Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

When Evangelical Churches Bow to Gay Demands?--
Townhall.com ^ | Marvin Olasky

Posted on 08/16/2007 11:08:18 AM PDT by Anti-Hillary

Should biblical churches host gay-glorifying funerals? Should evangelical politics move leftward? Many news organs give us one answer: Yes!

The lead of an Aug. 11 Associated Press story seemed to expose a clear case of homophobia: "A megachurch canceled a memorial service for a Navy veteran 24 hours before it was to start because the deceased was gay."

The story stated that officials at High Point Church in Arlington, Texas, offered to host the service for a gay janitor who wasn't a church member but had worked there -- only to say no when his obituary listed a life partner. The deceased's sister said, "It's a slap in the face."

The AP story did quote the church's pastor's concern that the service would promote the gay lifestyle. That quotation was a throwback to the old AP style of trying to present both sides equally, but the new AP is politically correct, and the overall slant of this story was clear: Christians lack compassion.

A Dallas Morning News story was more nuanced. It noted that the issue was not the deceased's unrepentant homosexuality but that "his friends and family wanted that part of his life to be a significant part of the service."

(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: antichristian; highpointchurch; homosexualagenda; olasky
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-108 next last
To: Non-Sequitur
I can always tell when someone realizes that they don't have a clue what they're talking about. They call their opponent a liberal.

Or it might be the fact that you always take the liberal position in debates - like the AG Morrison, Marines vs. JAG, southern pride, judicial supremacy, etc...

61 posted on 08/16/2007 1:20:13 PM PDT by Hacksaw (Appalachian by the grace of God - Montani Semper Liberi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Joann37

utter nonsense.

The bible is clear on the issue of sexual behavior and cultural references. Especially when puting the NON-biblical sources in context with the time period biblical references.

In addition, divorce has been around since the start. The orthodox christian church has had eclisiastical divoces for over a millenia. But there are rules, you are confusing the modern no fault secular divorce from something else.

Also divorce is a FAR HUGE cry from the sexual recreation of homosexuality. Divorce is not about recreation or poping orgasms. Homosexuality is ONLY AND EXCLUSIVLY about recreational sex, NOTHING else.


62 posted on 08/16/2007 1:20:21 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 4CJ
Did the story mention that Rev. Gary Simons and the church had been in prayer over the man for over 6 years? Or that a member of the church staff was at the hospital ministering to the family?

Every morning @5:30. Rumor has it that family was a little course with the ministers.

Rumor also has it the man's services was pro bono.

63 posted on 08/16/2007 1:22:00 PM PDT by BlabItGrabIt (Sly, Shy, and Wry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Hacksaw
Or it might be the fact that you always take the liberal position in debates - like the AG Morrison, Marines vs. JAG, southern pride, judicial supremacy, etc...

Back to something being liberal because you say it is? Well, thanks for clearing that up for us.

64 posted on 08/16/2007 1:22:24 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

You don’t have to have full out orgy pictures to have objections over including a dead persons trip to a hedonism resort. (the ones run by club med)

There could have been a VERY easy way to resolve this and quite frankly the dead man’s family should have been a bit understanding and less demanding.

The man had a lifestyle he chose. Choices have consequences. The churches position would be no differnet for a polygamist, satanist, wife swapper, or any other behavior lifestyle.


65 posted on 08/16/2007 1:33:06 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; BlabItGrabIt
The family has said that none of the pictures they provided showed any same sex individuals kissing or hugging or anything like that. What was filthy?

Just a hand over the crotch of the man's partner, and one where he shot the bird at someone. Nothing offensive.

66 posted on 08/16/2007 1:34:47 PM PDT by 4CJ (Annoy a liberal, honour Christians and our gallant Confederate dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
There could have been a VERY easy way to resolve this and quite frankly the dead man’s family should have been a bit understanding and less demanding.

Well the easiest way to resolve it would be not getting into the situation in the first place. Had the church not made the offer then they wouldn't have had to withdraw it.

The man had a lifestyle he chose. Choices have consequences.

Although whether or not the church knew the man was a homosexual before extending the invitation depends on which story you read, they did choose to extend the inivitation. That choice also had a consequence, which in this case turned out to be a boatload of publicity when they withdrew their offer.

67 posted on 08/16/2007 1:42:21 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: 4CJ
Just a hand over the crotch of the man's partner, and one where he shot the bird at someone. Nothing offensive.

Were those the only two you saw?

68 posted on 08/16/2007 1:43:26 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
How does one atone for sin by living in sin?

Which is why they could not celebrate his sin of sodomy.

By George, I think he's finally getting it!

And this isn't the first story posted about this, the picture figured prominently in the previous ones.

69 posted on 08/16/2007 2:08:35 PM PDT by FormerLib (Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Hillary
A Dallas Morning News story was more nuanced.

My guess...
the liberal writers at DMN know a lot of (liberal) subscribers
are hypocrites on gay-affirmation.

