Strife412
Member
Linking to here so another thread isn't hijacked by possible responses. But, needs to be said, as far as I'm concerned.
Why not Google?
- Thread starter Strife412
- Start date
Odale
Active Member
I really don't see anything wrong with treating people equally.
I am unsure about storing and sharing information though.
I am unsure about storing and sharing information though.
XionTawa
New Member
Errr...I would somewhat agree with you, however...you cannot avoid Google...their analytics run on 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of all websites... including mine, and these forums...you cannot block or get away from Google...so why not use them?
EDIT: Just a thought, Google is NOT a Christian company...
EDIT: Just a thought, Google is NOT a Christian company...
Last edited:
Strife412
Member
I'm about to get a bit crude, so I'll be using the spoiler box for those that don't want to see this. We have lost a sense of what is crude, and what is not.
The question then becomes, what is equal, and what is privilege?
If a man lives in his home with his homosexual partner, meaning they have intercourse with each other, then they get a raise in pay, so they can afford healthcare together.
If a man lives in his home with his heterosexual partner, meaning they have intercourse with each other, they do not get a raise in pay, because they "can" get married.
What if this couple doesn't believe in marriage? Should they not get equal rights as the homosexuals do?
What if the man is just downright butt ugly, and cannot find a woman that will take an interest in him? If he then turns to another type of sexuality, such as his dog, will he get a raise in pay so his pet will get veterinary coverage?
What if a blow up doll gets a hole punctured in it? Or a computer gets a drink spilled on it, and it can no longer visit sites of pornography?
Where does the line get drawn? When does cohabitation equate dependency? When does intercourse?
Marriage is important to society only because it forms a family unit. Without that family, and/or the possibility of there being that family, there is no reason for society to give any privileges to a couple of people living under the same roof. Society has decided to make it easier for a mother to remain home and raise children, while the father provides the income. That is the purpose of employment providing medical coverage.
As crude as this statement is, aberrant behavior does not include beastiality, pornography, adultery... and exclude homosexuality.
What is Google's purpose, other than normalizing aberrant behavior? Where then does the line get drawn?
If a man lives in his home with his homosexual partner, meaning they have intercourse with each other, then they get a raise in pay, so they can afford healthcare together.
If a man lives in his home with his heterosexual partner, meaning they have intercourse with each other, they do not get a raise in pay, because they "can" get married.
What if this couple doesn't believe in marriage? Should they not get equal rights as the homosexuals do?
What if the man is just downright butt ugly, and cannot find a woman that will take an interest in him? If he then turns to another type of sexuality, such as his dog, will he get a raise in pay so his pet will get veterinary coverage?
What if a blow up doll gets a hole punctured in it? Or a computer gets a drink spilled on it, and it can no longer visit sites of pornography?
Where does the line get drawn? When does cohabitation equate dependency? When does intercourse?
Marriage is important to society only because it forms a family unit. Without that family, and/or the possibility of there being that family, there is no reason for society to give any privileges to a couple of people living under the same roof. Society has decided to make it easier for a mother to remain home and raise children, while the father provides the income. That is the purpose of employment providing medical coverage.
As crude as this statement is, aberrant behavior does not include beastiality, pornography, adultery... and exclude homosexuality.
What is Google's purpose, other than normalizing aberrant behavior? Where then does the line get drawn?
Strife412
Member
I understand your point, but the point is to do our best to flee from evil, right? We may not be able to get around it all the time, because we do still live in this world, but being no longer of this world, I try to take a stand where I can. Where I know that there is something wrong, and do my best to do what little I can against it.
I don't hold it against a company for being "not Christian" but then why choose to be pro-homosexual? It's only expecting neutrality.
Strife412
Member
For a CGA/ToJ example, why don't we have an Age of Conan chapter?
I grew up a Conan fan, reading all the books, and was looking forward to the release of the game. I started watching the fan sites back in 2005, when development of the game was announced. When it was released I bought my wife the regular edition, and myself the collector's edition. It was somewhere amongst this timeframe that I came to find out who Jesus was, and understand what it was that He did for me, and why.
So I looked at the CGA, who I found through Guild Wars, and decided to check and see if we had an AoC chapter. That's when I got convicted because of this post:
Since then, I've been alot more careful where, and with whom, I do my business.
I grew up a Conan fan, reading all the books, and was looking forward to the release of the game. I started watching the fan sites back in 2005, when development of the game was announced. When it was released I bought my wife the regular edition, and myself the collector's edition. It was somewhere amongst this timeframe that I came to find out who Jesus was, and understand what it was that He did for me, and why.
