Tag Archives: homosexuality

A simple test for sanity, courtesy of the Boy Scouts

Even a flaming Liberal should see that it just might be a bad idea to knowingly let homosexual men spend unsupervised time, including overnight camping trips, with boys.  If your legal counsel tells you otherwise you should fire them and hire someone who is competent.  Just consider how an institution like Penn State will lose many tens of millions of dollars and perhaps their entire football program over the actions of one man.

Just consider this parallel: Would you think it wise to let heterosexual men have the same kind of interaction with young girls?  Would it be hateful to oppose that?

So kudos to the Boy Scouts for doing the obvious thing (though there would be nothing wrong and everything right about them making proactive inquiries).  Via Boy Scouts Reaffirm Ban On Open Gays; Call It ‘Absolutely The Best Policy’:

While the BSA does not proactively inquire about the sexual orientation of employees, volunteers, or members, we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals or who engage in behavior that would become a distraction to the mission of the BSA.

Yet here we are, where most of the commenters at that NPR link thought the Boy Scouts were doing something evil.

The good news about the extreme depravity we find ourselves in is that people have no excuses for not being able to spot wolves in sheep’s clothing.  In fact, the wolves got warm and took off the sheep’s clothing a long time ago.  Consider the UCC/UMC false teaching “Reverend” Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie, who took a break from taking little girls to gay pride parades to bash the Boy Scouts:

Discrimination against people who are gay and lesbian is contrary to the Greatest Commandment.

The greatest commandment is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength.  The god of Currie & Co. is obviously Satan, the god of this world, so I’ll concede that he does obey that command.  And don’t you love sermons by “reverends” who take 6 yr. old girls to gay pride parades?  Oddly, Chuck & Co. and their mainstream media accomplices forgot to tell you about another gay rights leader who was busted for child porn.

But for Christians who love the real God, we would seek to obey his commands and to protect the weak.

Few would question the overall value of the Boy Scout program.  But if the Boy Scouts are going to maintain that discrimination is a morally valid practice it is time for our churches to determine if the mission of the Boy Scouts is still compatiable with the mission of our churches.

Again, there is a grain of truth there.  Their “churches” have an entirely different mission than the real church.

Praise God that He has made the fakes so easy to spot!  Again, even a LGBTQ lawyer should applaud the Scouts for their decision.

Because of their idolatry, God gave them up to . . . square dancing?!

Well, not exactly.

Romans 1 has a tightly written explanation of why homosexual behavior is an example of rebellion against God’s created order.

Romans 1:26-28 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

I am very familiar with the objections and counter-arguments about Romans 1 and have written about them in Romans 1 and natural functions and Romans 1 and temple prostitutes.

But I was re-reading the False Teacher Profile post and something struck me that I hadn’t noticed before.  Uber-commenter Bubba made the following observation about the pro-gay theology views of the false teacher in question (bold added):

Paul is also quite clear in Romans 1: because of man’s idolatry, God gave up the unrighteous to impurity (1:24), to dishonorable passions (1:26), and to a debased mind (1:28), leading to all manner of evil, including envy, murder, and slander. Even if one were to put a heavy emphasis on the fact that this consequence of homosexual behavior was in the context of idolatry, it’s still impossible to conclude that homosexual behavior is biblically permissible.

AFTER ALL, God wouldn’t “hand over” an idolator to behavior that is good or even morally neutral. “They were idolators, and so God gave them over to prayer and almsgiving” DOES NOT WORK as a logical progression, nor does the idea that they were idolators, and so God would give them over to morally neutral behavior like square dancing and poetry readings.

No matter how you try to spin it, God was punishing their idolatry with something negative.  No matter what completes the “God gave them up to ____” passage, it is, by definition, a negative thing.  So those who claim that the “real” sin is idolatry are missing the point.

As Bubba noted, God didn’t “give them over” to square dancing or some benign thing, He gave them over to homosexual behavior.

Yes, idolatry is a sin that we all have to fight, and there is a laundry list of sins at the end of Romans 1 that we can be tempted by.  We shouldn’t grandstand on the sin of homosexuality just because it isn’t a temptation for us.  But neither should we lie and say it isn’t sinful.  And when the world and false teachers are trying to force us to change our religious beliefs on this topic, we need to defend the truth.  They brought up the topic, not us.

God “gave up” the false teachers as well, as their idolatry leads them to sit in judgment of God and to give approval to those who practice homosexual behavior and other sins.

Despite what the media, government and countless false churches will tell you, homosexual behavior is still a sin.  It is a forgivable sin, and one that people can be rescued from, but it is still a sin.  If you can’t bring yourself to say that then Christianity may not be for you.

