I did not see the actual broadcast of the segment entitled, "Gays in the church?" on Larry King live, however, I found the transcript via Al Mohler's blog. One thing I'd like to point out here is that I think the King segment was not named correctly. The debate and controversy is not about "gays in the church." It is about whether or not open, sexually active homosexuals should be leaders in the Christian church.
I will post the transcript first, then two excellent articles written by Al Mohler.
Over the next several days, I plan to utilize Scripture to counter what the "homosexual-behavior affirming clergy" stated (and that which they they ignored) within this transcript. Meanwhile, any of my visiting Christian friends who would like to begin a counter-argument against what they said (e.g. Gene Robinson, Jo Hudson, Andrew Sullivan) are most welcome to do so in the comment section. Additional comments/questions are also welcome...as long as we can keep the dialogue civil!
More to come...
Christine
*******
*Beginning of Transcript*
CNN LARRY KING LIVE
Gays in the Church?
Aired June 15, 2006 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LARRY KING, HOST: Good evening. Like so much of the country, the Episcopal Church is in turmoil over gay rights. It first came to a head three years ago when openly gay Gene Robinson was confirmed as the church's ninth bishop of New Hampshire. His confirmation at an official Episcopal gathering in 2003 triggered a walk out by some conservatives and at the Episcopal General convention now going on in Columbus, Ohio, many church officials are saying that a split is inevitable.
We have a major panel to discuss this. In Columbus is Bishop Gene Robinson, the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church. Here in Los Angeles, Reverend Jo Hudson. Joe is pastor of the Cathedral of Hope in Dallas, Texas, one of the Texas's largest predominantly gay churches in the United States. She's an ordained member in the United Church of Christ in Washington is Andrew Sullivan, "Time" magazine columnist, openly gay Catholic. His blog site by the way is andrewsullivan.com. In Columbus, Ohio is Reverend Canon David Anderson, president and CEO of the Anglican American Council who opposes gay clergy in the church, in Los Angeles, Father Michael Manning, Roman Catholic priest, host of the Word and the World, and in Roanoke, Virginia, Reverend Al Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
We're going to spend most of the time in the first segment with Reverend, with Bishop Robinson and Canon Anderson. Bishop Robinson, why do you want to be an official in a church that doesn't want you?
BISHOP GENE ROBINSON: Because the Episcopal Church is an amazing institution, because it so much wants to be a vehicle for God's love in the world. We've struggled with lots of issues before and we have come to know of God's expansive love. We've changed our minds about people of color and women and their places in the church. And we are now in a family struggle to express God's love for all of God's children, include God's gay and lesbian children.
KING: Canon Anderson, is membership dwindling because of this?
REV. CANON DAVID C. ANDERSON, PRES/CEO AMERICAN ANGLICAN COUNCIL: Membership in the Episcopal Church has been dwindling since 1965, progressively at about the rate of 35,000, 36,000 a year and that has continued through the time since Gene Robinson has been a bishop.
KING: So it hasn't increased?
ANDERSON: Up to the latest figures in 2004. We believe that since 2004, the rate has increased but there aren't hard data yet to examine.
KING: Why did you want to be a bishop, Bishop Robinson?
ROBINSON: Actually, at first, I didn't want to be a bishop. God had to chase me for quite a long time before I would say yes. I knew this would be controversial and yet sometimes God asks us to do things that are hard. And in my prayer life, what I discovered was that God was promising to be faithful to me as God had always been faithful to me in my life and would stand by me during this very difficult time if I would just struggle and strive to listen to and for his voice.
KING: Bishop Robinson, were you ever married?
ROBINSON: Yes, I was very happily married and I have two wonderful daughters and two granddaughters.
KING: So you lived a lie?
ROBINSON: No. I wouldn't say I lived a lie. I had a wonderful relationship with the woman that I was married to. I had told her within a month of meeting her that I had struggled with this issue before. I had gotten to therapy to try to change. I had done all the things that gay and lesbian people try to do to fit in, to deny who they are and to change themselves, and I had prayed about it. And yet, this is not something that one does. This is something that one is. And that's what's so important for people to understand. God made me this way and declared me good. And that's, that's something that I have laid claim to.
KING: Canon Anderson, since we're told that God loves everyone, that would have to include gay people. What do you have against Bishop Robinson being a bishop in your church?
ANDERSON: Well, God certainly loves Gene Robinson. Gene Robinson is a child of God just as I am and others are. But the fact is that certain aspects of his life, in particular, his being an open homosexual, disqualify him for leadership in the Christian church, not just the Anglican Church, but in the Christian church, and it's that part that disqualifies him from leadership. God would love to see him transformed. God doesn't create a person homosexual. How they become homosexual or feel that inclination is unclear, but certainly people can be transformed back to a heterosexual life.
KING: If it's a choice, Canon Anderson, did you choose to be heterosexual and if so, how do you choose it?
ANDERSON: I think the heterosexualists, the standard default setting, if you will, and whether you start with scripture and God's account of how things were created or, in fact, if you start with Charles Darwin and evolution, you come to the same point, that men were meant for women and women were meant for men.
KING: So what, then, does someone like Bishop Robinson do if he has all of these feelings but he's a good Episcopal priest and he wants to be a bishop and he wants to lead a flock, what does he do? ANDERSON: He conforms his life to the scriptural standards and lives a chaste and celibate life honoring God and honoring God's commandments.
KING: Bishop Robinson, how would you respond?
ROBINSON: Well, I would say that none of us are able to conform our lives to scriptural standards. In the gospel of Luke, for instance, Jesus said if you want to be a follower of mine you must give up all your possessions. I don't see many of us doing that. We all fall short in one way or another. The miracle, the good news, is that we're not worthy, but we're made worthy by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. That's the good news we have to give to the world and God has said to me and to all of God's children what God said to Jesus at his baptism, you are my beloved. In you, I am well pleased. The world is desperate to know a God like that.
KING: We'll take a break. When we come back, the entire panel will join us. Our two early guests will remain as well. You're watching LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBINSON: It's time for us to stop talking about being gay and start talking about God and telling the story of how God has acted in your life and in mine. And when we tell that story, people will come to see that the Jesus they know is the Jesus we know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Reverend Jo Hudson, you've heard our two distinguished members of the Episcopal faith. You're with the United Church of Christ.
REV. JO HUDSON, CATHEDRAL OF HOPE, DALLAS: I am.
KING: Where does that denomination stand?
HUDSON: Well, the denomination is radically different than the Episcopal Church in that the denomination lets congregations be self- determining and so they are in relationship by virtue of the fact that they covenant to be in relationship and to honor each other even though we may disagree.
KING: So United Church of Christ in Miami could say no gays?
HUDSON: Right.
KING: And the one in Dallas as yours, could say yes?
HUDSON: Absolutely. And the thinking behind that is where the spirit of God is, where the risen Christ is. Then the people of God can determine what is best and listen for how God would have them be in the world. KING: Are you a lesbian?
HUDSON: I am.
KING: What brought you to the church?
HUDSON: I fell in love with God.
KING: Didn't some of the teachings pretty much harm you, hurt you?
HUDSON: I never really...
KING: That it's a sin?
HUDSON: I never was -- well, they say that, you know, they say that women shouldn't preach in church, too. I have had to wrestle with the scriptures but the reality is is that I have found a relationship with God that I discovered in the church and want to be a part of a community of faith that brings that love to other people.
KING: Father Manning, the Catholic Church is pretty adamant against it, is it not?
FATHER MICHAEL MANNING, CATHOLIC PRIEST: Against -- well, the important thing I think is saying that there is a real sense of love and care for a person that is a homosexual or a lesbian. Deep care, God loves them, God cares for them.
KING: Could they be a priest?
MANNING: They could be a priest, but the thing has to be, and the other - the canon mentioned that, that you would have to reframe from sex. That's kind of the difference that you find.
KING: So you can say you're a homosexual or a gay, be a priest --
MANNING: There is a stronger push right now, the church, the Vatican is coming out with some real negative statements about anyone in the seminary process that's that way, but it's that kind of difference. There is the respect that we give to a person that is moving in that direction, but at the same time, saying, wait, that's not what God made us for.
KING: Andrew Sullivan, what do you make of all of this? You're a Catholic.
ANDREW SULLIVAN, TIME COLUMNIST: I am a Catholic and people often ask me, how can you be openly gay and be a Catholic? And my response is always I'm openly gay, because I'm a Catholic, because God taught me not to bear false witness to who I am and my faith is something that I really have no choice over. I've tried. I've had a terrible struggle with my own faith, but God wouldn't let me go and he keeps bringing me back and he keeps saying to me, in the Eucharist and in the church I love you and you belong here. And I want you to have a loving relationship and I feel that my own relationship is a gift from God. I cannot alone in my conscience before God believe otherwise. So I can do no other. I'm here because I have no choice.
KING: Reverend Mohler, why has the Southern Baptist, and you've been with us before, why does someone being gay bother you? In other words, what does it matter what someone's sexual preference might be when they are good people?
REV. ALBERT MOHLER, PRES, SOUTHERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: Well, the first thing should never be what really bothers me but whether or not as Christians, God has set a standard to which we are obligated. The issue is, always has been and always will be, the authority of scripture. The scripture very clearly tells us that our creator has a purpose for our sexuality and that homosexuality among other sins is a violation of that purpose and so love compels us to tell people the truth and also, as we understand the depth of their struggle with this, to tell them that there is a way out. I'm very thankful that Andrew Sullivan feels that pull. I believe that's a pull towards repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and I pray to see that continue all the way until he finds what I believe his purpose to be as God intended.
KING: Reverend Mohler, how could something be a sin if you didn't choose it?
MOHLER: Well, actually, that's just something I can't accept in the sense of choosing. Larry I have to say, first of all, we're choosing all the time. Even in the moments we spend together here, we're making moral choices. I do understand that there are some choices that we make that seem to be prior to anything we can even understand and I understand there are many homosexuals who say I don't even have any impression of having chosen this erotic interest, this sexual orientation. I accept that at face value, but that does not mean that it normalizes and makes acceptable homosexual acts. I want to help them through that struggle regardless of how it came into their lives.
KING: Bishop Robinson, at the conclave that you're at, are they going to vote on this?
ROBINSON: We will, in fact, be taking votes on various sorts of resolutions. But the real question before us right now, which is in our great Anglican and Episcopal tradition, is can we all stay at the table and talk about this while we disagree? Talk of unity is not necessarily talk of unanimity. And the great thing that the Episcopal Church has to offer the world is this great umbrella under which we disagree about lots of things and yet we find our unity when we go to the alter rail and receive the body and blood of Christ as humbly as we possibly can, find our unity there in Jesus Christ and then we go back to the pews and fight about all sorts of things, but we remain a community. We remain a communion and that's what God wants for us.
KING: Canon Anderson, what's the harm? Why is it harmful to the church to have Bishop Robinson have a flock?
ANDERSON: Well, he could have a flock, but it would need to be outside of the Anglican tradition and I think really outside of the historic Christian tradition. If he wants to make his own rules as it were, or come up with an alternate interpretation of scripture, that's his decision. But scripture has been very clear. The witness of the church for 2,000 years has been very clear and it's only recently that the Episcopal Church, if you will, has been, I might use the word, hijacked by those who have a different perspective, a different theology, and they are taking it in a different direction.
SULLIVAN: Larry, may I say the scripture is clear and scripture says that I should be put to death. The very verse that says that shalt not lie with another man as one does with a woman, says that I should face the death penalty. That's clear. Is that the policy of Reverend Mohler and the other gentlemen? Why is that not taken seriously?
KING: Canon Anderson, is he right?
ANDERSON: Scripture has that as a penalty. The fact is --
SULLIVAN: Why do you not support it?
ANDERSON: Because grace, grace can stand in the way, but it doesn't mean you have to be put to death.
SULLIVAN: So you pick and choose? You pick and choose the parts of the Bible you agree with? Clearly.
KING: Let him finish.
ANDERSON: If you want to keep interrupting me, go ahead.
KING: Go ahead. He has a point, though, Canon Anderson. If it says you should be put to death and it's scriptures and you follow scripture, why don't you follow it?
ANDERSON: Well, the old testament law had consequences for the sin and we believe that in Jesus Christ, his death on the cross paid the penalty for sin. So you get a fresh start, but if you keep sinning over and over again, at some point the Lord is going to call into question your sincerity about the grace he's giving you.
KING: We'll take a break and we'll be back with more. We'll be including your phone calls later. Don't go away.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HUDSON: I loved that ministry in that church. I loved that church that had had the courage to send me away to seminary and now I was back to serve among them. I was also living with a very deep and chronic fear. I was a closet lesbian.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Reverend Hudson, does the Bible you preach call what you do an abomination?
HUDSON: There are passages in Leviticus that talk about homosexuality or actually an act of sexuality, a man lying with a man is an abomination.
KING: How does that make you feel?
HUDSON: I wrestle with it, but the reality is, that's part of a Levitical holiness code that few people actually adhere to today and follow every point of and so I think it's important to take it within the context in which it was written.
KING: How do you deal, Father Manning, with what is written and what you disagree with. You can't agree with everything.
MANNING: Correct. When you read through Deuteronomy, you come up with some really harsh things about the death penalty and what not and yet, when you come to an experience of Christ, you find that there is a look that almost speaks of a progressive understanding of God's love.
KING: Your church is opposed to?
MANNING: Very much so, so that we can move with Christ much closer to an understanding to oppose the death penalty rather than go --
KING: In Deuteronomy, there are passages in the scripture.
MANNING: I have to come in my mind. I have to say that there is a progressive growth that can enable me to say, hey, wait a minute, we can't just go out, some of the instances of death in Deuteronomy are, for example, if a child is unruly or what not you can take him out and stone him. That's not the spirit of Jesus.
KING: Reverend Mohler, isn't a lot of this your interpretation of it?
MOHLER: There is always the danger that we will read our interpretation of it. That's why for one thing we're dependent upon how Christians have read the scriptures for centuries in which there has been a universal consensus about what the scriptures had to say about sexuality. The old testament text you mentioned were addressed to the ancient theocracy of Israel. If we were the ancient theocracy of Israel, we would be obligated to those texts, but we are Christians here talking about the church in the new testament and there we find the amazing teaching from the apostle Paul that we're made up as the church as those who come from many different kinds of sins, all of us, as sinners, speaking of homosexuality, as well as swindlers and others, Paul said such were some of you, speaking to Christians.
KING: Reverend Mohler, are you a sinner? Are you a sinner?
MOHLER: That's the power of the transformation. You bet I am, Larry, absolutely.
KING: Since you are, why rail out against homosexuals since you have your own sins?
MOHLER: Well, I don't believe I do rail out against homosexuals. I'm obligated to teach the whole council of God about everything that God declares to be sin. It is however, as Canon Anderson said earlier, when we're talking about qualifications for leadership in the church, God has revealed certain particular issues that are of great importance to him and thus for the church and we are obligated to those things. It's not a matter of talk about sinners or those who are not sinners. It's a matter of talking about sinners who are saved by grace, sinners who have repented of their sin and the message of the gospel is that all who repent of their sin and come by faith to the Lord Jesus Christ will be saved. That's the (INAUDIBLE) each of us comes with our own story.
KING: Bishop Robinson?
ROBINSON: Yes, Larry, I think it's really important to understand that being certain about something does not necessarily -- even if you're certain about it for 2,000 years doesn't make it right. The church was pretty certain that scripture justified slavery and that only changed about 150 years ago. We were pretty certain for 2,000 years that women had no place in the leadership of the church. But we worship a God who is not locked up in scripture 2,000 years ago, but continues to reveal God's self to us. It's not God that's changing. It's our understanding. We're being led by the Holy Spirit to understand in a new way what God was intending. The question before us right now is, might God be intending something different in our welcome of gay and lesbian people that's not been true for the last 2,000 years? And would that not be God's will for us?
KING: Father Manning?
MANNING: One of the things that we find as Catholics, it's a word we use, the natural law. It gets down to the basics of who we are as male and female and what was the orientation of male and female, its orientation of male and female to generate children. That's where we're called to and there is a real desire to try to make sure that we're continually keeping in line with that, that call.
KING: Gays can't do that?
MANNING: They can. They can love and they can have friendship. But when you get --
KING: Can't have children?
MANNING: When you get into the children reality, you're all of a sudden finding yourself in a kind of no man's land or no woman's land.
KING: Andrew Sullivan, do you feel tormented by it?
SULLIVAN: I have in the past to be perfectly honest with you, of course. When you're told as a child that what you know to be yourself is somehow evil and wrong, it's a terrible wound that the church places in the souls of so many young people and it continues to torment those souls and one of the things that one can do as a believing person of faith, who is also gay, is to tell those kids out there, do not despair. God does loves you. Do not believe some of the things that are taught to you. Know in your heart who you are and that God loves you and don't listen to this. One thing I want to say is that being gay is not about sex as such, although that's part of it. It's a tiny part of it. What it's about, my relationship is about love and friendship and commitment and fidelity and all the virtues that we're called for and called to in our tradition. And God's creation is more diverse than we understand and I think we should have a little bit more humility in the face of God's creation than some of the things we've been hearing about tonight. We don't know what God necessarily means by nature. We're learning all sorts of things about what nature is. Maybe homosexuality as it's part of so many other species, is a part of nature, part of what God created and he want us to be whole and part of that human family.
KING: We'll take a break. We'll come right back. I got to take a break and then we'll come right back with lots more to go including phone calls. We'll also check in with Bishop Frank Griswold. He's the chief pastor of the Episcopal Church of the United States. He's at the convention center in Columbus and we'll spend a few moments with his thoughts. Don't go away.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a very serious situation in the Anglican community. This is a marriage which is in separation and it is in danger of heading to divorce and the Anglican community has brought in a marriage counselor who has given us very specific pleas to do what we need to do to create the space necessary to create reconciliation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Welcome back to LARRY KING LIVE. Bishop Griswold will be joining us probably in the next segment. He's tied up on other things at that busy convention in Columbus.
Let's take some calls. Cleveland, Ohio, hello.
CALLER: Hello, this is Mike. I'm confused by this biblical conversation. It seems to me that, I wonder if we shouldn't be interpreting the scripture the way Jesus interpreted scripture. I mean he, he healed on the sabbath, he met with people who weren't clean in this society. When you look at what Peter and Paul did in welcoming the gentiles, what was their rubric or way of understanding whether the gentiles should come in? That was against the book as well. So I really don't get this way of interpreting the scripture that is so literal. It seems that it requires a double standard.
KING: All right, Canon Anderson, would you respond?
ANDERSON: Well, when we read scripture, for example, the Gospel of John, Jesus says that he's doing the work that his father has given him to do, and the words of his father are his words, so the fact, for example, that Jesus doesn't say a lot himself about homosexuality, nevertheless, Jesus is teaching us what is on the heart of his father and his father's thoughts are written in scripture already. So, you know, I think that as long as we stay to what is in print and has been taught by the church for 2,000 years, we're not inventing new interpretations, but others are.
SULLIVAN: Can I correct that? It's not that Jesus said little about homosexuality, he said nothing about homosexuality. The only thing he did say was that divorce was impossible and, of course, without a divorce, the Episcopalian church would not exist at all.
KING: Bishop Robinson, do you think Jesus would embrace you today?
ROBINSON: Absolutely. Let's be very clear and Canon Anderson knows this, in fact, Jesus violated his scriptures quite often. That's why he got into such trouble. He was always associating with those who had been pushed to the margins of his society, looked down upon as being sinful and unclean. He spent time with them. And he drove the religious authorities of his day crazy because he was not following scripture as he had learned it as a child, but, in fact, was reinterpreting it through the lens of God's love. And, we follow a person who was always reinterpreting scripture and letting people know that it's the spirit of what's going on in one's heart that is the real key and when he said love one another as I have loved you, it means that we need to be moving to the margins, doing justice work, working against racism. All kinds of things that Jesus would be doing in this day and time. I have no question in my mind that Jesus considers me beloved. Just as I am.
KING: Do you think we're moving toward marriage of gays, Reverend Hudson?
HUDSON: I think it's going to be ...
KING: ... Going to happen?
HUDSON: I think ultimately it will happen. Actually, the reality is, that gay and lesbian people have been standing in holy places for centuries with priests present, surrounded by family and friends, being blessed in their covenant relationships. What is at work here, it's not about marriage, it is about taxpayers who are being denied their civil rights.
KING: Atlanta, hello?
CALLER: Hi, Larry. I have a question for the panel. Romans 25, 26, and 27 clearly states about homosexuality and them changing god's word into a lie. Who gave anyone the authority to change the word of God and interpret it the way you want, when the scriptures, Romans 25, 26 and 27, clearly state about homosexuality.
KING: Clearly stating what, sir?
ANDERSON: It's an abomination.
KING: It says it's an abomination. He says why is there any question, right?
HUDSON: Actually, I think it's important to note that over time, if you look at the development of scripture and if you look at how people have interpreted it and how, and you can go back and look, over time, the different translations from the original texts, you will see that the word homosexual actually comes into the scripture much later. That the original Greek has to do with an act of abuse of younger people for sexual purposes. And that the word homosexual is gradually brought into scripture, that condemns a whole group of people, and you can trace that very clearly through time as we move up into present day and how that word is finally introduced into scripture.
KING: Aiken, South Carolina, hello.
CALLER: My question is for, is his name Bishop Robinson.
KING: Yes.
CALLER: I would like to know, he's a practicing gay man and he's living with another gay man. If he was a heterosexual man living, let's say, out of wedlock with a woman, does he think he should be bishop then? He's not married, he's practicing his homosexuality.
KING: He can't marry, ma'am.
CALLER: That's right. He can't marry. And until, so that's not acceptable. If he wants to be a gay man, that's fine. I'm an Episcopalian but I do not think he should be in a leadership position.
KING: Want to comment, Bishop Robinson?
ROBINSON: You bet I do. Larry, you're right. I don't have the option of marrying my partner, but, you know, Jesus said that good fruit can't come from a bad tree. What we're saying is, look at our relationships. Look at the good that comes from them. If you look closely, you'll see God showing up in them. Look at what gay and lesbian people contribute to this culture. Contribute to their own children and to other people's children. Look at the fruits of what we're doing, and then decide in us, can you see the face of Christ? And if you can, then welcome us into the church as god would have us welcomed.
KING: We'll be right back with more. Don't go away on this edition of LARRY KING LIVE.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If we indeed want to change our direction to repent or genuinely regret what we've done, which is my hope, the hope of many in the Episcopal church, and the hope of many throughout the Anglican communion. If we choose to do that, let us say so openly, honestly and sincerely.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) KING: We're back on LARRY KING LIVE. Joining us now from Columbus, Ohio from the convention center is Bishop Frank T. Griswold. He is the chief pastor of the Episcopal Church of the United States, president or chairman of numerous Episcopal Church boards and agencies. Thank you for joining us, Bishop Griswold. Where do you stand on the issue of gays in your church?
BISHOP FRANK GRISWOLD, CHIEF PASTOR, EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF THE U.S.: I think gay and lesbian people have a privileged place in our church and are integral to our life and our ministry. And this has been true for a very long time.
KING: Should they be bishops?
GRISWOLD: I think the important thing to be aware of is that the Episcopal Church has always been a church that has been able to contain diverse opinions on any number of topics, and I think that the whole question of the ordination of gay and lesbian people is one of those topics upon which we as a church have, again, a variety of opinions. I think it is inevitable...
KING: And what is yours?
GRISWOLD: Well, I think -- certainly I gave my consent to the ordination of the bishop of New Hampshire and presided his ordination, which I hardly would have done if I felt that it was intrinsically wrong. At the same time...
KING: What do you -- I'm sorry, go ahead.
GRISWOLD: ... I recognize -- yes, I recognize that many Episcopalian would disagree with that position.
KING: And what is going to happen at the convention in that regard?
GRISWOLD: Well, I think the important thing here, and I've just come from an evening in which I presided with Senator John Danforth as our principal speaker. He's of course an Episcopal priest, as you probably know.
KING: Yes.
GRISWOLD: And one of the points he made was, we're a church that's always been able to contain multiple points of view, and he said in this world where we're so polarized, politically and religiously, where language is so divisive, it's so important that a church such as ours manifest and witness to the fact that we can stay together and respect the fact that we have different points of view and be one in mission to a broken world. That is the point that I think is so important. The broken world needs our attention. And sexuality, as important as it may be, is not the dominating concern. Life and death issues, poverty, disease, all these things that really threaten human life are where we need to place our attention.
KING: We'll hold it right there, Bishop Griswold. We've got to take a break, and when we come back, lots more. The bishop will return.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: We're back. We'll be right back with our panel, but first let's check in with our roving man, Anderson Cooper. There he is. And tonight, he's in the beautiful city of San Francisco. What's up tonight, Anderson?
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Larry, lots to talk about tonight. Coming up at the top of the hour on "360," the war over the war erupts on Capitol Hill today. Members of Congress taking up the issue of Iraq and how long troops should stay. Emotions got very, very hot. Some would say that's exactly what Republicans had wanted all along. We'll have all the angles on that.
Plus, did a judge withhold a jail sentence for a convicted child molester because the criminal is too short? That's what some people in Sidney, Nebraska are saying happened, and they are outraged. We'll tell you how that story may not sound as cut and dry as it seems. All that and more, Larry, at the top of the hour.
KING: Look at that sensational view, Anderson Cooper in front of the Golden Gate Bridge. "AC 360" at the top of the hour, 10:00 Eastern, 7:00 Pacific.
Back with our panel and back to Bishop Frank T. Griswold. Why, Bishop Griswold, can it be judged congregation by congregation?
GRISWOLD: I think congregations vary tremendously, and you will find that there are congregations in which gay and lesbian people feel much more at home than other congregations. I think, since I travel the United States, I can see all kinds of regional variations as well. And I think one of the important things to be aware of is that the gospel is always interpreted in particular contexts. Our social influences, our historical influences all have something to do with how we read the gospel and interpret it and apply it to our lives.
KING: Canon Anderson, it would appear that you're in disagreement with the chief pastor of your church. How do you reconcile that?
ANDERSON: Well, three years ago in August, we told Presiding Bishop Griswold that he was running the Titanic into the iceberg on the Gene Robinson confirmation. They said -- he said and others that we would all get over it. That's not been the case. People are voting with their feet. 35,000 a year, that's 700 a week literally, are saying no to Gene Robinson being a bishop, no to Frank Griswold's episcopacy, and they are moving on to other denominations, and moving into other Anglican entities but out of the Episcopal Church. That's pretty significant.
KING: Why do you stay, Canon Anderson?
ANDERSON: Well, I like a good fight.
KING: OK. Well said. How do you react to that, Bishop Griswold?
GRISWOLD: Well, I think I would say that we're a church of diverse opinions...
KING: Obviously.
GRISWOLD: ... and the overwhelming reality of the Episcopal Church is what I call the diverse center. People who have all kinds of opinions, but have an overriding sense of being churched together, not just to be cozy and familiar, but in order to serve Christ in the world. I think that larger sense of mission is what really galvanizes Episcopalians.
KING: Father Manning, would you describe this church as progressive?
MANNING: The Episcopal Church?
KING: The Episcopal Church.
MANNING: Yes, very progressive. You know what I want to say, I really think that we need to be, as Christians, very, very sensitive to gay and lesbians, and make sure that this is not something that they are objects of prejudice and they are thrown off and that they suffer. That isn't what Jesus is about.
It does come down, though, to this basic understand that if you are gay, if you are a lesbian, praise the Lord, use your gifts, but be careful that you don't allow sexuality to move into that, because it moves against what is the natural experience.
KING: How can you not let it move in?
MANNING: Oh, but you can. You can friendship and love and care.
(CROSSTALK)
HUDSON: How is he defining natural, natural relationship? My relationship is wholly and completely natural to me. It is exactly who I believe God has created me to be. And I have a wonderful, living, dynamic relationship with God. And I know, in the core of my being, that the most natural way for me to be, is exactly who I am.
KING: Reverend Mohler, don't you sympathize with that?
MOHLER: I sympathize with every single human heart wishing to know the one true and living God, but I believe there is only one way that can happen through Jesus Christ and the gospel is about repenting of sin, not celebrating it. A church that buys into the logic of Bishop Griswold is a church that's obligated to ordain homosexuals openly and unrepentant or anyone else because it's moved away from the clear authority of scripture.
A church that worships diversity is a church that's destined to accept a death null because the church itself is grounded in truth. The true church always celebrates the truth. I'm thankful there are many conservative, orthodox Episcopalians who celebrate that truth and want to obey the truth. In the main, the big truth is not the interpretation of scripture but whether we obey it or not.
SULLIVAN: And we're trying to bear witness to that truth. And we are doing so with our lives and with our souls and we're opening them up to tell the world who we are, and if we're rejected, then so be it, but God won't reject us and we have a duty to tell the truth. There is no commandment that says thou shalt not be gay, but there is a commandment that says that shalt not bear false witness and I will not bear falls witness to who I am.
And I will not as a Catholic be thrown out of my home and my church and my faith and my communion because of who I am. Because of how God made me and that's the bottom line, father, and I understand there is diversity and I respect that. And I understand your faith. But we're not leaving and we exist and we're here and we're human.
KING: Bishop Griswold, I know you have to leave us. Before you go.
GRISWOLD: Let me make a comment here. Jesus says I have many more things to tell you but you cannot bear them now. When the spirit of truth comes he will draw from what is mine or reveal it to you. Truth is unfolding. Isn't it interesting that we learn more about truth in medical areas, truth about the world around us, but we can't learn anything new about sexuality? Isn't that strange?
KING: Thank you, bishop. Thanks for being with us. Bishop Frank T. Griswold, Chief pastor of the Episcopal church of the United States and when we come back our remaining moments with our panel of six. Don't go away.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think it's unhelpful because to pass this resolution, to send a message to the thousands of Episcopalians across the country, who have heard the call of the holy spirit and have a new understanding, an understanding that was so well set forth, to set our hope on Christ that the blessing and the inclusion of people who are partnered, gay and lesbians, are being invited into our church.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: We have another caller in Denver. Hello.
CALLER: Yes, I'm in a committed relationship of 24 years. I was raised Southern Baptist, my partner is Catholic. However, we're not welcomed in a church and I just wondered why or how we're not welcomed in a church of worship, when so many people like myself are not welcomed in a church and some are not welcomed in society, and look at suicide and how we're not welcomed in a church of God.
KING: I guess the question is, do you want to respond, Reverend Hudson. HUDSON: You would be very welcomed at the Cathedral of Hope in Dallas, Texas.
KING: But they're in Denver.
HUDSON: You can watch us online. We broadcast our worship services online and you would be very welcomed in our church. It's made up of 3,500 people, predominantly gay and lesbian, bisexual and transgender.
KING: Bishop Robinson, would they be welcomed in the Episcopal church in Denver?
ROBINSON: You bet they would. We have signs in every little town and every large city that says the Episcopal church welcomes you. There is no asterisk after that listing, the people who are exceptions. It means everyone is welcomed and we're a church that's struggling to make that kind of reality true for us and on behalf of God everywhere.
KING: Andrew Sullivan, why don't you become Episcopal? They seem more, welcoming to you than the Catholic church?
ROBINSON: Welcome, Andrew.
SULLIVAN: Thank you, Gene. Look, this is my home and this is my faith. And I love the mass. I love the mass. I love my faith, and I took a time-out because I couldn't really bear it anymore the way they were talking about us and scapegoating us and demonizing us. But I've come back because I can't be without it. This is who I am. I love it. And so many gay Catholics out there love it. I want to say to them don't let them take your faith away from you. Stay there. Stay in the pews and be at mass and at the lord's table because he loves you.
KING: Canon Anderson can't you sympathize with what Andrew just said?
ANDERSON: Well, many of us that are orthodox, conservative Episcopalians have experience a real sense of isolation within the Episcopal church, and we're hoping for a better day to come for our own situation. We anticipate that at some point, the global communion will remove the Anglican franchise from the Episcopal church and grant it to another entity. We don't see how the Episcopal church can really continue the way it is.
KING: Do you ever see the Baptists changing, Reverend Mohler?
MOHLER: Well, I hope not on this regard because it comes under the authority of scripture, but I know the one thing that must not change is this, as one sinner saved by grace to other sinners, I say come to Jesus Christ and come no newness of life. It will change your sex life, for everyone. It will change every dimension of your life and that's by the grace and mercy of God.
KING: Do you think that can happen, Father Manning? MANNING: In the Catholic Church?
KING: Yes.
MANNING: The grace of God can move mightily. I would hope also.
KING: Do you think it can change with this Pope?
MANNING: You mean that they would open it up to homosexuals? No, no. That's not gong to change. It's fundamental with the Catholic Church. It's an understanding that this is not the way we were made. And it's that struggle with that. It's even more fundamental than some of the changes that we've experienced in scripture through the years.
KING: Thank you all very much. Bishop Gene Robinson, Reverend Joe Hudson, Andrew Sullivan, Canon David Anderson, Father Michael Manning and Reverend Al Mohler for this special edition of LARRY KING LIVE. We'll be back tomorrow night from New York City, the big apple. You may have heard of it.
Let's go to San Francisco. Anderson Cooper is standing by. He will host AC 360 by the Golden Gate Bridge, Anderson?
*End of Transcript*
*******
First Al Mohler article:
Friday, June 16, 2006
Courage and Compassion on Homosexuality
The church's engagement with the culture involves a host of issues, controversies, and decisions--but no issue defines our current cultural crisis as clearly as homosexuality. Some churches and denominations have capitulated to the demands of the homosexual rights movement, and now accept homosexuality as a fully valid lifestyle. Other denominations are tottering on the brink, and without a massive conservative resistance, they are almost certain to abandon biblical truth and bless what the Bible condemns.
Within a few short years, a major dividing line has become evident--with those churches endorsing homosexuality on one side, and those stubbornly resisting the cultural tide on the other.
The homosexual rights movement understands that the evangelical church is one of the last resistance movements committed to a biblical morality. Because of this, the movement has adopted a strategy of isolating Christian opposition, and forcing change by political action and cultural pressure. Can we count on evangelicals to remain steadfastly biblical on this issue?
Not hardly. Scientific surveys and informal observation reveal that we have experienced a significant loss of conviction among youth and young adults. No moral revolution can succeed without shaping and changing the minds of young people and children. Inevitably, the schools have become crucial battlegrounds for the culture war. The Christian worldview has been undermined by pervasive curricula that teach moral relativism, reduce moral commandments to personal values, and promote homosexuality as a legitimate and attractive lifestyle option.
Our churches must teach the basics of biblical morality to Christians who will otherwise never know that the Bible prescribes a model for sexual relationships. Young people must be told the truth about homosexuality--and taught to esteem marriage as God's intention for human sexual relatedness.
The times demand Christian courage. These days, courage means that preachers and Christian leaders must set an agenda for biblical confrontation, and not shrink from dealing with the full range of issues related to homosexuality. We must talk about what the Bible teaches about gender--what it means to be a man or a woman. We must talk about God's gift of sex and the covenant of marriage. And we must talk honestly about what homosexuality is, and why God has condemned this sin as an abomination in His sight.
Courage is far too rare in many Christian circles. This explains the surrender of so many denominations, seminaries, and churches to the homosexual agenda. But no surrender on this issue would have been possible, if the authority of Scripture had not already been undermined.
And yet, even as courage is required, the times call for another Christian virtue as well--compassion. The tragic fact is that every congregation is almost certain to include persons struggling with homosexual desire or even involved in homosexual acts. Outside the walls of the church, homosexuals are waiting to see if the Christian church has anything more to say, after we declare that homosexuality is a sin.
Liberal churches have redefined compassion to mean that the church changes its message to meet modern demands. They argue that to tell a homosexual he is a sinner is uncompassionate and intolerant. This is like arguing that a physician is intolerant because he tells a patient she has cancer. But, in the culture of political correctness, this argument holds a powerful attraction.
Biblical Christians know that compassion requires telling the truth, and refusing to call sin something sinless. To hide or deny the sinfulness of sin is to lie, and there is no compassion in such a deadly deception. True compassion demands speaking the truth in love--and there is the problem. Far too often, our courage is more evident than our compassion.
In far too many cases, the options seem reduced to these--liberal churches preaching love without truth, and conservative churches preaching truth without love. Evangelical Christians must ask ourselves some very hard questions, but the hardest may be this: Why is it that we have been so ineffective in reaching persons trapped in this particular pattern of sin? The Gospel is for sinners--and for homosexual sinners just as much as for heterosexual sinners. As Paul explained to the Corinthian church, "Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God" [1 Corinthians 5:11].
I believe that we are failing the test of compassion. If the first requirement of compassion is that we tell the truth, the second requirement must surely be that we reach out to homosexuals with the Gospel. This means that we must develop caring ministries to make that concern concrete, and learn how to help homosexuals escape the powerful bonds of that sin--even as we help others to escape their own bonds by grace.
If we are really a Gospel people; if we really love homosexuals as other sinners; then we must reach out to them with a sincerity that makes that love tangible. We have not even approached that requirement until we are ready to say to homosexuals, "We want you to know the fullness of God's plan for you, to know the forgiveness of sins and the mercy of God, to receive the salvation that comes by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, to know the healing God works in sinners saved by grace, and to join us as fellow disciples of Jesus Christ, living out our obedience and growing in grace together."
Such were some of you . . . The church is not a place where sinners are welcomed to remain in their sin. To the contrary, it is the Body of Christ, made up of sinners transformed by grace. Not one of us deserves to be accepted within the beloved. It is all of grace, and each one of us has come out of sin. We sin if we call homosexuality something other than sin. We also sin if we act as if this sin cannot be forgiven.
We cannot settle for truth without love nor love without truth. The Gospel settles the issue once and for all. This great moral crisis is a Gospel crisis. The genuine Body of Christ will reveal itself by courageous compassion, and compassionate courage. We will see this realized only when men and women freed by God's grace from bondage to homosexuality feel free to stand up in our churches and declare their testimony--and when we are ready to welcome them as fellow disciples. Millions of hurting people are waiting to see if we mean what we preach.
This article originally appeared on July 23, 2004. It is reprinted today in light of Dr. Mohler's appearance last night on CNN's Larry King Live.
*******
Second Al Mohler article:
Monday, June 19, 2006
A Call for Courage on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
The fault lines of controversy in contemporary Christianity range across a vast terrain of issues, but none seems quite so volatile as the question of gender. As Christians have been thinking and rethinking these issues in recent years, a clear pattern of divergence has appeared. At stake in this debate is something more important than the question of gender, for this controversy reaches the deepest questions of Christian identity and biblical authority.
For too long, those who hold to traditional understandings of manhood and womanhood, deeply rooted in both Scripture and tradition, have allowed themselves to be pushed into a defensive posture. Given the prevailing spirit of the age and the enormous cultural pressure toward conformity, traditionalists are now accused of being woefully out of step and hopelessly out of date. Now is a good time to reconsider the issues basic to this debate and to reassert the arguments for biblical manhood and womanhood.
The most basic question in this controversy comes down to this: Has God created human beings as male and female with a revealed intention for how we are to relate to each other? The secular world is now deeply committed to confusion on these matters. Denying the Creator, the secular worldview understands gender to be nothing more than the accidental byproduct of blind evolutionary process. Therefore, gender is reducible to nothing more than biology and, as the feminists famously argued, biology is not destiny.
This radical rebellion against a divinely-designed pattern of gender has now reached the outer limits of imagination. If gender is nothing more than a biological accident, and if human beings are therefore not morally bound to take gender as meaningful, then the radical gender theorists and homosexual rights advocates are correct after all. For, if gender is merely incidental to our basic humanity, then we must be free to make whatever adjustments, alterations, or transformations in gender relationships any generation might desire or demand.
The postmodern worldview embraces the notion of gender as a social construct. That is, postmodernists argue that our notions of what it means to be male and female are entirely due to what society has constructed as its theories of masculinity and femininity. Of course, the social construction of all truth is central to the postmodern mind, but when the issue is gender, the arguments become more volatile. The feminist argument is reducible to the claim that patriarchal forces in society have defined men and women so that all the differences ascribed to women represent efforts by men to protect their position of privilege.
Of course, the pervasiveness of this theory explains why radical feminism must necessarily be joined to the homosexual agenda. For, if gender is socially constructed, and therefore differences between men and women are nothing more than social convention, then heterosexuality becomes nothing more than a culturally-privileged form of sexuality.
The utopia envisioned by ideological feminists would be a world free from any concern for gender--a world where masculinity and femininity are erased as antiquated notions, and an age in which the categories of male and female are malleable and negotiable. In the postmodern view, all structures are plastic and all principles are liquid. The influence of previous ages has molded us to believe that men and women are distinct in significant ways, but our newly liberated age will promise to free us from such misconceptions and point us toward a new world of transformed gender consciousness.
As Elizabeth Elliot once reflected: "Throughout the millennia of human history, up until the past two decades or so, people took for granted that the differences between men and women were so obvious as to need no comment. They accepted the way things were. But our easy assumptions have been assailed and confused, we have lost our bearings in a fog of rhetoric about something called equality, so that I find myself in the uncomfortable position of having to belabor to educated people what was once perfectly obvious to the simplest peasant."
In response to this, secular traditionalists argue that the historical experience of the human race affirms important distinctions between men and women and differing roles for the two sexes in both the family and in the larger society. The secular traditionalists have history on their side and their claim to authority is rooted in the accumulated wisdom of the ages. For evidence, these traditionalists would point to the consistent pattern of heterosexual marriage across cultures, and the undeniable historical reality that men have predominated in positions of leadership and that the roles of women have been largely defined around home, children, and family. Thus, these traditionalists warn that feminism poses a threat to social order and that the transformed gender consciousness that the feminists demand would lead to social anarchy.
Clearly, the traditionalists come to the debate with a strong argument. They do have history on their side and we must acknowledge that the historical experience of the human race is not insignificant. Some of the most honest feminist thinkers acknowledge that their very aim is to reverse this historical pattern and much of their scholarship is directed at identifying and excising this patriarchal pattern in the future. The problem with the secular traditionalist is that their argument is, in the end, essentially secular. Their argument is reducible to the claim that the inherited wisdom of human experience points to an oughtness and a moral imperative that should inform the present and the future. In the end, this argument, though powerful and seemingly meaningful, fails to persuade. Modern individuals have been trained from the cradle to believe that every generation makes itself anew and that the past is really past.
The modern ethic of liberation, now so deeply and thoroughly embedded in the modern mind, suggests that the traditions of the past may indeed be a prison from which the present generation should demand release. This is where biblical traditionalists must enter the debate with vigor. We do share much common ground of argument with the secular traditionalists. Biblical traditionalists affirm that the historical experience of mankind should be informative of the present. We also affirm that the enduring pattern of differing roles between men and women, combined with the centrality of the natural family, does present a compelling argument that should be understood as both descriptive and prescriptive. Nevertheless, the biblical traditionalist's most fundamental argument goes far beyond history.
In this age of rampant confusion, we must recapture the biblical concept of manhood and womanhood. Our authority must be nothing less than the revealed Word of God. In this light, the pattern of history affirms what the Bible unquestionably reveals--that God has made human beings in His image as male and female, and that the Creator has revealed His glory in both the sameness and the differences by which He establishes human beings as male and female.
Confronted by the biblical evidence, we must make a vitally important interpretive decision. We must choose between two unavoidable options: either the Bible is affirmed as the inerrant and infallible Word of God, and thus presents a comprehensive vision of true humanity in both unity and diversity, or we must claim that the Bible is, to one extent or another, compromised and warped by a patriarchal and male-dominated bias that must be overcome in the name of humanity.
For biblical traditionalists the choice is clear. We understand the Bible to present a beautiful portrait of complementarity between the sexes, with both men and women charged to reflect God's glory in a distinct way. Thus, there are very real distinctions that mark the difference between masculinity and femininity, male and female. Standing on biblical authority, we must critique both the present and the past when the biblical pattern has been compromised or denied. Likewise, we must point ourselves, our churches, and our children to the future, affirming that God's glory is at stake in our response of obedience or disobedience to His design.
For too long, those who hold to the biblical pattern of gender distinctions have allowed themselves to be silenced, marginalized, and embarrassed when confronted by new gender theorists. Now is the time to recapture the momentum, force the questions, and show this generation God's design in the biblical concept of manhood and womanhood. God's glory is shown to the world in the complementarity of men and women. This crucial challenge is a summons to Christian boldness in the present hour.
This article originally appeared on February 21, 2005.
________________________________________________________
R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. For more articles and resources by Dr. Mohler, and for information on The Albert Mohler Program, a daily national radio program broadcast on the Salem Radio Network, go to www.albertmohler.com. For information on The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, go to www.sbts.edu. Send feedback to mail@albertmohler.com.
See also the most recent entries on Dr. Mohler's Blog.
Monday, June 19, 2006
Sunday, June 18, 2006
Episcopal Church's Downward Spiral
Even though the parable of the unjust steward is talking directly about money, it could also be applied to other types of desires. This parable reminds me of what is happening in the Episcopal church today. Within this parable, Jesus declared that no man or servant can serve two masters. Why? Because he will "hate the one, and love the other." Or, he will "hold to the one and despise the other".
When you read this article, can you see that this is exactly what is happening between those who want to serve the "master" of homosexual behavior acceptance rather than serve the true, Righteous Master, Jesus Christ, Lord of the universe and His revealed Word in the Bible?
We can see and compare the difference between the "revisionist bishops" that refuse to acknowledge what the Bible has always called homosexual behavior; namely - sin; and the orthodox bishops and priests who hold to God's unchanging, infallible and righteous Word. Notice in the article how one side is being "despised" by the other. Notice how serving that one secular humanist mindset of homosexual behavior acceptance is ripping the church apart, causing some orthodox priests to renounce their orders, and ultimately sending them away.
Woe to those who would call evil 'good' and good, 'evil'!
As if this and my former post weren't enough, add to it all the fact that these "leaders" also want to change the verses in the Bible that they believe "oppresses" certain 'groups' (a.k.a. homosexuals). When you read the article, you will find the last sentence makes the most sense.
What 'master' are the revisionist bishops truly following? Who is the Master that they are hating, despising, and rejecting?
Jesus fully warned us of the attempt to serve two masters. The conclusion? It doesn't work!
Matthew 6:24 - No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Luke 16:13 - No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Let's make a list of what the revisionist bishops in the Episcopal church are now rejecting.
1. They reject Jesus' Great Commission command to spread the gospel to all men.
2. They reject some portions of the Bible because it is deemed (in their eyes) "repressive to some groups."
3. They reject the message of what constitutes proper sexual relations that is clearly taught in the Scriptures, and attach a humanistic sexual agenda to church teaching.
4. They inadvertently (or possibly, do so on purpose) reject the orthodox priests adherance to Biblical morals and values and are driving them away in droves because of this one issue.
5. They are trying a new tactic to get orthodox priests to renounce their orders and get them to remove themselves so that the revisionist "bishops" don't have to.
6. They are putting their perceived "human needs" ahead of the spiritual needs of the lay people.
What is happening here is very clear. As the article stated:
Selling the humanistic gay agenda is more important to these "revisionists" than the direct call of being faithful to God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit's indwelling and leading; following and obeying the revealed Word of God, the Bible.
No matter what these "revisionists" do, there is a remnant of the faithful within that denomination who are holding fast to the truth. The fact remains that the truth of God's Word will still be here and will always and eternally prevail!
Luke 16:15-17 (Jesus speaking)
15 And He said to them, "You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts. For what is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God.
16 "The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it. 17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail.
When you read this article, can you see that this is exactly what is happening between those who want to serve the "master" of homosexual behavior acceptance rather than serve the true, Righteous Master, Jesus Christ, Lord of the universe and His revealed Word in the Bible?
We can see and compare the difference between the "revisionist bishops" that refuse to acknowledge what the Bible has always called homosexual behavior; namely - sin; and the orthodox bishops and priests who hold to God's unchanging, infallible and righteous Word. Notice in the article how one side is being "despised" by the other. Notice how serving that one secular humanist mindset of homosexual behavior acceptance is ripping the church apart, causing some orthodox priests to renounce their orders, and ultimately sending them away.
Woe to those who would call evil 'good' and good, 'evil'!
As if this and my former post weren't enough, add to it all the fact that these "leaders" also want to change the verses in the Bible that they believe "oppresses" certain 'groups' (a.k.a. homosexuals). When you read the article, you will find the last sentence makes the most sense.
The truth is, sinners do and should feel oppressed by the Bible, it is precisely why we need the salvation God offers.
What 'master' are the revisionist bishops truly following? Who is the Master that they are hating, despising, and rejecting?
Jesus fully warned us of the attempt to serve two masters. The conclusion? It doesn't work!
Matthew 6:24 - No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Luke 16:13 - No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Let's make a list of what the revisionist bishops in the Episcopal church are now rejecting.
1. They reject Jesus' Great Commission command to spread the gospel to all men.
2. They reject some portions of the Bible because it is deemed (in their eyes) "repressive to some groups."
3. They reject the message of what constitutes proper sexual relations that is clearly taught in the Scriptures, and attach a humanistic sexual agenda to church teaching.
4. They inadvertently (or possibly, do so on purpose) reject the orthodox priests adherance to Biblical morals and values and are driving them away in droves because of this one issue.
5. They are trying a new tactic to get orthodox priests to renounce their orders and get them to remove themselves so that the revisionist "bishops" don't have to.
6. They are putting their perceived "human needs" ahead of the spiritual needs of the lay people.
What is happening here is very clear. As the article stated:
He concluded by saying that God does not ask to be successful but faithful, but that he hoped that "the ears of the global community will hear our cry and act."
Selling the humanistic gay agenda is more important to these "revisionists" than the direct call of being faithful to God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit's indwelling and leading; following and obeying the revealed Word of God, the Bible.
The Rev. Don Perschall, rector of Trinity Episcopal Church in Mt. Vernon, Illinois and deputy from the Diocese of Springfield, said that he was "very alarmed" and "disturbed" by language about the Bible oppressing groups of people. "We do in fact have a theology and it's enshrined in our Book of Common Prayer. What this in effect does is it changes what's in our Book of Common Prayer."
Perschall referred specifically to the second chapter of the Book of the Common Prayer which explains how Christians can recognize the truths of the Holy Spirit. The answer: "We are measured by Scripture. We don't measure. We are held up to the light of Scripture in everything we do and say, not the other way around...The impact of what you're saying here is we're going to rewrite our theology, our understanding of God. And we don't have that right."
No matter what these "revisionists" do, there is a remnant of the faithful within that denomination who are holding fast to the truth. The fact remains that the truth of God's Word will still be here and will always and eternally prevail!
Luke 16:15-17 (Jesus speaking)
15 And He said to them, "You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts. For what is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God.
16 "The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it. 17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail.
Saturday, June 17, 2006
Episcopal Church Going Off the Deep End
Why does this not surprise me at all? Evangelism Low Priority for Episcopalians. Truly sad! People need to wake up and see what damage is being done to a once great denomination!
This comment at the site written by "Chalice" sums it up quite well:
Ya got that right!
Even worse! Episcopal Leaders to Honor Anti-Israel Theologian with 'Peace' Award
Note this portion of the article:
Wow. Honoring a "theologian" who praises suicide bombing?
I guess they don't read the Bible in that denomination either.
Genesis 12:1 - Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
Genesis 12:2 - And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
This comment at the site written by "Chalice" sums it up quite well:
Come on friends. This action of the ECUSA is only appropriate. How and why should the ECUSA make evangelism a priority when [they] have NOTHING to evangelize about. How can the ECUSA claim to have a Gospel to 'proclaim' and 'take into all the world' when they have just resolved that they can alter the Gospel in accord with their own agenda. The problem is that the ECUSA has, of its own volition, done a poor job at promoting 'justice and peace' within and amongst its own constituency. How can ANYONE look at a Bennison or a Howard and then have the audacity to claim that 'justice and peace' are important. This TOO is a lie. The obliteration of the Christian faith is what lies at stake ... and all in the name of 'justice and peace.'
Ya got that right!
Even worse! Episcopal Leaders to Honor Anti-Israel Theologian with 'Peace' Award
Note this portion of the article:
That same official is quoted as saying the Palestinian theologian has "spoken very warmly of the tactic of suicide bombing, explaining it as a logical outcome of the difficult situation in which many Palestinians live." In fact, in a 2002 essay, Ateek wrote that Palestinian homicide bombers were "the product of [Israel's] own making."
Wow. Honoring a "theologian" who praises suicide bombing?
I guess they don't read the Bible in that denomination either.
Genesis 12:1 - Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
Genesis 12:2 - And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
Genesis 12:3 - And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Standing Up Against Elite Left Bias
Here we have yet another looney liberal left case that fraudulently attempts to quell the free speech rights of those that they disagree with. The student in the article is to be commended for not backing down on his convictions and his willingness to show those in power at the public schools that their personal bias does not trump the laws protecting free speech!
If you can financially help this young man (who is about to enter into the Marines to help defend you, our country and our Constitutional free speech rights!) then please click on the link below!
God bless Joshua Denhalter! A courageous young man!
Christine
*******
Saturday, June 17, 2006
INVASION USA
Illegals protester seeks equal time
Student in appeals court after counter-demonstration barred
Posted: June 17, 20061:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com-->© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
A California student has filed an emergency appeal claiming high school officials intentionally interfered with his right to speak out on the issue of illegal immigration.
Joshua Denhalter of Jurupa Valley High School in Mira Loma, Calif., alleges he was barred from holding a counter-protest after students March 27, mostly of Mexican-American descent, illegally walked out of school in protest of legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives that would make being in the country illegally a felony.
Denhalter is represented by the public interest firm Lively, Ackerman & Cowles, which filed the appeal yesterday with the California Fourth District Court of Appeal, requesting he be allowed to "express himself freely as to political matters until the end of the school year," June 21.
The student, who plans to begin Marine Corps boot camp June 26, says that instead of walking out and being truant, he chose to organize a legitimate and lawful counter-protest during the lunch hour March 30.
The emergency appeal follows a superior court's refusal to hear Denhalter's demand for relief
June 14
Attorney Richard Ackerman called the school's actions "one of the worst governmental censorship cases I have seen in over a decade of practice."
"It is simply unbelievable that a school district would take sides with those who promote illegal activity over a student wishing to express his protected views in a traditionally and legally acceptable manner," Ackerman said. "These officials must be severely punished for their actions."
The suit says the "peaceable assembly" was to take place across from the school on a public sidewalk, which traditionally is considered a public forum.
Denhalter claims the assembly would not have disrupted school activities because the high school has an "open lunch" period in which students are free to come and go.
Any student, therefore, could have attended the assembly during lunch without disruption or violation of truancy laws.
On the morning of March 30, Denhalter handed out fliers for the event and later was approached by school officials who told him he had to stop.
The student refused and was suspended for "handing out flyers (before school) advocating the disruption of school activities."
The suit argues, however, the school did not punish the dozens of students who walked out in violation of the law several days before.
Denhalter also points out that from March 27-30, the school allowed the radical Hispanic separatist group MEChA to sponsor an on-campus rally in opposition to the House bill.
Denhalter's request to sponsor a similar rally on campus was denied by the school board.
The suit also says that on May 25 school officials barred Denhalter from wearing a "Save Our State T-shirt.
Ackerman says Denhalter, on the verge of entering the Marine Corps, cannot afford the litigation and is accepting tax-deductible donations through the Sacramento-based Pro Family Law Center.
If you can financially help this young man (who is about to enter into the Marines to help defend you, our country and our Constitutional free speech rights!) then please click on the link below!
God bless Joshua Denhalter! A courageous young man!
Christine
*******
Saturday, June 17, 2006
INVASION USA
Illegals protester seeks equal time
Student in appeals court after counter-demonstration barred
Posted: June 17, 20061:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com-->© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
A California student has filed an emergency appeal claiming high school officials intentionally interfered with his right to speak out on the issue of illegal immigration.
Joshua Denhalter of Jurupa Valley High School in Mira Loma, Calif., alleges he was barred from holding a counter-protest after students March 27, mostly of Mexican-American descent, illegally walked out of school in protest of legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives that would make being in the country illegally a felony.
Denhalter is represented by the public interest firm Lively, Ackerman & Cowles, which filed the appeal yesterday with the California Fourth District Court of Appeal, requesting he be allowed to "express himself freely as to political matters until the end of the school year," June 21.
The student, who plans to begin Marine Corps boot camp June 26, says that instead of walking out and being truant, he chose to organize a legitimate and lawful counter-protest during the lunch hour March 30.
The emergency appeal follows a superior court's refusal to hear Denhalter's demand for relief
June 14
Attorney Richard Ackerman called the school's actions "one of the worst governmental censorship cases I have seen in over a decade of practice."
"It is simply unbelievable that a school district would take sides with those who promote illegal activity over a student wishing to express his protected views in a traditionally and legally acceptable manner," Ackerman said. "These officials must be severely punished for their actions."
The suit says the "peaceable assembly" was to take place across from the school on a public sidewalk, which traditionally is considered a public forum.
Denhalter claims the assembly would not have disrupted school activities because the high school has an "open lunch" period in which students are free to come and go.
Any student, therefore, could have attended the assembly during lunch without disruption or violation of truancy laws.
On the morning of March 30, Denhalter handed out fliers for the event and later was approached by school officials who told him he had to stop.
The student refused and was suspended for "handing out flyers (before school) advocating the disruption of school activities."
The suit argues, however, the school did not punish the dozens of students who walked out in violation of the law several days before.
Denhalter also points out that from March 27-30, the school allowed the radical Hispanic separatist group MEChA to sponsor an on-campus rally in opposition to the House bill.
Denhalter's request to sponsor a similar rally on campus was denied by the school board.
The suit also says that on May 25 school officials barred Denhalter from wearing a "Save Our State T-shirt.
Ackerman says Denhalter, on the verge of entering the Marine Corps, cannot afford the litigation and is accepting tax-deductible donations through the Sacramento-based Pro Family Law Center.
Friday, June 16, 2006
It's a Spiritual Battle, Not Just Casual Debate
I have visited the blog of a pastor named DL Foster many times since finding him via Stephen Bennett's blog. He describes himself as "an ordinary man serving an extraordinary God." I just love that! That, in fact, is what we all are..."ordinary men and women serving our extraordinary Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ."
DL is not afraid to "tell it like it is." He's not into the "politically correct" type of evangelism that often tends to stress ONLY the grace, hope, and love of God (ALL VERY IMPORTANT, OF COURSE). As most born-again, Bible believing Christians know, we must share the "bad news" of sin's effect upon our souls before we can come to the Good News of the Gospel. This is just a fact my friends. And I'll tell you why.
