Posted on 08/03/2006 10:17:02 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
A Christian for the N.Y. Times
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 3, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Joseph Farah
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who says the New York Times is anti-Christian?
Why just the other day, I read a beautiful profile of an evangelical mega-church pastor from Minnesota. You could just tell the reporter for the Times loved the Rev. Gregory A. Boyd.
It isn't Christians the Times loathes. It's just right-wing Christians. And so does the Rev. Gregory Boyd.
Boyd has some interesting ideas – given that he claims to base his beliefs on the same Bible I read.
But let's start with abortion and homosexuality. While Boyd claims to oppose abortion, he doesn't advocate that believers do anything to stop it. While he thinks homosexuality is not God's ideal, he opposes standing in the gap and opposing its strident political agenda.
Many think the Bible is silent on abortion. I don't. In fact, I think it is the Judeo-Christian ethical teachings alone that kept abortion relegated to a few back alleys in America until 1973, when killing babies instantly became a constitutional right by proclamation of the high priests in black robes on the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Bible shows us what happens when people among you worship other gods. Recall the children sacrificed on the fiery altars of Baal? Did God allow for any compromise with that evil?
The Bible tells us that unborn babies had consciousness and that John the Baptist leapt in his own mother's womb in the presence of the pregnant Mary.
But let's cut to the chase on the abortion issue: What would Jesus do? Can anyone imagine Jesus walking by an abortion clinic without comment? Without action? With all that we know about the character of Jesus, can someone really suggest to me that He would not condemn such barbarism – that He would not do what He could to stop it and heal those involved with the sinful practice?
Trust me on this, when Jesus returns, He's not going to tell women it's their choice to kill their unborn babies.
Now what about homosexuality? What would Jesus have said? What would Jesus have done?
On this one, less speculation and guesswork is required. Because Jesus spoke openly and clearly on God's order for man and woman.
And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. – Matthew 19:4-6
It's even more clear cut elsewhere in the Bible. It begins in Leviticus 18:22 (KJV): "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
That seems pretty clear to me. Not a lot of ambiguity there. The chapter goes on to state that people who commit these acts, and others God considers abominations, causes the land itself to be defiled. That's a reason for everyone to be concerned about homosexuality – especially the brand of open, in-your-face ''gay'' pride variety. Then, in the New Testament, Paul writes in Romans 1:22-27:
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
"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: 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."
It's also suggested in the Bible that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God. Therefore, it's hard to imagine why someone who claims to be an evangelical would not want to let homosexuals know their behavior blocks them from eternal life. Some day, I suspect, Gregory Boyd will have to answer that question for himself.
He says Jesus never moralized about sex. But, as you can see from Jesus' simple but eloquent statement about God's plan for men and women, He certainly did. he also shocked the Samaritan woman into changing her life. He told the accused harlot to go and sin no more. You have to ignore a lot of Bible to think Jesus didn't care about illicit sex.
Boyd reads the Constitution about as clearly and astutely as he reads the Bible, concluding that it says something about "separation of church and state," which it does not.
But, despite all that, he's a favorite of the New York Times. Why, if anyone at the New York Times went to church, I'm sure it would be a church just like Boyd's.
Original Article:
Disowning Conservative Politics, Evangelical Pastor Rattles Flock (20% leave Church)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1675033/posts
They hate Christians who vote Republican. If we'd crawl off to our little circle for prayer and worship, and stay out of politics, they might let us live.
As for Jesus not moralizing, what's this in Matt 15?
15 Peter said, "Explain the parable to us." 16 "Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. 17 "Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20 These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.'"
It's not that the NYT hates the Christian RIGHT. It's that the NYT hates authentic Christianity.
>> If we'd crawl off to our little circle for prayer and worship, and stay out of politics, they might let us live <<
Naw; then they'd just legally murder all of us. That's what the Christians did against the Muslimes for the first couple centuries of Mohammedhism.
He says Jesus never moralized about sex. But, as you can see from Jesus' simple but eloquent statement about God's plan for men and women, He certainly did. he also shocked the Samaritan woman into changing her life. He told the accused harlot to go and sin no more. You have to ignore a lot of Bible to think Jesus didn't care about illicit sex.
