Posts
You've probably heard it before. It's one of the pettiest arguments on the internet and it says God Hates Shrimp. The gay rights advocates dumb down the Bible again, like Eve in the Garden of Eden. As you may recall, she said "God said" touching the forbidden fruit would kill you. She was hoping the fruit would bring her wisdom she obviously lacked.
So what about the seafood buffet a-la-lipitor?
According to the Old Testament of the Bible, these are the offenses which may have merited the death penalty for those living under the Jewish covenant and the Mosaic law.
Murder (Exodus 21:12, Exodus 21:15)
Kidnapping (Exodus 21:16)
Disobedience to parents (Exodus 21:17, Deuteronomy 21:18)
Juvenile delinquency - incorrigibility (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
Bestiality (Leviticus 20:15)
Violations of the Sabbath (Exodus 31:15)
Adultery (Leviticus 20:10)
Abominations (Leviticus 20:2)
Blasphemy (Leviticus 24:16)
Incest (Leviticus 20:11)
Homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13)
Witchcraft (Exodus 22:18, Leviticus 20:27)
False prophecy (Deuteronomy 13:5)
Worshipping a false god (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)
Sacrificing to false gods (Exodus 22:20)
Sodomy (Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13)
Sex with a woman betrothed to another (Deuteronomy 22:25)
False witness in a capital crime (Deuteronomy 19:16-20)
Fornication by daughters of priests (Leviticus 21:9)
Failure to abide by a decision of the High Court (Deuteronomy 17:12)
Unchastity (Deuteronomy 22:21-24)
Cursing someone (Leviticus 24:14)
Negligence resulting in death (Exodus 21:29)
I'm sorry, but shrimp, crab, lobster, clams, and mussels are NOT on this menu.
Neither did mixed fabrics make the list of capital offenses.
Looking over the list again -- these things look pretty bad, and same-sex sex is on the list.
God hasn't changed His mind about these things either.
In Leviticus the God of the Bible said certain meats weren't fit to eat. His people could still eat food though.
http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/
And doctors warn their high-cholesterol patients to avoid shrimp, lobster, pork, and shellfish. That doesn't make doctors the bad guys does it? But then, gays won't listen to health professionals about AIDS either.
I kind of hate ignorance, myself.
Comments
Q: "One question, just for the record, the last time your child disobeyed you in any way, did you in fact kill them in accordance with Scripture?"
A: No, I did not fulfill your idea of the Mosaic law by violating two more commandments of the same law -- the commandment of due process (Deut 17:12) which gives the court the authority I don't have to execute someone, and the commandment against murder (Ex 21:12). Taking matters of the law into my own hands also violates the New Testament commandment that Jesus gave us -- which is to love and to forgive. A loving parent would not kill their own child. Jesus said that loving other people the way God intended it, fulfils ALL of God's laws, hence by default, homosexuality is not an appropriate form of Christian love, just like the other capital offenses on the list.
Jesus DID NOT command us to love sin, however, and I see no good thing in the list of capital offenses presented here. Do you?
Q: JB said...
"(The Jewish attitude towards Torah laws is that if G-d had wanted to be more specific, she would have been; therefore, where G-d doesn't say how something is to be done, the sages got to decide.)"
A: The Jewish attitude toward God has never been in the feminine gender. Consider that God created man first in "His" own image as stated in Genesis, then from man God created woman as a complement to man, to be equal in all respects. Consider that Jesus was born a male child. Also consider that Jesus will marry His bride "The Church" as mentioned in the book of Revelation. Jesus will not be marrying another Jesus.
Q:Dieppe said...
The irony of it all is that the Laws in Leviticus (well the Torah and Talmud) are Jewish Civil Law. As such, beyond the "10 Commandments", these "Laws" really don't apply to Gentiles. Even Gentiles of a Christian faith.
A: This really boils down (no pun intended) to two issues: 1) What is moral conduct? 2) What is the eternal penalty for doing wrong? Shrimp and mixed fabrics (dietary and dress code violations) received little if any penalty whatsoever, yet murder(a moral code violation) received the death sentence -- an eternal consequence. Even under the Mosaic laws it would be reasonable for a starving person to eat unclean food or a naked person to wear mixed fabrics if there was nothing else to wear. However, I see no reasonable excuse for any of the capital offenses presented on the list. I personally see no good thing on the list. You tell me which ones God changed His mind about.
For example: Did God think Jews deserved an eternal punishment for murder, whereas it was acceptable conduct for gentiles? Ask the same question for all the other items on the list: Was infant sacrifice wrong for jews but ok for gentiles (Lev 20:2)? How about bestiality? Kidnapping? Gay sex? Adultery? Negligence resulting in wrongful death?
Q: I believe that "God Hates Shrimp" is trying to show the ridiculousness of applying ancient law to modern life. Do it if it makes you happy, but stop trying to apply it to everyone else who don't believe the way you do.
A: I've pointed out what the "Bible says" about this issue, and it does not agree with your disrespectful view of the Bible. This blog is here to present the scriptures truthfully and in love. It appears that the "God Hates Shrimp" web site pulled a few verses out of context at the expense of the rest of the Bible, and twisted those verses unsuccessfully to justify their views about gay marriage. This seems to be a rather common ploy by gay-advocates, and apparently it is the only way they can argue against the scriptures -- making Eve's mistake -- allowing a serpent to dumb up God's word for her and then re-inventing the scriptures to justify herself.
Q: Ryland said...
I'm not sure I understand your reasoning. If something doesn't merit a death penalty, it's OK? It says in Leviticus that it's an abomination to eat shellfish, and in Deuteronomy it says it's unclean. Is that not a prohibition against eating shrimp? Or are they just, you know, letting you know? "You can go ahead and eat shrimp, but FYI, it's an abomination"?
A: We know shrimp, lobster, and shellfish contain cholesterol which can be a root cause for heart attack and stroke -- so, no it's not necessarily "OK." These probably aren't the healthiest foods, and God wanted only the best for His people. According to the Bible, the foods restricted by Jewish dietary code are now cleansed for human consumption (ref Acts 10: 10-16). On the other hand, gay sex continues to be unclean moral conduct as reiterated in the New Testament of the Bible.
Q: songofsongs said...
This is what Paul meant about 'the wages of sin is death'. The Lord revealed to me some months ago, that there were two types of penaties to the Mosaic Laws: death penalty which required death by stoning and the sin offering such as the grain, meat, oil and wine offering which is self explanatory. Your articule "About God Hating Shrimp" is spot on.
A: Thanks song of songs. Here's a point I made on another forum, along the lines of your thought process:
"In the day of God's final judgment explained in the Bible, can you imagine what it is going to be like for a righteous, fair, and just God in that day? This is a God that is no respector of persons and treats all men equally in judgment.
To the OT Jew that was stoned to death for having gay sex, God tells him to depart to an eternal burning hell, and gives him all the penalties for breaking His commandments. To the New Testament gentile God says well-done thy good and faithful servant for living the gay lifestyle the way I created you.
Does this sound like a righteous, fair, impartial, and just God to you?"
Q: The boy with the green tambourine said...
No. Nor does the God who ordered the massacre of the Amalekites. Or the one who killed the Egyptian firstborn. Or the one who slaughtered forty children. Or the one who required Jeptha to perform human sacrifice, and Abraham and Isaac to go through a disgusting masquerade.In fact, your God's a pretty nasty person, all told.
A: Well I'm sorry you feel that way about the God of the Bible. All He's ever done for me is give me blessings that I never deserved.
Q: Dieppe said...
This is the point of "God Hates Shrimp". You pick and choose the Bible verses that you are okay with, ("God Hates Man on Man Sex") but discard that you don't agree with (Unclean meat, PROPER Sabbath observance) because it fits your needs! And yet you are too blind to see it! Has Satan blinded you, or is this just pick and choose of your own doing?
A: Thank you very much for your response. This is a typical example of how people promote sin in the church body -- how it is spun, rationalized, and justified until nothing is sin anymore. And now we have a whole group of gay people counting on a petty dietary law to justify themselves before God. It's sad, really and it's a shrimp-sized excuse. It's like me pleading that a traffic code revision somehow justifes murder now.
In your list of counterpoints you mentioned the observance of a proper Sabbath. Personally I would be quite willing to observe Saturday as the Sabbath if the rest of the church body would like to change their day of worship. Historically the church adopted Sunday as the new Sabbath in celebration and remembrance of our Lord’s resurrection. This change occurred in biblical times, and I respect this decision made by our church founders. Whatever the case might be here, I really do think people should observe their Creator on a Sabbath. I also believe our Lord is most interested in the right heart when believers come to worship Him -- that was really His ultimate request in the Bible regarding worship.
In addition, grace trumps the law for believers that received God's grace through repentance as revealed in the New Testament of the Bible. Unbelievers have not received God's gift of grace through repentance and they are still under every part of the Old Testament law as Paul explained. That is why Jesus came, to fulfill the law, and die for our sins, so we could be forgiven for our transgressions of the law through personal faith that brings repentance.
With all that said, tell us why God supposedly loves gay-sex now, but Jews were stoned to death for gay-sex under God’s commandments to Moses. In addition, explain what God should do with those He sent to an eternal hell for their violations of the law -- now that God has supposedly changed His mind about gay-sex and God really made people that way all along (according to the Gay Christian Movement).
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
The Sin of "Gay Christian" Doctrine
On a Christian forum I was confronted by a gay so-called Christian that promotes "loving monogamous gay relationships." He said nobody needs to repent because Christ died for everyone's sins. He argued in favor of same-sex sex in the lives of so-called "gay Christians." He said it does no harm to other Christians, in particular the ex-gay ones. I present his questions and my answers:
Q: What proof do you have that same sex sex was "harming them" (ex-gay Christians)?
A:
[1.0] The damage is spiritual according to some of our (ex-gay) brothers and sisters in Christ by their own personal testimonies. Their personal (ex-gay) testimonies belong to them and not to you. You can not speak for them.
[1.1] It's not about what you believe, or even who you are, it's about what struggling Christian brothers and sisters believe as they try to live for Christ.
[1.2] You believe you are living for Christ, and so do other gays. I'm not debating that, but if I must choose (and I feel that I must), then I choose the group that makes the greatest personal sacrifice for Christ. That group is obviously the ex-gay group, and they are my Christian brothers and sisters that are being hurt by gay rights advocates.
[1.3] Case at point: Ex-gay Watch and Truth Wins Out. Apparently many gays that call themselves Christians are siding with these monstrous groups of hate-mongers headed by men like Wayne Besen (the head of Truth Wins Out). God have mercy on anyone that calls himself/herself a Christian and joins this persecution against believers. (Rev 1)
[2.0] I bring a Christian brother's testimony as a witness:
"I am a Christian man who has struggled with same sex attraction. I am not a practicing homosexual because I know that homosexuality is wrong, know that it is a sin, and know that the Bible is very clear in teaching that it is immoral. I do not try to spin it, rationalize it, or conveniently reinterpret the Scripture. Marital Status: Married."
[2.1] It is sin for a fellow-believer to go against the weakness in another-believer's life, as they have done on the forum on many occasions.
[2.2] On more than one occasion this ex-gay brother said his conscience was offended by his so-called "gay Christian" brothers on the forum. They said God made him gay and it was disobedience for him to refrain from the way God created him. He was supposed to participate in God's ordained gift of gay-sex according to these "gay Christians."
[2.3] Regardless of what you or anyone else believes about sin, it is wrong conduct to offend his weakness.
[3.0] I bring Ist Corinthians 8:12 to witness:
And when you sin against other believers[a] by encouraging them to do something they believe is wrong, you are sinning against Christ.
Q: No proof that gays and lesbians aren't your brothers and sisters in Christ.
A:
[3.1] It is incumbent on ANY believer to prove THEY ARE a believer in Jesus Christ. That is their job, not mine. So your objection is irrelevant to the point being made about gay-affirming doctrine, which is sin by definition in I Cor 8. Your objection is a non sequitor.
[3.2] Besides, I think your claim is irrelevant to Christianity anyway: Is someone my brother or sister in Christ simply because they are gay? Faith in Christ is the basis for Christianity.
[3.3] My point is that the gay-affirming doctrine is an open invitation for struggling Christians to go against their own conscience. The gay-affirming proponents claim to be Christians and this is a violation of conscience for the struggling group of ex-gay believers.
Q: "The kind of God you believe in" must be an arbitrary one, if one must obey an arbitrary rule.
A:
[4.0] I believe in a Holy God that brings life to ALL believers. The spirit of same-sex sex kills the spiritual life of ex-gay Christians according to them. The same spirit blesses the spiritual lives of so-called "gay Christians" according to Katherine Schori, the Presiding Bishop of the ECUSA that ordinated the openly-gay noncelibate bishop Gene Robinson. This can not come from the spirit of Christ, otherwise Christ Himself is a contradiction -- slaying the spirit of one believer and blessing the spirit of another. Therefore, the spirit of same-sex sex can not come from a Holy God.
[4.1] I call the entire ex-gay movement to the witness stand. Regardless of what you believe about them, they are making a tremendous sacrifice to please God, and frankly I think they are trying a lot harder than you are.
[4.2] By their own testimonies they can not be in a same-sex sex relationship and serve God too. That fact alone is sufficient proof, regardless of what you believe about sin.
[4.3] I'm sorry, but God does not have two standards for Christian conduct. You really have no debate as far as I see it.
[4.4] The SIN epitaph for "gay Christian" doctrine, ironically, is the lack of love for struggling believers in Christ that are ex-gay.
