of line and the driver was in the wrong for exceeding the posted speed limit ((barring red herrings for the sake of this example such as a stuck gas pedal, medical emergency, etc.). However, putting this example into the "Barkley context", it would be wrong to label this person a Speeder (because it's considered judgment) and what we as a Country should do is increase the speed limit in order to accommodate this person's driving habit or abolish all speed limits in order that no one can be accused of Speeding.

lmao

The overwhelming majority of Christian Religions in the U.S. agree that innocent Human life should be respected and protected and that the traditional Family is a critical underpinning of a healthy society/culture. I'm at a complete loss to understand why Christians such as Charles Barkley classify the support of these tenets by fellow Christians as hypocrisy.

Since that wasn't what he was trying to say, I can certainly understand your deflec-, umm, confusion.

 

[TPS]

:17: :17: :17: :17: :17: Barkley '08 :17: :17: :17: :17: :17:

 

[TulsaSaint]

The overwhelming majority of Christian Religions in the U.S. agree that innocent Human life should be respected and protected and that the traditional Family is a critical underpinning of a healthy society/culture. I'm at a complete loss to understand why Christians such as Charles Barkley classify the support of these tenets by fellow Christians as hypocrisy.

Well, in all fairness, I think that most everyone would agree that innocent life should be protected and that families are a critical foundation of society. Just not everyone would agree that fetuses are human persons, and not everyone would agree that those families must be made up of a mom, a dad, 2.5 kids, and a dog with a white picket fence.

 

[AlbertaSaintsFan]

Chuck is just crazy...

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/akB8gfCMTDg&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/akB8gfCMTDg&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

[Pure Energy]

Nope. There is a distinct difference between recognizing sin and condeming the sinner. And I quite honestly find the comparison between sin/eternal damnation and a speeding ticket to be a stretch. It serves to gloss over the gross hyprocisy via minimization.

We're in agreement, there's a huge difference between recognizing sin and condemning the sinner. However, I boil his statements down this way: Conservatives are "fake Christians" and hypocrites because they don't agree with Charles Barkley's positions on marriage and abortion. In my opinion, he's taking the position that it's okay for him to condemn others (Conservatives) but they have no right to condemn him. Call me crazy, but my position is no one on this planet has the right to condemn anyone.

The reason for the speeding ticket analogy was not to minimize anything, but to provide an analogy that isn't that potentially inflammatory and yet illustrates the concept of changing the standard rather than holding people accountable for their actions.