So I looked at the CGA, who I found through Guild Wars, and decided to check and see if we had an AoC chapter. That's when I got convicted because of this post:
Since then, I've been alot more careful where, and with whom, I do my business.
Actually, we don't run Google Analytics.
Not necessarily. You can block Google Analytics by simply installing the NoScript add-on for Firefox and not allowing the google-analytics.com domain. I leave the domain blocked.
There's been debate whether there is truly such a thing as a "Christian company," just as some gamers point out there really is no such thing as a "Christian server." Of course, it's more an issue of semantics: When we say Tribe of Judah's Team Fortress 2 server is a "Christian server," we mean that it is paid for, operated, and moderated by Christians making their best attempt to manage a community according to Scriptural principles.
Even if the core members of Google leadership were Christians, that does not necessarily mean they live and govern in accordance with Scripture. Favoring homosexual couples in a misguided attempt at "fairness" is obviously not in line with Scripture.
And make no mistake: Homosexuality is a sin. The Bible is abundantly clear on that point. But all sin (pride, anger, greed, etc.) separates man from God and God longs that every person should be restored to a right relationship with Him. A culture suffers so long as it refuses to acknowledge a deeply embedded behavior--whether it be slavery, pride, or homosexuality--as acceptable or even "natural."
I think how businesspeople justified the exploitation of Italian and Irish immigrants in the early 20th century by the doctrine of "Social Darwinism" and I can't say I'm surprised to see so many in our country arguing that homosexuality is not sin.
If you choose not to support a business because you disagree with their policies, then so be it. But take care (and I say this to myself as much as anyone else on these forums) not to create an opportunity for pride while you're doing what you believe is right.
I admit I'm a bit surprised (and encouraged) that the post had a positive impact on someone.
And I'd encourage others to do the same. It can be difficult to speak your convictions with your wallet (especially if funds are tight), but I believe Christians should be more cautious when choosing which businesses to support.
XionTawa
New Member
It was listed in the running scripts...At least it was back when I used FF + NoScript (or maybe I am thinking of somewhere else)...
...but I have switched to Chrome awhile ago and am not looking back...
Strife412
Member
I admit I'm a bit surprised (and encouraged) that the post had a positive impact on someone.
Sir, you have no idea. lol
Odale
Active Member
What Tek said.
You have the right to express yourself with your wallet just as everyone else does, however; don't lose sight that you as a sinner are no better or worse off than homosexuals.
Also, to echo what Tek said, do not ever believe you are on higher moral ground because you are not a homosexual... it makes the rest of us Christians look bad.
Strife412
Member
If I was alone, then I would be no better off. But I'm not, so I'm eternally, and infinitely better off than an unrepentant sinner, whether they're a homosexual, or otherwise.
I don't mean to sound proud of myself, and believe me, I'm not. I know myself, and the darkness that dwells within my own heart. If not for my Lord, I know what paths I'd be traveling right now, and it would not be this one.
I'm not sure where the twist came that somehow put me in such a position as to question my own depravity without Him. But I do have Him. And I do seek to please Him. I let Him down daily, but I also daily shake my head and look back to Him. The only moral high ground that I have over any open homosexual, is that I repent, and seek to be perfect, even as our God is perfect. Sure, I fail, but when does the homosexual even attempt it? Why would they? They need to know Jesus first. Once they get there, then I don't expect them to be an open homosexual, but a struggling heterosexual, praising God through the fires of purification, seeking to come out as gold on the other side.
If that's what you mean, then I definitely agree.
I don't mean to sound proud of myself, and believe me, I'm not. I know myself, and the darkness that dwells within my own heart. If not for my Lord, I know what paths I'd be traveling right now, and it would not be this one.
I'm not sure where the twist came that somehow put me in such a position as to question my own depravity without Him. But I do have Him. And I do seek to please Him. I let Him down daily, but I also daily shake my head and look back to Him. The only moral high ground that I have over any open homosexual, is that I repent, and seek to be perfect, even as our God is perfect. Sure, I fail, but when does the homosexual even attempt it? Why would they? They need to know Jesus first. Once they get there, then I don't expect them to be an open homosexual, but a struggling heterosexual, praising God through the fires of purification, seeking to come out as gold on the other side.
If that's what you mean, then I definitely agree.
Odale
Active Member
To call homosexuals unrepentant is a generalization I'd rather not make. Like people have said before... everyone is a sinner and everyone continues to sin (often times its the same sin as well).