The apostle Paul explains it far better in Ist Corinthians 8 regarding Food Sacrificed to Idols (reference New Living Translation):
1 Now regarding your question about food that has been offered to idols. Yes, we know that “we all have knowledge” about this issue. But while knowledge makes us feel important, it is love that strengthens the church.
2 Anyone who claims to know all the answers doesn’t really know very much.
3 But the person who loves God is the one whom God recognizes.[a]
4 So, what about eating meat that has been offered to idols? Well, we all know that an idol is not really a god and that there is only one God.
5 There may be so-called gods both in heaven and on earth, and some people actually worship many gods and many lords.
6 But we know that there is only one God, the Father, who created everything, and we live for him. And there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom God made everything and through whom we have been given life.
7 However, not all believers know this. Some are accustomed to thinking of idols as being real, so when they eat food that has been offered to idols, they think of it as the worship of real gods, and their weak consciences are violated.
8 It’s true that we can’t win God’s approval by what we eat. We don’t lose anything if we don’t eat it, and we don’t gain anything if we do.
9 But you must be careful so that your freedom does not cause others with a weaker conscience to stumble.
10 For if others see you—with your “superior knowledge”—eating in the temple of an idol, won’t they be encouraged to violate their conscience by eating food that has been offered to an idol?
11 So because of your superior knowledge, a weak believer[b] for whom Christ died will be destroyed.
12 And when you sin against other believers[c] by encouraging them to do something they believe is wrong, you are sinning against Christ.
13 So if what I eat causes another believer to sin, I will never eat meat again as long as I live—for I don’t want to cause another believer to stumble.
[5.0] So in the end:
- [5.1] it doesn't matter about sin definitions.
- [5.2] it doesn't matter what anyone believes about the gay lifestyle.
- [5.3] it doesn't matter about monogamous loving relationships.
- [5.3b] it doesn't matter that someone feels their gay relationship is without sin, because ex-gay Christians can not live that way and serve Jesus Christ too as they have attested.
- [5.4] it doesn't matter about bible translations.
- [5.5] it doesn't matter about who wants to call themselves a brother or sister in Christ.
- [5.5b] it doesn't matter if ex-gay therapy is a total failure and a fraud.
- [5.6] it doesn't even matter about sex at all.
[5.7] What matters is the body of Christ, and the spiritual damage caused by this so-called "gay affirming Christian" sin-pandering doctrine that says gay sex is not sin. Some Christians that struggle with their Christian beliefs are confused and tempted to go against their conscience. As long as any Christian brother or sister struggles with this issue it doesn't matter about those that don't struggle with it, or those that failed and then returned to same-sex sex.
[5.8] The whole "gay Christian" argument can be defeated with OUR Christian love for brothers and sisters in Christ that are being hurt spiritually by this doctrine that says gay-sex is not sin. The gay affirmers can argue all they like. It's done. The proof is iron-clad.
Summary
"Gay Christianity" is incompatible with Christianity, because it violates the conscience of brothers and sisters in Christ that left same sex-sex to serve Christ.
If that isn't enough proof then consider the following points:
1) God is the perfect creator and author of love and life. If gay-sex were His intention then why did He give gays the physical ability to reproduce, but not with each other in monogamous loving relationships?
2) No reputable translation or translator of the Bible says gay sex is ok -- period.
Revisions
(1) Section 1.3 revised per the first comment.
Comments:
GCMWatch,
Thanks for your information. Curiously, Wayne Besen calls his movement "Truth Wins Out", implying that people can't change, while in reality there are ex-gays that have changed or became celibate. The supposed "immutability of sexual orientation" wasn't supported by Alfred Kinsey, the father of modern sexuality theories:
"Kinsey himself avoided and disapproved of using terms like homosexual or heterosexual to describe individuals, asserting that sexuality is prone to change over time, and that sexual behavior can be understood both as physical contact as well as purely psychological phenomena (desire, sexual attraction, fantasy)."
Even the APA tip-toes around the facts, saying that no therapist should treat same-sex orientation under the a-priori assumption that it needs to be changed, however it's common knowledge that people have changed sexual orientation. Take Anne Heche as just one example of many.
By the way are you associated with the Gay Christian Movement Watch? I see you are. Thanks for the link up.
Q: What proof do you have that same sex sex was "harming them" (ex-gay Christians)?
A:
[1.0] The damage is spiritual according to some of our (ex-gay) brothers and sisters in Christ by their own personal testimonies. Their personal (ex-gay) testimonies belong to them and not to you. You can not speak for them.
[1.1] It's not about what you believe, or even who you are, it's about what struggling Christian brothers and sisters believe as they try to live for Christ.
[1.2] You believe you are living for Christ, and so do other gays. I'm not debating that, but if I must choose (and I feel that I must), then I choose the group that makes the greatest personal sacrifice for Christ. That group is obviously the ex-gay group, and they are my Christian brothers and sisters that are being hurt by gay rights advocates.
[1.3] Case at point: Ex-gay Watch and Truth Wins Out. Apparently many gays that call themselves Christians are siding with these monstrous groups of hate-mongers headed by men like Wayne Besen (the head of Truth Wins Out). God have mercy on anyone that calls himself/herself a Christian and joins this persecution against believers. (Rev 1)
[2.0] I bring a Christian brother's testimony as a witness:
"I am a Christian man who has struggled with same sex attraction. I am not a practicing homosexual because I know that homosexuality is wrong, know that it is a sin, and know that the Bible is very clear in teaching that it is immoral. I do not try to spin it, rationalize it, or conveniently reinterpret the Scripture. Marital Status: Married."
[2.1] It is sin for a fellow-believer to go against the weakness in another-believer's life, as they have done on the forum on many occasions.
[2.2] On more than one occasion this ex-gay brother said his conscience was offended by his so-called "gay Christian" brothers on the forum. They said God made him gay and it was disobedience for him to refrain from the way God created him. He was supposed to participate in God's ordained gift of gay-sex according to these "gay Christians."
[2.3] Regardless of what you or anyone else believes about sin, it is wrong conduct to offend his weakness.
[3.0] I bring Ist Corinthians 8:12 to witness:
And when you sin against other believers[a] by encouraging them to do something they believe is wrong, you are sinning against Christ.
Q: No proof that gays and lesbians aren't your brothers and sisters in Christ.
A:
[3.1] It is incumbent on ANY believer to prove THEY ARE a believer in Jesus Christ. That is their job, not mine. So your objection is irrelevant to the point being made about gay-affirming doctrine, which is sin by definition in I Cor 8. Your objection is a non sequitor.
[3.2] Besides, I think your claim is irrelevant to Christianity anyway: Is someone my brother or sister in Christ simply because they are gay? Faith in Christ is the basis for Christianity.
[3.3] My point is that the gay-affirming doctrine is an open invitation for struggling Christians to go against their own conscience. The gay-affirming proponents claim to be Christians and this is a violation of conscience for the struggling group of ex-gay believers.
Q: "The kind of God you believe in" must be an arbitrary one, if one must obey an arbitrary rule.
A:
[4.0] I believe in a Holy God that brings life to ALL believers. The spirit of same-sex sex kills the spiritual life of ex-gay Christians according to them. The same spirit blesses the spiritual lives of so-called "gay Christians" according to Katherine Schori, the Presiding Bishop of the ECUSA that ordinated the openly-gay noncelibate bishop Gene Robinson. This can not come from the spirit of Christ, otherwise Christ Himself is a contradiction -- slaying the spirit of one believer and blessing the spirit of another. Therefore, the spirit of same-sex sex can not come from a Holy God.
[4.1] I call the entire ex-gay movement to the witness stand. Regardless of what you believe about them, they are making a tremendous sacrifice to please God, and frankly I think they are trying a lot harder than you are.
[4.2] By their own testimonies they can not be in a same-sex sex relationship and serve God too. That fact alone is sufficient proof, regardless of what you believe about sin.
[4.3] I'm sorry, but God does not have two standards for Christian conduct. You really have no debate as far as I see it.
[4.4] The SIN epitaph for "gay Christian" doctrine, ironically, is the lack of love for struggling believers in Christ that are ex-gay.
The apostle Paul explains it far better in Ist Corinthians 8 regarding Food Sacrificed to Idols (reference New Living Translation):
1 Now regarding your question about food that has been offered to idols. Yes, we know that “we all have knowledge” about this issue. But while knowledge makes us feel important, it is love that strengthens the church.
2 Anyone who claims to know all the answers doesn’t really know very much.
3 But the person who loves God is the one whom God recognizes.[a]
4 So, what about eating meat that has been offered to idols? Well, we all know that an idol is not really a god and that there is only one God.
5 There may be so-called gods both in heaven and on earth, and some people actually worship many gods and many lords.
6 But we know that there is only one God, the Father, who created everything, and we live for him. And there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom God made everything and through whom we have been given life.
7 However, not all believers know this. Some are accustomed to thinking of idols as being real, so when they eat food that has been offered to idols, they think of it as the worship of real gods, and their weak consciences are violated.
8 It’s true that we can’t win God’s approval by what we eat. We don’t lose anything if we don’t eat it, and we don’t gain anything if we do.
9 But you must be careful so that your freedom does not cause others with a weaker conscience to stumble.
10 For if others see you—with your “superior knowledge”—eating in the temple of an idol, won’t they be encouraged to violate their conscience by eating food that has been offered to an idol?
11 So because of your superior knowledge, a weak believer[b] for whom Christ died will be destroyed.
12 And when you sin against other believers[c] by encouraging them to do something they believe is wrong, you are sinning against Christ.
13 So if what I eat causes another believer to sin, I will never eat meat again as long as I live—for I don’t want to cause another believer to stumble.
[5.0] So in the end:
- [5.1] it doesn't matter about sin definitions.
- [5.2] it doesn't matter what anyone believes about the gay lifestyle.
- [5.3] it doesn't matter about monogamous loving relationships.
- [5.3b] it doesn't matter that someone feels their gay relationship is without sin, because ex-gay Christians can not live that way and serve Jesus Christ too as they have attested.
- [5.4] it doesn't matter about bible translations.
- [5.5] it doesn't matter about who wants to call themselves a brother or sister in Christ.
- [5.5b] it doesn't matter if ex-gay therapy is a total failure and a fraud.
- [5.6] it doesn't even matter about sex at all.
[5.7] What matters is the body of Christ, and the spiritual damage caused by this so-called "gay affirming Christian" sin-pandering doctrine that says gay sex is not sin. Some Christians that struggle with their Christian beliefs are confused and tempted to go against their conscience. As long as any Christian brother or sister struggles with this issue it doesn't matter about those that don't struggle with it, or those that failed and then returned to same-sex sex.
[5.8] The whole "gay Christian" argument can be defeated with OUR Christian love for brothers and sisters in Christ that are being hurt spiritually by this doctrine that says gay-sex is not sin. The gay affirmers can argue all they like. It's done. The proof is iron-clad.
Summary
"Gay Christianity" is incompatible with Christianity, because it violates the conscience of brothers and sisters in Christ that left same sex-sex to serve Christ.
If that isn't enough proof then consider the following points:
1) God is the perfect creator and author of love and life. If gay-sex were His intention then why did He give gays the physical ability to reproduce, but not with each other in monogamous loving relationships?
2) No reputable translation or translator of the Bible says gay sex is ok -- period.
Revisions
(1) Section 1.3 revised per the first comment.
Comments:
GCMWatch,
Thanks for your information. Curiously, Wayne Besen calls his movement "Truth Wins Out", implying that people can't change, while in reality there are ex-gays that have changed or became celibate. The supposed "immutability of sexual orientation" wasn't supported by Alfred Kinsey, the father of modern sexuality theories:
"Kinsey himself avoided and disapproved of using terms like homosexual or heterosexual to describe individuals, asserting that sexuality is prone to change over time, and that sexual behavior can be understood both as physical contact as well as purely psychological phenomena (desire, sexual attraction, fantasy)."
Even the APA tip-toes around the facts, saying that no therapist should treat same-sex orientation under the a-priori assumption that it needs to be changed, however it's common knowledge that people have changed sexual orientation. Take Anne Heche as just one example of many.
By the way are you associated with the Gay Christian Movement Watch? I see you are. Thanks for the link up.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Polygamy is for Primitive Uneducated Cultures
Introduction
Polygamy is illegal in America, and it is not the way the Bible intended marriage to be. Polygamy legitimizes the dead-beat father. World cultures with polygamous marriage are primitive, violent, poor and uneducated without exception.
In the state of Utah, multiple partnering is a widely accepted practice in the Mormon (LDS) religion. Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon religion said he received a revelation to practice polygamy, and he brought this practice to Utah. Utah had to ban polygamy to receive statehood in the union. This article is a revelation on the social and economic failures associated with this form of so-called marriage.
Polygamy hurts in the pocket
Attached are some excerpts and analysis from the following web-site:
http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy298.html
“A husband with several wives and many children usually spends his money on quantity rather than quality, and therefore his children receive a mediocre or even poor education. This, in turn, lowers the education level of those societies in which polygamy is a common practice.
That is the conclusion of three Hebrew University professors in a report called "The Mystery of Monogamy". It is based on a study conducted in the African country of Ivory Coast. “
“Eric Gould is a Hebrew University economics professor and one of the authors of the report. He told RFE/RL that the purpose of the research was to look at the correlation between polygamy and economic development, since all of the societies in which polygamy is practiced are developing countries, while monogamy is common practice in all developed countries.”
“The study said polygamy used to be practiced in the West but died out as the societies developed and education became a key to prosperity. “
“Having more than one wife was a widespread practice in pre-Christian and pre-Islamic societies. Nowadays, it still exists mainly in Thailand, sub-Saharan Africa, and in some other Islamic countries. “
“Gould said the study on polygamy showed that the correlation between polygamy and Islam is not as strong as the linkage between polygamy and the level of economic development. “
“Gould said governments in poorer countries need to subsidize education. If there is a firmer link between a country's wealth and its human capital, governments will encourage men to devote themselves to finding a single, educated woman and fathering only a few children - rather than having several wives and many children.”
The Bible and Polygamy
On a Christian forum, a poster made the following notable quote regarding polygamy:
“The Bible blesses polygamous marriages the same way it blesses 1 man + 1 woman marriages.”
He was asked:
“So can you explain to us where God says polygamy is a good thing, and show where that's His plan for marriage. Can you also show us where Jesus approves of a plural marriage relationship instead of calling it adultery?”
His response was:
“First of all, let's look at some of the polygamists God blessed:
Jacob marries Leah and Rachel. (Genesis 29)
God causes his flocks to increase (Genesis 30) and is personally blessed by God (Genesis 32:22-32). Nowhere does God rebuke Jacob for taking two wives.
King David had many wives (2 Samuel 12:11-12). The context of this passage is the prophet Nathan cursing David for committing adultery with Bathsheba and killing her husband Uriah to cover up the affair; however, he doesn't reprimand David for polygamy.
King Solomon had many wives, as well (2 Kings 11). While the passage here is negative, it does not condemn his polygamy; instead it condemns the fact his wives followed other religions.
Biblical laws regarding polygamy:Exodus 21:7-11 states that if a man marries a woman who is a slave, and then marries another woman, he must still treat the first wife with all marital rights.
Deuteronomy 21:15-17 regards the situation of inheritance when a man is married to two women and has a son by each of them.
Deuteronomy 25:5-10 concerns the case of a childless widow. The law states that the dead man's brother should then wed her, and doesn't make allowances for if the surviving brother is already married or not.
To bring the New Testament in on this, Jesus was asked about the last law in Matthew 22:23-33. Did Jesus then condemn the polygamous practice? Nope.
The Bible addresses polygamy in many passages, yet nowhere does it condemn it. In fact, it sets up laws governing it.
If you want to deny homosexuals the right to marriage by saying "The Bible defines marriage as 1 man and 1 woman," be advised that the Bible also recognizes and blesses polygamy.”
As you can see from his response, the polygamous marriage issue is interwoven with gay marriage.
Big Love in the Rocky Mountains of the USA
Hildale the US Capital of Big Love
“HILDALE -- Government was once a sworn enemy of polygamy. Now, it is a benevolent uncle. Welfare is a way of life in the polygamous communities of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Ariz., where more than a third of the residents accept food stamps to support the huge families their old-style faith demands. "If it wasn't for government subsidies, these people couldn't survive," said Benjamin Bistline, who has renounced polygamy, but still lives in town. "There are people here with 15 wives on welfare."
Nearly every facet of life in this impoverished desert community on the Utah-Arizona border -- with a combined population of 5,274 -- is dominated by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (FLDS), the largest polygamous assembly in North America. Most girls marry in their teen-age years.”
“Polygamists in the twin towns of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Ariz., have low incomes, calling into question whether they can support their large numbers of children without taxpayer assistance.”
Hildale and Colorado City at a Glance:
Polygamists in the twin towns of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Ariz., have low incomes, calling into question whether they can support their large numbers of children without taxpayer assistance.
Hildale, Utah
......................................Hildale.................................Utah...............
Median age.....................13.1 Youngest in state...26.8 Youngest in nation
Persons per household....8.55 Largest in state.......3.13 Largest in nation
Avg household income*...$21,822..........................$41,316
Per capita income..............$3,772.Lowest in state...$14,492
% of families in poverty.....32.4%..............................11.4%
*Average household adjusted gross income from federal tax returnsSource: Utah Tax Commission 1995, US Census, Utah and ArizonaDepartments of Education.
Colorado City, Arizona
.........................................Colorado City...............Arizona
Median age........................12.5 Youngest in state......32.2
Persons per household.......7.97 Largest in state.........2.62
Avg household income*.....$19,663............................$35,426
Per capita income..............$2,319..............................$13,461
% of families in poverty.......61%..................................11.4%
*Average household adjusted gross income from federal tax returns Source: Utah Tax Commission 1995, US Census, Utah and Arizona Departments of Education.
“Today there are more than 5,000 residents, nearly all of them believers in polygamy.
Polygamy and AIDS
In sub-Saharan Africa, polygamy is one of the root causes to the AIDS epidemic. :
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_r...fm?DR_ID=44290
"The practice of having one sexual partner at a time "traps the virus in a relationship for months or years at a time" and "considerably slows" the progress of HIV through the population, while the "practice of formal or informal polygamy links sexually active people not only to one another but also to the partners of their partners ... creating a giant web that can extend across huge regions," Epstein writes. "
http://www.world-links.org/aidsweb/goal3.html
"Ghanaian participants raised the issue of whether polygamy promotes or hinders the spread of HIV. Zimbabweans agreed that polygamy spreads HIV, with the reasoning that one or more of the wives in a polygamous marriage may have outside partners."
In summary, polygamy spreads STDs (sexually transmitted diseases).
Conclusion
In conclusion the social statistics tell us that polygamy is nothing more than a welfare program. The result is poverty, low education, and teen pregnancy. It also has health risks. It does not belong in a civilized country like America.
Polygamy is illegal in America, and it is not the way the Bible intended marriage to be. Polygamy legitimizes the dead-beat father. World cultures with polygamous marriage are primitive, violent, poor and uneducated without exception.
In the state of Utah, multiple partnering is a widely accepted practice in the Mormon (LDS) religion. Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon religion said he received a revelation to practice polygamy, and he brought this practice to Utah. Utah had to ban polygamy to receive statehood in the union. This article is a revelation on the social and economic failures associated with this form of so-called marriage.
Polygamy hurts in the pocket
Attached are some excerpts and analysis from the following web-site:
http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy298.html
“A husband with several wives and many children usually spends his money on quantity rather than quality, and therefore his children receive a mediocre or even poor education. This, in turn, lowers the education level of those societies in which polygamy is a common practice.
That is the conclusion of three Hebrew University professors in a report called "The Mystery of Monogamy". It is based on a study conducted in the African country of Ivory Coast. “
“Eric Gould is a Hebrew University economics professor and one of the authors of the report. He told RFE/RL that the purpose of the research was to look at the correlation between polygamy and economic development, since all of the societies in which polygamy is practiced are developing countries, while monogamy is common practice in all developed countries.”
“The study said polygamy used to be practiced in the West but died out as the societies developed and education became a key to prosperity. “
“Having more than one wife was a widespread practice in pre-Christian and pre-Islamic societies. Nowadays, it still exists mainly in Thailand, sub-Saharan Africa, and in some other Islamic countries. “
“Gould said the study on polygamy showed that the correlation between polygamy and Islam is not as strong as the linkage between polygamy and the level of economic development. “
“Gould said governments in poorer countries need to subsidize education. If there is a firmer link between a country's wealth and its human capital, governments will encourage men to devote themselves to finding a single, educated woman and fathering only a few children - rather than having several wives and many children.”
The Bible and Polygamy
On a Christian forum, a poster made the following notable quote regarding polygamy:
“The Bible blesses polygamous marriages the same way it blesses 1 man + 1 woman marriages.”
He was asked:
“So can you explain to us where God says polygamy is a good thing, and show where that's His plan for marriage. Can you also show us where Jesus approves of a plural marriage relationship instead of calling it adultery?”
His response was:
“First of all, let's look at some of the polygamists God blessed:
Jacob marries Leah and Rachel. (Genesis 29)
God causes his flocks to increase (Genesis 30) and is personally blessed by God (Genesis 32:22-32). Nowhere does God rebuke Jacob for taking two wives.
King David had many wives (2 Samuel 12:11-12). The context of this passage is the prophet Nathan cursing David for committing adultery with Bathsheba and killing her husband Uriah to cover up the affair; however, he doesn't reprimand David for polygamy.
King Solomon had many wives, as well (2 Kings 11). While the passage here is negative, it does not condemn his polygamy; instead it condemns the fact his wives followed other religions.
Biblical laws regarding polygamy:Exodus 21:7-11 states that if a man marries a woman who is a slave, and then marries another woman, he must still treat the first wife with all marital rights.
Deuteronomy 21:15-17 regards the situation of inheritance when a man is married to two women and has a son by each of them.
Deuteronomy 25:5-10 concerns the case of a childless widow. The law states that the dead man's brother should then wed her, and doesn't make allowances for if the surviving brother is already married or not.
To bring the New Testament in on this, Jesus was asked about the last law in Matthew 22:23-33. Did Jesus then condemn the polygamous practice? Nope.
The Bible addresses polygamy in many passages, yet nowhere does it condemn it. In fact, it sets up laws governing it.
If you want to deny homosexuals the right to marriage by saying "The Bible defines marriage as 1 man and 1 woman," be advised that the Bible also recognizes and blesses polygamy.”
As you can see from his response, the polygamous marriage issue is interwoven with gay marriage.
Big Love in the Rocky Mountains of the USA
Hildale the US Capital of Big Love
“HILDALE -- Government was once a sworn enemy of polygamy. Now, it is a benevolent uncle. Welfare is a way of life in the polygamous communities of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Ariz., where more than a third of the residents accept food stamps to support the huge families their old-style faith demands. "If it wasn't for government subsidies, these people couldn't survive," said Benjamin Bistline, who has renounced polygamy, but still lives in town. "There are people here with 15 wives on welfare."
Nearly every facet of life in this impoverished desert community on the Utah-Arizona border -- with a combined population of 5,274 -- is dominated by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (FLDS), the largest polygamous assembly in North America. Most girls marry in their teen-age years.”
“Polygamists in the twin towns of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Ariz., have low incomes, calling into question whether they can support their large numbers of children without taxpayer assistance.”
Hildale and Colorado City at a Glance:
Polygamists in the twin towns of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Ariz., have low incomes, calling into question whether they can support their large numbers of children without taxpayer assistance.
Hildale, Utah
......................................Hildale.................................Utah...............
Median age.....................13.1 Youngest in state...26.8 Youngest in nation
Persons per household....8.55 Largest in state.......3.13 Largest in nation
Avg household income*...$21,822..........................$41,316
Per capita income..............$3,772.Lowest in state...$14,492
% of families in poverty.....32.4%..............................11.4%
*Average household adjusted gross income from federal tax returnsSource: Utah Tax Commission 1995, US Census, Utah and ArizonaDepartments of Education.
Colorado City, Arizona
.........................................Colorado City...............Arizona
Median age........................12.5 Youngest in state......32.2
Persons per household.......7.97 Largest in state.........2.62
Avg household income*.....$19,663............................$35,426
Per capita income..............$2,319..............................$13,461
% of families in poverty.......61%..................................11.4%
*Average household adjusted gross income from federal tax returns Source: Utah Tax Commission 1995, US Census, Utah and Arizona Departments of Education.
“Today there are more than 5,000 residents, nearly all of them believers in polygamy.
Polygamy and AIDS
In sub-Saharan Africa, polygamy is one of the root causes to the AIDS epidemic. :
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_r...fm?DR_ID=44290
"The practice of having one sexual partner at a time "traps the virus in a relationship for months or years at a time" and "considerably slows" the progress of HIV through the population, while the "practice of formal or informal polygamy links sexually active people not only to one another but also to the partners of their partners ... creating a giant web that can extend across huge regions," Epstein writes. "
http://www.world-links.org/aidsweb/goal3.html
"Ghanaian participants raised the issue of whether polygamy promotes or hinders the spread of HIV. Zimbabweans agreed that polygamy spreads HIV, with the reasoning that one or more of the wives in a polygamous marriage may have outside partners."
In summary, polygamy spreads STDs (sexually transmitted diseases).
Conclusion
In conclusion the social statistics tell us that polygamy is nothing more than a welfare program. The result is poverty, low education, and teen pregnancy. It also has health risks. It does not belong in a civilized country like America.
Good day and God bless.
Monday, September 3, 2007
Gay Men Plagued by Health Issues
Introduction
Gay men in North America have higher health risks than most people, and this fact is clearly recognized by our public health organizations. Even some of the more militant gay-rights advocates are co-operating with health authorities to reduce the HIV/AIDS crisis. Some gay-affirmers are determined to minimize and trivialize their efforts by making their political views more important than the lives of the people they represent.
These gay-advocates are out to do destigmatize their cause by legitimizing diseases. I feel this approach is unconscionable, and unacceptable in a civil society.
The information presented in this article comes from some of the most credible public health resources available. The information is founded in scientific research that is intended to help humanity. It is the best, most honest information available for saving human lives.
[1] Warnings from the Centers for Disease Control
This clear warning comes from the Centers for Disease Control, a US government funded agency that is fully accountable for controlling disease epidemics in the United States:
"MSM made up more than two thirds (68%) of all men living with HIV in 2005, even though only about 5% to 7% of men in the United States reported having sex with other men."
(MSM is an abbreviation for men who have sex with men.)
As the report says a small segment of the US population (MSM) accounts for more than half of ALL male HIV/AIDS cases in the USA. A reasonable person would conclude that MSM have a much higher risk of getting the HIV infection.
But some gay-advocates, with their compasses set on auto-pilot, trivialize the message by pointing to HIV in sub-Saharan Africa, as they try to de-stigmatize HIV away from homosexual men in North America. Obviously sub-Saharan Africa has nothing to do with American public health policy, and everything to do with furthering their gay agenda. This obstructionism doesn't save human lives in America.
