Comments on: More Intolerance by the Forces of Tolerance http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/ Bill Muehlenberg's commentary on issues of the day... Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:57:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Bill Muehlenberg http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160254 Bill Muehlenberg Sat, 07 Nov 2009 01:43:49 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160254 Thanks Pascal I of course don’t think highly of them at all. They give the pro-faith and pro-family camp a very bad name. We are to speak the truth in love. That can sometimes be a difficult thing to do. But we must try nonetheless. While God does hate sin, he does love each of us, and seeks to woo us back to himself. The love of God and the holiness of God must always be kept in proper biblical balance. The truth is, we are all sinners, and we all deserve eternal separation from the Father. But Jesus made it possible for us all to return to God through his substitutionary sacrifice at Calvary. In a sense, it is not one particular sin that keeps us from being reunited with a righteous, pure and holy God, but a sinful nature that is fixated on self. Conversion involves a change of allegiance from self to the rightful centre of the universe. So it is not homosexuality as such – or adultery, or theft, or murder, or whatever – that is keeping us from God, but our own unwillingness to let God be God, and to bow our knee to Him. Every person on the planet needs to keep hearing the good news. As Jesus so clearly taught in John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch Thanks Pascal

I of course don’t think highly of them at all. They give the pro-faith and pro-family camp a very bad name.

We are to speak the truth in love. That can sometimes be a difficult thing to do. But we must try nonetheless. While God does hate sin, he does love each of us, and seeks to woo us back to himself. The love of God and the holiness of God must always be kept in proper biblical balance.

The truth is, we are all sinners, and we all deserve eternal separation from the Father. But Jesus made it possible for us all to return to God through his substitutionary sacrifice at Calvary. In a sense, it is not one particular sin that keeps us from being reunited with a righteous, pure and holy God, but a sinful nature that is fixated on self.

Conversion involves a change of allegiance from self to the rightful centre of the universe. So it is not homosexuality as such – or adultery, or theft, or murder, or whatever – that is keeping us from God, but our own unwillingness to let God be God, and to bow our knee to Him.

Every person on the planet needs to keep hearing the good news. As Jesus so clearly taught in John 3:16:

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

]]> By: Pascal http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160238 Pascal Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:36:03 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160238 Some people perceive every act of denunciation of homosexuality as an equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church. Maybe, Bill, you could tell us what you think of this group? Thanks, Pascal Denault, Montréal Some people perceive every act of denunciation of homosexuality as an equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church. Maybe, Bill, you could tell us what you think of this group?

Thanks, Pascal Denault, Montréal

]]> By: Bill Muehlenberg http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160191 Bill Muehlenberg Fri, 06 Nov 2009 07:51:41 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160191 Many thanks Jamie And thanks for the Lewis quote. Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch Many thanks Jamie

And thanks for the Lewis quote.

Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

]]> By: Jamie Bowman http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160189 Jamie Bowman Fri, 06 Nov 2009 07:46:45 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160189 In a broader 'western' sense I thought this CS Lewis statement appropriate: "He who surrenders himself without reservation to the temporal claims of a nation, or a party, or a class is rendering to Caesar that which, of all things, most emphatically belongs to God: himself... " Keep playing a straight bat Bill, you do a mighty job. And I am more and more active because of it. Jamie Bowman In a broader ‘western’ sense I thought this CS Lewis statement appropriate: “He who surrenders himself without reservation to the temporal claims of a nation, or a party, or a class is rendering to Caesar that which, of all things, most emphatically belongs to God: himself… ”
Keep playing a straight bat Bill, you do a mighty job. And I am more and more active because of it.
Jamie Bowman

]]> By: John Snowden http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160180 John Snowden Fri, 06 Nov 2009 05:15:26 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160180 Stanley Fishley, the research partly predates Eysenck. But what is interesting is the touchiness of the subject. Years ago I innocently mentioned this research to a group of Humanistic types. Within a few years one listener had transformed in his memory a passing remark of mine into insinuated racism on my part. If you look at the world-view of these touchy liberal types, you'll find it's second-hand Darwinian (as it was in the case of my listener). There is nothing in evolutionary theory that predicts all human racial groups would be of equal intelligence, given that intelligence is largely genetically determined. Personally I don't think the difference is important. One racial group can be as stupid as the other. John Snowden Stanley Fishley, the research partly predates Eysenck. But what is interesting is the touchiness of the subject. Years ago I innocently mentioned this research to a group of Humanistic types. Within a few years one listener had transformed in his memory a passing remark of mine into insinuated racism on my part. If you look at the world-view of these touchy liberal types, you’ll find it’s second-hand Darwinian (as it was in the case of my listener). There is nothing in evolutionary theory that predicts all human racial groups would be of equal intelligence, given that intelligence is largely genetically determined. Personally I don’t think the difference is important. One racial group can be as stupid as the other.
John Snowden

