So this group called Soulforce, comes and protests schools they believe to be hostile to homosexuals . They were on tour and planned on protesting at Cornerstone and Calvin (maybe Hope too, I can't remember). The group sends the school they are planning on visiting a letter to let them know their intentions. Cornerstone responded by saying that the group is not welcome and that they would be arrested if the came on school grounds.
So, the group showed up and two students came on the property and were arrested. But I got in to some discussions with some friends about the subject. Here are some of the questions asked by one another.
1. Isn't it Cornerstone's perogative to allow them on campus or not?
2. What would it hurt to let them on campus?
3. What is the "homosexual agenda"?
4. Is it "cool" to be gay?
5. How do we dialogue with people who disagree on the issue of sexuality (especially Christians)?
I'll try to give some of my opinions on these 5 questions.
1. Yes- But it makes them and Christians look stupid, arrogant and not willing to dialogue about issues that afeect our culture.
2. This was actually something I hadn't thought of but that I thought was a good point. My friend said that since they are not affiliated or supported by a denomination but instead by individual donors, that they had a lot to lose. Money. I can see how this would be a concern, but don't think it's a very noble or honorable one.
3. According to Wkipedia, Dr. Dobson has stated this "homosexual agenda" as: "Those goals include universal acceptance of the gay lifestyle, discrediting of scriptures that condemn homosexuality, muzzling of the clergy and Christian media, granting of special privileges and rights in the law, overturning laws prohibiting pedophilia, indoctrinating children and future generations through public education, and securing all the legal benefits of marriage for any two or more people who claim to have homosexual tendencies."
Any thoughts on this "agenda"?
4. I stated that in 10 years of youth minstry, I had only met 3 youth who thoguth it was "cool" to be gay and none of them were outside of Wedgwood.
5. I don't know how. I think it starts with discussing these tough issues with people that it affects most. I know very few LGBT people, and have little personal experience with this issue, but hope that I can continue to see things from somebody elses perspective. My problem has been discussing hot issues with other Christians that I disagree with.
33 comments:
Hi again, I still enjoy reading through your posts and finding news I haven't heard. I couldn't resist this issue, it hits home for me because I've been on both sides of the fence. I used to think "throw all the homosexuals in one pot and boil 'em" until I learned I was no better because I had lusted in my heart and thus committed adultery (Matt. 5:28) and hated homosexuals for no reason and thus murdered in my heart(Matt. 5:22).
I grew up knowing some openly LGBT (which is a big deal in a conservative SD town of 672 people) my girlfriend's brother is openly homosexual and I've never treated him as any less than a brother.
I read somewhere, "The biblical way to witness to a homosexual is not to argue with him about his lifestyle but to use the Law to bring the knowledge of sin -which can easily be done in an unoffensive way-. This will show him he is guilty of breaking God’s holy Law, and he is damned not because of but despite his sexual preference."
I've seen a lot of damage done by people who will slander someone for being a homosexual, only to turn around and blaspheme God's name or look lustfully at some girl. What's the word...hypocrisy?
I'm not sure of the legalities in this case, but it looks like the college was in the right. Money is often a priority with schools as you mentioned, it's also possible the school was concerned with protesters disrupting education, or concern over students engaging the group on campus in an improper way. Personally I wouldn't have let them on campus because protesters annoy me. I think the group should have appealed to the school for a formal debate, they could all have at least respected the school's policy, right or wrong, and been satisfied.
What do you think?
Did you read the email your cousin sent us yesterday? With the Youtube link on it? It was exactly about the "homosexual" agenda. All I know is that I hope that I always err on the side of love and grace, not hatred and judgment. Like Jesus said, "Let he without sin cast the first stone." I don't believe there is one single American who doesn't KNOW the beliefs of RWECs. So to reiterate those thoughts would be futile with a GLBT individual. I think, instead of trying to intellectualize people into thinking how you think we should spend more time trying to put ourselves in their shoes. it's about being marginalized for something out of your control.
Does Dobson really lump pedophilia with homosexuality? That's just mean!
I agree with our friend Brian McClaren, "unless you know 50 homosexuals personally, you aren't allowed to give your opinion about the subject." So there you have it. I don't know 50 G,L,B, or T people. Only have met about 10-20...so I guess I should work on that first:)
There is no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who has never met Chuck Norris.
Seriously though, I really wanted to comment something real about this post, but I had to share that one...come on. It's funny.
I'll comment for real later.
i think the college should have hosted them. Served them a meal & drinks, and showed them that they are not against those who differ in their sexual preferences, but rather for submitting to the Scriptures even where we don't completely understand them.
Hey Oscar. Welcome back. I wonder if there is a different/better way to love this group of people. I think that (rightly or wrongly) these folks don't view their sexuality the same way as many inside the church. If somebody is convinced that they have no choice, it would seem like a personal attack to hear that they are sinning. I'm still not sure where I stand on this issue, but many would disagree that it is sin at all.
I agree that the college CAN do anything it wants with it's property. It has been in the news. Another Christian College in our town welcomed the group, fed them, and engaged in a formal discussion sanctioned by the college. Needless to say, Soulforce was much more willing to engage in peaceful and civil discussion on the issue. Cornerstone, in my opinion, came off as arrogant and exclusive.
Jodi. Yes. Unfortunately the words "pedaphelia" and "beastiality" are often lumped in with homosexuality. I assure you this is only to try to be as slanderous as possible. I'm sure there is a word for it in the world of "logic". Anybody who seriously thinks that the 3 should be grouped has no complexities of sexuality and are ussually dismissed as lunatics.
Dan- Chuck Norris says he wants you to respond seriously or he'll break your thumbs.
Keith- Keith. Right on. You should be president at Cornerstone. I wonder if they'll let me write you in next election.
I think the only election Cornerstone believes in has to do with Calvinism
(Eccl 11:9; Jer 23:5; Rev 21:8; Jer 33:15; Mat 10:15; Mat 12:36; Mark 6:11; Romans 2:5; 2 Peter 2:9; 2 Peter 3:7; 1 John 4:17; Jude 1:6) ...so God has set a date when he will judge all the world in righteousness?
(1 Cor 6:9; Mat 15:19) ...how dare God lump sexual immorality with murder, adultery, theft, and lying. He has a standard for how we should act?
(Psalm 19:7; Psalm 37:31; Psalm 94:12; Psalm 119:39; Romans 2:15; Romans 3:19,20; Romans 5:20; Romans 7:5;7,12,16) ...hmmm, so God's Law is good and can reveal to us our sinful nature? A friend recently said to me, "keeping the law doesn't imply a legalistic outlook. it just means that we're doing our best to keep the commandments God requires of us. we know we're not saved by keeping that law, but that does not mean we shouldn't do our best to do it."
(Romans 3:21; Romans 10:4) ...so we know we're not saved by keeping the Law. Christ fulfilled the payment the Law demanded thus declaring us righteous, something we could never attain on our own.
So should we maybe do what Scripture says and use the Law to bring about the knowledge of sin so that homosexuals can see that they are damned despite their perversion, thus revealing their need for the Savior? Or should we all sit down with a plate of brownies listening to Elton John sing Kumbaya (only without "Lord" in it, we wouldn't want to offend anyone) that way people will see how affectionate Christians really are and how swell Jesus is and they'll want to be like us. Or maybe we should wait until we fill McClaren's criteria for being allowed to make a judgment call about someone's immoral actions; while he's out waiting for the 50 homosexual buddies he needs to cross of his list, we can follow in Jesus footsteps to reach the thousands that will die in the mean time.
Oscar- Did I write something that was personally offensive to you? Maybe I'm not reading your tone correctly, but the sarcasm is rude bro. I don't mind discussing this issue with you (and can probably appreciate more fully where you're at), but it doesn't seem like you want a dialogue.
If your purpose in coming here is to change my mind, then your motives are all wrong. My mind may indeed be changed and influenced by you, but i'm not interested in an online "Oscar's Theology 101". No offense.
Maybe you feel like I have tried to do the same thing to you? Have I told you how you need to think or believe? I've questioned some of your thoughts but understand that you have thought through issues just like I have. If we, as Christians, can't discuss these issues civily, then how do we expect to engage the rest of the world on such topics?
Man, I just re-read your comments. They seem to attack Jodi and her ideas directly. Don't do that. It's mean (not to mention, I think you're dead wrong about your approach in loving other people) and I don't like it. But take a deep breath and count to 10 next time you comment on here and think about how you're coming accross.
But I do like Elton John, and brownies. But will pass on the Kumbaya.
For some reason I think Jesus would be more likely to sit around the fire eating brownies and singing kumbaya with some homosexuals than telling them they were going to Hell.
Jesus reserved most of his most condemning words for pharisees - but how did he treat sinners? He ate with them, he called them to follow him, he loved them.
I'm not saying we throw all witnessing out the door, but the idea of scaring people into Heaven through the fear of Hell just doesn't sit well with me.
When Jesus preached this way he was speaking to the Jews who just didn't get that he was the Messiah but thought they were close to God because of their heritage. Even then he didn't neccesarily say, "Hey, you're going to burn if you don't _________" He warned them they'd be cut off, but he did so when they were acting like the arrogant, self-righteous hypocrites they were.
Jesus treated sinners completely differently.
Thanks Christian, I didn't take it as a personal attack, if he did mean it that way, oh well. I'm turning over a new leaf with this topic, blog, and the conversations within it. I'm no longer going to waste my time getting all angry, even though I may feel justified in feeling so, I'm going to embrace my new mantra..."Relax, have a home brew". Or "The Dude abides, man. The Dude abides."
Peace.
Hey Wayne. What happened to your comment? All that work and then it's gone. I've been chewing on it all day and hoping to respond. What a downer.
Steve- I agree with your post. Again, I don't know if I would go as far as to call them "sinners" for being homosexual, but maybe you are saying, "If you are assuming that homosexuals are sinners, then...".
I just think that if we view homosexuals as "sinners", which we all are, then we may as well forget about ever speaking or relating to these potential friends. This is the problem with modern day evangelism. It starts with "sin" and progresses (or digresses) from there.
Jodi- The Dude does in fact, Abide. Sometimes you eat the bear and sometimes it eats you.
I would love to relax and have a homebrew with you. I'll bet even my homebrew will taste good after 10 months of abstaining.
Christian,
I am sorry to let you down. After I slept on it, I thought that my comment was too polemic so I deleted it.
Blessings,
Wayne
Christian,
You're right, I was speaking from the assumption that homosexuality is a sin, and not all Christians agree on that. You're also right that we are all sinners.
Look at it this way. Jesus, who was perfect, chose to embrace those that society in general viewed as outcasts because of their "sins." If you really dive into these stories, you find that the "sinners" Jesus hung out with tended to repent of their sins and seek forgiveness when Jesus was around.
So by the definition of most evangelicals, were these people born again? Were they sinners turned saints? It sure seems like it, and yet to the Pharisees and religious leaders they were still sinners.
It seems like Christians today tend to lump all homosexuals into a special "sinners" category. We treat homosexuality like it's the real problem, and once they take care of that then they can get saved and start dealing with other issues. I've heard Christians say before that homosexuals can't be saved because they commit a "lifestyle sin."
But why should homosexuality (if you view it as a sin) define who you are, but lying or having lustful thoughts about someone of the opposite sex shouldn't? So homosexuality is a "lifestyle sin" but being an arrogant jerk isn't?
I think it's time that Chritians (who view homosexuality as a sin) stop treating homosexuality different than other sins.
-Steve
P.S. Thanks, Christian, for making me type all those freakin' asides!
Good comments steve. I haven't researched this topic a ton and wish Wayne would comment some more about it. Wayne, maybe you could post some of your papers or some sections of them pertaining to the issue.
Steve- again, I think you're right on, but you're starting to sound like a Calvinist. If we view sin as an individual moment in time, we miss the actual impact of our nature and the complexity of the human brain and the butterfly affect that leads to each moment in time. I'm soooo smart. I know you guys are going to have to wiki "butterfly affect".
steve said: "I think it's time that Chritians stop treating homosexuality different than other sins."
Perfectly said steve... this sums up exactly what I was saying.
evangelismteam.com has a good tract about homosexuality that expresses this idea. The tract really isn't about homosexuals, it just uses that as bait then as someone reads it they are confronted with God's Holy Law(in this tract lying,stealing, blasphemy), then are presented with the reality of judgment day, and then gives them the gospel of grace telling them how much God loves them.
This isn't hell-fire preaching, we don't want to scare people into making a decision, we're just warning people what the Bible says. If a person becomes fearful after they realize they have an appointment with God and that He will judge them in righteousness (Matt 12:36) that's a good thing, it shows they are taking it seriously. Ravi Zacharias said, "A healthy fear of God never hurt anybody." Deuteronomy 5:29 "Oh, that their hearts would be inclined to fear me and keep all my commands always, so that it might go well with them and their children forever!"