And if there is on hard lesson being learned by the MSM these days:
don't throw rocks at the people who pay your salary.
70 posted on 08/16/2007 2:17:33 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; stainlessbanner
What if Mark 10 is right and Jesus gave no exceptions to his command that those who divorce and remarry are committing adultery? Now you can go with Matthew and his loop-hole, but I've always thought that trying to wriggle out of something using a loop-hole was a very liberal thing to do.

Two distinct situations. When a man gave his wife a bill of divorcement he was obligated to return her dowry. A low-life would simply put his wife away (no bill/dowry) meaning he was still MARRIED, and would be committing adultery. This is what Luke refers to.

Similarly, to Jesus (in Matthew) the only Biblical grounds for divorce was adultery/sexual immorality, and only on that ground could a husband and wife divorce (with bill of divorcement and dowry). Other than for this reason, any divorce was Biblically unjust, and to God if they remarried they committed adultery.

Luke concerns separation/remarriage, Matthew unBiblical divorce/remarriage.

71 posted on 08/16/2007 2:17:44 PM PDT by 4CJ (Annoy a liberal, honour Christians and our gallant Confederate dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Were those the only two you saw?

One would have been enough.

72 posted on 08/16/2007 2:19:05 PM PDT by 4CJ (Annoy a liberal, honour Christians and our gallant Confederate dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Hillary

As a pastor in a conservative Lutheran denomination, no one has a right to a church funeral. If the church’s view is that homosexuality is sinful, then do not be surprised if the church decides not to have a church service for a practicing homosexual. There are plenty of liberal denominations that embrace homosexuality. I suggest that those who are openly gay go to one of those.


73 posted on 08/16/2007 2:26:16 PM PDT by Ferox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BMIC
Talk about blatantly false reporting! The problem wasn’t his being gay. The problem is they wanted to make his memorial service into a perverse celebration of homosexuality.

EXACTLY. The real story is out there online; I've read it. People who wound up attending his funeral at another facility confirmed that it was indeed a service very homosexual in tone.

The church did precisely the right thing, and I emailed the church to say thanks.

MM (in TX)

74 posted on 08/16/2007 2:29:52 PM PDT by MississippiMan (Behold now behemoth...he moves his tail like a cedar. Job 40:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
Which is why they could not celebrate his sin of sodomy.

And why churches should not allow second spouses or their families to attend the funerals of those who divorce and remarry, since that would be celebrating the sin of adultery. Using your standards and definitions, of course. Right?

75 posted on 08/16/2007 3:01:22 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: 4CJ
Luke concerns separation/remarriage, Matthew unBiblical divorce/remarriage.

And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of "divorcement, and to put her away.
And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery." -- Matthew 10: 3-12

It doesn't look like Jesus is talking about fraud or unpaid dowry, and it looks like He's talking about divorce here, as well. Divorce and remarriage is adultery.

76 posted on 08/16/2007 3:11:27 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: 4CJ
One would have been enough.

Undoubtably. But according to news stories that's not what the pastor objected to. He claimed, "Some of those photos had very strong homosexual images of kissing and hugging." Pictures that the family denies giving him. Now what you described were two tasteless pictures which had no business in a church under any circtumstances, but they're hardly the kind of pictures Pator described. So if you didn't see any of the other ones then did they exist, as the Pastor claims? Or did they not, as the family says? Or did you even see them at all?

77 posted on 08/16/2007 3:16:05 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: 4CJ
"The family has said," hmmm. Mere speculation, but who knows if that family could be looking for some ka-ching grace.

RIP, may God have mercy on your soul, dearly departed!

78 posted on 08/16/2007 4:00:11 PM PDT by BlabItGrabIt (Sly, Shy, and Wry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Joann37

true, but I think most divorced couples (at least Christian ones) realize that divorce is wrong and repent (at least I hope they do) I have not seen a Christian advocating that divorce and remarriage is an acceptable let alone a glorified lifestyle.

The gays, however, see nothing wrong with what they do and try to celebrate it. God does forgive after repentance, Thank God. He does not forgive when not asked in the name of Jesus Christ to forgive a confessed and repented of sin. All Christians sin and are forgiven, but no true Christian can proclaim and celebrate sin. Rather it is something to confess, receive forgiveness, and move on. This is what the homnosexual movement refuses to do.


79 posted on 08/16/2007 4:07:48 PM PDT by Mom MD (The scorn of fools is music to the ears of the wise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; FormerLib
I see the discussion between the two of you continued...

Depends on which Gospel you refer to. But at best He allowed for divorce only in cases of infidelity.

I think that's a good point. As I understand it, even though somebody may divorce and remarry they can ask for forgiveness, be forgiven and move on with their life. Of course the model is never to divorce.

In regards to homosexuality, God specifically calls this behavior an abomination in the Old Testament. In Romans 1 he refers to a depraved mind. In 1 Cor 6:9-11 we see some of the Corinthians were previously adulterers, some were homosexual, but they were washed, sanctified and justified.

The idea here is to repent of your sin and to stop the sinful behavior. I don't see it as that complicated.

80 posted on 08/16/2007 4:34:29 PM PDT by scripter ("You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body." - C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-108 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson