Dr. Brown shares some stories about his mom and the importance of mothers, gives his thoughts about the NFL’s first homosexual kiss, weighs in on other news issues, and takes your calls. Listen live here 2-4 pm EST, and call into the show at (866) 348 7884 with your questions and comments.
Hour 1:
Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Keep you heart and mind focused on God, in the Word, refuse to be desensitized by the decadent culture and speak up and speak out according to the Truth!
Hour 2:
Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: As we celebrated Mother’s Day over the weekend let’s remember mothers and fathers are unique in this world. Mothers and fathers have an awesome role to play in cultural transformation!
SPECIAL OFFER! THIS WEEK ONLY!
This week, we’re offering two important resources from Dr. Brown, his brand new book, Can You Be Gay and Christian?, and his DVD debate with gay activist (and professing born-again Christian) Harry Knox. You can get both of these key resources for the super low price of just $25! Postage Paid! That’s a $15 savings!
Order Online!
Other Resources:
I wish I could catch the whole show because I’d like to hear how many callers would suggest boycotting the NFL games.
It’s like offensive television, turn it off.
Sheila,
You can hear the whole show online…or after the fact via the mp3 download.
Miami Dolphins safety Don Jones fined for tweets (“OMG” and “Horrible”) about Michael Sam. The dark beginnings of the new defacto social sedition laws.
[H]e who is unrighteous─let him be unrighteous still, and he who is filthy─let him be filthy still, and he who is righteous─let him be declared righteous still, and he who is sanctified─let him be sanctified still:
Revelation 22:11
Young’s Literal Translation
Sheila,
>>I wish I could catch the whole show because I’d like to hear how many callers would suggest boycotting the NFL games.
>> It’s like offensive television, turn it off.
Are you aware of the horrid stuff the heterosexual football players have been caught doing?
http://goo.gl/cJeFA7
I doubt that a chaste little gay kiss is going to get many TVs turned off. Heck, it might get some turned-on.
On today’s show, Dr. Brown complained about people who accuse him of having a personal problem with homosexuality.
On a previous blog entry, he chastised me for doing that.
I want to be clear… I do _not_ think Dr. Brown is one of those self-loathing gay, gay bashers.
But, he should understand that it’s not malicious to wonder why someone is so fixated on the gays. And this seems especially true of a certain generation of men.
Furthermore, it doesn’t fully explain things to say, “I preach against sin.”
There are _a lot_ of sins in the bible! And many are listed equally along side the gay thing.
Has Dr. Brown written two books, many articles and countless radio denunciations against, let’s say, greed or perjury?
Those sins are listed right along side homosexuality and surely ruinous as well.
So, why the fixation on homosexuality? It’s a fair question to ask.
I really should say “some” of those sins are listed equally among homosexuality. It’s not many.
Mainly, I supposed, because homosexuality is not mentioned many times in the bible.
Now you confuse me Greg. I thought you supported gay “marriage”, etc. But now your speaking out against it?
You said,
“There are _a lot_ of sins in the bible! And many are listed equally along side the gay thing.”
And also,
“Those sins are listed right along side homosexuality and surely ruinous as well.”
I agree with you. It is listed “equally along side” many other sins which we are to turn away from with all our hearts. Yes, all the other sins “listed right along side homosexuality” are “surely ruinous as well”. I agree with you in these quotes.
“And this seems especially true of a certain generation of men.”
– What defines this generation you mention? I ask since Dr. Brown and I are from different generations.
Benjamin,
Good point. Greg had a Freudian slip and finally agreed with what the scriptures actually say for a change.
Greg,
Is the problem with a certain generation of men or is the problem with many generations of Biblically illiterate sinners?
Benjamin,
I have long acknowledged that the bible condemns homosexuality.
Homosexuality — as it was practiced back then.
I believe it is a tragic mis-application of scripture to condemn gay people now for a practice that was very different back then.
And, this is not some sort of liberal hermeneutic. Do you force your women to stay silent in church? Why not? Because the role of women was very different back then. Do you demand that the men in your church cut their hair? Probably not. The meaning of hair length was very different back then.
While scripture has not changed, society has changed radically. This changes how we apply scripture. Or at least it should!
Greg,
Paul gives reasons for the women keeping silent in the assemblies and not one of them is about society. They are about how YHWH created man and woman and the authority structure that portrays YHWH’s government. The same goes for the hair thing. The only reason most churches have failed to do what the scripture commands is because of idolatry and rebellion. It is getting worse and it is time to come out of the great whore of Babylon.
Re 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
Benjamin,
You did not address my core premise.