A person is better off if they make an informed decision based on truth than a hasty decision based on emotion.
Look at Matthew 19:16-30 When the rich man says "what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?" Jesus didn't say "quick pray this prayer", or waiting around until this guy was impressed at His generosity to the poor, and he didn't say "you're evil, you're going to burn in hell unless you repent" No, that would be ridiculous and unbiblical, besides the rich man had knowledge of heaven and hell.
Jesus gave him the ten commandments and pointed out to the rich man that his god was his money.
Christian I'm sorry you find scripture to be so offensive. And I apologize if I have offended you Jodi that was not my intent.
Oscar- Your scripture didn't offend me. Take a careful re-read of your comment. I have never argued that parts of scripture shouldn't be in the Bible. You say things that make you look like an ass. This is what I have a problem with. Grow up and we can discuss issues. If not, don't feel the need to return to my blog. I am all for open debate and discussion, but if you make offensive comments to me or others on the blog, then you are not welcome. Many here have thought through these issues at least as much as you.
Christian - if you really wanted to sound smart you would have said "Chaos Theory" instead of "Butterfly Affect."
BooYah!
Hey Christian, what if soulforce didn't want a forum to dialouge? What if they wanted open access to all buildings including dorms, classromms and any other building? How could that promote a productive dialouge? Also, how do you know that the homosexual agenda is exactly what wikkapedia says it is. Since wikkapedia is editable by anyone you could be getting severly biased opinions.
Just some food for thought
Aaron Wells
Try not to read into things.
I'll leave if it makes you happy though. How's that for intolerance?
If I sounded a little heated I guess it was because Jodi's first comment included a quote from a false teacher(I'm definitely not fired up at Jodi or think she is a bad person; or that even McClaren is a bad person, well maybe, but I do question his beliefs)
But before I leave I wanted to get this out to anyone who reads this... it's an important message, so copy, paste and enjoy:
http://wayofthemasterradio.com/
listenwatch/
ToddFriel_Sermon-Bethel_TX.mp3
oh, and I hope you take the time to compare the audio to scripture, you'll find it's much more biblically accurate than the psycho babble you'll find here: http://www.understandthetimes.org/
mclarentrans.shtml
faithfully yours,
Oscar
Oscar- I'm actually amazed that you may think that I'd take the time to read your link. When I was a young fundamentalist, I really tried to take every opp. to "witness" to all those I encountered. But, if I said something stupid or offended anybody, I'd either back off or just try to learn from my mistake.
Your pattern has been to make inflammatory remarks, hijack conversation and then leave a bunch of scripture and think everything is good. I can disagree with my friends and even handle nonsense from them, but you and I have had a rocky "marriage". I am not ready to hear which "false teachers" are leading me astray, and am certainly not ready to accept your kooky web-sites. Study up on relational evangelism and come back to fix me. Until then, I just can't bear to watch you do this on my blog anymore.
Aaron- Welcome. I just deleted my response so I'll try to recap it. "what if soulforce didn't want a forum to dialouge? What if they wanted open access to all buildings including dorms, classromms and any other building? How could that promote a productive dialouge?"
Calvin didn't have a problem. Seems like welcoming these folks would have been a better route. If I was president, I would have given them a place to stay and meal tickets. Maybe I would have even offered them my swanky president housing. Boy the rumors would have been flying around then. It would have been the end of the Baptist denom. "Cornerstone President Sleeps with Soulf Force Members". Scandalous.
"Also, how do you know that the homosexual agenda is exactly what wikkapedia says it is. Since wikkapedia is editable by anyone you could be getting severly biased opinions".
I thought the wiki definition was pretty conservative. Do you have a different definition you'd like to go by? I don't really buy the "homosexual agenda" in the first place. I was just trying to point out what many who believe what the gays are "conspiring" about. Maybe a better definition of this "agenda" would be that LGBT people would just like to be treated like everybody else. Wait... that's my agenda. I need to go wiki the "Baron Agenda".
beware, hijacking in progress...
"I am not ready to hear which "false teachers" are leading me astray"
I know you're not. But that's not what I was saying, please don't apply your eisegesis to my statements (talk about hijacking).
