Dr. Brown Interviews MassResistance; and Thoughts on the Separation of Church and State

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

[Download MP3]
Dr. Brown interviews Brian Camenker and Amy Contrada from Mass Resistance (including a focus on former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney), and Harry Mehit from Liberty Counsel shares news of a victory in Florida. Tune in today to hear from a pro-family organization in Massachusetts; and what is the separation of Church and State really meant to protect?

Hour 1:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: If we’re going to be followers of Jesus, and of conscience and conviction, we will go against the grain. If we seek to stand up for what is right and moral sanity, we will go against the grain.  Take it on the chin, friends!  Do what’s right, regardless of cost or consequence, walk in love, even if people call it hate, and you’ll be blessed.

Hour 2:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: The cry is going forth; there are people looking for guidance, light, help and wisdom.  Will  you stand up and let your voice be heard, will you stand up for that which is right?

Featured Resources:

Separation of Church and State with Joseph Infranco [MP3 series],  and  It’s Time to Rock the Boat with Michael L. Brown [MP3 series] !


Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics. With offices in Florida, Virginia, Texas, Washington, D.C., and Jerusalem, Israel, Liberty Counsel has hundreds of advocates around the world.

Recognized by the IRS as a 501(c)(3) organization, Liberty Counsel is funded by tax-deductable donations from concerned individuals, churches and organizations.

Liberty Counsel provides pro bono legal assistance in the areas of religious liberty, the sanctity of human life and the family. Liberty Counsel’s Board of Directors has adopted a Christian doctrinal statement, but Liberty Counsel does not limit its services to Christians, as the rights of Christians are affected positively by defending the rights of others.  Read More…

Mass Resistance: A Pro-Family News Organization



Resources:

A Queer Thing Happened to America by Dr. Brown:  A Queer Thing Happened to America chronicles the amazing transformation of America over the last forty years, literally, from Stonewall Inn to the White House, and addresses the question head-on: Is there really a gay agenda, or is it a fiction of the religious right? Written in a lively and compelling style, but backed with massive research and extensive interaction with the GLBT community, this forthright and yet compassionate book looks at the extraordinary impact gay activism has had on American society.

Get Involved! Find out how you can make a difference in YOUR community!

Homosexuality, The Church, & Society [6 DVD Set] with Dr. Brown:  This could be the most important resource ever produced by this ministry! More than eight hours of eye-opening, carefully-documented, shocking truth that cannot be ignored.

Are Evangelicals Obsessed with Homosexuality? VOR Article by Dr. Brown

Writing in the On Faith blog for the Washington Post, Orthodox rabbi Shmuley Boteach claimed that evangelical Christians have “utterly marginalized themselves with their obsession over homosexuality.” Is this true? To be sure, in the aftermath of the elections, a lively debate is taking place as […]

27 Comments
  1. MassResistance is a designated Hate Group, like the KKK.

    Why? Screeds like this one:

    “…transgender/transsexual” activists… want to offer your children on the bloody altar of transsexuality — pulling them into sex-change operations involving unimaginable bodily mutilations and hormonal manipulations.

    The culture of death has created a compulsion in the souls of the homosexual radicals and their “trans” allies, driving them ever further into new perversions. There is no bottom to this pit of depravity, and they will drag many innocent victims along with them: the young, the lonely, the psychologically and physically wounded, the confused – including some of your children and grandchildren, family, friends and neighbors. There will be no safe haven. You cannot cocoon in your homes or churches. Our public schools, businesses, public accommodations (which may include churches), your employers and insurers, will all be forced to yield to yet-undefined perversions, protected by law.”

    I’m disappointed that you fell for their line, Dr B. Just a few minutes research on their documented encouragement of the harassment of Trans and Intersex children should have shown you that these were not nice people.

  2. Zoe,

    Do you consider Truth Wins Out to be a hate group? Just wondering. And are you sure that MassResistance doesn’t have testimonies to back their claims?

    For the record, I interview all kinds of people on the air — people I agree with and people I don’t agree with — but in this case, in the areas we will be discussing, I will be in agreement (although I don’t think we’re talking about transgender issues today). I’ve known their work for years and they have documented areas of real concern in Massachusetts and beyond, some of which, I believe, would concern you as well.