Why do you think older conservative men (especially) single-out homosexuality for some extra-special status?
For sure, they obsess over it compared to, let’s say, greed, gluttony or lying.
I have a theory but you won’t like it.
Greg,
You wrote:
“I have long acknowledged that the bible condemns homosexuality.
Homosexuality — as it was practiced back then.
I believe it is a tragic mis-application of scripture to condemn gay people now for a practice that was very different back then.”
Paul uses terms that ar completely generic and all encompassing. He was not only against some extant form of homosex. The Holy Spirit, through Paul and Moses, condemned all homosex of any type in any culture. You know it and will not admit it. You are causing little ones to stumble and the necklace that you are lusting after does not make a good life preserver.
Everybody,
Be sure and note how Greg will continue to slip himself clear of answering any pertinent scriptural questions.
>> Paul uses terms that ar completely generic and all encompassing.
Does Paul use the term “homosexual orientation”?
If not. He wasn’t’ all encompassing.
Obviously, Paul was condemning homosexuality as he knew it — pederasty and temple prostitution.
The bible was written in a time and a place for a specific circumstance.
In order to apply the bible, we have to know that time, place and circumstance.
I’m curious — what research have you done into how homosexuality was practiced in the first century? If you don’t know that, you don’t know what Paul was condemning.
Bo,
>> Be sure and note how Greg will continue to slip himself clear of answering any pertinent scriptural questions.
Please stop bearing false witness against me.
I have answered you more than anyone else.
I am new to commenting on the sight, but wanted to weigh in briefly on the comment Greg made. If society determines how God’s Word is applied, then society is now the law and not the Word of God. Just think, in generations past, slavery was socially acceptable. That means, that society could interpret the Bible to mean something it never intended to encourage, like stealing a group of people from their homeland and forcing them into labor because of the color of their skin. Yes, that has been since overturned, but this was the prevailing thought of society for over two centuries. There have been many more instances like this; abortion, prayer in schools, evolution, etc. When society becomes the determining factor in what is or is not acceptable, corruption prevails. Judges 21:25 says it this way,
“In those days Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes.”
Proverbs 14:12 also states, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.”
You bring up issues of women in church and men with their hair length, these are issues that are very minor and only briefly highlighted in scripture. It is not a situation where someone will be condemned eternally for not following them. However; issues concerning sexual sin (all sex outside of marriage), murder, theft, lying, etc. are heavily mentioned as being damnable without repentance. Yes, homosexuality is in this lot as it is mentioned in the Old and New Testament.
Just a thought.
Greg,
Your posts make it quite clear that you serve culture instead of YHWH. You base your beliefs upon society instead of on what scripture, which is YHWH’s idea of truth. It is idolatry for you to do this. You really need to wake up.
Bo said,
<<You are causing little ones to stumble and the necklace that you are lusting after does not make a good life preserver.
"the necklace that I am lusting after" ?!?!
What in the world does that refer to?
"Lusting" makes it seem like some creepy sexual reference. What else could it be? A noose? I honestly don't know!
Greg,
You have not answered the scriptures that are brought up, just as I said. I have not born false witness, but you have only asserted it like you do with everything you write. You almost never engage in the discussion of scripture.
Bo,
>>Your posts make it quite clear that you serve culture instead of YHWH.
Scripture applies to culture. It always has from the first day it was written up until now.
But, as culture changes, the application changes.
This is rock solid, conservative use of the bible.
By the way… are you Jewish? Why do you refuse to use the name, God?
Greg,
You do not know the scriptures or the power of YHWH.
Mr 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.
Bo,
I really need to do something else.
I will probably check back, so feel free to respond.
But please don’t falsely accuse me of not answering our posts.
Greg,
You wrote:
“Obviously, Paul was condemning homosexuality as he knew it — pederasty and temple prostitution.”
If this is true why did Paul not use the Greek terms for such, but instead use the general compound word that means “man bedder”?
Greg,
I didn’t accuse you of not answering my posts, but of not answering the scriptures that are brought up. You do not read my posts or the scripture carefully.
Benjamin,
Would you or someone else address post 18.
The idea that homosexuality is somehow practiced better today and so it’s “OK now”, is stupid. What a stupid argument!
It’s like saying that any baker who would refuse to put two grooms on a cake is somehow refusing to serve someone because of who they are, and that there’s nothing more to it than that.
Crazy.
It’s about the work some people want to impose on someone else who has the right to simply say, “Hey, we don’t do that kind of work, and it’s got nothing to do with who you are or who you think you are. We simply don’t do that kind of work for anybody. We wouldn’t do it if Moses or an angel from heaven walked in here and asked for such a thing.”