"We do not need to apologize for the priesthood of all believers, we do not need to turn aside because people accuse us of being unloving. It is the zenith of Christian love to tell people the truth when they are on their way to hell, and if you won't do it, if you won't tell them the truth get out of the way of the people that want to because that's the name of the game: SALVATION. And if Jesus Christ is not Lord of all, if He is not God the Son, second person of the Trinity, if His blood is not complete atonement for sin, and His resurrection the seal of justification, if He did not tell the truth AWAY WITH HIM! If He could not save Himself, He cannot save us, but if He is who He said He was, and if He rose from the dead immortal after the power of indissoluble life, then He is to be BELIEVED, and He is to be OBEYED, and those that pervert what He says are to be held up publically so that the world may know 'this is not of God'. That's Christian theology, if the Church is to survive she must put on the whole armor of God and stand against this stuff, resist it and it will flee from us." -Walter Martin
you said: "I'm actually amazed that you may think that I'd take the time to read your link."
I'm actually amazed that you wouldn't. You claimed before to be so open and tolerant of other people's ideas. I know it's the EC way to be tolerant of everyone, EXCEPT fundamental Christians, but yeah I was hoping you'd take the time to listen to that audio message because it applies to the original subject of this post. The Todd Friel audio message applies to us all but it wasn't my intent to "save you" by posting it. The second link posted is just a poke in the ribs of McClaren, it's really just too easy to see the false teachings in his answers, I won't even insult your intelligence pointing them out.
and congratulations on the new little one mate
God bless
Oscar- I know where you're at on these issues. I don't want to read or listen to Todd Friel. My point about not wanting to link to your suggested listening has more to do with how you have interacted on here than even what you have to say (or what Todd Friel has to say). If I went to a Fundamentalists blog and just started phishing for discussion to try to change everybody,s minds, I'd look like a total prick. And nobody would even think about what I had to say. They would dismiss me as an enemy combatant. This is my point about your phishing techniques here. You didn't come with an olive branch. You came with a sword-- the Word of God to chop us (me) into bits and then let God sort it out. This doesn't work. It never actually worked. The gospel is not something to be used to win people. It is a way of living. It smells sweet. But now we're talking past one another again (this time me). s far as the EC is concerned, I'm not sure if you mean Emergent, or the Episcopal Church, but either way, the demon you've created in your mind doesn't allow you to see any good in it. Once you see that there is good in all branches of the faith, you will begin to engage in real dialogue. Otherwise, the star bellied sneetches can sit on their beaches and have their weenie roasts without me.
yeah, too bad no one can leave Oscar comments on his blog. Again, Oscar, you didn't offend me, but thanks for the apologies. I hope the next blog you join in on you take some of our advice and approach strangers with honey vs. vinegar.
Peace
Be sure that you search for what is true, not just for something that you already believe. Make sure you have evidence to prove you're taking a calculated leap of faith.
faithfully yours,
Oscar
p.s. Jodi I'm working on the comments on my blog, I've written the tech guys but the comments option still doesn't appear.
Great advice Oscar. Because of our relationship and how much I trust you. I'll do exactly that. Where should I start? I'm anxious to learn more of this incredible journey you're on.
hey that's great. First read up on a great man called Naaman who in 2 Kings was healed of a skin disease. While being a very true story it's also an allegory for the gospel, primarily talking about HUMBLING oneself.
Then start doing some research on the Emergent Church. I have some posts and links on my blog that might be a good start and while I don't expect you to take anything at face value, anything less than a thorough comparison of the information against the authority of Scripture would be foolish. Also I mailed some stuff for you to read and watch. I hope you received it. Anyway it wasn't an effort to conform you but so you could study up, because you really can't go around condemning other people's claims until you've done the research to know if what they state is actually true or not. Also read your Bible everyday and apply the correct form of hermeneutics (normal hermeneutics=correct; neo-orthodox hermeneutics=very, very wrong)
all the best mate,
Until the nets are full,
Oscar
Oscar- When did you post this. Sorry I missed your valuable advice until now.
I don't think I got your reading materials. I assure you though, I only read books by the most liberal and heretical authors. In fact, I have come to the understanding that the Emergent Church is the only true church and that anybody who doesn't read McLaren is not part of the Church. Here's praying that you pony up the $20 bucks and buy one of his books. I want you to "go around condemning other people's claims until you've done the research to know if what they state is actually true or not". I'd be willing to bet I've done a lot more research than you on the matter. but who knows? Maybe I'll pay an eternal price of fire and torture for reading McLaren. I hope not. I feel very sarcastic today.
Post a Comment