    In any case, if you’d like to post something for me to ask them, coming from your transgender perspective, please do so here or on FB and I’ll do my best to raise your concern.

    Thanks, as always, for the interaction.

  3. Dr B:

    TWO a hate group? It must come perilously close at times. The criteria are this: do they deliberately lie to vilify a particular group? Do they encourage or take part in violence or harrassment against that group?

    The trouble is that if you include TWO as a hate group, you’d also have to include a lot of anti-gay groups that I don’t think deserve that appelation. Merely being vehemently anti-gay, or vehemently pro-gay, is not enough. One must deliberately, not inadvertantly, bear false witness to inspire hatred of a particular group.

    For example – Catch the Fire ministries is at least as anti-gay as MassResistance (though not anti-gay people, they just consider Homosexuality a sin). But Dr B does not lie – though I think he’s grievously mistaken in some areas. I think he’s said and written some things that are not true – but never, ever, knowingly.

    He certainly does absolutely nothing to inspire hatred of anybody, and the only thing he hates is Sin.

    Now that I’ve listened to the program, I thought that the interview was entirely fair, and I apologise for thinking that Dr B had “fallen for a line”. His interviewing style was objective, not propagandistic.

    MassResistance’s efforts to vilify Trans people in Maryland were followed by this – I don’t claim it’s directly causal, just that they foster an environment where such attacks are common, and support the attackers with silence, or occasionally, praise.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMe2-Cf9Cxc

    That screed in my first post was on the first page of “The Coming Nightmare of a “Transsexual Rights and Hate Crimes” Law in Massachusetts.”, a publication they still use today.

    I ask – is there anything remotely Christian about it?

    The bill would give Trans and Intersex people the same civil rights that Gays have had in Mass. for 22 years. That’s it. See http://www.massresistance.org/docs/govt11/tranny_bill/bill_analysis.html#bill_text

    Parenthetically, if a group had had a directory called “n1gger_bill”, I think that might be a dead giveaway. The use of the perjorative “tranny” is too.

    Similar legislation is in force in 15 states, plus the Mass. cities of Boston and Cambridge, with none of the effects MassResistance claims it has. They know this. They’ve had legal advice that their claims are untrue. They lie anyway.

  4. Debbie Fraser

    I’m no Christian in any sense. Neither do I believe in Gods.

    I try to follow 1 Corinthians 13, Matthew 22:39-40, and the 4 vows of the Bodhisattva.

    “There’s too many sins not to commit some – but I’ll try not to anyway.

    There’s too many people to help them all – but I’ll try to help them anyway.

    There’s too many virtues to attain them all – but I’ll try to attain them anyway.

    Perfection is impossible – But I’ll try to perfect everything anyway.”

    Many thanks for your kind wishes – may your kindness be returned many times over.

    All the best, from a very fallible and all too human Zoe

  5. Dr B wrote:

    “In any case, if you’d like to post something for me to ask them, coming from your transgender perspective, please do so here or on FB and I’ll do my best to raise your concern.

    Thanks, as always, for the interaction.”

    I’m working on it! Meanwhile, again my apologies – I gained the wrong impression from the pre-program description, and again, should have known better.

    BTW I don’t identify as “Transgender” as such – though the nuances of the differences between Transgender, Transsexual, Intersex etc might be lost on many, just as the differences between Homoousianism, Homoiousianism, Supralapsarianism and Infralapsarianism would be.

    I’ll answer to “Transgender” if that helps mutual understanding though.

  6. Zoe,

    You wrote: “Now that I’ve listened to the program, I thought that the interview was entirely fair, and I apologise for thinking that Dr B had “fallen for a line”. His interviewing style was objective, not propagandistic..” That’s all I could ask for!

    Also, while you state that MassResistance is not Christian in tone, it is not, in fact, a ministry but rather a conservative organization, and, as mentioned in today’s interview, Brian Camenker, one of the primary leaders, is Jewish.

    Again, thanks for the interaction.

  7. Hi Dr B.

    I don’t wish to go all Pharisaic, and under the guise of sweetly reasonable words, attempt to trap anyone. These questions are genuine ones:

    1. 5ARD and 17BHDD syndromes can cause apparently girl children to change into boys. How would MR have these issues dealt with? It’s uncommon, but there would be hundreds of such cases in the USA every year, and schools do have to deal with such issues, not hypothetically, but in reality. There’s two issues here – that of the welfare of the child themselves, but also the effect on other children who have been deliberately misinformed that such things are impossible. At what age should we educate children about these things, and what should be the content of the curriculum?

    2. Regarding other Intersex children, with bodies neither male nor female – how would MR have those dealt with – the effect on the child, and the effect on the children around them, confronted with two contradictory facts: that they’ve been told by those they trust that there’s a strict divide between the sexes, when it’s obvious from observation that there is not, not always, just usually?

    3. Then onto the knotty problem of Transsexual children. The median age that Trans kids realise their situation is age 5. Naturally, if one’s religious beliefs preclude the existence of transsexuality, one can just state that such children must be defective, mentally ill, possessed by demons, products of abuse etc and should be quarantined and treated. If such beliefs extend to the existence of Intersex children though, there’s an obvious mismatch between belief and reality.

    4. What *is* MR’s take on Transsexuality, and how do they justify their beliefs in the face of the evidence? How come of the hundred thousand or so of trans people who exist, and if as they say, 1/3 regret transition, that the only narratives they are able to dredge up are those from people peddling their books? Given the 2% regret rate that “Trans Activists” claim is from misdiagnosis, there should be hundreds: given MR’s claims, tens of thousands. Where are they?

    5. While individual members of MR have, on the Free Republic site and elsewere, praised the actions in the Baltimore McDonalds as “self-defence by heroic teenagers against a transgender pervert”, will MR ever distance itself from such attacks, as it has never done so far. I don’t want to criticise MR for the private opinions of individual members, but their silence is significant.

  8. Hi Zoe,
    I had to look up what Bodhisattva was. Wasn’t familiar with that term. So it is Buddhism.

    Anyways Zoe I will check out your web site in a bit.

    Question for you Zoe,
    What do you believe or think happens to you when you die?

    Trust me Zoe when I say this, no human being is perfect. We all mess up now and then. No judgement upon you at all. I’m sure we all have a story to tell.
    But answer that question for me if you can.

    TY

  9. Zoe,

    Having received your questions well after the show was over, I was obviously not able to ask Brian and Amy about your concerns. However, I’ll let them know about this link in the event that they have time to respond.

    Thanks!

  10. Debbie Fraser

    Hi once more. I think it unlikely that we do more than end. Is the Mona Lisa more than just a collection of canvas and pigment? Yes, it has meaning beyond the merely physical. But where does it “go” when the physical aspects decay? Does something as powerful and beautiful have an eternal supernatural component?

    For that matter, where does a play go after it’s been performed?

    The Mind is not so much an object as a performance. It can be affected by crude, physical phenomena such as a bullet in the brain. Moreover, with cell turnover, we’re not quite the same people when we wake up as when we went to bed.

    I could of course be wrong here: there is some evidence – inconclusive, suggestive – that there might be more to it than that. So while I consider it unlikely, it’s not as unlikely as the existence of an interventionist deity. There I think we have enough evidence to say that such an entity’s existence is incompatible with the physical characteristics of the Universe. A non-interventionist deity, a Deistic rather than Theistic model, is not precluded though.

    In any event, I’ll know soon enough, and won’t have to guess.

    If there *is* a place of punishment, I hope to end up there. To me, the ultimate torment would be to be in a place of comfort and ease, knowing there are others in agony and I can do nothing to help them. My place is with them, to help them expiate their crimes, and incidentally work off a few (million) of my own in the process.

    “When a single person is drowning, how can one leave the pool?”

    Dr B.

    Thanks, that’s what I really wanted you to do. For one thing, it’s possible that I mistake their motives. I *have* been known to err…. which is human. But it’s also my responsibility to pr-actively seek out sources of error, and when I’ve done someone an injustice – as I did to you – to apologise for that.

