Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Other Sport] Israel Folau - Christian Martyr



Flagship

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2018
424
Brighton
Was it brave or just foolhardy for Falau to express his Christian beliefs on-line. Should he have lost his career?
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,265
Was it brave or just foolhardy for Falau to express his Christian beliefs on-line. Should he have lost his career?

its not a christian believe though is it, thats just dress up for his prejudice.
 


Eeyore

Lord Donkey of Queen's Park
NSC Patreon
Apr 5, 2014
23,381
No.

He is entitled to believe that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God. I believe it isn't.

His reference to the hell awaiting homosexuals, among others, on the face of it may seem aggressive and hateful. From the outside it can appear that way. However, his call, from his religious viewpoint, was to repent and be saved. I don't regard this as the same thing. He was not making a hateful discourse in his own eyes, not like, say, an extremist who calls for all such people to be prosecuted or even put to death.

Cultural norms shift over time. Only half a century ago the warped understanding of the acceptance of a number of things was much different to today. And that lack of reason was aggressive and hateful. We have changed. I do not think Israel Folau is a hateful person. I just think he has a wrong and outdated understanding of salvation and relatedness to the creator. My view might be different of others who say similar things because I believe their views are fueled by hatred.

The decision to ban him has its source not in reason but fear of a political backlash. He should be challenged not banned. That is how we develop a productive discourse in society.
 
Last edited:


Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Jul 11, 2003
73,371
West west west Sussex
I take it this is the fella quoting The Bible to express and justify his abhorrent views on homosexuality.


The Bible must be of great comfort to him:-

Ye-shall-not-make-any-cuttings-in-your-flesh-for-the-dead-nor-print-any-marks-upon-you-I-am-the-.png

Oh.
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,265
We have changed. I do not think Israel Folau is a hateful person.

i do. the rightous religious believer who holds a commited belief in hell and damnation, is hateful towards the groups they believe will go to hell. that is the purpose damnation, punishment on those not deemed good enough.
 




vegster

Sanity Clause
May 5, 2008
27,867
Was it brave or just foolhardy for Falau to express his Christian beliefs on-line. Should he have lost his career?

I'm pretty sure you know the answer to that ?

I would say this though, often, in order to become a Christian Martyr you had to die a very painful death for your beliefs.... looks like that's changed quite a bit.
 


vegster

Sanity Clause
May 5, 2008
27,867


Sorrel

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
2,736
Back in East Sussex
A proper Christian would prioritise the teachings of Jesus over those of the older 'discovered' Deuteronomic books of law. Jesus says nothing about homosexuality (or tattoos) - though of course, if Jesus had followed Mosaic law he would not have been brought up to be in favour of them.
 




Eeyore

Lord Donkey of Queen's Park
NSC Patreon
Apr 5, 2014
23,381
I take it this is the fella quoting The Bible to express and justify his abhorrent views on homosexuality.


The Bible must be of great comfort to him:-

View attachment 108291

Oh.

Indeed. He was quoting from 1 Corinthians, almost verbatim.

It's the old covenant v new covenant thing.

But that's a forty thousand page thread....
 




beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,265
A proper Christian would prioritise the teachings of Jesus over those of the older 'discovered' Deuteronomic books of law. Jesus says nothing about homosexuality (or tattoos) - though of course, if Jesus had followed Mosaic law he would not have been brought up to be in favour of them.

thats the funny thing i can never quite understand about Christianity. it would be quite nice philosophy for life if they jettisoned the old testament, full of contradiction and not very Christian.
 




Eeyore

Lord Donkey of Queen's Park
NSC Patreon
Apr 5, 2014
23,381
A proper Christian would prioritise the teachings of Jesus over those of the older 'discovered' Deuteronomic books of law. Jesus says nothing about homosexuality (or tattoos) - though of course, if Jesus had followed Mosaic law he would not have been brought up to be in favour of them.

Early Christians were clearly confused by this and there is still confusion. Grace v law is a long debate. Not sure what you mean by 'discovered'- the Torah was around long before Christ.
 




blue-shifted

Banned
Feb 20, 2004
7,645
a galaxy far far away
No.

He is entitled to believe that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God. I believe it isn't.

His reference to the hell awaiting homosexuals, among others, on the face of it may seem aggressive and hateful. From the outside it can appear that way. However, his call, from his religious viewpoint, was to repent and be saved. I don't regard this as the same thing. He was not making a hateful discourse in his own eyes, not like, say, an extremist who calls for all such people to be prosecuted or even put to death.

Cultural norms shift over time. Only half a century ago the warped understanding of the acceptance of a number of things was much different to today. And that lack of reason was aggressive and hateful. We have changed. I do not think Israel Folau is a hateful person. I just think he has a wrong and outdated understanding of salvation and relatedness to the creator. My view might be different of others who say similar things because I believe their views are fueled by hatred.

The decision to ban him has its source not in reason but fear of a political backlash. He should be challenged not banned. That is how we develop a productive discourse in society.