IMHO, no one really can be certain what Jesus would do with gay and lesbian people. I believe he would forgive them because my Christianity tells me that he regarded ALL sin in black-and-white terms (with no sin being greater than another with the exception of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit--Atheism). This article seems to imply that Jesus would immediately condemn homosexuals to eternal hell, whereas fornicators (adulteress at well) would be forgiven.
I hope you just forgot the /sarc button.
Yes, Jesus forgives the repentent sinner. He does not force forgiveness on those who won't even acknowledge they are doing anything wrong. And I'm quite sure He gets downright angry at those who claim God made them homosexuals (or adulterers or whatever).
My hometown paper, the LBPress-Telegram asked its opinion question on this very event. Odd is it not that the Left never takes on its own patronizing use of black, Hispanic, gay and liberal churches of having Clinton, Gore, and Jesse Jackson,Al Sharpton to advance its agenda , raise money, and yes, sign up voters! Boyd just cannot see that double standard. As usual , the Left is blind to its own hypocrisy. Note, 1,000 members walked out since Boyd did not want to allow, allow, Christian Pubs as citizens who according to the Bill of Rights, has equal rights with Christian Dems!!!
Actually, there is some truth to what Boyd said. But what he doesn't recognize is that politics (primarily leftist politics) is a false religion, is idol worship, that stands in opposition to biblically-informed faith and practice. He also doesn't seem to recognize that if I am being faithful to the teachings of the Bible, it will impact how I understand my role in society, and will impact my opinions and the way I vote. Apparently, Boyd has successfully compartmentalized his faith in a way that it doesn't have application or doesn't touch upon issues outside his church life.
I have noticed over the last 3 weeks an incredible increase in the media of interviews with left wing Christians. I saw an interview with Jim Wallis and a few others on CNN. There was a big article with Obama in one of the major rags and other articles I have read. All of them say the same thing: Christianity is not Republican and the Religious right does not have a lock on morality. These are straw men easily setup and knocked down. I have never heard any Christian claim that God is a Republican.
Boyd can't take a position on these and other critical matters since his god hasn't taken a final position on them since his god doesn't know the future.
Or alcoholics, or drug abusers, or sociopaths, or bisexuals, or obesity, or anorexia, or bulemics, or _______________!
Here is the entry on Wikipedia about Rev. Gregory Boyd :
Bingo!
I can't remember where I read it,but the left has decided that they're not going to concede Christianity to the Right.They've realised how influential the Christian Right is and what a rich voting demographic it has been for the Republican party. They're trying to co-opt this vote,by putting forth a leftist version of "Christianity", to appeal to Republican Christian voters. They don't seem to understand that they can't reconcile the leftist agenda of abortion,homosexuality,socialism,etc,with why Christian voters vote Republican. Sure,the Republican party isn't an exact fit for Christians,but it's as close a realistic option as there is,if we want to have a voice in the direction of this country.
I often visit a Christian site called "Crosswalk",and I've noticed an increasing number of new and newish members there posting things calling for "toleration","moderation",and other things that coincide with leftist politics. I guess that they meant it-trying to slice off some of the "religious" vote-but it won't work,because so-called "religious" voters reasons for voting Right just don't fit in with the leftists agenda,and we already know it. And they can't muffle the increasingly loud "looney left" voices of the Rat party. It's a pipe dream that they have,and it's so obvious that it's funny.
Interesting enough, I never hear rebuttals to these pastors in any of these articles or interviews. Everytime a conservative christian is interviewed, you get quite a few rebuttals from the other side. Not one of these articles have I seen a rebuttal from the right (card stacking by the media).
I think this is because we need to be very sensative to critizing fellow believers in public (we should do it in private first aka 1 Cor. 6:1-6). I wonder how many of these pastors have contacted those they are offended by in person before they go to the public?
There are some people who are "holy" on Sunday and hell-on-wheels the remaining six days of the week. I would venture to guess these people attend Rev. Boyd's church??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.