    OK, yes, I know that as a Christian minister you’re supposed to be forgiving etc etc. But I would be committing another wrong if I took that for granted, and treated you like a doormat. Thank you for so graciously accepting my apology.

  11. Zoe, as one to whom much mercy and longsuffering has been shown by my loving Father, it is altogether natural for me to be patient as well, all the more in such minor cases as this.

  12. Hi Debbie

    That makes me even more determined. Consider the Demons – no love, only hatred, cruelty, malice – what a terrible existence! Something has to be done for them. Forgiveness, for a start.

    Returning kindness for cruelty, mercy and compassion for hatred. No matter what the torments of the damned, *their* existence is worse. They need help to be redeemed. I am but a weak reed, but even I know that. And just think – I’d have an eternity to work on them, no death, no matter how badly I’m damaged. I can’t help but succeed.

    I can’t understand the testimony about “humiliation”. The only one who can humiliate me is myself. Oh, I can have my dignity removed. My pride stripped away – but how valuable is that anyway? If anything, it’s a sin that I’m well rid of.

  13. Just a word on Christians & politics.

    The prevalent idea that Jesus is coming back just so he can whisk his people back to heaven is wrought with errors. Leading to a “drive-thru” instead of a real second Coming!

    First of all, Jesus nor his apostles EVER promised believers heaven as their inheritance, “final destination”. If anything, the whole of the Gospel message is summed up in his saying of, “the meek shall inherit the earth”. An idea that can easily and clearly be traced back to the promises made to Abraham in Gen 17.

    A good lesson of where Christians stand in relation to some sort of patriotic duty and love for any earthly government one they may have, is found in the words of the Apostle Paul when he exhorts us to “behave as citizens worthy of the gospel of Christ…standing firm in one spirit, one mind, striving side by side for the faith” that Christ will bring with him God’s soverign rule.

    Paul goes on to explain that this is because our citizenship is in heaven FROM WHICH Jesus will come and in doing so, “transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body” [Phil 1.27; 3.20].

    The goal being to inherit the restored earth that God’s coming Kingdom will bring about.

    The word translated as “citizenship” is from the Koine Greek politeuma and “nicely captures Paul’s play on words here and in 3:20…Philippi prided itself on being a Roman colony, offering the honor and privilege of Roman citizenship. Paul reminds the congregation that they should look to Christ, not Caesar, for their model of behavior, since their primary allegiance is to God and his kingdom.” ESV Study Bible

  14. Zoe,
    Demons can not be forgiven nor do they want too. They choose to be evil, just like people choose to be evil.

    Zoe,
    Seeing that you have such a kind heart you should follow Jesus because Jesus also is kind and full of compassion. You two would get along great. 🙂

  15. Jesus’ story, indeed the story of the Bible as a whole, is nothing but a royal, Davidic, Messianic story. It is spiritual politics from start to finish. The Devil has really only one trick, and that is to separate Jesus from his teachings. You can preach “Jesus” endlessly but is this really Jesus if he is divorced from his own teachings/Gospel? I think if we reread the New Testament with this in mind, we find so much of the writing there dedicated to saying, “you must hold on to the Word, and by Word is meant the Gospel of the Kingdom” (Matt. 13:19). “Word” in the Bible is not just a synonym for the Bible. It means the saving Gospel, the heart of the Bible. The “word” is to the Scripture as the “core” is to the apple or the bull’s eye to the target. Satan is a master of getting rid of the essential information. Muddle the language and you have everything confused. While the public knows only that “the Bible is the word of God,” Jesus said “the seed is the word of God” (Luke 8:11). The NT generally calls the Bible “the Scriptures.”