Who do these people think they are to impose their gay agenda on others?
Who do they think we are?
Do they think we’re stupid?
Crazy.
Ray,
“Stupid” “Crazy”
Lot of truth in those words.
Any man who is for the gay agenda, who would plead for it, ought to seriously examine himself to see if he is in the faith or not.
I’m sure it won’t be too long before Michael Sam proposes to his boyfriend on the Jumbo Tron, then it’s off to Hawaii for a white wedding. I can just picture the cover of Sports Illustrated. Can’t wait.
As a football fan, I think it’s disgusting. It’s degraded the game. It’s a blemish on the NFL, and on television that covers the news when they “report” such things without speaking against them.
I wonder if there will be movement among Christian athletes who will stand against such things. I wonder if many of them will leave the game because of the corruption and what it’s becoming.
How is it that they have penalties for carnal displays of pride and arrogance, and then put on some team openly homosexual athletes?
They should be barred from the NFL.
It’s disgusting.
Greg,
You wrote:
“The bible was written in a time and a place for a specific circumstance.
In order to apply the bible, we have to know that time, place and circumstance.
I’m curious — what research have you done into how homosexuality was practiced in the first century? If you don’t know that, you don’t know what Paul was condemning.”
This is like saying that because there were no handguns in Bible times the only kind of murder that is spoken against is with swords, clubs and arrows.
The idea of applying the scripture to culture or technology is not to excuse new forms of the same sin, but to continue to hold the same standard. Just because we are better at murdering babies in the womb does not make it OK. Just because we do not use oxen that might gore someone does not mean that we should not make restitution for our cars harming someone. Just because there was no form of internet or telephone fraud when the Bible was penned, does not mean that they are not stealing.
Both Paul and Moses used generic terms for homosex. If they would have been specific about a certainn type of homosex, Greg might (I use that term purposefully.) have a point. They didn’t and he doesn’t.
The Meanings of the Greek and Hebrew words used by Moses and Paul are obvious to both scholars and laymen alike if they care to know. It is only in very recent times that there were so called scholars that have tried to postulate that only pederasty and temple prostitution were intended by Paul and Moses. These ideas have been fully demolished by real Greek and Hebrew scholars over and over. Greg hangs on to liberal scholarship and agenda for his truth instead of the scripture. This is abundantly evident in his posts.
And yes Greg, I am aware of the things that went on in Biblical times. I know about how they practiced homosex and murder and fraud. We do all of these a little differently and they are all still horrendous sin. The problem with your twist of scripture is that the Greek that Paul uses specifically condemns the committed homosex relationship. It literally says that anyone that continues in homosex loses his inheritance in the kingdom of heaven. And he does not use the words for temple prostitution or pederasty. He uses generic, all encompassing terms. He actually, probably coined the term that means man-bedder in the Greek. He probably did it to make sure that no one twisted his words to their own destruction thinking that they could be lawless or find a loophole in it.
Jesus defined marriage for all time and all places and condemned sex outside of it. He was quire clear about that.
Greg, out of my 25 books, which have you read other than A Queer Thing Happened to America? How about Go and Sin No More, dealing with holiness and morality and sexual purity without a reference to homosexuality? Or all the books on the need for revival and repentance in the church? It looks like you’re showing up late on the scene and not realizing the issues that are crushing our society today.
The NFL has a monopoly on America and exerts it’s politics and social justice in too many areas. I gave up cutting the cable over 3 years ago on the NFL. This is not Jack Lamberts game any more! I can not see Jack running around in pink cleats.
What the NFL did to Tim Tebow still makes me upset. If millions of people will cut the cable and subscribe to alternative things like the Blaze, or this website is still free! If you love sports go see a soccer game or a AAA baseball game. It is not so bad not knowing much of the sheeple ESPN – Who cares the messiah is coming!
The hermenutic I use, regarding gays, is not liberal. It not novel. Every conservative Christian I know uses it. Almost surely, even Bo uses it — unwittingly, I’ll guess.
As a case study, I’ll use it on a famous Pauline commandment: I Corinthians 14:34
“Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.”
This commandment is unambiguous, seemingly-universal and has precedent in the law.
Yet, the Pentacostals didn’t apply I Corinthians 14:34 to that amazing woman, Amee Semple McPherson! The little hard-rock fundamentalist church I grew up didn’t silence their woman. Your church probably allows women to speak. IN CLEAR CONTRADICTION TO THIS PASSAGE!
Why? Because as Bo accuses me — you serve society and not YHWH? Because you don’t love the bible? Because you are ignorant of the bible? Because you probably aren’t really a Christian? Because of the dozen other things you have charged at me?