Strife412
Member
Many times the same sin, yes. But if they remain an open homosexual, I feel it necessary to call them unrepentant. If they call themselves a heterosexual with homosexual urges, than I call them a brother or sister, and have compassion for their temptation.
I've talked with some of the Christians around here that have this sort of problem. It's called "The Way Out Ministries." They don't call themselves homosexuals, but say that they have problems with homosexuality. These folks I have compassion on, because they strive for God, and occasionally find themselves drawn back towards who they were. We all feel that draw. Not all of us have something so dark, however. I was never a homosexual, but I did have a hankering for pornography. The draw to return to it is very strong, and only by the grace of God am I able to stay away from it. I use my own examples of temptation to help these guys out.
And all this, doesn't mention a member of my own family... Which could go on for many, many paragraphs. I pray for them every day that I remember to. But if they remain an unrepentant homosexual, I know that I will not see them again in paradise. It's up to God who will come to Him, but I still tell them who He is, because those that come are His, and we don't know who they will be. If they remain openly homosexual, and throw back at me that homosexuality isn't a sin... That God accepts it and them... No. They are facing only damnation. At this point, do I say, "Ah well. Equality for all!" This is in my own family. Somebody very close to me. At this point, I do all I can to point out what God says about their lifestyle, that they must speak straight to the Christ. That they need Him, because only He can give them a blank check. Then repent, because "Faith alone saves. But the faith that saves, is not alone." [Dr. Ironside? quoted by Dr. McGee many times.] It comes with the works, because if we are saved, it changes us. "Be ye holy; for I am holy." "Faith without works is dead." Without a change, that faith they have is not real. It's a pretend "see I'm all better!"
"We love him, because he first loved us."
I've talked with some of the Christians around here that have this sort of problem. It's called "The Way Out Ministries." They don't call themselves homosexuals, but say that they have problems with homosexuality. These folks I have compassion on, because they strive for God, and occasionally find themselves drawn back towards who they were. We all feel that draw. Not all of us have something so dark, however. I was never a homosexual, but I did have a hankering for pornography. The draw to return to it is very strong, and only by the grace of God am I able to stay away from it. I use my own examples of temptation to help these guys out.
And all this, doesn't mention a member of my own family... Which could go on for many, many paragraphs. I pray for them every day that I remember to. But if they remain an unrepentant homosexual, I know that I will not see them again in paradise. It's up to God who will come to Him, but I still tell them who He is, because those that come are His, and we don't know who they will be. If they remain openly homosexual, and throw back at me that homosexuality isn't a sin... That God accepts it and them... No. They are facing only damnation. At this point, do I say, "Ah well. Equality for all!" This is in my own family. Somebody very close to me. At this point, I do all I can to point out what God says about their lifestyle, that they must speak straight to the Christ. That they need Him, because only He can give them a blank check. Then repent, because "Faith alone saves. But the faith that saves, is not alone." [Dr. Ironside? quoted by Dr. McGee many times.] It comes with the works, because if we are saved, it changes us. "Be ye holy; for I am holy." "Faith without works is dead." Without a change, that faith they have is not real. It's a pretend "see I'm all better!"
"We love him, because he first loved us."
inkelis
New Member
As for homosexuality. I'd rather not judge. Who am i to say they are unrepentant? I don't know what is in their heart, i don't know what they are struggling with. It's important that we don't judge others, so that they may not be turned off to what it is we have to offer.
Patriot
Active Member
1 Corinthians 5:9-13
I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 10 Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person.
12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”
I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 10 Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person.
12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”
Strife412
Member
"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?"
We don't need to judge them. Open homosexuality judges them for us.
"Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
If they can say, "Homosexuality is evil, it is a sin, and I pray that God will deliver me from it" then I will call them brother. If not, they stand as the enemy, unless God changes their heart.
We cannot judge, unless we can be judged. I know I am guilty, and there is no doubt of that. That's the very point of Jesus's death, burial, and resurrection.
Nowhere in the Word will you find, "Thou shalt not judge."
Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith. Titus 1:13
And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. Ephesians 5:11-12
How are we to do all this, if we do not judge another? Take a look at the very verse that people use to decry judgment:
Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
We are supposed to remove the mote from our brother's eye, but before we judge him, we must judge ourselves. If we point a finger at another, we must first point the finger at ourselves. Am I not a sinner? Of course I am. Which is exactly why I lay my entire hope of salvation at the foot of the cross.
But how can we know who are the swine, if we do not judge? Only look at the fruit of their labor, and you can tell who you are faced with.