[2] Gay men are in Denial according to the Barcelona AIDS Conference
North American homosexual men live in denial to their health risks and this causes the HIV/AIDS epidemic to get worse. From the Barcelona AIDS conference:
"The study involved 5,719 men who were interviewed at dance clubs, bars and other places frequented by gays in Baltimore, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City and Seattle. It tested the men for exposure to the AIDS virus, finding that 573 had H.I.V. Of those, 440, or 77 percent, had said they were unaware they were infected. The results of the H.I.V. tests were available to the men, but it is not known how many sought them, or learned that they were infected."
Nearly ten per cent of the men in these cities with a large gay population had HIV, and most of them didn't even know it. Are they representative of other cities in the USA? Probably so. Don't most young gay men go to bars, dance clubs, and such to meet other gay men? Probably so. Yet some gay-affirmers argue that these cities aren't representative. If the population samples weren't representative, then why did the public health officials choose them for the study? This is an attack on their credibility.
[3] Gay men have a shortened lifespan in Canada
In a major Canadian city it was found that Gay men didn't live as long. This result came from the Oxford International Journal of Epidemiology
"CONCLUSION: In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday."
Again some gay affirmers tell us the data is not representative. If this major Canadian city was not representative for modeling the impact of HIV/AIDS on the homosexual male population, then why was it used in a study? That would be a waste of research funding, and someone should demand a full refund from RS Hogg who conducted the study.
The author of the study, RS Hogg, after some obvious pressuring from gay-political activists, issued a letter to the editor some four years later, to say things have changed. Oddly he presented no scientific data to support his own statements which appeared to make his study a little more "PC" compatible. Neither did he retract the original findings of his study. The study showed that gay men in North American cities won't live as long.
[4] So-called "Monogamous" Gay Relationships are Deadly
Finally a research study from the Netherlands puts it in perspective about "gay monogamous relationships" as it demonstrates these relationships are probably just as deadly if not more deadly than the promiscuous ones. The gay men in these "partnered" relationships have a false sense of security and engage in more risky behaviors according to the study. Gay marriage has been legal in the Netherlands for several years.
https://www.aidsmeds.com/news/20030514epid001.html
This web site is written for and by people that have the HIV virus, and this report comes from Reuters Health:
"Dr. Xiridou and colleagues developed a mathematical model to assess the proportions of steady and casual partners that were sources of HIV infection among Amsterdam's young homosexual population.They found that 86% of new HIV infections are now occurring within steady partnerships. Moreover, the model suggests that the increases in risky sexual behavior among steady partners may counterbalance the benefits of HAART."
HAART is an anti-viral medication being used to treat HIV infections in the Netherlands. Well, so much for the health benefits of "gay loving monogamous relationships" that are touted so vigorously by gay-rights advocates. The health benefits don't add up.
The full results of the Netherlands gay marriage study are available in the Official Journal of the International AIDS Society. The conclusion says and I quote:
"Conclusion: Most new HIV infections among homosexual men in Amsterdam occur within steady relationships. Prevention measures should address risky behaviour, specifically with steady partners, and the promotion of HIV testing."
In the Netherlands, the "loving monogamous same-sex" model is a public health disaster.
In addition, only about 2% of the gay population chooses to marry in the Netherlands where it has been legal for more than 7 years.
"Why So Few Gay Marriages? First published in the Bay Area Reporter on May 11, 2006.The Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, which opposes gay marriage, has just issued a new report finding that relatively few gay couples are getting married in jurisdictions where gay marriage is permitted. Is this correct? If it is, why are there so few gay marriages so far? Here's a summary of the findings from the report:
The highest estimate to date of the proportion of gays and lesbians who have married in any jurisdiction where it is available is 16.7% (Massachusetts). More typically, our survey of marriage statistics from various countries that legally recognize same-sex unions suggests that today between 1% and 5% of gays and lesbians have entered into a same-sex marriage.
The Independent Gay Forum agrees with the findings:
"The report derives these numbers by comparing the total number of same-sex marriages in a jurisdiction to an estimate of the total number of adult homosexuals in the jurisdiction (based on survey data). While we could quibble over the estimates of the number of gays in a given jurisdiction, the report uses a range of reasonable assumptions. "
http://www.indegayforum.org/topics/show/30947.html
Conclusion
Now I'm sure somebody will come along and argue that this is all hate propaganda, and an orchestration of persecution, but I have to wonder if they are thinking rationally. These are credible public health protectors that are here to help us. Why can't everyone let them do their job? Is political correctness more important than saving human lives? Apparently it is to some people, and I honestly can't understand why. Their opposition to the truth just doesn't seem to be mentally sound. I expect there could be some law suits, and rightfully so. A few law suits would probably help the health authorities deal with these irresponsible obstructionists.
Good day and God bless you.
Reference Links:
Real Proposal for Marriage Magazine, New Bacteria Strain found among Gay Men
http://www.therealproposal.com/815503.html
NY Times Article about New Bacteria Strain found among Gay Men
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/health/15infe.html?em&ex=1200718800&en=d8f1d09b1e96ae83&ei=5087%0A
Annals of Internal Medicine, New Bacteria Strain attacks MSM through anal sex
http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/0000605-200802190-00204v1
Gay men in North America have higher health risks than most people, and this fact is clearly recognized by our public health organizations. Even some of the more militant gay-rights advocates are co-operating with health authorities to reduce the HIV/AIDS crisis. Some gay-affirmers are determined to minimize and trivialize their efforts by making their political views more important than the lives of the people they represent.
These gay-advocates are out to do destigmatize their cause by legitimizing diseases. I feel this approach is unconscionable, and unacceptable in a civil society.
The information presented in this article comes from some of the most credible public health resources available. The information is founded in scientific research that is intended to help humanity. It is the best, most honest information available for saving human lives.
[1] Warnings from the Centers for Disease Control
This clear warning comes from the Centers for Disease Control, a US government funded agency that is fully accountable for controlling disease epidemics in the United States:
"MSM made up more than two thirds (68%) of all men living with HIV in 2005, even though only about 5% to 7% of men in the United States reported having sex with other men."
(MSM is an abbreviation for men who have sex with men.)
As the report says a small segment of the US population (MSM) accounts for more than half of ALL male HIV/AIDS cases in the USA. A reasonable person would conclude that MSM have a much higher risk of getting the HIV infection.
But some gay-advocates, with their compasses set on auto-pilot, trivialize the message by pointing to HIV in sub-Saharan Africa, as they try to de-stigmatize HIV away from homosexual men in North America. Obviously sub-Saharan Africa has nothing to do with American public health policy, and everything to do with furthering their gay agenda. This obstructionism doesn't save human lives in America.
[2] Gay men are in Denial according to the Barcelona AIDS Conference
North American homosexual men live in denial to their health risks and this causes the HIV/AIDS epidemic to get worse. From the Barcelona AIDS conference:
"The study involved 5,719 men who were interviewed at dance clubs, bars and other places frequented by gays in Baltimore, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City and Seattle. It tested the men for exposure to the AIDS virus, finding that 573 had H.I.V. Of those, 440, or 77 percent, had said they were unaware they were infected. The results of the H.I.V. tests were available to the men, but it is not known how many sought them, or learned that they were infected."
Nearly ten per cent of the men in these cities with a large gay population had HIV, and most of them didn't even know it. Are they representative of other cities in the USA? Probably so. Don't most young gay men go to bars, dance clubs, and such to meet other gay men? Probably so. Yet some gay-affirmers argue that these cities aren't representative. If the population samples weren't representative, then why did the public health officials choose them for the study? This is an attack on their credibility.
[3] Gay men have a shortened lifespan in Canada
In a major Canadian city it was found that Gay men didn't live as long. This result came from the Oxford International Journal of Epidemiology
"CONCLUSION: In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday."
Again some gay affirmers tell us the data is not representative. If this major Canadian city was not representative for modeling the impact of HIV/AIDS on the homosexual male population, then why was it used in a study? That would be a waste of research funding, and someone should demand a full refund from RS Hogg who conducted the study.
The author of the study, RS Hogg, after some obvious pressuring from gay-political activists, issued a letter to the editor some four years later, to say things have changed. Oddly he presented no scientific data to support his own statements which appeared to make his study a little more "PC" compatible. Neither did he retract the original findings of his study. The study showed that gay men in North American cities won't live as long.
[4] So-called "Monogamous" Gay Relationships are Deadly
Finally a research study from the Netherlands puts it in perspective about "gay monogamous relationships" as it demonstrates these relationships are probably just as deadly if not more deadly than the promiscuous ones. The gay men in these "partnered" relationships have a false sense of security and engage in more risky behaviors according to the study. Gay marriage has been legal in the Netherlands for several years.
https://www.aidsmeds.com/news/20030514epid001.html
This web site is written for and by people that have the HIV virus, and this report comes from Reuters Health:
"Dr. Xiridou and colleagues developed a mathematical model to assess the proportions of steady and casual partners that were sources of HIV infection among Amsterdam's young homosexual population.They found that 86% of new HIV infections are now occurring within steady partnerships. Moreover, the model suggests that the increases in risky sexual behavior among steady partners may counterbalance the benefits of HAART."
HAART is an anti-viral medication being used to treat HIV infections in the Netherlands. Well, so much for the health benefits of "gay loving monogamous relationships" that are touted so vigorously by gay-rights advocates. The health benefits don't add up.
The full results of the Netherlands gay marriage study are available in the Official Journal of the International AIDS Society. The conclusion says and I quote:
"Conclusion: Most new HIV infections among homosexual men in Amsterdam occur within steady relationships. Prevention measures should address risky behaviour, specifically with steady partners, and the promotion of HIV testing."
In the Netherlands, the "loving monogamous same-sex" model is a public health disaster.
In addition, only about 2% of the gay population chooses to marry in the Netherlands where it has been legal for more than 7 years.
"Why So Few Gay Marriages? First published in the Bay Area Reporter on May 11, 2006.The Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, which opposes gay marriage, has just issued a new report finding that relatively few gay couples are getting married in jurisdictions where gay marriage is permitted. Is this correct? If it is, why are there so few gay marriages so far? Here's a summary of the findings from the report:
The highest estimate to date of the proportion of gays and lesbians who have married in any jurisdiction where it is available is 16.7% (Massachusetts). More typically, our survey of marriage statistics from various countries that legally recognize same-sex unions suggests that today between 1% and 5% of gays and lesbians have entered into a same-sex marriage.
The Independent Gay Forum agrees with the findings:
"The report derives these numbers by comparing the total number of same-sex marriages in a jurisdiction to an estimate of the total number of adult homosexuals in the jurisdiction (based on survey data). While we could quibble over the estimates of the number of gays in a given jurisdiction, the report uses a range of reasonable assumptions. "
http://www.indegayforum.org/topics/show/30947.html
Conclusion
Now I'm sure somebody will come along and argue that this is all hate propaganda, and an orchestration of persecution, but I have to wonder if they are thinking rationally. These are credible public health protectors that are here to help us. Why can't everyone let them do their job? Is political correctness more important than saving human lives? Apparently it is to some people, and I honestly can't understand why. Their opposition to the truth just doesn't seem to be mentally sound. I expect there could be some law suits, and rightfully so. A few law suits would probably help the health authorities deal with these irresponsible obstructionists.
Good day and God bless you.
Reference Links:
Real Proposal for Marriage Magazine, New Bacteria Strain found among Gay Men
http://www.therealproposal.com/815503.html
NY Times Article about New Bacteria Strain found among Gay Men
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/health/15infe.html?em&ex=1200718800&en=d8f1d09b1e96ae83&ei=5087%0A
Annals of Internal Medicine, New Bacteria Strain attacks MSM through anal sex
http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/0000605-200802190-00204v1
Friday, August 10, 2007
Catholic Church of the Pedophile Priest
Introduction
I really don't mean to offend Catholics. They have a lot of good points other than their pedophile priest issue, but the scriptural-requirements for church-leadership are clear. The scriptures say church-leadership is supposed to be "married with children" -- not members of NAMBLA (the North American Man Boy Love Association).
God in His wisdom, through His anointed prophet, the Apostle Paul, gave us His divine guidelines for choosing a church pastor in 1st Timothy Chapter 3:1-6, which specifies that he should be married with children, and have a good reputation that can be verified.
Even in human terms the reasoning is fairly obvious:
1) a married minister has more accountability because of a wife and a family.
2) a married minister has an outlet for his sexual drive with a wife.
3) a married minister with a family has more to lose from foul play.
4) a married minister brings more history with him that can be examined by talking to the wife and his children.
5) a married minister with children has more eyes watching his daily conduct.
Here is where the RCC has gone wrong with their ministry:
1) Catholic leadership is not allowed to marry, and hence ALL of these aforementioned safeguards are forfeited.
2) Furthermore, the secrecy, authority, trust, and access to children are like a magnet for child predators that have no interest whatsoever in marrying another adult. They are only interested in child sex.
3) They disguise themselves as trustworthy priests when they are criminals.
4) Furthermore, the catholic hierarchy knowingly breaks the law by harboring these known felons from justice.
Background
Many centuries ago, the Catholic Church departed from God's plan for church-leadership. Today, in the information age, where everything is out in the open, the Catholic Church continues to make the news with sexual abuse law suits. Here we see ordained priests that are MARRIED to NO ONE, and molesting someone else's CHILDREN while their superiors look on with indifference. These pedophile priests are criminals. They bring shame and reproach to the entire church body. The reputation extends far beyond the RCC (Catholic Church) to all of Christendom. I'm sorry, but as Christians, we can't just ignore it and call it a catholic issue, because it tarnishes the name of Christ.
