Evangelicals the most unfavorable religion

Oddly enough, Lutherans were at one time also considered evangelical. And are also not on the list.

They certainly are. Just yesterday, I saw a bumper sticker on a car that read, "I don't care what the Bible says."

They certainly are. Just yesterday, I saw a bumper sticker on a car that read, "I don't care what the Bible says."

I always find that ironic. They will quote "the golden rule" when it comes to how they want to me treated.

Unfortunate but true. Living out a life of faith is a much more powerful witness than words to unbelievers.
In John 5:19 Jesus says He always did what He saw the Father doing. This is much different than always evangelizing. God isn't always stirring the hearts of those around us. So many are busy when God is still.
This is at least in good part due to the lack of real and vital and intimate relationship lacking in so many Christians. We profess to be led by the Spirit but we know little of true spirituality.
Even the children of Israel in the desert had the good sense to remain in place until the pillar of smoke and fire moved. Probably alot more wood, hay, and stubble being collected than gold, silver, and precious stone.

I took a picture of that bumper sticker.

View attachment 249516

What do you think we should do about these two main areas, abortion and same-sex relationships, that seem to draw the most disrespect?

God is very clear about His stance on them and He's destroyed whole cities because of them.

I can see where this is going.....

What do you think we should do about these two main areas, abortion and same-sex relationships, that seem to draw the most disrespect?

God is very clear about His stance on them and He's destroyed whole cities because of them.

I can see where this is going.....

They certainly are. Just yesterday, I saw a bumper sticker on a car that read, "I don't care what the Bible says."

I get the impression from those outside the faith, that they do not disrespect evangelicals for the gospel, the teaching of that Jesus Christ is truly God, and the only atonement is through the death of Jesus Christ. I believe Paul and Peter have given us the description of the real problem.

"What business of mine is it to judge outsiders? God is their judge. But within the fellowship, you are the judges: ‘Root out the wrongdoer from your community.’" (1Cor 5:12-13 REB)

"Be wise in your dealings with outsiders, but use your opportunities to the full. Let your words always be gracious, never insipid; learn how best to respond to each person you meet." (Col 4:5-6 REB)

He [the leader, pastor, bishop] must moreover have a good reputation with the outside world, so that he may not be exposed to scandal and be caught in the devil’s snare. (1Tim 3:7 REB)

"Let it be your ambition to live quietly and attend to your own business; and to work with your hands, as we told you, so that you may command the respect of those outside your own number, and at the same time never be in want." (1Thess 4:11-12 REB)

"If you are reviled for being Christians, count yourselves happy, because the Spirit of God in all his glory rests upon you. If you do suffer, it must not be for murder, theft, or any other crime, nor should it be for meddling in other people’s business. But if anyone suffers as a Christian, he should feel it no disgrace, but confess that name to the honour of God." (1Pet 4:14-16 REB)

The two main areas that seem to draw the most disrespect, are abortion and same-sex relationships. These are two topics that vary greatly in the Bible translations of the pertinent verses, and complete agreement among the assembly of Christ through the centuries is absent. It is little wonder that evangelicals are considered "haters" and it doesn't take long on the Internet to see it. Yes, yes, the depraved and leftists are haters too, but Christians are to be better.

Evangelicals come across more like the Pharisees of Christ's day, who attack others who reject their idea of religion and sin.[/QUOTE]



I was with you till here. So what response in your opinion should evangelicals take so they are more likable with the world?

So many little groups doing their own thing here, (I suppose you have to start somewhere.)
And some of them,
Instead of preaching the love of God, they yell about hell fire.

Sometimes it’s a case of bearing reproach of other “Christians”

Or, is this evidence of a poor witness of evangelicals for Christ?

When I was a teen, in the 70’s, and my mother took us to the Pentecostals, I didn’t know what the agenda was but they taught us a new song…..”I don’t care what church you belong to”
And two Nuns attended in their costumes for the occasion,
And in those years, they had that convention in Canberra with a representative from every religion, trying to show unity amongst every faith.
We also partook in a massive “christian“ demonstration rally through Adelaide city centre with every denomination marching. My sister and I even made our own little home made banner.
Next thing I heard was “catholic charismatics” had started.

But I only see one doctrine in scripture.

2 John 1:9 KJV
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

About abortion, the civil laws have no business forcing a theological view of some, onto others who hold to a different theological view of when a human being starts existence. So, in line with older views and the earlier translations, I'd make civil law against abortion begin at 15-20 weeks, NOT earlier. I base that on such statements as by 19th century Adam Clarke on Exodus 21:22 -

You asked, so I'll tell you my views as well as how I perceive the world viewing the evangelicals on these two hot button topics.

About abortion, the civil laws have no business forcing a theological view of some, onto others who hold to a different theological view of when a human being starts existence. So, in line with older views and the earlier translations, I'd make civil law against abortion begin at 15-20 weeks, NOT earlier. I base that on such statements as by 19th century Adam Clarke on Exodus 21:22 -

"But if mischief followed, that is, if the child had been fully formed, and was killed by this means, or the woman lost her life in consequence, then the punishment was as in other cases of murder-the person was put to death; Ex 21:23."

This is in line with Exodus 21:22, 23 as translated in the LXX as used by Jesus and the Apostles -

"And if two men strive and smite a woman with child, and her child be born imperfectly formed, he shall be forced to pay a penalty: as the woman's husband may lay upon him, he shall pay with a valuation. But if it be perfectly formed, he shall give life for life," (Exod 21:22-23, LXXE)

Historically, v22 has been understood as "miscarriage" and that is how the 1977 NASB translated it, but when fundamentalist modernists saw that hurt their anti-abortion ideas, the later NASB translations switched to some form of premature birth. It is so obvious to translate to support your already held belief.

