Pastor forgives teens accused of cross burning

CNN.Com / U.S. ^ | Sunday, March 28, 2004 Posted: 9:11 PM EST (0211 GMT) | Associated Press

[Bobby777]

probably so ... kids are rebellious by nature so they tend to be attracted to outrageous stunts ... this one had little humor ... the best result we can hope is that these teens attend the church and listen to the man ... perhaps the love will turn their hearts ... sounds like they are already pretty ashamed ... the Lord can take this bad thing and turn it around for His Glory ... may it be so ...

[familyop]

I see. I am a Protestant. We are very few and no longer have any organized church in the USA. All organized churches seem to be Unitarian or Catholic to some extent or other.

[Theo]

I see. I am a Protestant. We are very few and no longer have any organized church in the USA. All organized churches seem to be Unitarian or Catholic to some extent or other.

That's an odd comment. Not sure I understand. Perhaps you're using "Protetant" in a non-standard way?

[gortklattu]

Just pretend they're burning our flag then its ok

[Jason Kauppinen]

"A pastor who awoke to find a cross ablaze in his family's front yard said Sunday he hopes to speak with the teenagers accused of setting the fire to tell them they are forgiven."

Guilty until proven innocent eh?

[rdb3]

Guilty until proven innocent eh?

Did you even read the article?

Show 'em my motto!

[mhking]

Guilty until proven innocent eh?

You obviously didn't read the article. The teens "accused" of setting the fire turned themselves in to police.

[mhking]

True wisdom comes from this minister.

Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)

Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.

[KPfromDerryNH]

If I lived in the area, I would be at the peaceful protest too and I'm white. I'd bring my kids so make that 2 more whites. I think if the march stayed peaceful, it did not contribute to worsening race relations but highlighted community togetherness. Good for that minister.

[cyborg]

We should have this kind of attitude more often (I definately include myself in this).

[Bobby777]

me too ... Southern Baptist affiliation but I attend Pentecostal AOG at the time ... God bless ...

[Eala]

Not that this was a hoax of course.

This happened to a family in our church a dozen-odd years ago, some 20 miles south of where this burning occurred.

[familyop]

" That's an odd comment. Not sure I understand. Perhaps you're using "Protestant" in a non-standard way?"

It's not my site, and I haven't read much of it at all. But it should be fairly close to giving some understanding on what Protestantism is.

http://www.apuritansmind.com/MainPage.htm

A Protestant is one who protests against Catholicism, mysticism, illuminism, and so forth. A Protestant reads scripture, doesn't ignore any inspired scripture and does not try to add anything to scripture (such as the sin of spiritualism--worshipping the dead).

For example, my mother took the religion of her grandmother. Let's just say that it's charismatic, very spiritual, and claims to be some part of Protestantism. Members of her church seek magic and spiritualism. They have crosses in their church and pictures of their physically attractive, long haired Arian god (artists guesses on what Jesus looked like) on their walls. They invoke spirits. Their women head their households and drive their husbands away. Their church does not condemn adultery in sermons, and it preaches that our Father permanently forgives all who say an incantation one time (ignoring the other scriptural conditions for forgiveness and salvation. It's a very common and somewhat old church. It's beliefs are essentially like the beliefs of most churches that claim to be Protestant while having adopted pagan practices. All who use the NIV are being misled by a bible that was insidiously revised by a lesbian feminist (Mollenkott) and others who are lost.

The columns behind the following URL appear interesting. ...think I'll start reading those.

http://www.apuritansmind.com/MyArticles.htm

[Theo]

All right. I guess that explains a bit why I shy away from the word "Protestant" to describe my faith, as it seems more a reaction *against* heresy than an adherence *to* biblical orthodoxy.

I guess I consider myself most simply as "Evangelical," as the gospel is central to my faith -- that I'm a sinner in need of a Savior, and that Jesus has been sent as that Savior.

The site you pointed me to is cool in some ways -- I find Reformation/Puritan doctrine refreshing, for example. The guy who maintains that site, though, spends a lot of time being quite negative -- negative toward those whose doctrines or expressions differ subtly from his. And most of the articles are fraught with "straw man" fallacies (such as in the example you posted), which get old real fast. On the continuum between "legalism" and "licentiousness," that side seems to err toward the "legalism" side....