Roundup

Will this be enough for the climate lobby?  Doubtful.  Too much money and power is at stake.

Is this finally proof we’re NOT causing global warming? The whole of the Earth heated up in medieval times without human CO2 emissions, says new study

  • Evidence was found in a rare mineral that records global temperatures
  • Warming was global and NOT limited to Europe
  • Throws doubt on orthodoxies around ‘global warming’

And please don’t be taken in by the “earth hour” silliness.

Earth Hour – it’s the best thing since sliced bread

Earth Hour is yet another way for the disconnected, self-absorbed masses to pretend they’re involved in an issue.

I have written previously on this issue (oddly, that was also a March 31st) and in that discussion observed that the likely cost to the environment to produce candles, t-shirts and all other manner of supporters’ paraphernalia was far in excess of the gains achieved by turning off a couple of light bulbs (but not the TV – how else will they know what everyone else is doing?).

—–

Jimmy Carter’s new study Bible is a train wreck of bad theology.  See Glenn’s analysis here.  A sample, which includes the fallacious argument from silence:

Huffington Post:  A lot of people point to the Bible for reasons why gay people should not be in the church, or accepted in any way.

Carter:  Homosexuality was well known in the ancient world, well before Christ was born and Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. In all of his teachings about multiple things -– he never said that gay people should be condemned. I personally think it is very fine for gay people to be married in civil ceremonies.  … if a local Baptist church wants to accept gay members on an equal basis, which my church does by the way, then that is fine.
My comment:  Jesus also didn’t mention child abuse, pedophilia, wife beating, bestiality, etc, so I guess he was okay with those?  Christ, being God, had plenty so say about homosexuality in the O.T. and soundly condemned it.  (Notice the behavior is condemned rather than an “orientation.”).  While Christ did indeed address marriage, referring back to Adam and Eve as what marriage was, Carter sanctions same-sex unions, as does his church.

But I will give Jimmy credit for sort of challenging Democrats on abortion.

—–

Trayvon Martin’s death is still a tragedy, and it is still tragic that the media ghouls and fake Christians are using his death to advance their agenda.  If Zimmerman broke the law he should be held accountable.

Quick questions: Does your media describe Zimmerman as an Hispanic Democratic?  Would they have forgotten to mention his party affiliation if it was Republican?  Do they mention his real school record, his Twitter account activity, show more recent pictures of him and show how the media has doctored his hoodie picture?  If so, you should branch out with your media consumption.

And judging without evidence sure worked well for the Duke Lacrosse players, eh?  Read Ann Coulter’s piece for a good perspective.

—–

A good summary of perspectives on the problem of evil.  All philosophies have to address it somehow.  Christianity has the best explanations.

—–

Have conservatives really lost their faith in science, as was recently reported?  Not at all.  We just exercise appropriate skepticism and discernment, especially in two sub-sets of the dozens of branches of science (Darwinism and global climate change).  And we do that with good reasons.  Those two are driven by power, money and materialistic philosophy instead of science .

Actually, almost no one loses their faith in science when it is evidence-based and useful. Who turns down cancer treatments that work?

Rather, people lose their faith in “anything can be true in our multiverse,” “apes think like humans,” “the aliens have just gotta be out there,” “a giant heat wave is engulfing the planet,” “random sorts can produce highly specialized information,” and “my theory explains the origin of life” because – quite honestly – this stuff is not science.

It’s too bad if only identified “conservatives” doubt all the dubious propositions out there. The rest of the crowd will catch up after a while, though. They can’t afford not to.

—–

No wonder many black people don’t like Darwin’s theory

—–

Obama promises Planned Parenthood that he’ll never stop fighting for their choice to kill unwanted human beings.

 

It isn’t just about love and hate, but about truth and lies and right and wrong

The Left reflexively plays the hate card when dealing with LGBTQ issues.  Sadly, too many  Bible-believing people fall prey to the trick and it silences them.  But it isn’t just about love and hate, but about truth and lies and right and wrong.

Consider these four possibilities:

1. You believe homosexual behavior is a sin and you share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.
2. You believe homosexual behavior is a sin and you do not share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.
3. You believe homosexual behavior is a not a sin and you share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.
4. You believe homosexual behavior is not a sin and you do not share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.

Before you can talk of love and hate, you’d need to understand right and wrong — or at least the perception of it by those in question.

Options 1 and 3 would be be acting in love (defined in the sense of having people’s long-term best interests at heart and not in the worldly sense of pampering people). Options 2 and 4 would be acting out of hate, or at least selfishness or indifference.

So it if you think homosexual behavior is a sin and don’t speak the truth, then you are acting hatefully — even if you were wrong in assessing the Bible (which you wouldn’t be).