The evangelicals can stop pretending they hold the ONLY biblical view on the topic. Even our founding fathers, such as James Wilson, saw that a fetus gains legal status at viability, not conception.

Intelligent people of the world can see the difference between the sodomitic behavior condemned in the scriptures and a simple case of same sex relationships. The sexual sin of Sodom was attempted rape and the destruction of Sodom was described by God in the following:

"As I live, saith the Lord, this Sodom and her daughters have not done as thou and thy daughters have done. Moreover this was the sin of thy sister Sodom, pride: she and her daughters lived in pleasure, in fullness of bread and in abundance: this belonged to her and her daughters, and they helped not the hand of the poor and needy. And they boasted, and wrought iniquities before me: so I cut them off as I saw fit." (Ezek 16:48-50, LXXE)
(again from the translation used by Jesus and the apostles)

On 1 Cor. 6:9, the 2021 NRSV Updated Edition put explanatory notes on the two questionable words in the Greek writing:

a "male prostitutes" 6.9 Meaning of Gk uncertain
b "men who engage in illicit sex" 6.9 Meaning of Gk uncertain

You can read various translations and it is clear that there is NO consensus on what the words mean for certain and it has been true back in history, not just today.

Christians can disagree on such matters as abortion and same-sex relationships, but when the world sees the nasty, hate-filled dogmatism of the evangelicals, they reject it, as is quite understandable. If you do not think the evangelicals come across as nasty and hating, just read evangelical's statements you find online. Evasions such as "love the sinner but hate the sin" is such an obvious cover for hate toward persons, and it is received as such.

My view is, on abortion, a cut off point of 15-20 weeks is legitimate in civil law, as it was at the founding of America. On the topic of same-sex conduct, laws about abuse and sodomy should be the only concern of civil law. If some Christians don't like same-sex relationships and abortion before 15 weeks, then those Christians should certainly not engage in it for it would violate their own conscience. But you get a rebellion from the world trying to force your conscience onto the public at large by civil law. It is amazing how so many Baptists who were historically known by their insistence on separation of church and state, are now so strong in wanting government to regulate consciences. By the way, marriage is ONLY between man and woman, period! It may be, the evangelical nastiness lost them such credibility at the start on matters of same-sex relationships, they had no influence on the matters of who qualifies as marriage partners.

It is easy to go to https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng.html and read through over 100 commentaries from the past and some modern. You'll find that there has NOT been agreement among Christians on these topics over the years and to pretend that evangelicals today have the only true understanding is untrue.

I get the impression from those outside the faith, that they do not disrespect evangelicals for the gospel, the teaching of that Jesus Christ is truly God, and the only atonement is through the death of Jesus Christ. I believe Paul and Peter have given us the description of the real problem.

"What business of mine is it to judge outsiders? God is their judge. But within the fellowship, you are the judges: ‘Root out the wrongdoer from your community.’" (1Cor 5:12-13 REB)

"Be wise in your dealings with outsiders, but use your opportunities to the full. Let your words always be gracious, never insipid; learn how best to respond to each person you meet." (Col 4:5-6 REB)

He [the leader, pastor, bishop] must moreover have a good reputation with the outside world, so that he may not be exposed to scandal and be caught in the devil’s snare. (1Tim 3:7 REB)

"Let it be your ambition to live quietly and attend to your own business; and to work with your hands, as we told you, so that you may command the respect of those outside your own number, and at the same time never be in want." (1Thess 4:11-12 REB)

"If you are reviled for being Christians, count yourselves happy, because the Spirit of God in all his glory rests upon you. If you do suffer, it must not be for murder, theft, or any other crime, nor should it be for meddling in other people’s business. But if anyone suffers as a Christian, he should feel it no disgrace, but confess that name to the honour of God." (1Pet 4:14-16 REB)

The two main areas that seem to draw the most disrespect, are abortion and same-sex relationships. These are two topics that vary greatly in the Bible translations of the pertinent verses, and complete agreement among the assembly of Christ through the centuries is absent. It is little wonder that evangelicals are considered "haters" and it doesn't take long on the Internet to see it. Yes, yes, the depraved and leftists are haters too, but Christians are to be better.

Evangelicals come across more like the Pharisees of Christ's day, who attack others who reject their idea of religion and sin.

The biblical conception of life is conception. And because life isn't random but is a deliberate act of God, anyone who purposely and deliberately ends that life is guilty of destroying the image of God.

My view is, on abortion, a cut off point of 15-20 weeks is legitimate in civil law, as it was at the founding of America.

On the topic of same-sex conduct, laws about abuse and sodomy should be the only concern of civil law. If some Christians don't like same-sex relationships and abortion before 15 weeks, then those Christians should certainly not engage in it for it would violate their own conscience.

But you get a rebellion from the world trying to force your conscience onto the public at large by civil law. It is amazing how so many Baptists who were historically known by their insistence on separation of church and state, are now so strong in wanting government to regulate consciences.

By the way, marriage is ONLY between man and woman, period! It may be, the evangelical nastiness lost them such credibility at the start on matters of same-sex relationships, they had no influence on the matters of who qualifies as marriage partners.

Evangelicals come across more like the Pharisees of Christ's day, who attack others who reject their idea of religion and sin.

Or, is this evidence of a poor witness of evangelicals for Christ?