The Hoax

[Chris]

If this has already been posted, please remove this. Big Daddy put this on facebook.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/06/28/so ... iage-hoax/

[Dave Roberts]

Interesting disinformation. Sounds almost like some of the BP releases about CBF a few years ago.

[Chris]

[Haruo]

It's just an example of ...

[David Montoya]

You know this had to make the folks in Nashville livid. Probable sent Land to the emergency room.

[T. D. Webb]

It is curious, indeed, that libel and slander generated by those who promote, defend, and/or practice homosexual agendas and behavior receive little more than a wink and a nod from many professing Christians. Conversely, these same people are not reluctant in the slightest to decry and castigate Bible believing Christians when the latter simply proclaim their agreement with Scriptures as to the sinfulness of homosexuality and remind everyone of the warnings recorded in Holy Writ as to the judgement in store for those who practice such gross sexual immorality. While there are, without question, many other specific sins condemned in Scripture, it is interesting that the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah are Biblical poster child illustrations of Divine judgement inflicted upon those who practice this specific immoral transgression.

One is reminded of what Paul recorded in Romans, Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil, full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice, they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them." (Romans 1:22-32) (emphasis mine)

In His Grace and Peace,

[Haruo]

So, Tom, do you think disinformation practiced against the SBC by gay activists is somehow more objectionable than its converse? I think Internet hoaxes (which this sort of is, though expanded to contain unusual extra-virtual objects like live people on the other ends of phone calls) are generally bad business, and I do not extend them "a wink and a nod". But I also don't think they are horribly awful crimes against humanity requiring condemnation of persons as well as acts. The Center for Responsible Christian Living, if it actually has separate existence, has lost its opportunity to get my money if I know it.

For that matter, David Montoya is not exactly known for being pro-gay, but his response was surely no stronger than my own, who am.

Note that I have not even engaged the question of identifying/describing "the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah", though I think that particular bit of disinformation deserves to take a hit, too.

[Gene Scarborough]

I think this is one of the most hilarious things ever to be deserved by the SBC---so many lies and distortions were wildly disbursed during the 1979- battle that one can hardly feel sorry for those who took over with equally rediculous amounts of distortion!!!!!

What goes around comes around and here is the added content which briefly outlines the stuff---read especially the several comments already attached to the story---the public is amused and has grown perplexed with Conservative Religious pretense:



It should be noted in the Sodom and Gomorrah story how Abraham offered his own daughters up for debauchery in the place of those men the crowds sought to sodomize!!!!! What was his ethical stance with this---women can be debauched, but leave the men alone???????

[T. D. Webb]

[Haruo]

[Gene Scarborough]

Oops---in old age I can get my grandchildren confused so it extends to Lot as well!!

[Jim]

[T. D. Webb]

[Haruo]

Thanks, Tom, I do not wish to argue the gross immorality of the Sodomites' behavior, and certainly when they went after "strange flesh" their gross immorality took on a sexual context, though I suppose it could also mean eating shellfish... anyhow... our hermeneutics are obviously pretty dissimilar. I wouldn't even dream of asserting as fact that Jude the Epistolary was the (half-)brother of Jesus (though he does identify himself as the brother of James); indeed, given its many queer (sic) allusions, I would be reluctant to make Jude my authority for any doctrine at all. Much of what it says is not part of the truth once for all delivered to you or me by our saints. You make a lot of assumptions and draw a lot of equations that I consider unsupported, and say that the Bible clearly teaches things that I don't see there. And, as I see it, you are led by your misunderstanding of scripture to support (at least indirectly) unchristian and irresponsible treatment of GLBT persons in the name of Jesus. I don't condone or like the method this group used to get back at the SBC (indeed, I don't condone the whole concept of getting back at those who have mistreated us), but I don't blame them for wanting to.

[T. D. Webb]

[Haruo]

[T. D. Webb]

[Haruo]

[Gene Scarborough]

While this debate over the nature of the Bible and some strange content is interesting, the start of this thread was the fake statements of the SBC over homosexuality which were disbursed to public media.

Jesus said NOTHING relative to homosexuals---although they were present in his day as in ours. If our Lord and Saviour was more interested in bringing grace and joy to people than condemnation, then I take that track!!!

I still contend the SBC has only gotten what it deserves for all the lies and distortions told about Seminary Professors and fellow Autonomous churches which now participate in CBF.

Besides, their fussing and fighting continues as they are further extending their judgementalism to churches pastored by women / the Turant Association using a building Paige Patterson wants to have / the failure to used Bold Mission Thrust to share the Gospel in ways now available with satellite technology / etc., etc., etc....

The higher the monkey climbs the tree---the more you see his tail!!!!

[Jim]

[Sandy]

[Gene Scarborough]

Hardly, my brother!!!!

The people who try to make Jesus a homophobe ALWAYS start with a "one step removed" and several steps added approach. You WILL NOT be able to quote to me a single straight-up statement from Jesus concerning the homosexual issue---although we know it existed in his day.

Jesus said little or nothing concerning sexual matters. It's not because he didn't utter things about such, but sexuality is such a ticklish matter thanks to the Apostle Paul and his belief that the end of the world was at hand and people should abstain from sexual pleasure in deference to being completely committed to God and ministry without sexual relations. Add to this, the "virgin birth" assertion and you have a pretty clear picture of Christians and sex = not very healthy nor mature and certainly distorted!

Now, we both should know Paul was a Zealot and most such people are inordinantly seeking pleasure. Many scholars have conjected that his "thorn in the flesh" was an STD he could not beat in his day. If you want to debate this, then think on the current religious zealots who have fallen to sexual abuse and disgrace. Women often use religion as a substitute for sex and become the same in their desire to "lay a priest."

A final observation is with respect to Jesus' take on divorce. He was addressing the issue of a Jewish man being able to come home at any time and present his wife with a "certificate of divorce." It legally justified a man wanting to participate in serial monogamy so that he could flush the old wife and pursue another. When Jesus equated such behavior with "adultery," he was NOT addressing the issue of a broken relationship in marriage which could not be fixed by both partners seeking to stay together with all their hearts. I don't think Jesus would condone any woman staying in abuse out of faithfulness to a marriage vow---now broken by the abusive spouse. Women can be abusive as well.

When we consider the way Jesus advocated AGAPE love in his discussion with Peter over "do you love me"---the original Greek had Peter using "philos" while Jesus was using "agape" as his word for love. At last he gave up and used Peter's less-than-the-best word. In essence, he was saying, "Peter, you still don't get it, but I hope one day your will!"

[Gene Scarborough]

[T. D. Webb]

[Jim]