What's the difference?

[Wilsonwas]

8

Originally Posted by Aquila

Amen.

This fundamentalist lunacy has us condemning brethren over the mere consumption of a substance... and not the sin of the individual who abuses the substance.

The lunacy has its Genisis in things like the temperance movement, Wesleyan thoughts on holiness look, and the response to the counter culture of the late 50s, 60s and 70s. Some of the objections are grounded in honest response to the same creep in relative social views of sinful behaviour that lead us to having more than two genders on a form. By categorically phohibiting, or expressing even, "we know its not bible, but"......To say one should seperate fron the world and define this in terms relative to a point in time is maybe OK. But to continue the prohibition or disfavor of a look or act not specifically biblical, long after the relative worldly issue has changed is to border on ridiculous.
To call it "the old landmark" - invent horrendous stretches of interpretation and reading between the lines to quote bible for it, this is where we wander into not only lunacy, but circles as well. If you constantly see an old landmark, you either never left the area, or are walking in circles.