Never does He say, "Thou shalt not judge."
Odale
Active Member
Something about interpretations comes to mind...
ewoksrule
Active Member
Those are some solid verses in this thread. They seem pretty plain reading in my opinion. Not much left up to interpretation.
Last edited:
Kidan
Moderator
I think Patriot's scripture makes a very valid point.
Additionally, while Strife is correct in that the whole "thou shalt not judge" is often misused as a quote, we must remember that a lot of scripture, is focused on US as Christians.
Scripture is designed to guide US, as Christians, on a closer walk with Christ, and as such, should not be used as a battering ram against those who have not come to know Christ.
Remember, our overriding commandant from Christ, is to love one another and to love God. What sin they have committed or are committing has no place in that.
Let's make this clear: It's not OUR place to condemn or ostracize those in the world for their sin.
Those in the World are of sin, just like those of us in the grace of Christ are of Christ.
So, yes, while the Bible doesn't say that we cannot judge, we must also remember, that anyone who is lost, is just that, lost. We cannot hold them accountable for their actions, because they are not our brothers and sisters in Christ. Rather our sole purpose should be to show those who are lost the love of Christ.
Tek's post about AoC are his stance on the content of that game, and how it does not meet what he views as sufficient morality for inclusion in the list of chapters. Personally, I've never played it, and have no real desire to, but I am left wondering (just from the descriptions) if that is not the place where we, as Christians, really need to be?
Think, one doesn't typically find those needing Christ perched in their Sunday best in the front pew of the church. No, one finds those who need Christ down in the gutter, and in the bars.
But again, Tek, as the spiritual leader of this fellowship made the decision to not support a AoC Chapter, and it is his decision to make, and I respect it.
Now, what does this have to do with Google?
Nothing.
The fact that Google pays a certain subset of employees more than others because of non-job related traits doesn't bother me at all. Fact of the matter is, I'm utterly unconcerned in how Google reimburses its employees for their time. After all, it has no impact on my own paycheck.
My interaction with Google can be defined as thus: Google provides software and services which I find useful, and as such, I provide money to continue to utilize those software and services.
That said, I don't use those services to perform actions which I find morally out of place with Biblical precepts of living.
Consider it thus: Age of Conan has highly questionable content, therefore I did not purchase it. But just because AoC has questionable content, doesn't mean I'm not going to play my old copy of Final Fantasy VII just because they were both produced by Square/Eidos.
Additionally, while Strife is correct in that the whole "thou shalt not judge" is often misused as a quote, we must remember that a lot of scripture, is focused on US as Christians.
Scripture is designed to guide US, as Christians, on a closer walk with Christ, and as such, should not be used as a battering ram against those who have not come to know Christ.
Remember, our overriding commandant from Christ, is to love one another and to love God. What sin they have committed or are committing has no place in that.
Let's make this clear: It's not OUR place to condemn or ostracize those in the world for their sin.
Those in the World are of sin, just like those of us in the grace of Christ are of Christ.
So, yes, while the Bible doesn't say that we cannot judge, we must also remember, that anyone who is lost, is just that, lost. We cannot hold them accountable for their actions, because they are not our brothers and sisters in Christ. Rather our sole purpose should be to show those who are lost the love of Christ.
Tek's post about AoC are his stance on the content of that game, and how it does not meet what he views as sufficient morality for inclusion in the list of chapters. Personally, I've never played it, and have no real desire to, but I am left wondering (just from the descriptions) if that is not the place where we, as Christians, really need to be?
Think, one doesn't typically find those needing Christ perched in their Sunday best in the front pew of the church. No, one finds those who need Christ down in the gutter, and in the bars.
But again, Tek, as the spiritual leader of this fellowship made the decision to not support a AoC Chapter, and it is his decision to make, and I respect it.
Now, what does this have to do with Google?
Nothing.
The fact that Google pays a certain subset of employees more than others because of non-job related traits doesn't bother me at all. Fact of the matter is, I'm utterly unconcerned in how Google reimburses its employees for their time. After all, it has no impact on my own paycheck.
My interaction with Google can be defined as thus: Google provides software and services which I find useful, and as such, I provide money to continue to utilize those software and services.
That said, I don't use those services to perform actions which I find morally out of place with Biblical precepts of living.
Consider it thus: Age of Conan has highly questionable content, therefore I did not purchase it. But just because AoC has questionable content, doesn't mean I'm not going to play my old copy of Final Fantasy VII just because they were both produced by Square/Eidos.