There were some Christians with some signs talking about sin and salvation at a Gay Pride parade in Seattle, but a number gays demonstrated an obvious hatred towards the Christians and their message and could not help but physically attack them in broad daylight as a video record of the incident was being documented. I recently wrote about the pernicious myth that biblical Christians supposedly "hate" gays. It seems that many have been trying to put the shoe on the wrong foot.
A key phrase that seemed to reflect the animosity of the attackers was,
"Is it your job to judge?"
This phrase underscores a lack of understanding with regard to the message being presented by the Christians, as we'll see.
1. Speaking the truth is not a "job" for Christians, it's simply a mark of being an authentic believer.
Jesus outlined how his followers are to be "salt and light" in a corrupt and spiritually darkened world, according to Matthew 5.13 (NIV):
“You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot. “You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven."
2. Christians don't judge, God's word is the ultimate judge.
According to scripture, Christians are not to judge others in a condemning manner. Rather, it is the word of God that judges all men as the Holy Spirit operating through believers convicts people of sin.
Jesus outlined how the word of God will be the ultimate judge:
"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." (John 12:
3. If Christianity is false, then why do gays and secular atheists tend to get so angry at the gospel message?
If someone began demonstrating on the street saying that the Great Spaghetti Monster was going to send me to the Sargasso Spaghetti Doldrums for all eternity because of what I do and what I believe, I don't think I would be very upset. Why? Because I know the message is false. Yet, the deep seeded animosity and aggression demonstrated in this video tends to imply that these people do feel genuinely convicted in their conscience by the gospel message and, thus, they are actually helping to underscore the truth of what was being presented by the Christians.
The anger and hostility of militant atheists, such as Richard Dawkins, is fairly well-known. William Lane Craig once declared that Dawkins is a "proud man" and a "coward" who puts on an "illiterate, angry schtick" for the public. When you look into moral relativism from a philosophical perspective, you'll find that it doesn't carry logical support. This may add to the frustration and sense bitterness.
Christian ex-gay activist Michael Glatze describes gay aggression as a kind of defense mechanism:
"God is regarded as an enemy by many in the grip of homosexuality or other lustful behavior, because He reminds them of who and what they truly are meant to be. People caught in the act would rather stay “blissfully ignorant” by silencing truth and those who speak it, through antagonism, condemnation and calling them words like “racist,” “insensitive,” “evil” and “discriminatory.""
A few notes:
ReplyDelete1) I watched the video; I see no evidence that the most violent assailant (the one who was arrested, and, in the linked news report, has a significant history) is actually gay. So, saying "but a number gays demonstrated an obvious hatred towards the Christians and their message and could not help but physically attack them in broad daylight" is, at best, a stretch; indeed, there were several people involved who clearly did not approve of the message, but got in the way of the most belligerent folk.
2: "It seems that many have been trying to put the shoe on the wrong foot."
Considering a) the large number of GLBTQ Christians, and b) the recent documented attacks on Russian GLBTQ folks -- and, indeed, the government activity against them -- I suspect you are once again failing to see the forest by staring at one tree.
3: "Jesus outlined how his followers are to be "salt and light" in a corrupt and spiritually darkened world, according to Matthew 5.13 (NIV):"
A question: Would you find it appropriate for atheists to carry signs and use loudspeakers in the middle of an Easter service? Or GLBTQ folks to do the same at, say, High Mass? Because when preachers choose to go into areas where they know that their message is one of denigration, condemnation, and dismissal, why should the people subjected to that have to do so quietly? That's not being salt, that's rubbing salt in a wound.
Remember that for many people in the GLBTQ realm, they've had to deal with people claiming to be Christian actively trying to deny them rights, deny them freedoms, at times deny their very existences -- why, then, should more Christians spreading similar messages expect kindness and reserve?
(It is worth noting that I do not, in any way, shape, or form, approve of the behaviors of the nitwits grabbing signs or engaging in assault. Vehement questioning? Sure. If you're going to preach on the street, you had best be able to handle argument.)
4: "According to scripture, Christians are not to judge others in a condemning manner." Funny -- when people try and pass laws prohibiting behaviors, and declare that people are going to Hell, the people who are on the receiving end of that feel judged. ;) When people claiming to be Christians make statements like: "So we've got to get to the point where tolerance is seen as a sin because we're tolerating a lot stuff that destroys our families, that destroys our own character and we can't tolerate that stuff." and "We have to get back to the point where hate is a virtue, at least certain kinds of hate." then, funny, GLBTQ folks feel judged -- and hated.