That said, I read through a treatise on "worship," which had some insightful points -- very consistent with what I hear on Sunday mornings! :-)

A final thought -- the argument between NIV and KJV can get tiresome, too, when taken to extremes. My preferred version is the English Standard Version. Have you seen that version? I did a quick google search and found its website: http://www.esv-bibles.com/

Anyway....

[familyop]

Thank you for your considerate response. Most responses to my posts on this topic have been angry ones. We are "negative" and grumpy old men, at times, too. But on the NIV, prepare yourself for a shock.

The NIV, in Deuteronomy 23:17, says, "No Israelite man or woman
is to become a shrine prostitute."

The KJV says in Deuteronomy 23:17, "There shall be no whore of
the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel."
"Sodomite" is a word that I haven't found in the NIV.

A feminist lesbian named Virginia Mollenkott helped to write the
NIV. Here's some info on Mollenkott.

The New International Version - 1978
http://www.revelationwebsite.co.uk/index1/kjv/mouth4.htm#niv

Let's read something else Ms. Mollenkott had to say.

"Virginia Mollenkott wrote, in a letter to Christian
Century (March 7, 1984, p. 252), 'I am beginning to
wonder whether indeed Christianity is patriarchal to its
very core. If so, count me out. Some of us may be forced
to leave Christianity in order to participate in Jesus'
discipleship of equals.'"

I saw that on the following book page.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/cbmw/rbmw/chapter26.html
"Charity, Clarity, and Hope: The Controversy and the Cause of
Christ"
John Piper and Wayne Grudem

"Two New Organizations: Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
Christians for Biblical Equality"

(Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
A Response to Evangelical Feminism
Wayne Grudem and John Piper)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And that's the older NIV, by the way--not the new "gender
inclusive" version.

I will look at the English Standard Version, and thank you.

[familyop]

Oh, and here's something else you might find interesting, if you read some of the documents behind the links.

"Susan B. Anthony: Lucifer's Chick?"
http://familyops.us/anthonyproject/Susan_B_Anthony_Devil.html

How long, do you think, before they start taking our heads?

[GeronL]

I meant in the last few years, it seems that the hoaxes have almost out-numbered the real cases. Its always sad when it happens to anyone.

[Theo]

Grudem and Piper's "Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood" is a great book -- I purchased a copy a few years ago, and find their definitions of "biblical masculinity" and "biblical femininity" quite counter-cultural, and quite helpful. I'm sure someone could misinterpret what they're saying, and say they're furthering the old cliche of patriarchal-types pushing women down, but I've found the concepts to be honoring to both women and men, as well as to the Creator.

When I was in high school, the NIV was fine for me. I honestly don't think it did any harm, and only did good. The vocabulary is pretty simple, and the sentence structure is pretty simple -- something that's fairly easy for fairly young people to read and understand.

As for the translation of "whore/sodomite" vs. "male/female prostitute" -- they seem the same to me. Both versions condemn sexual perversion. I can see how the NIV might downplay homosexual perversion, but I can see how one could interpret the NIV as implying homosexual perversion. Well, there are plenty of other verses in the NIV that clearly show homosexual perversion to be wrong, so I don't see a need to get too concerned about that one verse (although it may reveal a bias on behalf of one or more translators).

Hm. Just did some research, and the words in the Hebrew are KEDESHA and KADESH, which literally mean "holy" or "sacred."  There is no Hebrew derivative of the word "Sodom" in this passage. But it does look as though the male prostitutes were available for men, and so it follows that they'd be committing sodomy. Yuck.

Anyway, what I like about the ESV is that it doesn't shy away from complex terms and complex concepts/sentences, something I've become familiar with over the past 10 years or so. This past Sunday's sermon, for example, included such great words as "expiation" and "propitiation." Non-clergy like me can appreciate words like those, that help me gain an appreciation for what the Lord has done, the richness of his kindness and glory.