From pedophile to priest -- a "pedo-priest" as it were -- this is not what God intended for the ministry, for the church body, or for sexual conduct PERIOD. We often hear about sex scandals in other church denominations, whether it be Haggard, Bakker, or Swaggart, but the RCC takes the unique spotlight for child sexual abuse -- in particular man-boy sexual abuse.
In 1st Timothy Chapter 3, the apostle Paul (who was not married) gave the blue print specifications for a bishop:
1 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
As verse 5 says, the bishop can not take care of the church if he can't even take care of his own family. The "husband of one bride", having a "blameless" reputation, known for "good behavior." This doesn't sound like a pedophile catholic priest AT ALL.
The catholic denomination claims the bishop is "married" to the church; however Christ does not share His bride with anyone. That would be adultery. Besides that, Peter was married, and he was supposedly the first pope of the Catholic Church.
The catholic interpretation and requirements DO NOT compare to scriptures. Unmarried priests help the Catholic Church save money, so I hear, with no inheritance going to a spouse or to children. Economically convenient -- but the bible blue print has been altered -- and the plan is not founded in God's Word.
News and Commentary
So we read the news headlines and see stories like this:
"LOS ANGELES - The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles will settle its clergy abuse cases for at least $600 million, by far the largest payout in the church's sexual abuse scandal. "
"The settlement would be the largest ever by a Roman Catholic archdiocese since the clergy sexual abuse scandal erupted in Boston in 2002. Among the largest total payouts was $100 million in 2004 by the Diocese of Orange, Calif., to settle 90 claims. The Archdiocese of Boston agreed in 2003 to pay $84 million for 552 cases, roughly the same figure the Diocese of Covington, Ky., agreed last year to pay to settle about 360 claims. Facing a flood of abuse claims, five dioceses — Tucson, Ariz.; Spokane, Wash.; Portland, Ore.; Davenport, Iowa, and San Diego — sought bankruptcy protection.Last month, the Archdiocese of Portland agreed to pay about $52 million to 175 people, while setting aside another $20 million for anyone who comes forward in the future.The Diocese of Spokane, Wash., also recently emerged from bankruptcy protection after agreeing to pay $48 million to settle about 150 claims. "
"The largest of those came in December, when the archdiocese reached a $60 million settlement with 45 people whose claims dated from before the mid-1950s and after 1987 — periods when it had little or no sexual abuse insurance. Several religious orders in California have also reached multimillion dollar settlements in recent months, including the Carmelites, the Franciscans and the Jesuits."
Note that the RCC has sexual abuse insurance for its clergy. That is truly amazing! While everyone else thinks about medical insurance or life insurance, their leadership needs sexual abuse insurance. Wow!
Sadly, the story doesn't end with the priests, but we read their leadership covered it up, shuffling the pedo-priests from parish to parish where they did the same thing all over again. The leadership became negligent accessories to the crimes, and a legal battle looms over their records. Yet they aren't honest enough to admit guilt, so who is supposed to believe them when they say they are sorry? They were aware of the problem all along, which has gone on for decades and possibly even centuries.
News Analysis
The following analysis is posted courtesy of the Boston Globe. In summary, the pedophile priest abuse is a catholic phenomenon. It has been researched in many Protestant denominations, but the Catholic Church is in a class by itself on this issue. There is no comparison.
News Commentary from:
http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/stories/031302_abuse.htm
All faiths question handling of abuse
Debate over celibacy as factor is rancorous
By Michael Paulson, Globe Staff, 3/13/2002
''There are absolutely no Protestant equivalents,'' said Anson D. Shupe, a professor of sociology at Indiana University-Purdue University in Fort Wayne who researches clergy misconduct. ''If I could find some spectacular cases, that would help my career, but I can't. You don't have rapacious serial predators, and the Protestant establishment doesn't tolerate it the way the Catholic establishment has.''
"By contrast, Protestant and non-Christian denominations have had so few reported cases that their leaders can generally count them on one hand. A 1999 study of clergy misconduct, in which academics with the Hartford Institute for Religion Research spoke with 76 ministers who had, over the last 40 years, served 532 different congregations in 14 different denominations, turned up no instances of sexual abuse of children in the Protestant congregations studied."
"But, as diocese after diocese around the United States acknowledges that it has employed multiple priests accused of molesting children over the last several decades - the contrast with other denominations seems to be growing."
''The Catholic hierarchy has stonewalled any attempts to do any kind of study on this issue, and they've had offers to do it,'' said Rev. Thomas P. Doyle, a Catholic Air Force chaplain, who, as a canon lawyer working at the Vatican Embassy in Washington in 1985, wrote a report on the problem of clergy sexual abuse that he says was ignored by the bishops. "
"Priests are more able to abuse children because of the extraordinary amount of authority and reverence they enjoy within the Catholic Church. Protestant and Jewish clergy are generally less powerful within their congregations, and can often be fired by laypeople."
"The only non-Catholic denomination that has been plagued with allegations of widespread child sexual abuse is the Hare Krishna movement, a small Hindu-like sect. Scores of people have alleged that they were sexually abused as children at Hare Krishna boarding schools in the 1970s and 1980s."
Biblical Rebuttal
In the gospels, Jesus Christ tells us what He thinks about child-molesters that target the church body:
Matthew 18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
Mark 9:42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
Luke 17:2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.
According to scriptures the shepherds of the RCC flock did a really poor job:
John Chapter 10:
11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
12 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep. 13 The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.
14 I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
The hireling flees because he doesn't care for the sheep. A hireling doesn't look out for the sheep -- a hireling looks out for himself. Catholic clergy claim they are "married" to the church, but the pedophile priests look more like the wolf, and the negligent bishops look more like the hireling shepherd that fled.
Conclusion
Some RCC members tell us that ALL the church denominations are involved in pedophilia, and they should ALL share equally in the blame. Unfortunately other Christians ARE sharing in the blame, and it's NOT because they are guilty. We just can't trust God's plan -- so we're told by some Catholics. Come on, we're not buying it! The Lord told us how to choose church-leadership, and somebody failed to do it right.
The Lord gave us the blue-print for building church-leadership, and somebody isn't using it. No wonder there are flaws. God is the architect and He gave us the specifications through the apostle Paul. The specifications say: MARRIED WITH CHILDREN. God knows best. Good day to you.
UPDATE 4/18/08
Pope Benedict XVI working to clean up the priesthood
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080419/ap_on_re_us/pope_us
While visiting in the USA, Pope Benedict has committed to work on the Catholic priest abuse issues. Stating he wants quality over quantity, he proposed an overhaul of administrative procedures to make it easier to purge out pedophile priests. He also met privately with abuse victims.
"He spoke privately with victims — in what is believed to be the first time a pope has met with people who had been abused by priests. He also told bishops the problem had sometimes been very "badly handled" — an indirect but clear papal admonition. Benedict could take up the issue again Saturday in a Mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral with priests from around the country.
So far, Benedict has offered support to America's clergy during his visit.
He said priests who had done nothing wrong had been unfairly tarred by the crisis. More than 4,000 clergy have been accused of molesting minors in the U.S. since 1950. Abuse-related costs have surpassed $2 billion in that period, with much of the payouts in just the last six years."
UPDATE 9/21/08
The vatican used a policy known as the Crimen Sollicitationis to control sex-abuse scandals to the advantage of the catholic church. It was issued by the vatican and used world-wide as a play book for priest sex-abuse cover-ups.
The document is also known as The Manner of Proceeding in Cases of Solicitation.
Article from the BBC:
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/5389684.stm
"It instructs them how to deal with priests who solicit sex from the confessional. It also deals with "any obscene external act ... with youths of either sex." "
Quotes form Article:
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news5/2003_07_29_Shaw_VaticanDocument.htm
Should an accused priest go before a church trial, "in every way the judge is to remember that it is never right for him to bind the accused by an oath to tell the truth."
The directive also says the person who is solicited in the confessional must report the incident to the bishop within a month or to the Holy Office. The accused confessor is required to warn the person confessing of this duty. A person who knowingly failed to denounce the priest incurs excommunication.
I just have to ask, why is a priest-offender (an adult) held to a lower standard of accountability than his emotionally-tramautized child-sex-abuse-victim? This is horrific.
ADDENDUM LINKS
Catholic Priest Offenders:
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/priestdb/#map
Additional Information:
http://www.silentlambs.org/
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/PUBLICATIONS/factsheet/fsabuse1.htm
Pedophile Criminal Profile:
http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/psychology/pedophiles/7.html
I really don't mean to offend Catholics. They have a lot of good points other than their pedophile priest issue, but the scriptural-requirements for church-leadership are clear. The scriptures say church-leadership is supposed to be "married with children" -- not members of NAMBLA (the North American Man Boy Love Association).
God in His wisdom, through His anointed prophet, the Apostle Paul, gave us His divine guidelines for choosing a church pastor in 1st Timothy Chapter 3:1-6, which specifies that he should be married with children, and have a good reputation that can be verified.
Even in human terms the reasoning is fairly obvious:
1) a married minister has more accountability because of a wife and a family.
2) a married minister has an outlet for his sexual drive with a wife.
3) a married minister with a family has more to lose from foul play.
4) a married minister brings more history with him that can be examined by talking to the wife and his children.
5) a married minister with children has more eyes watching his daily conduct.
Here is where the RCC has gone wrong with their ministry:
1) Catholic leadership is not allowed to marry, and hence ALL of these aforementioned safeguards are forfeited.
2) Furthermore, the secrecy, authority, trust, and access to children are like a magnet for child predators that have no interest whatsoever in marrying another adult. They are only interested in child sex.
3) They disguise themselves as trustworthy priests when they are criminals.
4) Furthermore, the catholic hierarchy knowingly breaks the law by harboring these known felons from justice.
Background
Many centuries ago, the Catholic Church departed from God's plan for church-leadership. Today, in the information age, where everything is out in the open, the Catholic Church continues to make the news with sexual abuse law suits. Here we see ordained priests that are MARRIED to NO ONE, and molesting someone else's CHILDREN while their superiors look on with indifference. These pedophile priests are criminals. They bring shame and reproach to the entire church body. The reputation extends far beyond the RCC (Catholic Church) to all of Christendom. I'm sorry, but as Christians, we can't just ignore it and call it a catholic issue, because it tarnishes the name of Christ.
From pedophile to priest -- a "pedo-priest" as it were -- this is not what God intended for the ministry, for the church body, or for sexual conduct PERIOD. We often hear about sex scandals in other church denominations, whether it be Haggard, Bakker, or Swaggart, but the RCC takes the unique spotlight for child sexual abuse -- in particular man-boy sexual abuse.
In 1st Timothy Chapter 3, the apostle Paul (who was not married) gave the blue print specifications for a bishop:
1 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
As verse 5 says, the bishop can not take care of the church if he can't even take care of his own family. The "husband of one bride", having a "blameless" reputation, known for "good behavior." This doesn't sound like a pedophile catholic priest AT ALL.
The catholic denomination claims the bishop is "married" to the church; however Christ does not share His bride with anyone. That would be adultery. Besides that, Peter was married, and he was supposedly the first pope of the Catholic Church.
The catholic interpretation and requirements DO NOT compare to scriptures. Unmarried priests help the Catholic Church save money, so I hear, with no inheritance going to a spouse or to children. Economically convenient -- but the bible blue print has been altered -- and the plan is not founded in God's Word.
News and Commentary
So we read the news headlines and see stories like this:
"LOS ANGELES - The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles will settle its clergy abuse cases for at least $600 million, by far the largest payout in the church's sexual abuse scandal. "
"The settlement would be the largest ever by a Roman Catholic archdiocese since the clergy sexual abuse scandal erupted in Boston in 2002. Among the largest total payouts was $100 million in 2004 by the Diocese of Orange, Calif., to settle 90 claims. The Archdiocese of Boston agreed in 2003 to pay $84 million for 552 cases, roughly the same figure the Diocese of Covington, Ky., agreed last year to pay to settle about 360 claims. Facing a flood of abuse claims, five dioceses — Tucson, Ariz.; Spokane, Wash.; Portland, Ore.; Davenport, Iowa, and San Diego — sought bankruptcy protection.Last month, the Archdiocese of Portland agreed to pay about $52 million to 175 people, while setting aside another $20 million for anyone who comes forward in the future.The Diocese of Spokane, Wash., also recently emerged from bankruptcy protection after agreeing to pay $48 million to settle about 150 claims. "
"The largest of those came in December, when the archdiocese reached a $60 million settlement with 45 people whose claims dated from before the mid-1950s and after 1987 — periods when it had little or no sexual abuse insurance. Several religious orders in California have also reached multimillion dollar settlements in recent months, including the Carmelites, the Franciscans and the Jesuits."
Note that the RCC has sexual abuse insurance for its clergy. That is truly amazing! While everyone else thinks about medical insurance or life insurance, their leadership needs sexual abuse insurance. Wow!
Sadly, the story doesn't end with the priests, but we read their leadership covered it up, shuffling the pedo-priests from parish to parish where they did the same thing all over again. The leadership became negligent accessories to the crimes, and a legal battle looms over their records. Yet they aren't honest enough to admit guilt, so who is supposed to believe them when they say they are sorry? They were aware of the problem all along, which has gone on for decades and possibly even centuries.
News Analysis
The following analysis is posted courtesy of the Boston Globe. In summary, the pedophile priest abuse is a catholic phenomenon. It has been researched in many Protestant denominations, but the Catholic Church is in a class by itself on this issue. There is no comparison.