The Bible couldn’t be more clear.  Even non-Christians and two out of the three types of pro-gay theologians can see these truths:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

So even in some bizarre hypothetical where the Bible actually supported homosexual behavior and Leviticus, Romans, all the verses on parenting and marriage, etc. stated the opposite of what they do, it wouldn’t be hateful to describe LGBTQ behavior as sinful. It would only be hate if someone “knew” the Bible said homosexual behavior was acceptable and taught otherwise.

In the same way, it is loving to remove false teachers from the church when they are advancing falsehoods with pro-gay theology.  It is a virtue to protect people.

And it would be un-loving to reject people just because they struggle with a sin that isn’t a temptation for you.  If people recognize that homosexual behavior is a sin and aren’t teaching the opposite, they should be welcomed in church. You should be willing to pray for them and be friends with them.

The hate card assumes motives and judges the hearts of others.  In some cases it is probably accurate to define people as haters, such as with Democrat Fred Phelps and his “church.”  But it is a cheap trick to use it against everyone you disagree with — and especially right after all your other arguments have been exposed as faulty.

The real haters are those that know what the Bible really says yet value their own popularity over the physical, emotional and spiritual health of others. They would rather be politically correct than tell you the truth. That’s love of self, not love of others.

The truth sounds like hate to those that hate the truth.

Also see Responding to Pro-Gay Theology.

Responding to a common pro-gay theology argument

My post asking if the Bible was unclear on homosexuality brought this somewhat predictable comment. It never made reference to the Bible, it just repeated all sorts of un-biblical fallacies.  Sadly, this is no straw man comment.  Lots of people claiming the name of Christ repeat these arguments.

quite a few of my friends are gay. I am not. But knowing them, i know with all my heart they were born – created – gay. It is not something they chose to be.

I’ve had a lot of gay friends as well.  I don’t get in their face about it any more than I do that with the sins of heterosexual friends.  But I also don’t teach that any sins of my friends are acceptable to God.

You “know” that with your “heart?”  Emotions are nice, but not a good way to make decisions.  Please consider Paul’s prayer in Philippians 1:9-11 —  And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.

Please note how he links love with knowledge and discernment.

I encourage you to read some research on the causes of homosexuality.  It is not genetic.

And even if they were “born that way,” it is a biblical concept that we are born with a sinful nature.  We don’t get an “ought” from an “is.”  Sadly, I’ve been really effective at coveting, pride and selfishness since I was little, but I don’t get a pass on those sins because I was “born that way.”

God is LOVE. God loves all of us. How could He not love people HE created gay?

I mean this in a most serious and kind way: How much of the Bible have you studied?  Do you not see how you could apply that to any sin?  Do you not see how seriously God treats sin?  My #1 recommendation to anyone debating any topic on Christianity is to read the Bible more.

God wants US to love one another. Treat one another with love and acceptance.

That argument assumes that homosexuality isn’t sinful, but it doesn’t explain why we should hold that view.  Can you show me in the Bible where we are taught to accept any sin?  How about 1 Corinthians 5?

I do not believe it is the right of any of us to judge any other person – only God.

But aren’t you judging me and others who hold the view that homosexual behavior is a sin (along with many other behaviors)?

I do not believe it’s about whether their behaviour is sinful or not. Who of us is without sin?

But it is about whether the behavior is sinful.  That’s the point of the discussion, and you’ve already claimed it isn’t sinful. But the burden of proof is on you to reason your case from the Bible.

The fact that we are all sinners doesn’t mean that we would encourage people to remain in sin.

The really Christian thing to do is love your neighbour. I love my gay friends, and they are beautiful and in some cases deeply Christian – more Christian than many so called Christians who have rejected them for their sexuality.

Your love for your friends isn’t the Biblical love of having their long-term best interests at heart.  If anyone teaches the opposite of the Bible then I don’t think it is correct to describe them as “deeply Christian.”

We don’t reject them for their sexuality, we love them enough to speak the truth.  I urge you to read the Bible thoroughly and reconsider your views.

Is the Bible unclear on homosexuality?

Some false teachers act as if it is a toss-up, offering self-refuting falsely humble lines about how both sides are just expressing an opinion and that we can’t be sure, and that it is bad to have certainly about your position.  But does the mere existence of multiple viewpoints mean the case isn’t clear?

What is interesting is that of the three types of pro-gay theology — all of which are wrong — only one claims that we are misunderstanding the text. The other two concede what authentic Christians and even most atheists and other non-believers know, namely that it clearly defines homosexual behavior as sinful.

Type 1: The Bible is either not the Word of God, or most parts of it aren’t. This view claims that we can ignore the prohibitions against homosexual behavior because they were written by homophobic Jews.