    Jesus counteracts this verbal confusion with his brilliant clarity. He had read Ezekiel’s parable of the royal cedar tree (Ezek. 17). He knows himself to be God’s ally and bearer of God’s Gospel of the Kingdom. Thus he embarks on the work of spreading the news of the New Order coming. He is the purveyor of the formula of immortality. All life springs from a seed. Seeds bear fruit. Based on that fundamental notion about seeds presented also in Genesis 1, Jesus goes about creating the new creation. He sows the royal family, his own brothers and sisters, by sowing his seed (Luke 8:5). His name for a Christian is “a Son of the Kingdom” or a “disciple of the Kingdom” — royal sons or royal students. The Messiah, having redefined the family as “those who hear the word and do it,” conveys the secret about how this divine Kingdom life is to be acquired and propagated:

    “The sower went out to sow his seed.” The analogy with reproduction is obvious. Jesus reproduces himself in others by transmitting the seed message of the Kingdom (Matt. 13:19), which dwells firstly in him. The seed Message has been part of his DNA, so to speak, since the moment God created the Son in Mary’s womb. The Son is marked out by the Father at his baptism at the hands of John, an important stage of the Christian career as the public sealing of our Kingdom confession. The voice of the Father provides the commentary: “This is my beloved Son. Listen to what he has to say” — not just “Watch him die and be buried and rise.” “Listen to what he preaches as Gospel. Listen to his instructions about being reborn for immortality. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” It is rather fascinating that Luke reports: “When he said these things [the parable of the sower] he would customarily raise his voice” (Luke 8:8).

    WWJD (“What would Jesus do?”) ought also to read “WWJS — What would Jesus say?” Jesus provided the script for all evangelism when he commanded “Preach that the Kingdom is at hand.”

    How strange that the word Kingdom is absent from almost every evangelical tract that has ever been printed!

    Prior to the massively important parable of the sower, Jesus has redefined the family. When his parents seek to talk to him, he diverts attention to a much greater truth. “Who are my mother and father?” Those who hear the word of God, the Gospel, and do it.

    His real affinity is not with Mary and Joseph (who even thought at one stage that their son had gone out of his mind), but with those who respond to the Kingdom Message. Jesus, as George Ladd observed, “divides society into the two antithetical camps, those who hear and understand the Gospel of the Kingdom and those who do not.” These two camps represent the two races of human beings — the degenerates and the regenerates. Unless a man begins all over again, unless he is born from above, born again, “he cannot see or enter the Kingdom of God.” “If they understood and received the Gospel of the Kingdom [Matt. 13:19] they would repent and be forgiven” (Mark 4:11, 12) That is the bottom line of all of Jesus’ theology.

    It is interesting to ask audiences: If being born again is the absolute essential for salvation — rebirth under the influence of spirit — why is it that Jesus according to Matthew, Mark and Luke did not ever use that phrase about rebirth? Why do Matthew, Mark and Luke not mention being “born again” in so many words? The answer must be that it is impossible that Jesus did not constantly speak of rebirth. The key is that he used different metaphors and parables (comparisons) to get his point over. In the synoptics, at the heart of the New Covenant teaching of Messiah, the immortality program is described in terms of new birth from seed, namely the seed which is the “word of God” (Luke 8:11) = the “word of the Kingdom” (Matt. 13:19). The Gospel/Word of the Kingdom is presented by Jesus as the immortality formula, the elixir of life, the key to indestructible existence. With the seed of new life we are truly living. Without having taken in that seed, we are dead while we live. Two camps: the regenerate and the degenerate. Jesus is creating the personnel of the Kingdom by rebirth. He is breeding the new race of immortals. (The Satanic caricature of this is the hideous episode described in Gen 6).

    The carrier of this new life is the teaching of the Messiah, his Gospel of the Kingdom, the words “which are spirit and life” (John 6:63). As that seed germinates in the mind (heart) of the listener, a new existence begins. It is an explosive event, attended by massive excitement. A whole new vista opens up. The heart soars as it contemplates life forever, the Life of the Coming Age, the Life of the Kingdom.

    If one scours Bible Dictionary articles on “regeneration” very occasionally one hits upon an excellent observation about what Jesus taught on this issue: “The parable of the Sower implies that the specific life of the Kingdom arises in the human heart by the sinking in of the Gospel (cp. “Let these sayings sink down into your ears”), and its producing, as it were, a new root of personality” (Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, “Regeneration,” p. 216).