News Commentary from:
http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/stories/031302_abuse.htm
All faiths question handling of abuse
Debate over celibacy as factor is rancorous
By Michael Paulson, Globe Staff, 3/13/2002
''There are absolutely no Protestant equivalents,'' said Anson D. Shupe, a professor of sociology at Indiana University-Purdue University in Fort Wayne who researches clergy misconduct. ''If I could find some spectacular cases, that would help my career, but I can't. You don't have rapacious serial predators, and the Protestant establishment doesn't tolerate it the way the Catholic establishment has.''
"By contrast, Protestant and non-Christian denominations have had so few reported cases that their leaders can generally count them on one hand. A 1999 study of clergy misconduct, in which academics with the Hartford Institute for Religion Research spoke with 76 ministers who had, over the last 40 years, served 532 different congregations in 14 different denominations, turned up no instances of sexual abuse of children in the Protestant congregations studied."
"But, as diocese after diocese around the United States acknowledges that it has employed multiple priests accused of molesting children over the last several decades - the contrast with other denominations seems to be growing."
''The Catholic hierarchy has stonewalled any attempts to do any kind of study on this issue, and they've had offers to do it,'' said Rev. Thomas P. Doyle, a Catholic Air Force chaplain, who, as a canon lawyer working at the Vatican Embassy in Washington in 1985, wrote a report on the problem of clergy sexual abuse that he says was ignored by the bishops. "
"Priests are more able to abuse children because of the extraordinary amount of authority and reverence they enjoy within the Catholic Church. Protestant and Jewish clergy are generally less powerful within their congregations, and can often be fired by laypeople."
"The only non-Catholic denomination that has been plagued with allegations of widespread child sexual abuse is the Hare Krishna movement, a small Hindu-like sect. Scores of people have alleged that they were sexually abused as children at Hare Krishna boarding schools in the 1970s and 1980s."
Biblical Rebuttal
In the gospels, Jesus Christ tells us what He thinks about child-molesters that target the church body:
Matthew 18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
Mark 9:42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
Luke 17:2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.
According to scriptures the shepherds of the RCC flock did a really poor job:
John Chapter 10:
11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
12 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep. 13 The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.
14 I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
The hireling flees because he doesn't care for the sheep. A hireling doesn't look out for the sheep -- a hireling looks out for himself. Catholic clergy claim they are "married" to the church, but the pedophile priests look more like the wolf, and the negligent bishops look more like the hireling shepherd that fled.
Conclusion
Some RCC members tell us that ALL the church denominations are involved in pedophilia, and they should ALL share equally in the blame. Unfortunately other Christians ARE sharing in the blame, and it's NOT because they are guilty. We just can't trust God's plan -- so we're told by some Catholics. Come on, we're not buying it! The Lord told us how to choose church-leadership, and somebody failed to do it right.
The Lord gave us the blue-print for building church-leadership, and somebody isn't using it. No wonder there are flaws. God is the architect and He gave us the specifications through the apostle Paul. The specifications say: MARRIED WITH CHILDREN. God knows best. Good day to you.
UPDATE 4/18/08
Pope Benedict XVI working to clean up the priesthood
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080419/ap_on_re_us/pope_us
While visiting in the USA, Pope Benedict has committed to work on the Catholic priest abuse issues. Stating he wants quality over quantity, he proposed an overhaul of administrative procedures to make it easier to purge out pedophile priests. He also met privately with abuse victims.
"He spoke privately with victims — in what is believed to be the first time a pope has met with people who had been abused by priests. He also told bishops the problem had sometimes been very "badly handled" — an indirect but clear papal admonition. Benedict could take up the issue again Saturday in a Mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral with priests from around the country.
So far, Benedict has offered support to America's clergy during his visit.
He said priests who had done nothing wrong had been unfairly tarred by the crisis. More than 4,000 clergy have been accused of molesting minors in the U.S. since 1950. Abuse-related costs have surpassed $2 billion in that period, with much of the payouts in just the last six years."
UPDATE 9/21/08
The vatican used a policy known as the Crimen Sollicitationis to control sex-abuse scandals to the advantage of the catholic church. It was issued by the vatican and used world-wide as a play book for priest sex-abuse cover-ups.
The document is also known as The Manner of Proceeding in Cases of Solicitation.
Article from the BBC:
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/5389684.stm
"It instructs them how to deal with priests who solicit sex from the confessional. It also deals with "any obscene external act ... with youths of either sex." "
Quotes form Article:
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news5/2003_07_29_Shaw_VaticanDocument.htm
Should an accused priest go before a church trial, "in every way the judge is to remember that it is never right for him to bind the accused by an oath to tell the truth."
The directive also says the person who is solicited in the confessional must report the incident to the bishop within a month or to the Holy Office. The accused confessor is required to warn the person confessing of this duty. A person who knowingly failed to denounce the priest incurs excommunication.
I just have to ask, why is a priest-offender (an adult) held to a lower standard of accountability than his emotionally-tramautized child-sex-abuse-victim? This is horrific.
ADDENDUM LINKS
Catholic Priest Offenders:
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/priestdb/#map
Additional Information:
http://www.silentlambs.org/
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/PUBLICATIONS/factsheet/fsabuse1.htm
Pedophile Criminal Profile:
http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/psychology/pedophiles/7.html
Thursday, August 9, 2007
Protestant Church of the Withered Branch
This article is about the damage caused by the Gay Christian Movement to several mainline church denominations including the ECUSA, UCC, Presbyterian Church USA, and Evangelical Lutherans. It's an eye-opener to the magnitude of this problem in Christendom, where this issue is perhaps the greatest church-splitter since the Protestant Reformation.
Preamble
Jesus died for sinners. The purpose of the church is to spread this redeeming message to all sinners. Everyone sins and comes short of the mark. The church is supposed to be open to all sinners. Some of them just happen to be homosexuals. Homosexuals can be saved by Jesus Christ like any other sinner, just as the apostle Paul wrote:
1 Corinthians 6:11
And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
Christians welcome homosexuals to church, but we do not welcome doctrine that promotes a sinful lifestyle. Some liberal-leaning churches have embraced sin rather than the sinner and that is what this article is about.
Introduction
Liberal theology lacks a biblical message, and its purpose is to make the members feel good about themselves, and about their sinful lifestyles. No change is needed in the heart of the believer, rather everyone is being told they are fine just like they are -- that Jesus makes sin irrelevant -- or even worse than that -- nobody was a sinner to start with.
Biblical Background
Someone might ask why the sin-affirming liberal-doctrine is so bad. There are many answers but let me present an example that gives the picture. It's the Church at Corinth, and it's in the Bible. This church was well known for its temple prostitutes and sexual perversions. As the Bible put it -- even the world shuddered about the Church at Corinth. The apostle Paul wrote:
1 Corinthians 5:1
It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
Yes, a sickening picture where fornication was rampant. The Church of Corinth was utterly destroyed. Today, there is no Church of Corinth -- there are NO NEW MEMBERS. A dead church has NO MEMBERS, nobody sitting in the pews, nobody even preaches there anymore. And a dead church is measured by its MEMBERSHIP -- members keep a church alive. Are we getting the picture?
Attendance Statistics
Looking at the attendance numbers, it is clear that the liberal wing of the church is dieing. The following attendance statistics came from Church Executive Magazine regarding the main line American church denominations.
The winners typically have taken the more conservative approach regarding the sin-pandering gay doctrine:
24. The Orthodox Church in America, 1,064,000 members, reporting an increase of 6.40 percent.
10. Assemblies of God, 2,779,095 members, reporting an increase of 1.81 percent.
4. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 5,999,177 members, reporting an increase of 1.74 percent.
1. The Catholic Church, 67,820,833 members, reporting an increase of .83 percent.
Churches with no change:
5. The Church of God in Christ, 5,499,875 members, no increase or decrease reported.
6. National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc., 5,000,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
8. National Baptist Convention of America, 3,500,000, no increase or decrease reported.
11. African Methodist Episcopal Church, 2,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
12. National Missionary Baptist Convention of America, 2,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
13. Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc., 2,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported
16. Churches of Christ, 1,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
17. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, 1,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
18. Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, Inc., 1,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
19. The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, 1,432,795 members, no increase or decrease reported.
22. Baptist Bible Fellowship International, 1,200,000, no increase or decrease reported.
23. Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, 1,071,615 members, no increase or decrease reported.
Some of the losers are conservative and some are not:
20. American Baptist Churches in the USA, 1,432,840, reporting a decrease of .57 percent.
3. The United Methodist Church, 8,186,254 members, reporting a decrease of .79 percent.
14. The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod (LCMS), 2,463,747, reporting a decrease or 1.01 percent.
2. The Southern Baptist Convention, 16,267,494 members, reporting a decrease of 1.05 percent.
25. Jehovah's Witnesses, 1,029,902 members, reporting a decrease of 1.07 members.
The worst losers are all gay-affirming, including gay clergy that are openly same-sex-partnered and practicing gays and lesbians:
7. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, 4,930,429, reporting a decrease of 1.09 percent.
15. Episcopal Church, 2,463,747, reporting a decrease of 1.55 percent.
9. Presbyterian Church (USA), 3,189,573 members, reporting a decrease of 1.60 percent.
21. United Church of Christ, 1,265,786, reporting a decrease of 2.38 percent.
News and Headlines
The news headlines and analysis tell us why the membership numbers are falling for these churches:
" Nashville's largest predominantly gay and lesbian church is joining a national Protestant denomination that has seen dozens of churches leave in the last year because of its support for same-sex unions.Holy Trinity Community Church in west Nashville officially will join the United Church of Christ in an installation ceremony Sunday. "
"The just-elected Episcopal presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, is a one-woman combination of all these things, having voted for Robinson, blessed same-sex couples in her Nevada diocese, prayed to a female Jesus at the Columbus convention and invited former Newark, N.J., bishop John Shelby Spong, famous for denying Christ's divinity, to address her priests."
"Katherine Schori, leader for the Episcopal Church denomination, calls homosexuality a gift rather than sin as Gene Robinson is ordinated."
"Who we are... Gay-affirming Baptists? No, this is not an oxymoron!Ten years ago, after the lgbt community had been dealt yet another blow by members of their denomination, a group of American Baptist pastors decided that it was time to stand up and declare their affirmation of glbt people. The network of churches they founded, the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (AWAB), has now grown to more than 60 churches and organizations. AWAB members are Baptist churches, organizations, and individuals who have gone on record as being welcoming and affirming of all persons, without regard to sexual orientation."
"Church defies Presbyterian order to ban gay preachers."
"NEWS ANALYSIS: Methodists Divided on Gay Rights
Church leaders anguish over same-sex unions."
"Yet many conservative Presbyterians believe that passage of the so-called Fidelity and Chastity Amendment will end more than two decades of division over homosexuality. Describing the ordaining of gays as a "direct challenge of the scriptures," the Rev. Jack Harderer, a supporter of the amendment, said, "It has boiled down to the real watershed issue: (do) we believe in the authority of the scripture or do we not?"
"Lutheran leaders look to ease stance on gay pastors.
The Lutheran proposal, which is being spearheaded by Bishop Margaret G. Payne of Massachusetts, would maintain an official requirement that gays and lesbians abstain from homosexual relationships in order to qualify as ministers. But it would allow local church leaders to "refrain from disciplining" congregations that disregard that requirement and hire "partnered" gay or lesbian pastors."
"three years ago, the Presbyterian Church USA, at its general assembly in Birmingham, Ala., was turning itself into the laughingstock of the blogosphere by tacitly approving alternative designations for the supposedly sexist Christian Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Among the suggested names were "Mother, Child and Womb" and "Rock, Redeemer and Friend." Moved by the spirit of the Presbyterian revisionists, Beliefnet blogger Rod Dreher held a "Name That Trinity" contest. Entries included "Rock, Scissors and Paper" and "Larry, Curly and Moe." "
"The Presbyterian Church USA is famous for its 1993 conference, cosponsored with the United Methodist Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and other mainline churches, in which participants "re-imagined" God as "Our Maker Sophia" and held a feminist-inspired "milk and honey" ritual designed to replace traditional bread-and-wine Communion. "
"When a church doesn't take itself seriously, neither do its members. It is hard to believe that as recently as 1960, members of mainline churches — Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans and the like — accounted for 40% of all American Protestants. Today, it's more like 12% (17 million out of 135 million). Some of the precipitous decline is due to lower birthrates among the generally blue-state main liners, but it also is clear that millions of mainline adherents (and especially their children) have simply walked out of the pews never to return. According to the Hartford Institute for Religious Research, in 1965, there were 3.4 million Episcopalians; now, there are 2.3 million. The number of Presbyterians fell from 4.3 million in 1965 to 2.5 million today. Compare that with 16 million members reported by the Southern Baptists. "
"When your religion says "whatever" on doctrinal matters, regards Jesus as just another wise teacher, refuses on principle to evangelize and lets you do pretty much what you want, it's a short step to deciding that one of the things you don't want to do is get up on Sunday morning and go to church."
"Despite the fact that median Sunday attendance at Episcopal churches is 80 worshipers, the Episcopal Church, as a whole, is financially equipped to carry on for some time, thanks to its inventory of vintage real estate and huge endowments left over from the days (no more!) when it was the Republican Party at prayer. Furthermore, it has offset some of its demographic losses by attracting disaffected liberal Catholics and gays and lesbians. The less endowed Presbyterian Church USA is in deeper trouble. Just before its general assembly in Birmingham, it announced that it would eliminate 75 jobs to meet a $9.15-million budget cut at its headquarters, the third such round of job cuts in four years. "
"The Anglican Communion is made up mostly of Bible-believing conservatives, while the majority of Episcopal parishes are characterized as liberal. The Episcopal Church has lost thousands of members over the years. Once 4 million strong, the church now has 870,000 parishioners, Schofield said."