No! Because you have the good sense to know that this verse can’t possibly apply to modern society.
The role of women in society has so radically changed from 2000 years ago, we can’t just force this scripture on them.
Even worse the Gospel of Jesus would be harmed if silenced women as Paul so clearly commandment. The world would (correctly!) know that we are so rigid, so doctrinaire that we are willing to hurt women in enforce our inflexible hermeneutic. In other words, our faith isn’t alive.
The _EXACT SAME_ hermeneutical technique that 99% of American Christians apply to women — I apply to gays.
Yes, Paul explicitly condemns gays. But, role of gays in society has so radically changed from 2000 years ago, we can’t just force the scripture on them.
PS: I meant to address the above post to Bo and Benjamin but I welcome response from anyone.
Bo asked:
>> I’m curious — what research have you done into how homosexuality was practiced in the first century?
The research has been done. Scholarly information about ancient sexuality can be easily found if you want to find it. .
People here demanded that I read “A Queer Thing” and I did. If I recommended a book on the history of homosexuality, would you have the courage and integrity to read it with an open mind?
The most recent book I read on this subject was : “Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century” by John Boswell
It’s getting a little dated but I found the book because it kept getting referenced in other stuff I was reading.
Greg, to the cross. Self justification is no good.
The gay agenda is all about self justification.
Dr. Brown,
I have only read the one book. But I have heard countless hours of you on the radio and read many of your articles.
Here is what people here don’t understand — I share your commitment to morality and holiness. I share your grief over the issues that are crushing our society.
I just don’t think that loving gay couples are crushing our society.
At your request and others insistence I read “A Queer Thing” and I found it completely unconvincing.
Your response? You accused me of not reading it!
(I tried not to dwell on the obvious insinuation — that you think I’m a liar.)
I spent hours, not just reading your book but studying it and following quite a few of your footnotes. (not an easy task, considering what a mess they were).
When I was done. I had post-its sticking out everywhere and pages of my own notes and research.
When I felt like I fully understood your book, I wrote A reflection on the book, which I posted on-line and linked here several times.
What did you do?
You assured me of not reading the book!
I know you are busy and I don’t expect a full engagement you.
But _NOBODY_ on this blog gave a thoughtful response to my review of your book.
Others even accused me of not having even read your book! After all those hours of studying it!
In light of that — why would I read another one?
Ray,
>>Greg, to the cross. Self justification is no good.
I am not gay. This is not self-justification
But it is good, time-tested, bible interpretation.
And, by the way, I am a born-again, Evangelical Christian. I am saved what the grace of God through Jesus’ work on the cross.
So what do you mean “to the cross.” ?
Care to give a meaningful response to my post?
I must get to work.
I will check back here later if anyone cares to give a _meaningful_ response to explanation of why I don’t think the bible condemns modern gays.
Greg, your review of the book was just terrible, terrible. It is as if you did not grasp the simple truth to it. How do you review and accuse/sulley a plain facts view to the boiling water us frogs are sitting in????
Plain and simple it gives plain jane facts to the nuts and bolts to this queer thing that Lincoln or any in his generation could not imagine. Wake up ! The only thing I have written before is that the debate with Shmuley the rabbi made a good point that the queer thing started smoldering in the 1950’s we should have woken up to the smoldering fire then, now it is a raging fire! Greg, you would have to be completely intoxicated with our society if you can not see this simple point.
Greg forgive me for not congradulating you on your foolish review on the book. I do not see how in world you ever came up with such stupidity. This is a rough review on your review, but how could anyone in God’s name possibly review the book the way you did! It seemed to be way off the reservation of any possible way to review it. You do not have to accept it all, but your agenda seemed to color your glasses a dark sinister shade of wackiness.
Greg, What region of the country do you live in?I will tell you what, I am looking for an opportunity to go to one of M.b. meetings in which he invites listeners to go to. If this in your region I will make it a priority to go to this if you would also be interested in going. I hope that might be in the Rocky mountain region, but will travel to Ca/Dallas/and possibly even North Carolina. If your interested let me know.
Hello Greg.
I hope you are good this morning. Also I hope you have not taken anything I have said to you in recent threads as personal attacks as I have not said anything negative to or about you. I try to ask questions and be precise about where I am coming from, and I may come across as straight forward most of the time, or blunt.
You asked me, “You did not address my core premise.
Why do you think older conservative men (especially) single-out homosexuality for some extra-special status?”