    The dictionary does not however elaborate on what that seed really is. Luke does. He says, “The seed is the word of God.” Mark likewise says, “The seed is the word.” Matthew: “the seed is the word of the Kingdom.” No wonder Jesus accused the establishment of taking away the key of Knowledge, the Key of the Kingdom (Luke 11:52; Matt. 23:13).

    Rather astonishingly the head of Moody Bible College writes: “The Gospel of grace has nothing to with the Kingdom of God per se” (from correspondence).[10]

    Again, a very significant loss of information has occurred because the public has been taught to say “the word of God is the Bible.” Jesus said the word of God is the seed — his own Gospel. Many churchgoers speak of “the Word” or “Word of God” as if this is just a synonym for the Bible. But it is not. The Bible generally calls itself the Scriptures. It largely reserves, in the NT, the term “word” for the Gospel as Jesus and the apostles preached it.

    Once the essential creative seed of immortality is identified as the Gospel of the Kingdom, the rest of the New Testament presents itself as commentary on this central theme. Every exhortation to “abide in the word” or “let the word of Christ abide in you richly” is embedded in the idea that the Kingdom-Gospel is to govern all our thinking and action. John’s Gospel is largely a sermon on accepting “the word” and “words of Jesus.” Peter rejoices in the seed of rebirth as the “word of the Gospel which was preached to you” (I Pet. 1:22-25, where seed, rebirth and Gospel are the topic). James speaks likewise of the “word of Truth” as the tool of rebirth (James 1:18) and of the word thus implanted. Paul also observes that Christians are those “born of the spirit,” that is, those born of the Promise (Gal. 4:28, 29). But Paul prefers the image of the new creation. Just as the light first shone in Genesis at creation so the light of the Gospel of the glory of Christ shines in our hearts (II Cor. 4:6). Paul is a dogged preacher of the Gospel of the Kingdom and sums up his whole career as the “heralding of the Kingdom” (Acts 20:25), where he identifies the Gospel of grace (Acts 20:24) as the Gospel of the Kingdom (see also Acts 8:12, Philip, and Paul’s relentless emphasis on the Gospel of the Kingdom in Acts 19:8; 28:23, 31). John echoes his fellow apostles when he points to the indwelling seed in reborn believers as the key to triumphant Christianity (I John 3:9).

    I believe the Abrahamic, Kingdom faith of Jesus must confront the watered down version of the Gospel now massively widespread. Dispensationalism, either in its “ultra” form or otherwise, has achieved a separation of Paul from Jesus and thus a separation of the Gospel from Jesus.[11] Romans 10:8-17 has been mishandled to give the impression that only the death and resurrection of Jesus counted for Paul in the Gospel. If that were so, Paul would have abandoned the Gospel of Jesus. Paul would have disobeyed the Great Commission. Paul would have put himself under his own curse (Gal. 1) for subtracting from the Gospel the essential Kingdom element so important to Jesus as the treasure of saving wisdom and understanding. But Paul did not depart one iota from the Messiah’s Gospel. He declared as his resounding conclusion in Romans 10 that “faith comes by hearing and hearing from Messiah’s word,” i.e., Messiah’s Gospel (v. 17). He observed in verse 14 that one must hear Jesus preaching in order to be saved: “How can they believe in him whom they have not heard [preaching]” (see NASV, not NIV).

    So everything goes back to Jesus, who for some 30 chapters in the Synoptics preached the Gospel without at that stage any mention of his death and resurrection. The royal road to immortality and rulership in the Kingdom to come — as well as peace on earth for the human race — begins and ends with Jesus who was adamant in his rejection of any notion of coequal Deity —“Why do you call me good? There is none good but the One God” (Matt. 19:17).

    Our task is to announce far and wide (Luke 9:60) the Kingdom of God as Gospel, and it is the Kingdom of the One God of Israel to be administered by the human Messiah, the Son of that Living God. There is much work to be done, as the Roman Catholic scholar I quoted at the beginning acknowledged. The Son of God “came to bring us an understanding in order that we may know God” (I John 5:20). The royal road to the Kingdom depends not only on the death and resurrection of Jesus[12] but equally on the Messiah’s knowledge and understanding. “By his knowledge shall my righteous one cause the many to be righteous” (Isa. 53:11). It is “those who have insight who will shine brightly in the Kingdom” (Dan 12:3). Jesus also stated: “If they understood the Message of the Kingdom, they would repent and I would forgive them” (Matt. 13:15 with Mark 4:11, 12).