]]> By: Stan Fishley http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160172 Stan Fishley Fri, 06 Nov 2009 03:22:43 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160172 John Snowden, thanks for the memory jog. I have often wondered who did this research, good old Eysenck. He certainly copped a lot of flack for being honest. Stan Fishley John Snowden, thanks for the memory jog. I have often wondered who did this research, good old Eysenck. He certainly copped a lot of flack for being honest.
Stan Fishley

]]> By: David Skinner http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160105 David Skinner Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:27:56 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160105 Kathleen’s response may not be hate filled but it is certainly scary. It reveals just how far the secular leftists are winning the psychological war. Accuse anyone of harbouring feelings of hatred and they are automatically accused, judged and condemned for being a homophobe. Precisely that for which the LGBTs accuse us. But thank God we have scripture to endorse and encourage rejection of all that is contrary to the word of God. "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law - a man's enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it." -Matthew 10:34-39 The love that Kathleen describes is adulterous and idolatrous for it misplaces the love of another human being above that of God. As Lewis reminded us, it is not so much that we love people too much, but we don't love God enough. This then becomes idolatry. To really love people, we must love them God's way. David Skinner, UK Kathleen’s response may not be hate filled but it is certainly scary. It reveals just how far the secular leftists are winning the psychological war. Accuse anyone of harbouring feelings of hatred and they are automatically accused, judged and condemned for being a homophobe. Precisely that for which the LGBTs accuse us.

But thank God we have scripture to endorse and encourage rejection of all that is contrary to the word of God.

“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law – a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.” -Matthew 10:34-39

The love that Kathleen describes is adulterous and idolatrous for it misplaces the love of another human being above that of God. As Lewis reminded us, it is not so much that we love people too much, but we don’t love God enough. This then becomes idolatry. To really love people, we must love them God’s way.

David Skinner, UK

]]> By: John Snowden http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160102 John Snowden Thu, 05 Nov 2009 12:44:21 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160102 With regard to John Thomas' post on Eysenck, this great psychologist also ran into opposition in Australia when he attempted to discuss the relationship between race and IQ in the light of reputable research. Leftwing, socially "progressive" folk can be remarkably touchy on this subject, possibly because the mention of it reminds them of the "racist" thoughts that pop inconveniently into their consciousnesses at times, as unwelcome thoughts from the subconscious tend to do. I had an opportunity to meet Eysenck but refused to pay the exorbitant fee for the privilege. With regard to the matter of some homosexuals being likeable as persons, indeed some are. Neurotics can be likeable too, but that does not warrant a view that neurosis is a desirable, unproblematic state. In any case, how likeable someone is depends partly on how much you know about them. Years ago I had a homosexual colleague whom I liked because he was intelligent and cultured. My view of him changed after several visits to his home. On the first occasion he introduced me to his flatmate, an adolescent boy whom he was "looking after". The boy was a homeless runaway. On the second occasion I was invited with a group of colleagues during our lunchbreak. This fellow's idea of socialising was to put on a video of "Deep Throat". I walked out. The last I heard of him was that he had legal problems relating to an attempt at picking up a youth. He seems to avoid the social company of his former colleagues. Possibly it is because he has a low opinion of himself. John Snowden With regard to John Thomas’ post on Eysenck, this great psychologist also ran into opposition in Australia when he attempted to discuss the relationship between race and IQ in the light of reputable research. Leftwing, socially “progressive” folk can be remarkably touchy on this subject, possibly because the mention of it reminds them of the “racist” thoughts that pop inconveniently into their consciousnesses at times, as unwelcome thoughts from the subconscious tend to do.

I had an opportunity to meet Eysenck but refused to pay the exorbitant fee for the privilege.

With regard to the matter of some homosexuals being likeable as persons, indeed some are. Neurotics can be likeable too, but that does not warrant a view that neurosis is a desirable, unproblematic state. In any case, how likeable someone is depends partly on how much you know about them. Years ago I had a homosexual colleague whom I liked because he was intelligent and cultured. My view of him changed after several visits to his home. On the first occasion he introduced me to his flatmate, an adolescent boy whom he was “looking after”. The boy was a homeless runaway. On the second occasion I was invited with a group of colleagues during our lunchbreak. This fellow’s idea of socialising was to put on a video of “Deep Throat”. I walked out. The last I heard of him was that he had legal problems relating to an attempt at picking up a youth. He seems to avoid the social company of his former colleagues. Possibly it is because he has a low opinion of himself.