Analysis
The following analysis comes from Rasmussen Reports. In summary the liberal congregations typically support the ordination of gay-lesbian pastors, but the supporting members typically don't attend church. The gay-pastorate doesn't get them back in church either.
From Rasmussen Reports June 30, 2006
Churchgoers Disapprove of Gay and Lesbian Pastors 86% Agree Government Should Stay Out of It.
Is it appropriate for gay and lesbian church members to serve as pastors and bishops in a Christian Church? Two thirds (67%) of those who attend Church weekly say no. Just 27% of those faithful worshippers say yes.
Self-identified Evangelical Christians oppose gay and lesbian pastors by an 80% to 15% margin. Other Protestants oppose such pastors by a 2-to-1 margin while Catholics are nearly evenly divided.
The only demographic group to favor gay and lesbian pastors are those who rarely or never attend church. Among this segment of the population, 49% believe such pastors are appropriate. Thirty-nine percent (39%) disagree.
Among those who attend churches that are growing, just 26% believe it is appropriate to appoint gay and lesbian church leaders. Sixty-six percent (66%) are opposed.
Opinion is more evenly divided in churches with declining attendance.Forty-four percent (44%) of those in declining churches say it is appropriate for gay and lesbian leadership appointments. Forty percent (40%) disagree.
Episcopal Meltdown
This section will be devoted specifically to the Episcopal Church's dilemma. Excerpts come from Reverend Earle Fox and his blog on the The Road to Emmaus.
Episcopal Crisis
This is a reflective write-up by Tucker Carlson, Episcopalian, news anchor, commentator, and pundit for MNBC. It looks at the progressive downward spiraling path taken by Anglican leadership in America.
Why the Episcopal Church has Self-Destructed
"Bishop William Winterrowd ("In the Head, but not the Heart" 6/4/06), makes, I think, precisely the error which has brought the Episcopal Church to its demise -- pitting the legislative against the reconciliation mode, thus putting unity above truth. "
The Episcopal Tragedy and the Coming of Clarity
"I am an Episcopal priest who has labored in that vineyard for over forty years, now watching the Church I loved and cherished self-destruct. There will be a resurrection of sorts, that is a division with one side conforming, more or less, to orthodoxy."
Conclusion
Jesus died for sinners, and that includes all of us. Carnal doctrine, on the other hand, preaches that we are not sinners or that sin no longer matters. Sin-pandering "gay theology" is carnal preaching at its worst. If you claim the name of Christ I hope you haven't fallen for this destructive lie.
Homosexuals have a moral challenge that is difficult. Don't surrender them to satan by telling them it's ok to practice this sexual perversion. It doesn't matter what humanistic psychologists or political special interests say about it. They aren't the experts on morality -- God is.
Don't be a Christian that goes for PC instead of JC. The Bible is clear on this issue. There IS NO debate. Those that raise issues with the Bible translations show their own ignorance. The Bible and Jewish history both tell us in very clear terms that sex with the same-sex IS SIN under ALL circumstances.
Good day and God bless.
Preamble
Jesus died for sinners. The purpose of the church is to spread this redeeming message to all sinners. Everyone sins and comes short of the mark. The church is supposed to be open to all sinners. Some of them just happen to be homosexuals. Homosexuals can be saved by Jesus Christ like any other sinner, just as the apostle Paul wrote:
1 Corinthians 6:11
And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
Christians welcome homosexuals to church, but we do not welcome doctrine that promotes a sinful lifestyle. Some liberal-leaning churches have embraced sin rather than the sinner and that is what this article is about.
Introduction
Liberal theology lacks a biblical message, and its purpose is to make the members feel good about themselves, and about their sinful lifestyles. No change is needed in the heart of the believer, rather everyone is being told they are fine just like they are -- that Jesus makes sin irrelevant -- or even worse than that -- nobody was a sinner to start with.
Biblical Background
Someone might ask why the sin-affirming liberal-doctrine is so bad. There are many answers but let me present an example that gives the picture. It's the Church at Corinth, and it's in the Bible. This church was well known for its temple prostitutes and sexual perversions. As the Bible put it -- even the world shuddered about the Church at Corinth. The apostle Paul wrote:
1 Corinthians 5:1
It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
Yes, a sickening picture where fornication was rampant. The Church of Corinth was utterly destroyed. Today, there is no Church of Corinth -- there are NO NEW MEMBERS. A dead church has NO MEMBERS, nobody sitting in the pews, nobody even preaches there anymore. And a dead church is measured by its MEMBERSHIP -- members keep a church alive. Are we getting the picture?
Attendance Statistics
Looking at the attendance numbers, it is clear that the liberal wing of the church is dieing. The following attendance statistics came from Church Executive Magazine regarding the main line American church denominations.
The winners typically have taken the more conservative approach regarding the sin-pandering gay doctrine:
24. The Orthodox Church in America, 1,064,000 members, reporting an increase of 6.40 percent.
10. Assemblies of God, 2,779,095 members, reporting an increase of 1.81 percent.
4. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 5,999,177 members, reporting an increase of 1.74 percent.
1. The Catholic Church, 67,820,833 members, reporting an increase of .83 percent.
Churches with no change:
5. The Church of God in Christ, 5,499,875 members, no increase or decrease reported.
6. National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc., 5,000,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
8. National Baptist Convention of America, 3,500,000, no increase or decrease reported.
11. African Methodist Episcopal Church, 2,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
12. National Missionary Baptist Convention of America, 2,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
13. Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc., 2,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported
16. Churches of Christ, 1,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
17. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, 1,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
18. Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, Inc., 1,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.
19. The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, 1,432,795 members, no increase or decrease reported.
22. Baptist Bible Fellowship International, 1,200,000, no increase or decrease reported.
23. Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, 1,071,615 members, no increase or decrease reported.
Some of the losers are conservative and some are not:
20. American Baptist Churches in the USA, 1,432,840, reporting a decrease of .57 percent.
3. The United Methodist Church, 8,186,254 members, reporting a decrease of .79 percent.
14. The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod (LCMS), 2,463,747, reporting a decrease or 1.01 percent.
2. The Southern Baptist Convention, 16,267,494 members, reporting a decrease of 1.05 percent.
25. Jehovah's Witnesses, 1,029,902 members, reporting a decrease of 1.07 members.
The worst losers are all gay-affirming, including gay clergy that are openly same-sex-partnered and practicing gays and lesbians:
7. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, 4,930,429, reporting a decrease of 1.09 percent.
15. Episcopal Church, 2,463,747, reporting a decrease of 1.55 percent.
9. Presbyterian Church (USA), 3,189,573 members, reporting a decrease of 1.60 percent.
21. United Church of Christ, 1,265,786, reporting a decrease of 2.38 percent.
News and Headlines
The news headlines and analysis tell us why the membership numbers are falling for these churches:
" Nashville's largest predominantly gay and lesbian church is joining a national Protestant denomination that has seen dozens of churches leave in the last year because of its support for same-sex unions.Holy Trinity Community Church in west Nashville officially will join the United Church of Christ in an installation ceremony Sunday. "
"The just-elected Episcopal presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, is a one-woman combination of all these things, having voted for Robinson, blessed same-sex couples in her Nevada diocese, prayed to a female Jesus at the Columbus convention and invited former Newark, N.J., bishop John Shelby Spong, famous for denying Christ's divinity, to address her priests."
"Katherine Schori, leader for the Episcopal Church denomination, calls homosexuality a gift rather than sin as Gene Robinson is ordinated."
"Who we are... Gay-affirming Baptists? No, this is not an oxymoron!Ten years ago, after the lgbt community had been dealt yet another blow by members of their denomination, a group of American Baptist pastors decided that it was time to stand up and declare their affirmation of glbt people. The network of churches they founded, the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (AWAB), has now grown to more than 60 churches and organizations. AWAB members are Baptist churches, organizations, and individuals who have gone on record as being welcoming and affirming of all persons, without regard to sexual orientation."
"Church defies Presbyterian order to ban gay preachers."
"NEWS ANALYSIS: Methodists Divided on Gay Rights
Church leaders anguish over same-sex unions."
"Yet many conservative Presbyterians believe that passage of the so-called Fidelity and Chastity Amendment will end more than two decades of division over homosexuality. Describing the ordaining of gays as a "direct challenge of the scriptures," the Rev. Jack Harderer, a supporter of the amendment, said, "It has boiled down to the real watershed issue: (do) we believe in the authority of the scripture or do we not?"
"Lutheran leaders look to ease stance on gay pastors.
The Lutheran proposal, which is being spearheaded by Bishop Margaret G. Payne of Massachusetts, would maintain an official requirement that gays and lesbians abstain from homosexual relationships in order to qualify as ministers. But it would allow local church leaders to "refrain from disciplining" congregations that disregard that requirement and hire "partnered" gay or lesbian pastors."
"three years ago, the Presbyterian Church USA, at its general assembly in Birmingham, Ala., was turning itself into the laughingstock of the blogosphere by tacitly approving alternative designations for the supposedly sexist Christian Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Among the suggested names were "Mother, Child and Womb" and "Rock, Redeemer and Friend." Moved by the spirit of the Presbyterian revisionists, Beliefnet blogger Rod Dreher held a "Name That Trinity" contest. Entries included "Rock, Scissors and Paper" and "Larry, Curly and Moe." "
"The Presbyterian Church USA is famous for its 1993 conference, cosponsored with the United Methodist Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and other mainline churches, in which participants "re-imagined" God as "Our Maker Sophia" and held a feminist-inspired "milk and honey" ritual designed to replace traditional bread-and-wine Communion. "
"When a church doesn't take itself seriously, neither do its members. It is hard to believe that as recently as 1960, members of mainline churches — Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans and the like — accounted for 40% of all American Protestants. Today, it's more like 12% (17 million out of 135 million). Some of the precipitous decline is due to lower birthrates among the generally blue-state main liners, but it also is clear that millions of mainline adherents (and especially their children) have simply walked out of the pews never to return. According to the Hartford Institute for Religious Research, in 1965, there were 3.4 million Episcopalians; now, there are 2.3 million. The number of Presbyterians fell from 4.3 million in 1965 to 2.5 million today. Compare that with 16 million members reported by the Southern Baptists. "
"When your religion says "whatever" on doctrinal matters, regards Jesus as just another wise teacher, refuses on principle to evangelize and lets you do pretty much what you want, it's a short step to deciding that one of the things you don't want to do is get up on Sunday morning and go to church."
"Despite the fact that median Sunday attendance at Episcopal churches is 80 worshipers, the Episcopal Church, as a whole, is financially equipped to carry on for some time, thanks to its inventory of vintage real estate and huge endowments left over from the days (no more!) when it was the Republican Party at prayer. Furthermore, it has offset some of its demographic losses by attracting disaffected liberal Catholics and gays and lesbians. The less endowed Presbyterian Church USA is in deeper trouble. Just before its general assembly in Birmingham, it announced that it would eliminate 75 jobs to meet a $9.15-million budget cut at its headquarters, the third such round of job cuts in four years. "
"The Anglican Communion is made up mostly of Bible-believing conservatives, while the majority of Episcopal parishes are characterized as liberal. The Episcopal Church has lost thousands of members over the years. Once 4 million strong, the church now has 870,000 parishioners, Schofield said."
Analysis
The following analysis comes from Rasmussen Reports. In summary the liberal congregations typically support the ordination of gay-lesbian pastors, but the supporting members typically don't attend church. The gay-pastorate doesn't get them back in church either.
From Rasmussen Reports June 30, 2006
Churchgoers Disapprove of Gay and Lesbian Pastors 86% Agree Government Should Stay Out of It.
Is it appropriate for gay and lesbian church members to serve as pastors and bishops in a Christian Church? Two thirds (67%) of those who attend Church weekly say no. Just 27% of those faithful worshippers say yes.
Self-identified Evangelical Christians oppose gay and lesbian pastors by an 80% to 15% margin. Other Protestants oppose such pastors by a 2-to-1 margin while Catholics are nearly evenly divided.
The only demographic group to favor gay and lesbian pastors are those who rarely or never attend church. Among this segment of the population, 49% believe such pastors are appropriate. Thirty-nine percent (39%) disagree.
Among those who attend churches that are growing, just 26% believe it is appropriate to appoint gay and lesbian church leaders. Sixty-six percent (66%) are opposed.
Opinion is more evenly divided in churches with declining attendance.Forty-four percent (44%) of those in declining churches say it is appropriate for gay and lesbian leadership appointments. Forty percent (40%) disagree.
Episcopal Meltdown
This section will be devoted specifically to the Episcopal Church's dilemma. Excerpts come from Reverend Earle Fox and his blog on the The Road to Emmaus.
Episcopal Crisis
This is a reflective write-up by Tucker Carlson, Episcopalian, news anchor, commentator, and pundit for MNBC. It looks at the progressive downward spiraling path taken by Anglican leadership in America.
Why the Episcopal Church has Self-Destructed
"Bishop William Winterrowd ("In the Head, but not the Heart" 6/4/06), makes, I think, precisely the error which has brought the Episcopal Church to its demise -- pitting the legislative against the reconciliation mode, thus putting unity above truth. "
The Episcopal Tragedy and the Coming of Clarity
"I am an Episcopal priest who has labored in that vineyard for over forty years, now watching the Church I loved and cherished self-destruct. There will be a resurrection of sorts, that is a division with one side conforming, more or less, to orthodoxy."