Type 2: The Bible is the Word of God, but it doesn’t really say homosexual behavior is wrong. This view holds that people just aren’t reading the Bible properly, and that God’s Word is actually affirming of gay relationships.

Type 3: The Bible is the Word of God and does clearly and emphatically describe gay behavior as sinful. However, the Holy Spirit has given additional revelations such that this behavior is now acceptable. This view holds that God has changed his mind on this moral issue and not only is it now acceptable, but it is sinful if you don’t affirm this behavior and same-sex relationships.

I don’t know the precise percentages of people in each group. Sometimes they shift between categories in a contradictory attempt to make their case.  In my experience the first group is the largest, the second is next and then the third.  No matter how you slice it, two of the types concede what the Bible really says.

Then add to that how most atheists agree that the Bible says that homosexual behavior is sinful.  I realize they don’t have the gift of the Holy Spirit, but many things are plain from the text.

So you have all the Bible-believing Christians plus two out of three types of pro-gay theologians plus most atheists all agreeing that the Bible says that homosexual behavior is a sin.  Should you listen to them or to the pro-gay theology subset that insists that Jews misunderstood the issue for 2,000 years and then the Christians for another 2,000 years, only to have a subset of Western Christianity discover the “truth” a couple decades ago?

The Bible is very, very clear.  Don’t be fooled into thinking it isn’t.

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

See Responding to Pro-Gay Theology for concise yet thorough replies to the common objections to the text.

Aside from the Bible, consider how atheist countries like the former U.S.S.R., China, etc. all consider marriage to be between one man and one woman and hold that homosexual behavior is wrong.  Then add in the Buddhists, Hindus and especially the Muslims.  Good luck dismissing them for their “Christian” beliefs on marriage.

Evidence against the “you won’t be affected by ‘same-sex marriage'” lie

One of the pro-LGBTQ arguments swallowed by too many people in the center — and especially by those claiming the name of Christ — is that oxymoronic “same-sex marriage” (SSM) won’t impact them.  That is a lie.  Via Evidence of homofascism | Reason To Stand, where you can see many of the things already carried out by the Gaystap / GayGB.  View the link to see the entire list.  And note that these things have happened while most states have voted against SSM.  It will only get worse.  Religious freedoms will inevitably erode further, because they will make real Christians enemies of the state.

As part of my answer I mentioned the oppression of natural marriage proponents by homosexuals and was subsequently asked to provide evidence to substantiate my claim.

Here is my answer.

The issue is how, in the quest for normalization/affirmation, “gay rights” will result in oppressive laws/regimes like the Human/Homosexual Rights Commission of Canada.

Redefining marriage will certainly affect how everyone thinks about marriage and statistical data shows that in countries where marriage has been redefined to mean nothing more than two people posessing strong feelings for one another, the number of people who get married and stay married are dismal at best.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/660zypwj.asp

Of course the redefinition of marriage is not the only cause behind the decline of the institution of marriage, it was already sick as evidenced by the prominance of sexual promiscuity and high divorce rates. But redefining marriage in an attempt to divorce it from its biological moorings is like adding a new sickness on already diseased animal.

As for the oppression that forced normalization/acceptance of homosexuality brings, I submit the following list as examples of what is becoming known as “homo-fascism”, a term I find quite apt and not the least bit ironic.

Please note as well that these are actual cases that have already happened, this is not a “slippery slope” hypothetical scenario. The politically corerect ship of homosexual persecution has already sailed.

Couple faces legal action for refusing to rent a room to a homosexual couple http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259646/Gay-couple-turned-away-guest-house-owner-let-share-bed.html

Couple lose ability to provide foster care for refusing to affirm homosexuality http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/feb/28/christian-couple-lose-care-case Bonus: The courts official ruling is that their religious beliefs are trumped by gay rights (the right not to be offended?) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1361469/Christian-beliefs-DO-lose-gay-rights-Judges-ruling-devout-foster-couple-lose-case.html

Prop 8 supporters harassed http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/prop._8_supporters_suffer_harassment_assaults_from_homosexual_activists/

Counseling student prevented from graduating and ordered to receive mandatory sensitivity training http://emhardegree.hubpages.com/hub/Christian-Counseling-Student-Sues-School-for-Forcing-Gay-Sensitivity-Training

Schoolboy suspended merely for disagreeing with homosexuality (Cant have this sort of bullying going on now can we?) http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/09/22/texas-school-punishes-boy-for-opposing-homosexuality/

Paypal refuses to process donations to groups that don’t affirm homosexuality http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/paypal-launches-investigation-of-pro-family-groups-following-homosexual-com/