5: "If someone began demonstrating on the street saying that the Great Spaghetti Monster was going to send me to the Sargasso Spaghetti Doldrums for all eternity because of what I do and what I believe, I don't think I would be very upset. Why? Because I know the message is false"
And this is speaking from a position of privilege. Tell me, Rick; if you were living in a place where Christianity had been *illegal* in parts of the country until very recently -- funny, I think you did -- and you saw people parading around with signs telling people that Christians were evil, destroyers of the nation, destroyers of culture -- and you knew plenty of Christians who'd been beaten, lost their jobs, lost their families, etc, because of those very beliefs -- would you be a little more upset?
If certain sorts of Christians were willing to let people live and let live, there would be a lot less ire against them -- but they're not.
6: " William Lane Craig once declared that Dawkins is a "proud man" and a "coward" who puts on an "illiterate, angry schtick" for the public." And John Loftus, former student of William Lane Craig, once declared Craig was a coward. Anyone can call names.
As for the article you linked to -- do you want me to argue with it here, or there? ;)
Imnotandrei
Delete1. I'm not sure which video you were watching. The big bald guy is not the only violent and aggressive one in the crowd. For example, in the first few seconds you see the aggressive blonde physically pushing one preacher away with her body. Then she stiff arms the other preacher pretty hard a few seconds later. At the 2.30 mark a shorter guy with a grey T-shirt and a black hat attempts to wrestle a preacher's sign away from him and that's when the free for all begins. So, no, it's mot just one guy that's violent. I'm not stating anywhere that all gays are violent. But it is notable that the Stonewall Riots, basically violent rioting against police, mark the birth of the gay rights movement in the US.
2. "Considering a) the large number of GLBTQ Christians..."
- Again, you've gone back to perennial subject of "What exactly is a Christian?" I've pointed out before that a genuine Christian will be interested in following the straightforward meaning of scripture, not torturing the text of scripture in order to try and make it confess whatever it is a person has decided it should say (even going so far as to flatly contradict the plain meaning.)
Basic elements of biblical Christianity are outlined in scripture, as noted here:
True Christians, True Scotsmen and Venn Diagrams
http://templestream.blogspot.com/search?q=true+christian
Four verses on homosexuality defining it as sin:
Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"
1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 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. 28 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."
Now, do present one scripture offering that homosexuality is NOT a sin from the Old OR New Testament.
I:Tell me, Rick; if you were living in a place where Christianity had been *illegal* in parts of the country until very recently -- funny, I think you did -- and you saw people parading around with signs telling people that Christians were evil, destroyers of the nation, destroyers of culture...
DeleteTo be honest, Christianity was discouraged in the Soviet Union, but even under Stalin Christianity was allowed legally.
Also it is ironic, that there are plenty of good arguments for christianity being evil, destroyers of nations and destroyers of culture. However, there are no good arguments against same sex mariages. 8)
R:If Christianity is false, then why do gays and secular atheists tend to get so angry at the gospel message?
Rick, I know you have the memory span of a gold fish. That question has been answered at your blog before. People get angry at Christians because they force upon others their beliefs. They actively interfere into politics like with the banning of same sex marriages, forcing their view upon people, who would like to be left alone.
R:For example, in the first few seconds you see the aggressive blonde physically pushing one preacher away with her body.
THE HORROR! That preacher must have ended up in a hospital after that light push.
Let us forget about the fact, that the majority of people are trying to stop the violence.
R:Again, you've gone back to perennial subject of "What exactly is a Christian?"
Again you go for the no true scotsman fallacy. It was pointed to you that even an atheist can qualify as a true christian according to you Venn diagramm
R:Basic elements of biblical Christianity are outlined in scripture, as noted here
Yes, the message is so clear that 42 000 denominations of Chrstianity exist. Those denominations all have serious bible scholars that think they are true christians.
R:Now, do present one scripture offering that homosexuality is NOT a sin from the Old OR New Testament.
You ran away from our discussion, Rick. Some claim that the crucifixion abolished all the laws, including those against homosexuality.