In previous posts, I have discussed our need to avoid the heresy of preaching the "cross-less Gospel." While reading DL's blogpost dated June 14th, 2006, I followed through to the links posted. The title of his post reiterated what I have been saying all along about the homosexual activism going on in our schools, churches and society in general. It is not just a casual debate.
Unfortunately, I have met many Christians who would rather keep their heads in the sand, avoid the ridicule and bashing that ultimately gets hurled at anyone who opposes gay activists as they secretly wish that the turmoil over "gay" themed issues (e.g. "their" special "rights", "gay" marriage, adding sexual orientation as a specialized form of "hate" crimes laws etc.) would just go away.
People, it's not going to just go away! It's not going to just "resolve itself." The Lord has given us the Great Commission; to go out and preach the gospel to all the world. This includes people trapped in sinful homosexual behavior and extends much further to the evil realm of indoctrination currently going on in America. The goal? To get people's minds converted into the "pro-gay behavior affirming thinking matrix."
Of course, we know that anyone who opposes them (especially ex-gay Christian evangelists, pastors or ministers) are called hateful, bigoted, intolerant, non-Christian (plus some expletives that I can't list here) and this is one of their greatest "weapons" to try and silence our voices.
Well, if they want to call me a BIGOT, I say let them! I will wear that badge for the sake of Jesus Christ and the gospel message. However, the term "BIGOT" is being used here in the context of an acronym for what I truly believe.
Bible
Is
God's
Only
Truth
What is the main message of the Bible? It all points to our Savior, Jesus Christ. Jesus died on the cross as our Substitute for our sins. In eternity, when we come face to face with the Living, Holy, Righteous Judge of the universe, we either choose to face Him with our own sins still upon our souls or with that sin debt paid in full through Jesus Christ's death on the cross and resurrection to life everlasting. He is the ONLY Mediator who enables us to cross over from eternal death (the second death) to eternal life with God in heaven.
Jesus told us that "in this world you will have trouble; but take heart! for I have overcome the world." He is the only "religious" leader, so to speak, that can make that claim. No other leader of any other religion ever claimed to die for the sins of others. Only Jesus sets the captives free from the grip of Satan who comes to kill, steal, and destroy us through the weapon of unrepentance for sin.
You can go to this blogpost and read about why the Cross is essential to Christian belief. You can read about the Cross of Christ from God's perspective. You can also read about the Cross of Christ from our perspective. Here, I want to concentrate on the Cross from Satan's perspective.
Here's a portion of my former post:
Next, I'd like to apply this portion to the current raging battle going on between secular society and evangelical Christians regarding homosexuality.
You see, Satan WANTS YOUR SOUL! He is the enemy of our souls and he will do ANYTHING to keep us away from the saving grace of God through the power of the Cross of Jesus Christ!
In Genesis, Satan was the tempter of Eve and then Adam. In Revelation, he is labeled the "accuser." Satan had the gall to even tempt Jesus, (several times during his 3 year earthly ministry) the Son of God, away from His mission on earth. He even accuses God of not being just!
Satan is so good at half-truths, isn't he? It is true that justice demands punishment for our sins. But he falsely lumps into the mix the lie that true justice does not allow any possibility for forgiveness of sins. Did you notice that? So, doesn't it logically follow that Satan would want to keep man in the grip of his sins in order for that person to not even think he needs to confess, repent, and come to the foot of the cross of Christ as our Divine Mediator to God the Father? Sure! Satan is like that philosophical author (Maxwell Maltz?) who wrote that book, "I'm O.K., you're O.K." Remember in the Garden of Eden when Satan asked the leading question, "Did God really say....if you eat from the tree of good and evil you would die?" His career on this earth is in trying to get people to doubt God's Word and get them to think, "you will not surely die."
Satan wants to keep you and your soul in the grip of death. He will use anything (and anyone) as a means to that end. Remember, he is our accuser:
Notice again, no chance for reconciliation in those words...only accusation. Isn't this the very tool that is often used by non-Christians against us to get us to doubt our worth FOR salvation and worth TO God?
Take a moment to read the post and then the comments at this blog. I will warn you now, it includes a lot of hate-filled diatribes against ex-gay people.
It is a blogpost that is in direct opposition to a billboard that stated:
Secularly speaking, we could view this as a deliberate action to exclude former homosexuals from the "hate crimes" law legislation.
That is true.
But if you look at it with spiritual eyes, you will see that we can also hear Satan whispering in our ears the idea that agrees with atheist, secular humanist Wayne Besen's way of thinking. If you read about Besen's hatred (directed specifically at ex-gays) can't you see Besen actually agreeing that yes, homosexuals are more valuable and deserve these special hate crimes laws for"protection."
Ask yourself this question. Doesn't Satan desire for us to remain in the grip of sin (in this case, homosexual behavior) and away from confession, repentance, and the gift of unmerited grace through Jesus Christ?
The following two paragraphs and points shows the contrast between man's wisdom and God's wisdom.
The portion in bold represents man's wisdom as to what is considered "justice, mercy and grace." But notice this next paragraph:
This demonstrate's that God's Wisdom is ultimately superior to man's. The sinner needs to agree with God about his/her sinfulness, acknowledge it before God, confess, REPENT and come to the foot of the cross of Jesus for forgiveness and reconciliation.
Now, think about people who refuse to repent. Where does that leave them? Let's examine Wayne Besen, his terrible bashing of ex-gays, and discover the reason(s) behind it all.
Who is Besen's anger really directed at? God? Jesus Christ? The Bible? Any and all born-again Christians who have repented and turned away from former homosexual lusts and behaviors? All four of these?
People, there is a spiritual battle raging here. It's not just about the physical aspects of sin that encompass homosexuality. It's the spiritual aspect of placing oneself on the throne of you life instead of reserving that space for God, our Creator!
In John 3:5-8 Jesus said:
We Receive Christ By Personal Invitation -
[Christ speaking]
Receiving Christ involves turning to God from self (repentance) and trusting Christ to come into our lives to forgive us of our sins and to make us what He wants us to be. Just to agree intellectually that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that He died on the cross for our sins is not enough. Nor is it enough to have an emotional experience. We receive Jesus Christ by faith, as an act of our will.
Picture in your mind two circles with a throne in the middle which represent two kinds of lives:
The self-directed life has "self" on the throne, Christ is outside the life and interests are directed by self, often resulting in discord and frustration.
The Christ-directed life has Christ in the center of the life and on the throne. Self is yielding to Christ (at the foot of the cross). Interests are directed by Christ, resulting in harmony with God's plan.
Which circle best represents your life?
Which circle would you like to have represent your life?
People like gay activist Wayne Besen have "self" on the throne of their lives. Thus, the cross of Christ is a "stumbling block" to those who are perishing.
The Bible says that the cross is a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles (1 Corinthians 1:23). The central point of the gospel is that apart from Jesus, we will never find forgiveness of sins.
Those who refuse to acknowledge, confess, and repent of their sin (any kind of sin) cannot be forgiven for it!
Jesus doesn't want a portion of us...he wants the entirety of our being! We can then claim to be His and He is ours! He's an awesome God and Savior of our souls! He then puts into us (through the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit) a new heart and new mind. The old has passed away and we have become new creatures in Christ!
This is what the non-believing reprobate mind cannot stand! All they can do is ridicule, debase, mock and attempt to demoralize those who have been successful at changing their behavior and lifestyle for the sake of Christ and their love for Him! Like Satan, they have that accusatory mind, soul, heart and body. They cannot stand the things of God because their hearts are so hardened against Him!
It is ultimately God who they reject.
As Christian believers, we are just additional objects of their hate and rejection.
DL is not afraid to "tell it like it is." He's not into the "politically correct" type of evangelism that often tends to stress ONLY the grace, hope, and love of God (ALL VERY IMPORTANT, OF COURSE). As most born-again, Bible believing Christians know, we must share the "bad news" of sin's effect upon our souls before we can come to the Good News of the Gospel. This is just a fact my friends. And I'll tell you why.
In previous posts, I have discussed our need to avoid the heresy of preaching the "cross-less Gospel." While reading DL's blogpost dated June 14th, 2006, I followed through to the links posted. The title of his post reiterated what I have been saying all along about the homosexual activism going on in our schools, churches and society in general. It is not just a casual debate.
Unfortunately, I have met many Christians who would rather keep their heads in the sand, avoid the ridicule and bashing that ultimately gets hurled at anyone who opposes gay activists as they secretly wish that the turmoil over "gay" themed issues (e.g. "their" special "rights", "gay" marriage, adding sexual orientation as a specialized form of "hate" crimes laws etc.) would just go away.
People, it's not going to just go away! It's not going to just "resolve itself." The Lord has given us the Great Commission; to go out and preach the gospel to all the world. This includes people trapped in sinful homosexual behavior and extends much further to the evil realm of indoctrination currently going on in America. The goal? To get people's minds converted into the "pro-gay behavior affirming thinking matrix."
Of course, we know that anyone who opposes them (especially ex-gay Christian evangelists, pastors or ministers) are called hateful, bigoted, intolerant, non-Christian (plus some expletives that I can't list here) and this is one of their greatest "weapons" to try and silence our voices.
Well, if they want to call me a BIGOT, I say let them! I will wear that badge for the sake of Jesus Christ and the gospel message. However, the term "BIGOT" is being used here in the context of an acronym for what I truly believe.
Bible
Is
God's
Only
Truth
What is the main message of the Bible? It all points to our Savior, Jesus Christ. Jesus died on the cross as our Substitute for our sins. In eternity, when we come face to face with the Living, Holy, Righteous Judge of the universe, we either choose to face Him with our own sins still upon our souls or with that sin debt paid in full through Jesus Christ's death on the cross and resurrection to life everlasting. He is the ONLY Mediator who enables us to cross over from eternal death (the second death) to eternal life with God in heaven.
Jesus told us that "in this world you will have trouble; but take heart! for I have overcome the world." He is the only "religious" leader, so to speak, that can make that claim. No other leader of any other religion ever claimed to die for the sins of others. Only Jesus sets the captives free from the grip of Satan who comes to kill, steal, and destroy us through the weapon of unrepentance for sin.
You can go to this blogpost and read about why the Cross is essential to Christian belief. You can read about the Cross of Christ from God's perspective. You can also read about the Cross of Christ from our perspective. Here, I want to concentrate on the Cross from Satan's perspective.
Here's a portion of my former post:
THE CROSS FROM SATAN'S PERSPECTIVE
The Bible calls Satan "the accuser" in Revelation 12:10. He whispers, "You cannot possibly expect God to accept you. You have a disgusting imagination. Look at those things you've done - your deceitfulness, your hatred and bitterness. You call yourself a child of God? " And to God, Satan says, in effect, "If You are just at all, You cannot possibly forgive his/her sins and accept him/her. Your justice demands that he/she be punished."
But John tells us how such accusations are dealt with: "If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1 John 2:1, KJV). Generally, an advocate will stand up before a judge and plead on behalf of the accused something like this, "My lord, yes, he is not perfect - he has failed- but he is now a kind and helpful citizen, and I am bringing witnesses to testify to his good character." In so doing, the advocate pleads for the judge to be lenient.
Jesus, as our Advocate, doesn't work that way. When Satan accuses, Jesus says to His Father, "Everything You said about him is true. He is wicked; he is sinful. There is not one good thing about him. But, Father, You cannot punish him because the punishment already has been paid - by Me."
The Father looks to the sacrifice of the Son to see that the punishment was paid in full. Atonement made, acceptance guaranteed - and we are free. This is what is meant by Jesus being our Substitute.
"Because the sinless Savior died,
My sinful soul is counted free,
For God, the Just, is satisfied,
To look on Him and pardon me." *
Jesus provided for our greatest need - the forgiveness of sin. Apart from Him it could never happen. That is why the cross must be at the heart of our evangelism.
* From "Before the Throne of God Above," by Charitie Lee Bancroft
Next, I'd like to apply this portion to the current raging battle going on between secular society and evangelical Christians regarding homosexuality.