I sort of agree with this. I'm totally opposed to what he is saying, but I don't think him or Vunipola or Bundee Aki are hateful people. They've just been bought up in a culture in a part of the world where these views are prevalent and their faith is more important to them than their careers. You might silence these views by banning people, you won't stop them though. Tough one for the rugby authorities
 




Eeyore

Lord Donkey of Queen's Park
NSC Patreon
Apr 5, 2014
23,381
thats the funny thing i can never quite understand about Christianity. it would be quite nice philosophy for life if they jettisoned the old testament, full of contradiction and not very Christian.

I'd say the Old Testament is much clearer and has less contradiction, although, perhaps, a little miss-application of standards.

We like the New Testament because it is not gruesome or unforgiving- and that's the way it should be.

Christianity has been hijacked for political means though. When Constantine declared it the official religion of the Roman Empire it was screwed.
 


Sorrel

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
2,736
Back in East Sussex
thats the funny thing i can never quite understand about Christianity. it would be quite nice philosophy for life if they jettisoned the old testament, full of contradiction and not very Christian.
It's been done on numerous occasions - the problem is that Jesus' teaching is rooted in around 500 years of Jewish Culture that is mostly based on the texts that form the Old Testament. Hard to know what to remove from that.

The Old is a mishmash of law, myth, history, songs, sayings, love poetry with plenty of repeated sections (Kings and Chronicles say the same thing, twice). There's enough there for almost any moral to be drawn if the reader wants to quote a short phrase (for example, if we followed it we should let off people who commit manslaughter if they can get to a city of refuge and stay there until the priest dies). That's why the use of it for moral purposes just betrays the existing bias of the speaker.

Personally I like Thomas Jefferson's approach: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible
 


hart's shirt

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
10,123
Kitbag in Dubai
Someone says something on Twitter which defies current social and sexual mores; others protest; corporate sponsors threaten to withdraw support; representatives of sports management make noises about this “not reflecting the values of the sport/business/town, etc.”; and the perpetrator is terminated and consigned to ignominious oblivion.

Twitter is hardly the best medium for discussing controversial topics when the capacity to reason and persuade others is almost non-existent. Deep thought can at best only be transformed into fortune cookie pietism when refracted through the lens of 140 characters. It's fair to ask whether those who drop these controversial soundbites are really trying to persuade others of a better way of thinking or merely attempting to generate heat and draw attention to themselves.

Folau has the right to express his opinions in the public square, using whatever medium is at his disposal. And I would defend his right to do so, as I would defend the right of his critics to respond. It is somewhat puzzling that many of his critics, who may well not believe in hell, should be so upset that Folau believes some people may be going there; but they have their right to believe and express their outrage just as he does to express his beliefs.

The controversy reveals the asinine level and fractious nature of so much political discourse, right and left, when it becomes merely an exchange of antithetical cheap outrage online. For starters, let's see if this thread manages to stay on topic.
 
Last edited:


Fungus

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
May 21, 2004
7,038
Truro
Never heard of him.

Googled him and he made homophobic comments on Twitter. Homophobic views are not tolerated these days, and rightly so.

Should he lose his career? Depends how he reacts. If he apologises & shows genuine willingness to educate himself, then it's water under the bridge. If he continues a campaign of homophobia then of course he should worry about his career, just like any of us would do.

Not just homophobic comments... "Drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists and idolators - Hell awaits you."

When's someone going to stand up for us drunks, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists and idolators?
 




Eeyore

Lord Donkey of Queen's Park
NSC Patreon
Apr 5, 2014
23,381
i do. the rightous religious believer who holds a commited belief in hell and damnation, is hateful towards the groups they believe will go to hell. that is the purpose damnation, punishment on those not deemed good enough.

I'd like to ask you to widen your thoughts on this though as you seem to be able to offer rational debate.

Most Christians believe they are 'sinners'. I.e transgressors who fall short of standards. So, that given, they themselves (had it not been for Christ's sacrifice) would be heading the same way. They believe that faith saves them and, as is written, would save others too. That is why they are evangelical.

There is, for me, two forms of Christianity, neither of which are compatible. There is the notion of a 'Christian country' which is a false political and sometimes racially charged term- note it is often used by hard right groups. In a sense, because it doesn't have its origins in faith it is a by-product of an inherited set of values both cultural and political. It is meaningless too as cultural norms shift over time. Surely Christianity, if the bible is its blueprint, is an absolute- unalterable in its doctrine and practice.

Secondly, we have apostolic Christianity. This preaches the New Testament as it is and calls for repentance and faith for salvation. It has a set of values similar to today but much eroded over the centuries (whether for good or bad- probably both). But the key message is faith.

A Christian is someone who believes Christ died for their sin. Nothing else. As most people don't believe that we a not a Christian country.

So what my elongated run up is leading to is the need to acknowledge that Christians are entitled to their beliefs as long as they don't actively seek to harm or repress those they believe need to repent. Or do we need to stop all support, relief, and encouragement for the church as society is perfectly capable of managing its own transgressions as understood by cultural norms ? I don't think we do.
 
Last edited:


hart's shirt

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
10,123
Kitbag in Dubai



Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here