John Snowden

]]> By: John Thomas http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160082 John Thomas Thu, 05 Nov 2009 08:57:36 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160082 Kathleen - You're right, gay people are like you say. The gay people I've known have been ... well, it's not inappropriate to say <i>loveable</i> people - too nice, in fact, for any of them to be plunged into the kind of hideous life, practices, physical/medical dangers they're inevitably bound for (do you really <i>know</i> how most gay people live?) - and yes, that's in this life. The <i>real</i> haters of gays are those who would "legitimise" and "normalise" their "lifestyle", and inevitably pitch them into the terrible life most will experience. But to the ideological people, individual men are just expendable cannon-fodder in the culture wars. I suggest it's people such as Dr Gagnon who exhibit <i>real</i> love for gay men. John Thomas, UK Kathleen – You’re right, gay people are like you say. The gay people I’ve known have been … well, it’s not inappropriate to say loveable people – too nice, in fact, for any of them to be plunged into the kind of hideous life, practices, physical/medical dangers they’re inevitably bound for (do you really know how most gay people live?) – and yes, that’s in this life. The real haters of gays are those who would “legitimise” and “normalise” their “lifestyle”, and inevitably pitch them into the terrible life most will experience. But to the ideological people, individual men are just expendable cannon-fodder in the culture wars. I suggest it’s people such as Dr Gagnon who exhibit real love for gay men.
John Thomas, UK

]]> By: Bill Muehlenberg http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/11/04/2083/comment-page-1/#comment-160050 Bill Muehlenberg Thu, 05 Nov 2009 02:29:00 +0000 http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/?p=2083#comment-160050 Thanks Kathleen You say you ‘identify’ as a Christian, but based on what you said, one can ask with all due respect just how strong that identification is. Indeed, it appears from what you have said that you have simply soaked up the spirit of the age – complete with all the pro-homosexual propaganda at your school – with very little biblical knowledge or understanding. You have completely fallen for this bogus notion of ‘hate speech’ wherein anyone who dares to speak the truth about homosexuality, or challenges their agenda, is simply dismissed as being hate-filled and bigoted. That is one way to always win a debate – just ignore the actual arguments and facts, and simply dismiss your opponent as hate-filled. And you of course are quite happy to jettison scriptural teaching in order to get along with the homosexual agenda. Yes it is true that we are to love everyone and show them the love of Christ. But biblical love never means allowing a person to continue in their sin and harmful sexual addictions. Biblical love is always about willing the highest good for the other person. The highest good for another person is what God demands of each of us. Scripture is quite clear that no homosexual will enter the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-11). So how can you even claim to love homosexuals – or any other sinner, which we all are, but some of us are forgiven sinners - if you are allowing them to enter a lost eternity? How can you claim biblical love when you simply allow behaviour which the Bible clearly calls sinful? Sadly your notion of love seems to be mere mushy sentimentalism and worldly tolerance, not biblical love. And you have managed to completely mangle the Lukan version of the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus never for a moment intended us to suspend judgment, critical evaluation, discernment, and the testing of all things. Christians are everywhere called upon to make loving judgments. Love and discernment are not opposites, but are very much two sides to the same coin. But I have more fully discussed this elsewhere: http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2008/10/08/thou-shalt-judge/ http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2007/06/14/jesus-and-judgment/ Sorry, but it seems clear from your comment that you have much more fully identified with secular humanism, and have very little identification at all with biblical Christianity. Thus it is a real pity that you missed Dr Gagnon’s lecture. It sounds like it would have done you a lot of good in clearing up some sloppy thinking and mushy moralising. Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch Thanks Kathleen

You say you ‘identify’ as a Christian, but based on what you said, one can ask with all due respect just how strong that identification is. Indeed, it appears from what you have said that you have simply soaked up the spirit of the age – complete with all the pro-homosexual propaganda at your school – with very little biblical knowledge or understanding.

You have completely fallen for this bogus notion of ‘hate speech’ wherein anyone who dares to speak the truth about homosexuality, or challenges their agenda, is simply dismissed as being hate-filled and bigoted. That is one way to always win a debate – just ignore the actual arguments and facts, and simply dismiss your opponent as hate-filled.

And you of course are quite happy to jettison scriptural teaching in order to get along with the homosexual agenda. Yes it is true that we are to love everyone and show them the love of Christ. But biblical love never means allowing a person to continue in their sin and harmful sexual addictions. Biblical love is always about willing the highest good for the other person.

The highest good for another person is what God demands of each of us. Scripture is quite clear that no homosexual will enter the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-11). So how can you even claim to love homosexuals – or any other sinner, which we all are, but some of us are forgiven sinners – if you are allowing them to enter a lost eternity? How can you claim biblical love when you simply allow behaviour which the Bible clearly calls sinful? Sadly your notion of love seems to be mere mushy sentimentalism and worldly tolerance, not biblical love.

And you have managed to completely mangle the Lukan version of the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus never for a moment intended us to suspend judgment, critical evaluation, discernment, and the testing of all things. Christians are everywhere called upon to make loving judgments. Love and discernment are not opposites, but are very much two sides to the same coin.

But I have more fully discussed this elsewhere:
www.billmuehlenberg.com/2008/10/08/thou-shalt-judge/
www.billmuehlenberg.com/2007/06/14/jesus-and-judgment/

Sorry, but it seems clear from your comment that you have much more fully identified with secular humanism, and have very little identification at all with biblical Christianity.

Thus it is a real pity that you missed Dr Gagnon’s lecture. It sounds like it would have done you a lot of good in clearing up some sloppy thinking and mushy moralising.

Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

]]>