You see, Satan WANTS YOUR SOUL! He is the enemy of our souls and he will do ANYTHING to keep us away from the saving grace of God through the power of the Cross of Jesus Christ!
In Genesis, Satan was the tempter of Eve and then Adam. In Revelation, he is labeled the "accuser." Satan had the gall to even tempt Jesus, (several times during his 3 year earthly ministry) the Son of God, away from His mission on earth. He even accuses God of not being just!
And to God, Satan says, in effect, "If You are just at all, You cannot possibly forgive his/her sins and accept him/her. Your justice demands that he/she be punished."
Satan is so good at half-truths, isn't he? It is true that justice demands punishment for our sins. But he falsely lumps into the mix the lie that true justice does not allow any possibility for forgiveness of sins. Did you notice that? So, doesn't it logically follow that Satan would want to keep man in the grip of his sins in order for that person to not even think he needs to confess, repent, and come to the foot of the cross of Christ as our Divine Mediator to God the Father? Sure! Satan is like that philosophical author (Maxwell Maltz?) who wrote that book, "I'm O.K., you're O.K." Remember in the Garden of Eden when Satan asked the leading question, "Did God really say....if you eat from the tree of good and evil you would die?" His career on this earth is in trying to get people to doubt God's Word and get them to think, "you will not surely die."
Satan wants to keep you and your soul in the grip of death. He will use anything (and anyone) as a means to that end. Remember, he is our accuser:
He whispers, "You cannot possible expect God to accept you. You have a
disgusting imagination. Look at those things you've done - your deceitfulness,
your hatred and bitterness. You call yourself a child of God? "
Notice again, no chance for reconciliation in those words...only accusation. Isn't this the very tool that is often used by non-Christians against us to get us to doubt our worth FOR salvation and worth TO God?
Take a moment to read the post and then the comments at this blog. I will warn you now, it includes a lot of hate-filled diatribes against ex-gay people.
It is a blogpost that is in direct opposition to a billboard that stated:
"Hate Crime Laws Say We Were More Valuable As Homosexuals Than We Are Now As Former Homosexuals."
Secularly speaking, we could view this as a deliberate action to exclude former homosexuals from the "hate crimes" law legislation.
That is true.
But if you look at it with spiritual eyes, you will see that we can also hear Satan whispering in our ears the idea that agrees with atheist, secular humanist Wayne Besen's way of thinking. If you read about Besen's hatred (directed specifically at ex-gays) can't you see Besen actually agreeing that yes, homosexuals are more valuable and deserve these special hate crimes laws for"protection."
Ask yourself this question. Doesn't Satan desire for us to remain in the grip of sin (in this case, homosexual behavior) and away from confession, repentance, and the gift of unmerited grace through Jesus Christ?
The following two paragraphs and points shows the contrast between man's wisdom and God's wisdom.
But John tells us how such accusations are dealt with: "If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1 John 2:1, KJV). Generally, an advocate will stand up before a judge and plead on behalf of the accused something like this, "My lord, yes, he is not perfect - he has failed- but he is now a kind and helpful citizen, and I am bringing witnesses to testify to his good character." In so doing, the advocate pleads for the judge to be lenient.
The portion in bold represents man's wisdom as to what is considered "justice, mercy and grace." But notice this next paragraph:
Jesus, as our Advocate, doesn't work that way. When Satan accuses, Jesus says to His Father, "Everything You said about him is true. He is
wicked; he is sinful. There is not one good thing about him. But, Father, You cannot punish him because the punishment already has been paid - by Me."
This demonstrate's that God's Wisdom is ultimately superior to man's. The sinner needs to agree with God about his/her sinfulness, acknowledge it before God, confess, REPENT and come to the foot of the cross of Jesus for forgiveness and reconciliation.
Now, think about people who refuse to repent. Where does that leave them? Let's examine Wayne Besen, his terrible bashing of ex-gays, and discover the reason(s) behind it all.
Who is Besen's anger really directed at? God? Jesus Christ? The Bible? Any and all born-again Christians who have repented and turned away from former homosexual lusts and behaviors? All four of these?
People, there is a spiritual battle raging here. It's not just about the physical aspects of sin that encompass homosexuality. It's the spiritual aspect of placing oneself on the throne of you life instead of reserving that space for God, our Creator!
In John 3:5-8 Jesus said:
5 Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.' 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. you hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."
We Receive Christ By Personal Invitation -
[Christ speaking]
"Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the
door, I will come in to him" (Revelation 3:20).
Receiving Christ involves turning to God from self (repentance) and trusting Christ to come into our lives to forgive us of our sins and to make us what He wants us to be. Just to agree intellectually that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that He died on the cross for our sins is not enough. Nor is it enough to have an emotional experience. We receive Jesus Christ by faith, as an act of our will.
Picture in your mind two circles with a throne in the middle which represent two kinds of lives:
The self-directed life has "self" on the throne, Christ is outside the life and interests are directed by self, often resulting in discord and frustration.
The Christ-directed life has Christ in the center of the life and on the throne. Self is yielding to Christ (at the foot of the cross). Interests are directed by Christ, resulting in harmony with God's plan.
Which circle best represents your life?
Which circle would you like to have represent your life?
People like gay activist Wayne Besen have "self" on the throne of their lives. Thus, the cross of Christ is a "stumbling block" to those who are perishing.
The Bible says that the cross is a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles (1 Corinthians 1:23). The central point of the gospel is that apart from Jesus, we will never find forgiveness of sins.
Those who refuse to acknowledge, confess, and repent of their sin (any kind of sin) cannot be forgiven for it!
Jesus doesn't want a portion of us...he wants the entirety of our being! We can then claim to be His and He is ours! He's an awesome God and Savior of our souls! He then puts into us (through the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit) a new heart and new mind. The old has passed away and we have become new creatures in Christ!
This is what the non-believing reprobate mind cannot stand! All they can do is ridicule, debase, mock and attempt to demoralize those who have been successful at changing their behavior and lifestyle for the sake of Christ and their love for Him! Like Satan, they have that accusatory mind, soul, heart and body. They cannot stand the things of God because their hearts are so hardened against Him!
It is ultimately God who they reject.
As Christian believers, we are just additional objects of their hate and rejection.
I want to say something that might be considered controversial, but it needs to be said. There are Christians who have the mindset that we are never to "judge" and that we shouldn't actively point out someone elses sin. My question is, if we don't share the "bad news" of sin, how can we help people realize their need for the Savior, Jesus Christ, bring them to the Cross of forgiveness to ultimately be reconciled back to God?
As Christians we know and acknowledge that we have already been under the judgment of God. By the grace of God, there go I! Because we (as Christians) already realize that we have been judged and found guilty of our sins, shouldn't we be actively sharing the need for reconciliation through the cross of Christ? Aren't we to share the entirety of the Gospel which includes the "bad news" of our sinful natures; not just the Good News?
When we look at the Cross through God's perspective, this becomes clear to us:
But it is precisely because God loves us that He had to deal with our sin - and
it is on the basis of this that we are accepted. Jesus could die a thousand deaths and yet not achieve salvation for us unless God were satisfied with the sacrifice. Yet the question remains: How can God be both the One who provides the sacrifice that makes Him propitious and be the One who receives the sacrifice?
The simple answer is that God's holiness demands propitiation.
God is blisteringly angry about our every single sin. You can see the awfulness of sin only by seeing what it did to His one and only lovely Son. If God looked at a sin and said, "Well, I'm not too bothered about that one," there would be injustice in His character. God retains His honor by giving His Son.
God unfolded a plan that both showed His unbelievably strong anger at sin and His infinitely strong love for us. He sent His Son and punished Him on our behalf. "The Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world" (1 John 4:14, NIV). No other message beside the cross is able to deal with the root problem of man's sin in relation to the justice and holiness of God.
*******
Update: WOW! Almost missed this post! Wayne Besen's Final Solution
Late Update: Goody! Now I don't need to suffer through reading any of Besen's book. There is an article that entirely refutes his vitriole and venom: ANYTHING BUT STRAIGHTFORWARD
A Rebuttal to Wayne Besen
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
A Frightening Example Why Gay Activism SHOULD NOT BE IN OUR SCHOOLS!!
This is just awful! If anyone reading this blog isn't familiar with the David Parker bogus arrest case due to homosexual indoctrination techniques being forced upon GRADE SCHOOL CHILDREN in Lexington, Massachusetts, you can go here , here and here to read all about it. There are some excellent (albeit very disturbing) links you can click over to from those blogposts that demonstrate how homosexual activism is going way to far in Lexington (in fact, way too far all over Massachusetts; precisely because of "gay" marriage!).
Below is an email that I just received from Article 8 Alliance/MassResistance leader Brian Camenker. When you read it...be horrified! And realize that if CHRISTIANS SIT BACK AND DO NOTHING ABOUT THE GAY ACTIVISM GOING ON IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, MORE SUCH INCIDENTS ARE IN STORE FOR ANY FAMILY (ESPECIALLY CHRISTIAN ONES!)THAT ADHERES TO TRADITIONAL MORALS AND VALUES.
I will let the story speak for itself. I'll be back on Friday to comment further.
Christine
*******
MassResistance -
** June 14 Email Update **
It's gone too far: Get involved!
Join the movement to take back our government in Massachusetts!
(Feel free to pass this along to others)
http://www.massresistance.com/ Help by Donating! MassResistance Blog
In this special email update:
David Parker's first-grade son surrounded and beaten up at school on anniversary of same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts.
School acknowledges that attack by group of kids was "planned and premeditated."
Caps year-long public campaign of anti-Parker hate by activists in town.
Young children also polarized and confused by homosexual normalization programs in schools.
On May 17 - the two-year anniversary of same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts - David Parker's first-grade son, Jacob, was dragged and beaten at the Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington during recess, receiving multiple blows to the chest, stomach, and genital area.
Last year David Parker was arrested and made national news over the school's refusal to notify him when adults discuss homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, then in kindergarten. The school system has continued to refuse to notify any parents. On April 27, 2006, Parker, his wife, and another family filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the school system.
During the recess period, a group of 8-10 kids suddenly surrounded Jacob and grabbed him. He was taken around the corner of the school building out of sight of the patrolling aides, with the taunting and encouragement of other kids. Jacob was then positioned against the wall for what appeared to be a well planned and coordinated assault. Many children stood, watched silently, and did nothing as the beating commenced.
The group of kids surrounded Jacob and he was beaten and punched. Then, as he fell to the ground, another child was heard saying to the group of children, "Now you all can finish him off," and as he was down on his hands and knees, the beating continued on his back. Then, fortunately, one little girl ran to contact the oblivious playground aides to stop it.
Four of the attackers were from Jacob's first-grade class; the others were from other classes at Estabrook.
The teachers' aide apparently determined that since she could not see external bleeding, and since Jacob apparently was not hit in the face, she did not send him to she school nurse. The Parkers were notified by the first-grade teacher within an hour of the incident.
School authorities told the Parkers that from their investigation they have determined that the beating was indeed planned and premeditated.
Safe schools? Tolerance? Diversity?
There can be no question that this beating has little to do with children. It was fueled and incited by adults (and, yes, school officials) in the town of Lexington. And it reflects the culture of extreme intolerance against anyone with traditional beliefs, and the willingness of adults to bring children into adult issues.
It cannot be accidental that this happened on May 17 - the two-year anniversary of same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts - a day when emotions were particularly high among certain activists.
*None of the kids involved were suspended from school. Instead, from what we are told, a "diversity" training session of sorts was held in the first-grade class. What if it had been a "gay" child who had been beaten, or even taunted? Across Massachusetts children are routinely suspended from school for even using the term "gay" in a less than positive fashion.
*The Estabrook Elementary School library has continuously displayed two particular issues of the local Lexington Minuteman newspaper which depict David Parker in big articles on the front page on a prominent table where kids often go. Those two issues were still displayed after this latest incident. [See MassResistance picture.]