You also never managed to provide a proof why some of the laws should not be followed from the OT, but others should be followed. Not to mention you never managed to explain why if it was once moral to execute gays, it is no longer so.
For example, in the first few seconds you see the aggressive blonde physically pushing one preacher away with her body.
DeleteIs this the same one who later gets in the way of the aggressive man, blocking him from the pursuit of the preacher?
'm not stating anywhere that all gays are violent. But it is notable that the Stonewall Riots, basically violent rioting against police, mark the birth of the gay rights movement in the US.
Actually, most rights movements start either with a riot or a massacre, or both.
I've pointed out before that a genuine Christian will be interested in following the straightforward meaning of scripture, not torturing the text of scripture in order to try and make it confess whatever it is a person has decided it should say (even going so far as to flatly contradict the plain meaning.)
So, you are prepared to flatly say that Bishop Gene Robinson, of the Episcopal Church, is not a Christian? Because that's what you're claiming.
I notice you have dropped the points 3, 4, and 5; are you going to return to them later, or?
Anonymous,
Delete> Tell me, Rick; if you were living in a place where Christianity had been *illegal* in parts of the country until very recently -- funny, I think you did -- and you saw people parading around with signs telling people that Christians were evil, destroyers of the nation, destroyers of culture...
- Per your example, I do not believe that morality is relative and interchangeable like Lego pieces. Whether or not Christianity is legal, following Christ is morally right.
I do not need to feel validated by the government or by laws. I will believe and follow Christ no matter what the opposition and I will try to do it peacefully. In my opinion, many gays feel the need to be validated by governmental laws because they are insecure in their own moral beliefs and standards.
>They actively interfere into politics like with the banning of same sex marriages, forcing their view upon people, who would like to be left alone.
Delete- It's not just about same sex marriages, this precedent relates to all potential LGBT marriages. If two gays have a legal right to marriage, then shouldn't four bisexuals have a right to a quadrophonic marriage? Shouldn't polygamy be legal as well? And how many partners should be legal? 4? 8? Why should there be any limitations, Anonymous? Do tell.
>It was pointed to you that even an atheist can qualify as a true christian according to you Venn diagram
Delete- Oh really? So do explain how an atheist is spiritually "born again" and regenerated. That's a good one!
Christ defined a born again person as one born by the spirit of God.
http://biblehub.com/niv/john/3.htm
An atheist can pretend, but cannot authentically qualify, as the Venn diagram outlines:
http://templestream.blogspot.com/search?q=no+true+scotsman
R:Now, do present one scripture offering that homosexuality is NOT a sin from the Old OR New Testament.
>>You ran away from our discussion, Rick. Some claim that the crucifixion abolished all the laws, including those against homosexuality.
Actually, I had stated previously that I would post an article explaining the verse you brought up about Christ not abolishing the law. And I did:
How did Jesus Fulfill the Law and the Prophets?
http://templestream.blogspot.com/2013/07/how-did-jesus-fulfill-law-and-prophets.html
We're still waiting for your answer to the following question:
R:Now, do present one scripture offering that homosexuality is NOT a sin from the Old OR New Testament.
- It's not just about same sex marriages, this precedent relates to all potential LGBT marriages. If two gays have a legal right to marriage, then shouldn't four bisexuals have a right to a quadrophonic marriage? Shouldn't polygamy be legal as well? And how many partners should be legal? 4? 8? Why should there be any limitations, Anonymous? Do tell.
DeleteIt's funny how the only people I see clamoring loudly for "bisexual marriage" are people opposed to gay marriage. I know some polyamorous folks; and while they agree that it would be good to expand the definition of "family", they also understand that right now, marriage is between two people. All that has changed is a restriction on *which* two people has been removed.
(I also notice that, as usual, you're withdrawing into abstraction rather than confront a simple question: Is Bishop Gene Robinson a Christian by your lights?)
R:Now, do present one scripture offering that homosexuality is NOT a sin from the Old OR New Testament.
Any text you can twist; there are many people, who believe themselves Christians, who would cite the Great Commandment, or 1 Corinthians 13:13
Oh, and while we're at it:
"So do explain how an atheist is spiritually "born again" and regenerated."
Well, considering that Catholics, Episcopalians, the Orthodox, and many other sects do not consider themselves "born again", are you asserting that they are not true Christians? We've had this discussion before, and you refused to answer.
R:Per your example, I do not believe that morality is relative and interchangeable like Lego pieces.
DeleteLiar. You claimed that it was once moral to execute homosexuals, but it is no longer so. What do we have here? An interchageable morality like Lego pieces.
R:It's not just about same sex marriages, this precedent relates to all potential LGBT marriages. If two gays have a legal right to marriage, then shouldn't four bisexuals have a right to a quadrophonic marriage?
I do not have any problems with polygamy as long as all the parties want such relationship. Somehow polygamy has been legal in islam for centuries and no collapse of civilization has occured. Though, I do have some concerns because there is the possibility of a forced marriage. However, the same thing can happen with regular marriages.
R:Oh really? So do explain how an atheist is spiritually "born again" and regenerated. That's a good one
It would help tremendously if you did address the problem in the relevant thread and not in another one several months later. I repeat my point from you "no true scotsman" thread:
Because being "born again" is a word salad that has no clear meaning. There is no objective criteria to define who was "born again" and who was not. An atheist who believes in spirits can claim that he was born again.
R:Christ defined a born again person as one born by the spirit of God
Yet, there is no consensus even among christians what he meant by being "born again".
R:Now, do present one scripture offering that homosexuality is NOT a sin from the Old OR New Testament.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_christianity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominational_positions_on_homosexuality
Here you have the standard yaba-yaba... wrong translation (and you DO acknowledge that there passages in the Bible that have a wrong translation)...wrong interpretention (and you also acknowledge that some interpretentions of the bible are wrong)...
Correction:
DeleteR:Christ defined a born again person as one born by the spirit of God
Yet, there is no consensus even among christians what he meant by being "born again" or what does it mean being "born by the spirit of god". There are no objective criteria
Everyday, when Christian's wake up in the morning they are facing the devil's den, it doesn't have be be only the homosexuals, we are faced with, murder, or death when we are out doing the Lord's work. They say that Christians are Judging, when that is not the case at all, when they hear God's Word, that brings forth conviction. If they were just preaching God's Word, then what did they do wrong? Please Homosexuals, what did they do wrong? If that was all they were doing, just Ministering God's Word. What I saw was, heshe's not liking what they were hearing, and they were convicted, and the Word was hurting their ear, their heart, those Ministers were just doing what God Commands all of us to do, I am sure God was looking down upon them saying, Well done my Good and Faithful Children.
ReplyDelete>What I saw was, heshe's not liking what they were hearing, and they were convicted, and the Word was hurting their ear, their heart, those Ministers were just doing what God Commands all of us to do, I am sure God was looking down upon them saying, Well done my Good and Faithful Children.
Delete- Yes, this would seem to be the best interpretation. I don't think the Christians threw any punches. They were simply trying to avoid an assault while preaching the truth. There was no evident hate at all in their demeanor. On the contrary, the hate was directed at them.
Please Homosexuals, what did they do wrong?
ReplyDeleteWe don't know what happened beyond the video. We do know that people using the same rhetoric of hellfire have been calling for the punishment of gays, their outlawry, the prohibition of their relationship, the destruction of their lives.
At the very least, what they did was the equivalent of coming to, say, the celebration of a Mass and marching around it with sighns proclaiming the evilness of the people within -- taking what was meant to be a happy occasion for them and turning it into controversy.
Now, this doesn't justify hitting them. Standing in front of them, confronting them with one's opinion just as they are trying to do -- why not?
heshe's not liking what they were hearing,
And here's some of the casual bigotry that is the reason why their presence there was unwelcome. I did not see anyone who was clearly transgender there, and transgender folk *hate* that term -- you might as well be breaking out the N-word. Referring to those "preachers' as bible-thumping morons is far more polite than what you've just done.
I am sure God was looking down upon them saying, Well done my Good and Faithful Children.
If God was looking down at that, and thinking that, then that's not a God showing any particular reason for me to worship them -- unless they'd do the same at a group of gay people marching with their signs in the middle of a major Christian event -- and even there, the LGBTQ folks wouldn't be *recruiting*, they'd simply be asking for recognition of their basic humanity.
Correction:
ReplyDeleteR:Christ defined a born again person as one born by the spirit of God
Yet, there is no consensus even among christians what he meant by being "born again" or what does it mean being "born by the spirit of god". There are no objective criteria