Technically I did engage you on that premise in post #7 by asking you for more information so I could more engagingly respond, “What defines this generation you mention? I ask since Dr. Brown and I are from different generations.” What is older conservative men? 50’s, 60’s? I need more information about this generation before I can respond.
I would also really like to know what your theory is you mentioned above about why this generation is so concerned with this particular topic. I encourage you to put it out there even if you think I will not like it. How does one learn anything if he is only exposed to things he will like? I will not take it personally. We are here to engage each other and learn from one another.
You brought up,
“And, this is not some sort of liberal hermeneutic. Do you force your women to stay silent in church? Why not? Because the role of women was very different back then.”
– There are a lot of assumptions in that quote.
But in response I will link to a sermon series from the Church I attended before I moved to another state.
Head-Coverings:
Part 1:
http://www.cornerstonebible.org/audio/HC1.mp3
Part 2:
http://www.cornerstonebible.org/audio/HC2.mp3
Part 3:
http://www.cornerstonebible.org/audio/HC3.mp3
Part 4:
http://www.cornerstonebible.org/audio/HC4.mp3
Part 5:
http://www.cornerstonebible.org/audio/HC5.mp3
Part 6:
http://www.cornerstonebible.org/audio/HC6.mp3
Part 7:
http://www.cornerstonebible.org/audio/HC7.mp3
Part 8:
http://www.cornerstonebible.org/audio/HC8.mp3
Part 9:
http://www.cornerstonebible.org/audio/HC9.mp3
“I will check back here later if anyone cares to give a _meaningful_ response to explanation of why I don’t think the bible condemns modern gays.”
Do you have a link to your explanation? I didn’t see the explanation above.
Thanks.
Greg,
You wrote:
“Bo asked:
>> I’m curious — what research have you done into how homosexuality was practiced in the first century?”
No! I did not ask that. You asked me that and I quoted you and I responded. And the best that I can tell you gave no meaningful response to my post.
You can accuse some people that post on this site of not obeying Paul’s commandments or say that they are like you in relegating parts of scripture to culture, but our women keep silent in the church. They wear head coverings. They wear long hair. The men wear beards and short hair. We do not eat things that the scripture says not to eat. The others that you addressed will have to defend their views and show how what they are doing is not like what you are doing.
2 Ti 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away…
13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
According to Paul things will get worse, not better in the last days. Homosex has gotten worse, not better. Now it is committed and deceptively called love when it is not. It is not Biblical love. Paul says that there will be religious people that fall for this sort of thing and that they should be shunned. Greg, you are deceived and you are deceiving others. Paul says to go by the scripture, not by culture that is getting worse. Homosex is not a good work. It is not righteous.
Greg, you did not answer why Paul and Moses use generic terms that are all encompassing instead of specific terms concerning the type of homosex that was being practiced. I agree things have changed, but the application does not go in the direction that you presume.
Ro 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Paul is not saying that men used to use female prostitutes but have now switched to male prostitutes. He did not say men with boys. Paul is not speaking specifically against male cult prostitution and pederasty. He is condemning all homosex in both men and women. Please show how it is not homosex in general that is being condemned here.
Benjamin,
So what was the conclusion? Where is the teaching on 1 Cor. 14:32-38?
I tried to locate it but this head-covering series was all that was archived that year. But I believe he affirmed Scripture which teaches that men are to lead in the congregation. I will have to contact them to see if they have it recorded somewhere.
So what is it about I Cor 14:34 and homosexuality?
Is it that we should see that since God made man male and female and gave his only begotten son to save mankind, that since somewhere around half of the saved, the redeemed are women, that he is doing things through women, and may be doing more through women in the future as we get nearer and nearer to the end time, that in like manner, we should expect to see God use homosexuals more, in like manner….is that it?
Should we suppose that just as God is not so concerned that a Christian is a man or a woman, so also we should consider that God isn’t concerned as to whether or not they are homosexual, is that it?
Now, God made mankind either male or female. That was his doing and his alone, by whatever and whomever he did that through. (I’m thinking of Christ here, his only begotten Son)
And there is no in between. One is either a man or a woman, and that is by God’s doing.
And what about homosexuality? I always thought of it as mostly man’s doing, though I suppose for whatever judgment God determined, some might be in that situation for something they either have done, or have failed to do.
I do not believe God would go around making some people homosexual at birth, randomly, or simply as some genetic fault.
It doesn’t seem to be like a birth defect to me, though some might like to perceive it as such.
I don’t believe God makes alcoholics at birth either.
But what does I Cor 14:34 have to do with homosexuality?
Is it that some who would plead for the gay agenda call upon us to use discretion, while they themselves are not willing to use any?