*Estabrook Elementary School is proud of its long-time involvement in various "Safe School" programs that make the schools "safe" for homosexuality but dangerous for anyone with a different viewpoint. The current rage there is the "Open Circle" program, which has ties to GLSEN.
*A group of adults in Lexington maintain and regularly update an angry anti-Parker website, http://www.lexingtoncares.org/. In addition to angry anti-Parker diatribes, they meticulously catalog all anti-Parker letters to the editor, newspaper articles, etc. They also organize anti-Parker rallies and demonstrations, and go on TV and radio bashing Parker. The group is led by well-known lesbian activist Meg Soens, who was involved in the infamous GLSEN "Fistgate" conference in 2000. (Soens also runs a second pro-homosexual Lexington website, http://www.respectingdifferences.org/. )
*Adults in Lexington have conducted a nasty and hateful anti-Parker letter-writing campaign in the local newspaper, the Lexington Minuteman, that has lasted for well over a year.
*The "Lexington Cares" group, and others, have recruited young children to participate in angry anti-David Parker public demonstrations. (Pictures can be viewed at website).
Statement by David Parker:
Just waiting to happen.
This outrageous incident should not come as a surprise to anyone. The hatred and vituperative nature of the homosexual activists and their allies, both in the schools and in the community, toward anyone who does not agree with their agenda has been well documented. This also clearly demonstrates the complete ineffectiveness and moral bankruptcy of the so-called "safe schools" programs, which cause far more problems than they solve. Unless things are forced to change, more innocent children will be at risk.
YOU CAN TAKE ACTION:
1. Stop the homosexual programs that help cause this.
This horrific incident exposes the poisonous nature of the state-funded "safe schools" program, which are thinly veiled homosexual propaganda -- that makes schools "safe" for gay activism but dangerously unsafe for anyone who doesn't agree. The Massachusetts Legislature is now poised to quadruple the funding for these programs -- to nearly $2 million! Governor Romney MUST veto this when it happens later this month.
Contact Governor Romney's office. Tell him that he must veto ALL money in the 2007 budget for homosexual programs in the public schools. Give our schools back to the parents and children! He needs to get that message!
State HouseOffice of the GovernorRoom 360Boston, MA 02133Phone: (617) 725-4005(888) 870-7770 (instate use only)FAX: (617) 727-9725To email the governor:http://www.mass.gov/Agovwebmail/WebMailPageControl.ser?level=101
2. Tell the activists that their anti-David Parker hate has no place in America.
This anti-David Parker website in Lexington (ironically called "Lexington Cares") obsessively incites and catalogues rhetoric, intimidation, and activism against David Parker and his family. http://www.lexingtoncares.org/Contact them at: http://www.lexingtoncares.org/ContactUs.html
This second website coordinates the homosexual activism against David Parker and his family in Lexington: http://www.respectingdifferences.org/
Note the confusion techniques that both of these websites use to incite people against citizens with traditional values.
Please help MassResistance continue to do our job! If we don't win the fights going on in our Legislature over the next several months, our schools and our lives in Massachusetts will be changed forever.
Donate to MassResistance by credit card
Donations can also be mailed to: MassResistance, PO Box 1612, Waltham, MA 02454
Contact us if you want to get involved.
AS WE'VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG - IT'S UP TO THE PEOPLE NOW! THIS CAN AND WILL BE WON.
Also, check out the MassResistance blog (for you red-meat activists)!
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FORWARD THIS TO LIKE-MINDED FRIENDS !!
Update: Lifesite News Article Link on incident.
P.S. In my absence from the blogosphere today, please feel free to share your thoughts on this topic!
*******
UPDATE 6/20/06 - The Legal Liability Associated with Homosexuality Education in Public Schools An assessment of the risks and liabilities associated with policies and programs that normalize homosexual behavior in public schools
[A word of warning: Some of the contents included in the above pdf paper link may be very disturbing to some readers].
Below is an email that I just received from Article 8 Alliance/MassResistance leader Brian Camenker. When you read it...be horrified! And realize that if CHRISTIANS SIT BACK AND DO NOTHING ABOUT THE GAY ACTIVISM GOING ON IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, MORE SUCH INCIDENTS ARE IN STORE FOR ANY FAMILY (ESPECIALLY CHRISTIAN ONES!)THAT ADHERES TO TRADITIONAL MORALS AND VALUES.
I will let the story speak for itself. I'll be back on Friday to comment further.
Christine
*******
MassResistance -
** June 14 Email Update **
It's gone too far: Get involved!
Join the movement to take back our government in Massachusetts!
(Feel free to pass this along to others)
http://www.massresistance.com/ Help by Donating! MassResistance Blog
In this special email update:
David Parker's first-grade son surrounded and beaten up at school on anniversary of same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts.
School acknowledges that attack by group of kids was "planned and premeditated."
Caps year-long public campaign of anti-Parker hate by activists in town.
Young children also polarized and confused by homosexual normalization programs in schools.
On May 17 - the two-year anniversary of same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts - David Parker's first-grade son, Jacob, was dragged and beaten at the Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington during recess, receiving multiple blows to the chest, stomach, and genital area.
Last year David Parker was arrested and made national news over the school's refusal to notify him when adults discuss homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, then in kindergarten. The school system has continued to refuse to notify any parents. On April 27, 2006, Parker, his wife, and another family filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the school system.
During the recess period, a group of 8-10 kids suddenly surrounded Jacob and grabbed him. He was taken around the corner of the school building out of sight of the patrolling aides, with the taunting and encouragement of other kids. Jacob was then positioned against the wall for what appeared to be a well planned and coordinated assault. Many children stood, watched silently, and did nothing as the beating commenced.
The group of kids surrounded Jacob and he was beaten and punched. Then, as he fell to the ground, another child was heard saying to the group of children, "Now you all can finish him off," and as he was down on his hands and knees, the beating continued on his back. Then, fortunately, one little girl ran to contact the oblivious playground aides to stop it.
Four of the attackers were from Jacob's first-grade class; the others were from other classes at Estabrook.
The teachers' aide apparently determined that since she could not see external bleeding, and since Jacob apparently was not hit in the face, she did not send him to she school nurse. The Parkers were notified by the first-grade teacher within an hour of the incident.
School authorities told the Parkers that from their investigation they have determined that the beating was indeed planned and premeditated.
Safe schools? Tolerance? Diversity?
There can be no question that this beating has little to do with children. It was fueled and incited by adults (and, yes, school officials) in the town of Lexington. And it reflects the culture of extreme intolerance against anyone with traditional beliefs, and the willingness of adults to bring children into adult issues.
It cannot be accidental that this happened on May 17 - the two-year anniversary of same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts - a day when emotions were particularly high among certain activists.
*None of the kids involved were suspended from school. Instead, from what we are told, a "diversity" training session of sorts was held in the first-grade class. What if it had been a "gay" child who had been beaten, or even taunted? Across Massachusetts children are routinely suspended from school for even using the term "gay" in a less than positive fashion.
*The Estabrook Elementary School library has continuously displayed two particular issues of the local Lexington Minuteman newspaper which depict David Parker in big articles on the front page on a prominent table where kids often go. Those two issues were still displayed after this latest incident. [See MassResistance picture.]
*Estabrook Elementary School is proud of its long-time involvement in various "Safe School" programs that make the schools "safe" for homosexuality but dangerous for anyone with a different viewpoint. The current rage there is the "Open Circle" program, which has ties to GLSEN.
*A group of adults in Lexington maintain and regularly update an angry anti-Parker website, http://www.lexingtoncares.org/. In addition to angry anti-Parker diatribes, they meticulously catalog all anti-Parker letters to the editor, newspaper articles, etc. They also organize anti-Parker rallies and demonstrations, and go on TV and radio bashing Parker. The group is led by well-known lesbian activist Meg Soens, who was involved in the infamous GLSEN "Fistgate" conference in 2000. (Soens also runs a second pro-homosexual Lexington website, http://www.respectingdifferences.org/. )
*Adults in Lexington have conducted a nasty and hateful anti-Parker letter-writing campaign in the local newspaper, the Lexington Minuteman, that has lasted for well over a year.
*The "Lexington Cares" group, and others, have recruited young children to participate in angry anti-David Parker public demonstrations. (Pictures can be viewed at website).
Statement by David Parker:
"We understand that skirmishes happen on the playground. What concerns us greatly is the premeditated, well planned and coordinated nature of the assault."
We are aware that the school administration sent notices home with all the young children concerning the Parker arrest, the "King and King" incident and the federal lawsuit. In addition, the school administration prominently displays the front-page Minuteman biased headlines of such incidents in the elementary school library for the children to see, read, and discuss. We also know that activist lesbian mothers and vehement anti-David Parker parents are spewing hateful, inflaming rhetoric, and probably also to their young children. What kind of atmosphere are they creating? Are their children acting out their parents' hate? Was this attack part of the "group think" that the pro-homosexual crowd espouses? "
Isn't the school supposed to be addressing safety and preventing bullying and violence? Or are such programs only focused on children with homosexual parents? You can be certain that if this happened to a child with homosexual parents more would be made of this and that "lessons" teaching tolerance and diversity of homosexual behavior normalization would be forced upon the young children."
Just waiting to happen.
This outrageous incident should not come as a surprise to anyone. The hatred and vituperative nature of the homosexual activists and their allies, both in the schools and in the community, toward anyone who does not agree with their agenda has been well documented. This also clearly demonstrates the complete ineffectiveness and moral bankruptcy of the so-called "safe schools" programs, which cause far more problems than they solve. Unless things are forced to change, more innocent children will be at risk.
YOU CAN TAKE ACTION:
1. Stop the homosexual programs that help cause this.
This horrific incident exposes the poisonous nature of the state-funded "safe schools" program, which are thinly veiled homosexual propaganda -- that makes schools "safe" for gay activism but dangerously unsafe for anyone who doesn't agree. The Massachusetts Legislature is now poised to quadruple the funding for these programs -- to nearly $2 million! Governor Romney MUST veto this when it happens later this month.
Contact Governor Romney's office. Tell him that he must veto ALL money in the 2007 budget for homosexual programs in the public schools. Give our schools back to the parents and children! He needs to get that message!
State HouseOffice of the GovernorRoom 360Boston, MA 02133Phone: (617) 725-4005(888) 870-7770 (instate use only)FAX: (617) 727-9725To email the governor:http://www.mass.gov/Agovwebmail/WebMailPageControl.ser?level=101
2. Tell the activists that their anti-David Parker hate has no place in America.
This anti-David Parker website in Lexington (ironically called "Lexington Cares") obsessively incites and catalogues rhetoric, intimidation, and activism against David Parker and his family. http://www.lexingtoncares.org/Contact them at: http://www.lexingtoncares.org/ContactUs.html
This second website coordinates the homosexual activism against David Parker and his family in Lexington: http://www.respectingdifferences.org/
Note the confusion techniques that both of these websites use to incite people against citizens with traditional values.
Please help MassResistance continue to do our job! If we don't win the fights going on in our Legislature over the next several months, our schools and our lives in Massachusetts will be changed forever.
Donate to MassResistance by credit card
Donations can also be mailed to: MassResistance, PO Box 1612, Waltham, MA 02454
Contact us if you want to get involved.
AS WE'VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG - IT'S UP TO THE PEOPLE NOW! THIS CAN AND WILL BE WON.
Also, check out the MassResistance blog (for you red-meat activists)!
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FORWARD THIS TO LIKE-MINDED FRIENDS !!
Update: Lifesite News Article Link on incident.
P.S. In my absence from the blogosphere today, please feel free to share your thoughts on this topic!
*******
UPDATE 6/20/06 - The Legal Liability Associated with Homosexuality Education in Public Schools An assessment of the risks and liabilities associated with policies and programs that normalize homosexual behavior in public schools
[A word of warning: Some of the contents included in the above pdf paper link may be very disturbing to some readers].
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
