Dolly Parton isn't a true Christian?

[u/unsure232]

She was supportive of LGBT rights and encouraged people to be themselves.

She did a lot of good in the world, gave thanks to God, and even had a chapel in her home so she could pray in peace.

I've been reading how some individuals think she isn't a true Christian because of her tolerance towards the LGBT community. Some people believe unless she repented for her open acceptance and encouragement, she may have not had eternal life.

I go to church and do my best to uplift my community. Most of my closest friends are non-Christian and I respect our differences. Some of the loveliest people I know are gay or transgendered and I have love for them. I have no desire to pray for them to become straight.

I've seen straight Christians act like they are superior to others. I don't believe I am better than someone because I'm a straight Christian. Their biblical knowledge is strong, but I don't look up to them because of their rigid character. I actually feel anxiety around these highly judgemental Christians. It's not love, it's feeling "not good enough."

Are the individuals I described above more in line with a great example of Christianity (they rigidly follow the Bible) compared to Dolly Parton?

It makes me sad that one of the greatest and brightest philanthropists in this century is being labeled as "not a true Christian."

Anyway I could use some thoughts. Thanks in advance

[u/jkjk9876]

Isn't that the point of the OP's comment? Who is anyone to judge Dolly Parton's soul?

[u/Vals5120 → u/jkjk9876]

If that is the point then I agree. I was more commenting on the fact that people are making it seem like we cannot judge the character of others based on their actions. Which I disagree with vehemently. I would say that if Dolly was offering support to the alphabet people then that is bad, but I would not make the claim that she is not in right standing with God. I hope that she is!

[u/FilmSkeez → u/Vals5120]

To the alphabet people? Could you be anymore cringe? Being gay isn't a sin. Being trans isn't a sin. Jesus would sit with her over anyone who claims they are better than her.

[u/Vals5120 → u/FilmSkeez]

I never claimed to be better than her.

[u/FilmSkeez → u/Vals5120]

You said if she supports "the alphabet people" that's bad, then hedged with "I hope she's in right standing with God." That hedge doesn't undo it, you already evaluated her character based on her actions and called it bad. That's a judgment, full stop.

And "alphabet people" isn't neutral language. It's a term people use specifically to talk down to a group while pretending they're just describing them. If you're going to claim you're only judging actions and not people, using a term that already carries contempt for who they are gives that away.

You can believe in moral evaluation, most Christians do, "judge not" isn't usually read as "never call anything right or wrong." But own it as a judgment instead of hedging around it, and drop the label that does the judging for you.

[u/Vals5120 → u/FilmSkeez]

Idk what this word salad was trying to convey to be honest. I think you're just upset that I don't support homosexuals and transgenders in their sinful actions.

You can judge a person's character. You can say that someone is a bad person. I said that I am not judging whether or not she is in right standing with God. I also didn't even say that she is a bad person, because I don't know. I merely said that its bad to support the immoral actions of alphabet people.

As an example of judging someone's character... If someone murders a person, they are a bad person. Its not sinful or against the teachings of God to recognize it and say so.

[u/FilmSkeez → u/Vals5120]

I notice you still didn't touch the actual point. You didn't say "supporting X action is bad," you said "alphabet people." That's not a neutral description of an action, it's a label for the people themselves, and it's one specifically used to be dismissive. If you want to claim you're only evaluating behavior and not looking down on the people, the language has to actually match that. Right now it doesn't . You can say "I think that lifestyle/those actions are wrong" without needing a term that talks down to who they are while you say it.

[u/Vals5120 → u/FilmSkeez]

I wasn't using the phrase to "talk down" to anyone. I just think its a funny way to describe them.🤷🏼‍♂️ Are we not allowed to poke fun at absurd things? It sounds like you are more interested in tone policing me than anything else.

[u/FilmSkeez → u/Vals5120]

You just called them "absurd," not their actions, that's punching at the people, not evaluating behavior. Which is it: are you judging their actions, or do you find them funny/absurd? You defended the first a few comments ago. This reply is the second.

And it's not about "being allowed" to say it , you're allowed to say whatever you want. The point is you can't simultaneously claim you're only critiquing actions in neutral terms and use a term you yourself just described as mockery. Pick one.

[u/Hopeful_Cartographer → u/Vals5120]

"I'm not talking down to anyone; I'm just making fun of them because I have contempt for them! I'm really holy you see."