    I believe the heritage of the faith of Abraham gives us an incomparable start in these great issues of Christology and Gospel.. And I believe this next year will see more and more seekers coming to embrace the Gospel as Jesus preached it. Let us work for that goal and thus bear fruit by expanding the royal family whom Jesus loves so much.

  16. Anthony, thanks for weighing in on this important subject without taking it in a different direction (e.g., a dispute over Christology, which would be off point in this particular thread). Your comments are always welcome.

  17. A great book on Homosexuality by someone who came out of homosexuality himself and who presents the issue with an unbelievably Christ-like spirit, is one by Richard Cohen, Straight Talk about Homosexuality – the Other Side of Tolerance. This and other truly great resources can be ordered at http://www.changeispossible.com . This book gives insight into the gay agenda, origins of homosexuality and how to treat friends and loved ones without compromising on the Christian standard of morality. Truly enlightening!

  18. Jaco

    The ‘problem’ is that the gay/homosexual does not seek “change” since they believe themselves to have been “naturally” created that way.

  19. Alot has been said and written about homosexual marriage lately.

    What “era” do you suppose to be the most tolerant and “socially progressive?” The Greeks? The Romans? The Age of Enlightenment?

    Why then didn’t these non-judgmental societies themselves institutionalize same-sex marriage?

  20. Hi, Chuck,

    From my own studies at Varsity it was clear to me (and the Freudians/Jungians who taught us) that homosexuality is not an identity. By proclaiming it an identity those of the Gay Agenda secure a self-fulfilled prophecy among those influenced so that change would not even be considered a possibility.

    From scientific findings alone and from social science research, it is overwhelmingly clear that homosexuality is a developmental disorder or fixation. It truly is being stuck in past hurts that were sexualised in an attempt to medicate the hurt. I’ve heard one psychotherapist relate how he treated a homosexual for depression. During the course of the therapy childhood hurts were addressed and resolved. Later the homosexual had to come for some coaching, since he suddenly felt attracted to members of the opposite sex!

    Good science, the Good News of God’s Kingdom under Jesus’ rule and holy spirit simply make a winning recipe for change – even for those who are same-sex attracted.

    Jaco

  21. Jaco

    I am sure those of the gay community have come up with their own scientific/statistical data to refute their opposition.

    One of the recurring arguments I hear is that “sex-reducation” just does not work. Since it makes the individual prone to depression and may go the rest of their lives feeling “unfulfilled”.

    Ed

    What “era” do you suppose to be the most tolerant and “socially progressive?” The Greeks? The Romans? The Age of Enlightenment?

    As far as my historical research goes, I believe there is no evidence to show that a government ever legalized same sex marriages.

    Until today that is.

  22. Hey, Chuck

    Yes, there are so-called “scientific” studies on the supposed genetic basis of sexual orientation, and many of the Gay Agenda will refer to these (3 popular ones). But on examining these studies one finds that they fall short of anything “scientific.” Richard Cohen discusses these in his book. A second-year social science student won’t even buy the findings of these studies.

    I find the concern over depression also unconvincing, since it is rather reductionistic to say that sexual reorientation must be bad because it “causes” depression. If there is brokenness (as, for instance in the case of drug abuse), then accessing emotional wounds will lead to emotional unease of some kind. As a rule persons in rehab centres experience depression precisely for that reason.

    I think many women and men rejoice over resolving emotional brokenness, even though the catharsis of these experiences may be disturbing. But coming out whole on the other side is worth the efforts to them. To me it is fascinating to appreciate how science has proven what was theologically stated centuries ago, namely, that change to holiness is possible.

    Dan1el, yes, some will hate me for saying what I did. But many will also find hope in it, and that is all that’s important. The hatred, in my mind, is merely another manifestation of hurt and brokenness they may experience.

    Jaco

Leave Your Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*