Conclusion
Jesus died for sinners, and that includes all of us. Carnal doctrine, on the other hand, preaches that we are not sinners or that sin no longer matters. Sin-pandering "gay theology" is carnal preaching at its worst. If you claim the name of Christ I hope you haven't fallen for this destructive lie.
Homosexuals have a moral challenge that is difficult. Don't surrender them to satan by telling them it's ok to practice this sexual perversion. It doesn't matter what humanistic psychologists or political special interests say about it. They aren't the experts on morality -- God is.
Don't be a Christian that goes for PC instead of JC. The Bible is clear on this issue. There IS NO debate. Those that raise issues with the Bible translations show their own ignorance. The Bible and Jewish history both tell us in very clear terms that sex with the same-sex IS SIN under ALL circumstances.
Good day and God bless.
Familiar Gay-Affirming Arguments
On a discussion forum, I requested the strongest arguments that gays have to justify their lifestyles.
After hundreds of responses, these were all the arguments the homosexual affirmers came up with to justify the gay lifestyle:
"Jesus never condemned a homosexual."
"I see no issue with sex in a committed long term relationship. Even if in the end the relationship fails."
"I don't believe that homosexuality is wrong; can't you come up with a better excuse for your hate then an archaic book that originated from a xenophobic culture that stoned anyone who was different from themselves?"
"I don't need a reason. I just am. That's enough for me. I don't have to justify it to you, god, or anyone else."
"I don't subscribe to "sin"."
"I think your religion and the book you got it out of is a pack of offensive lies that breed hatred, superstition, and intolerance?"
"What you think doesn't affect me and what homosexuals do doesn't affect you."
"ANYONE can get AIDS. To try and use such an unfortunate set of events to further your hateful Christian agenda is despicable."
"All I see in the bible is "I was hungry, and you fed me."I see nowhere where it calls for people to address the gay issue in church. Can you point out the specific verses?"
"I also think it's funny when people compare homosexuality -- which, so far, no one has proven has any negative consequences -- to things that do have negative consequences, like stealing or alcoholism. I don't know if it's a lack of imagination or what."
"Genetics"
“Normal people don't see why anyone should need an excuse to have gay sex.”
“SOME Christians say the gay lifestyle is sin. Other Christians, who are no less devout and no less concerned with interpreting and following the Bible correctly, disagree.”
Persons that claim to be Christians gave the following comments about the gay lifestyle:
"You ought to keep to yourself and dwell on your own sins and get right with God, rather than saying Christians that are homosexual are not Christian."
“You just want a prop to be a judgmental person, and that's truly sad to behold.”
“Instead of Christians demanding that they themselves end their divorce issues, adultery issues, porn issues, tithing issues, and all the other Biblical teachings we ignore, we can single out gays and demand that they change because it's easier to put demands on others than fix ourselves.”
"Telling someone that they aren't a Christian because of a certain sin, is actually causing many whom would otherwise remain believers to de-convert."
"This is a fine example of the "Christian: as long as they agree with me" attitude that has splintered Christianity into the mess it's in today."
"Sit down Christian. You cannot wave your unread Bible and scare me because I know the larger story that runs through it beginning to end."
“Interpretations of the Bible used to condemn homosexuality are flawed.”
"Is it not better to care for them, lead them to Christ's mercy and let Christ Himself convict them towards the changes they may need."
"Still trying to use a disease to justify prejudice?"
"And let's draw the line in the sand and say, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Who is ready to throw the first stone? Any takers?"
"Matt. 7:1 Do not judge, or you too will be judged."
"Why can't you focus on helping the poor and needy around the world instead of picking on gays."
I provided the following links about the health issues:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm
MSM made up more than two thirds (68%) of all men living with HIV in 2005, even though only about 5% to 7% of men in the United States reported having sex with other men.
AIDS awareness not working in America:
Many Gay Men in U.S. Unaware They Have H.I.V., Study Finds
Oxford International Journal of Epidemiology says
"CONCLUSION: In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday."
Good day and God bless.
After hundreds of responses, these were all the arguments the homosexual affirmers came up with to justify the gay lifestyle:
"Jesus never condemned a homosexual."
"I see no issue with sex in a committed long term relationship. Even if in the end the relationship fails."
"I don't believe that homosexuality is wrong; can't you come up with a better excuse for your hate then an archaic book that originated from a xenophobic culture that stoned anyone who was different from themselves?"
"I don't need a reason. I just am. That's enough for me. I don't have to justify it to you, god, or anyone else."
"I don't subscribe to "sin"."
"I think your religion and the book you got it out of is a pack of offensive lies that breed hatred, superstition, and intolerance?"
"What you think doesn't affect me and what homosexuals do doesn't affect you."
"ANYONE can get AIDS. To try and use such an unfortunate set of events to further your hateful Christian agenda is despicable."
"All I see in the bible is "I was hungry, and you fed me."I see nowhere where it calls for people to address the gay issue in church. Can you point out the specific verses?"
"I also think it's funny when people compare homosexuality -- which, so far, no one has proven has any negative consequences -- to things that do have negative consequences, like stealing or alcoholism. I don't know if it's a lack of imagination or what."
"Genetics"
“Normal people don't see why anyone should need an excuse to have gay sex.”
“SOME Christians say the gay lifestyle is sin. Other Christians, who are no less devout and no less concerned with interpreting and following the Bible correctly, disagree.”
Persons that claim to be Christians gave the following comments about the gay lifestyle:
"You ought to keep to yourself and dwell on your own sins and get right with God, rather than saying Christians that are homosexual are not Christian."
“You just want a prop to be a judgmental person, and that's truly sad to behold.”
“Instead of Christians demanding that they themselves end their divorce issues, adultery issues, porn issues, tithing issues, and all the other Biblical teachings we ignore, we can single out gays and demand that they change because it's easier to put demands on others than fix ourselves.”
"Telling someone that they aren't a Christian because of a certain sin, is actually causing many whom would otherwise remain believers to de-convert."
"This is a fine example of the "Christian: as long as they agree with me" attitude that has splintered Christianity into the mess it's in today."
"Sit down Christian. You cannot wave your unread Bible and scare me because I know the larger story that runs through it beginning to end."
“Interpretations of the Bible used to condemn homosexuality are flawed.”
"Is it not better to care for them, lead them to Christ's mercy and let Christ Himself convict them towards the changes they may need."
"Still trying to use a disease to justify prejudice?"
"And let's draw the line in the sand and say, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Who is ready to throw the first stone? Any takers?"
"Matt. 7:1 Do not judge, or you too will be judged."
"Why can't you focus on helping the poor and needy around the world instead of picking on gays."
I provided the following links about the health issues:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm
MSM made up more than two thirds (68%) of all men living with HIV in 2005, even though only about 5% to 7% of men in the United States reported having sex with other men.
AIDS awareness not working in America:
Many Gay Men in U.S. Unaware They Have H.I.V., Study Finds
Oxford International Journal of Epidemiology says
"CONCLUSION: In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday."
Good day and God bless.
Why do fundamentalists single out "Gay Christians" to point out their sin?
Introduction
I have debated this topic for quite a while on a supposedly Christian forum. The acceptance of gay theology is probably the greatest denomination-splitting issue since the Protestant Reformation. This isn't about "picking on gays"; rather it's about a ruinous doctrine that's destroying mainline church denominations.
Biblically speaking, fundamentalist Christians understand same-sex sex to be sin regardless of the reason for it. There are some church denominations that are misleading their congregations to believe it is not sin along with other false doctrines. In the fundamentalist view, the sinner is acceptable, but the sin is not acceptable. We object to calling same-sex sex an acceptable form of Christian conduct, and we object to "gay marriage" as a God-ordained partnership. Because of our belief in the Bible we are labeled intolerant and unloving bigots by gay activists.
Hence, the world sees this as a Christian "holier than thou" persecution of people that want to have gay sex. According to the Bible as we understand it, God will forgive any sinner that wants to be forgiven, but He will never accept his/her sins, and that is why Jesus died on the cross -- so the sinner could be washed clean of his/her sins. This forgiveness requires repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. Without repentance, the sinner remains unforgiven, and when a person denies any type of sin it indicates they probably never-even-once repented of ALL their sins.
Partial repentance is not true repentance biblically speaking. Partial repentance is no better than partial salvation, which is really no salvation at all. God can not forgive a sin unless a person repents of it -- meaning that he/she confesses it is wrong, and no longer wants it in his or her life.
Q&A
Q: Why do Christian fundamentalists single out "gay Christians" and point out their sins? Why don't they pick on adulterers, fat people, drunks, and all the rest?
A: Some of the terminology must be explained first before this question can be answered. The Bible never mentions "sexual orientation"; hence a person's sexual orientation is not sin. Secondly the Bible makes no distinction between bi-sexual, homosexual, or heterosexual acts. If a man has sex with a man, then biblically it is SIN regardless of the reason. The ACT is the sin NOT the ORIENTATION. Hence a person that is ATTRACTED to the same sex BUT DOES NOT ACT on it, is not committing sin biblically speaking. Let's please have that understood.
Sexual orientation does not bar someone from church membership in good standing. People with same sex attraction are encouraged to join the church body and have fellowship. The apostle Paul said some of those in the Christian faith were formerly having same-sex sex:
1 Corinthians 6:11
And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
Even same-sex-practicing gays are welcome to attend church, but they must respect the doctrine that is taught there. Conservative christians have the following biblical issues with so-called christians that promote this kind of a sexual lifestyle:
1) Practicing same-sex "Gay Christians" single themselves out for rebuttal. They claim they are EXEMPT from the biblical repentance that ALL other Christians are required to experience. "Gay Christians" that practice same-sex sex single themselves out by saying their sinful acts are righteous. In addition these so-called "gay Christians" have formulated a carnal doctrine that promotes their acts as "sinless perfection" in which sin abounds so that grace may more abound.
2) The church body is sick because of the false doctrine. This sin-pandering gay doctrine has infiltrated several liberal-leaning church denominations and it is causing them to split. The most noticeable example is the Episcopal Church in the USA. It has affected other Protestant denominations as well and the damage is clearly visible in lost membership, church closures, and divided congregations.
3) God's holiness deserves respect. Many Christians are offended when people that regularly practice same-sex sex flaunt their sins by calling themselves "gay Christians." We feel it is an insult to God's name and character to associate His name with the acceptance of sin. Understandably, a Christian can fall into sexual sin and remain a Christian. The difference is that a Christian confesses this and all other sins to Jesus Christ. In contrast a so-called "gay Christian" flaunts his or her sinful lifestyle, and claims it is righteous, in direct opposition to what the Bible teaches.
Responses:
Moriah Conquering Wind said...
# of scriptures labeling homosexuality outright as sin: a handful. not a ton, but a few.# of scriptures labeling daimonosexuality outright as sin: ZERO (0)# of daimonosexuals who readily admit their condition to be SIN: ALL# of homosexuals who readily admit their condition to be SIN, without equivocation: WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE??? # of CF moderators openly flaunting their "gayness" yet picking on a daimonosexual for even MENTIONING (with NO detail, NO descriptions, etc.) her orientation in passing, on a sex thread no less: at least two (2), possibly more.
SRF reply:
Dear Moriah,
I am sorry that people misunderstand you. I don't fully understand you either and I apologize for your pain. But I do know this: Jesus loves ALL sinners, and some just happen to be attracted to their own sex. Sexual desire is not a sin, but acting on it inappropriately is a sin. There is no appropriate outlet for gay-sex. This is not meant to blame you, and I try very hard to understand how difficult it must be for somebody to deny who they feel like they are. In our own strength we can not overcome, but in Christ's strength we can. Jesus is so far above me that there is no comparison. I hope you will look at Him instead of looking at me or any others that have not set the right example for you.
Welcome and Introduction
Welcome to the Scripture Refiner's Fire, where the Word of Truth IS rightly divided in love.
The Word of God is being corrupted by false teachers and sin-pandering political interests. The purpose of this blog is to expose the damage these false doctrines are causing to the church body. The church division and spiritual damage is real. It's time to let Christians know the truth in the scriptures. The lies we hear can not stand up to scripture. The Bible has the truth and we need to share it in love.
Scripture Refiner's Fire is here to provide a unified voice for Bible-believing Christians to defend the scriptures.
Shouldn't ALL churches be on the gold standard of God's Word? All other standards are counterfeits. There is only one standard for Christianity -- Jesus Christ. Jesus IS the word of God. There is only ONE REDEEMER -- Jesus Christ. Everything we know about Him comes from the Bible. Those of us that are Christian should respect God's authority as it is revealed in the scriptures just as much as we respect God Himself.
Just a few scriptures to keep in mind:
2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Matthew 5:8
Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
Zechariah 13:9
And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God.
1 Corinthians 3:13
Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
The Word of God is being corrupted by false teachers and sin-pandering political interests. The purpose of this blog is to expose the damage these false doctrines are causing to the church body. The church division and spiritual damage is real. It's time to let Christians know the truth in the scriptures. The lies we hear can not stand up to scripture. The Bible has the truth and we need to share it in love.
Scripture Refiner's Fire is here to provide a unified voice for Bible-believing Christians to defend the scriptures.
Shouldn't ALL churches be on the gold standard of God's Word? All other standards are counterfeits. There is only one standard for Christianity -- Jesus Christ. Jesus IS the word of God. There is only ONE REDEEMER -- Jesus Christ. Everything we know about Him comes from the Bible. Those of us that are Christian should respect God's authority as it is revealed in the scriptures just as much as we respect God Himself.
Just a few scriptures to keep in mind:
2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Matthew 5:8
Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
Zechariah 13:9
And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God.
1 Corinthians 3:13
Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)