Saturday, August 29, 2009

More Logicless thinking at 'New Christians'

Tony Jones Blog Seems to be just a breading ground for thinking that is just out of left field. I will give you an example, this is on the same thread as my previous post, regarding the intersexed.
Your Name [ yes, this is the name of the poster]
To the intersexed individual wanting answers...
Just my opinion: I wouldn't seek them here. It sounds like most of the people here haven't walked in your shoes (or don't know that they have since many parents and doctors choose the gender for intersexed babies at birth)...
It seems to me that this guy is guilty of a major logic error. Namely, I don't have to walk in the shoes of a murderer or a homosexual or a pro ball player to understand their struggles/nee ds. I mean this amounts to no one person being able to understand any other person, as we haven't all have the same experiences. I mean come on, lets try to think rationally.

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Who is the Real Fundimentalist

I have been busy over at Tony Jones' Blog. They posed a question about being 'intersexed' and I have been responding to one person specifically, Panthera.

I am going to post the conversation that has being occurring between He (?) and I, the goal of this is to see who the real fundimentalist is within this conversation.


dustin germain my marriage is legitimate. What you and your hateful version of Christianity thinks is totally irrelevant.

For what it's worth, my opinion is very simply put:

You should love the person who loves you. Build a committed, monogamous, loving, faithful and true marriage. Who cares what your chromosomal status or your sexuality is, marriage is strictly between two people and not determined by hateful conservative Christians.

Regardless of how often they rape, torture, beat and kill us.



I don't know what your story is, or frankly anything about who you are, and I'm not trying put on a pretense of judgment towards you, however, I think that for the Christian, the word of God must be our Authority for Truth. There are so many experiences, philosophies, sects, cults, and religious persons that I believe that to submit to any of them outside of scripture is folly.In Short, We must have an Arbiter of truth that is external from us.

That said I am a conservative Christian. I have never Raped, Tortured, Beat or Killed anyone and being as I don't even know who you are I clearly don't hate you. That said, I am, because of my belief in Sola Scriptura, against any and all forms of marriage that are not given to be valid covenantally by the Word of God (see Gen. 1-2, Matthew 19). I am forced by my love for scripture and the God of Scripture to say that out side of God instituting a covenant, persons in committed, monogamous,loving, lifelong relationships are still fornicating, an act described as sin by both the New and Old Testaments.

Is it possible for you to see that perhaps persons who take the view that I have just outlined are not hate-mongers, but rather are people who lovingly desire for you to not come under condemnation from God Almighty?


Of course it is possible for me, Ken.

I find it sad that you needs must imprison God by limiting Him to your interpretation of the Bible. And that is what you do.

Calling my marriage fornication is absurd. Do you really think I would abandon my husband just to satisfy your mumbo-jumbo?

Not going to happen.

There is little charity amongst you fundamentalist Christians, little indeed if you can call a faithful partnership of 25 years a sin.

Oh, and, yes, I am a Christian. You can be a Christian and gay. Even a Christian and gay and married.


panthera -

I would like to systematically address your response.

1. I think that it is completely irrational and unreasonable to say that I am imprisoning God. If the text explains God, then holding to that isn't an imprisonment, but rather a representation. This type of language serves more to Poison the Well, rather then to make a rational argument.

2. I am not calling your marriage fornication, I am saying that I do not believe that you can support from scripture same-sex marriage, being covenantally begun by God. I would also note that Dee Bradshaw a pastor in the MCC in his debate with Dr. James White said that he could not do so.

3. Do I really think you would abandon your husband just to satisfy my "mumbo-jumbo?" No, I don't. I don't think in fact if Jesus came down and told you that he did not approve of your actions that you would abandon your 'husband.' I hope that you understand that I mean that in the kindest was possible.

4. To say that there is little charity amongst fundamentalists may or may not be true, however, I am not a fundamentalist, which is frankly a derogatory term, that has no place in civil discussion. Notice that no where in what I have said did I Directly say that what you are doing is a sin. That is your conclusion from the logical case I am forwarding, but I did not use the word Sin.

5. I think that we must submit to 1 John as to what a Christian, I don't Judge you.


Ken, you wrote, I answered. I won't get into the hysterical fundamentalist/conservative/literalistic/bible-as-God's-only-message discussion with you.

Calling a fundamentalist a fundamentalist is no more an insult than it was after church Sunday when a local farmer came up to me and said his b i t c h was in heat and did I think my dawg might spend the week with his family, 'cause he knows what to do with his nose.

That man would die for his pretty little dog, they're that close. But he still calls her by what she is.

Tony, I see little hope of any mercy from these people for anyone whom they consider 'other'.


Panthera ~

The clear issue is that I am not a Fundamentalist. As a matter of fact based on the definition of the term, by Richard Dowkins, You are more of a fundamentalist then I am. "Richard Dawkins has used the term to characterize religious advocates as clinging to a stubborn, entrenched position that defies reasoned argument or contradictory evidence."

The clear fact is that you, in our brief encounter, have done exactly this. Thus we must conclude that You are the Fundamentalist not I.


And Richard Dawkin's opinion is relevant because...?

I simply don't care how you self-identify. I have no interest in the mumbo-jumbo you practice in your version of Christianity in your church.

All I care about is that you cease attacking my status as a human and stop blocking my civil rights, including the right to have my marriage legally recognized in the US.

That is the difference between us - I am more than happy to leave you and your hatefilled ilk be. You recognize neither my status as Christian nor human, demanding I bend to your perverted, hatefilled will.

Ain't gonna happen.

I will die before I surrender to you and your nasty fellow travelers.


Panthera ~

Can you please show me, and everyone else reading this where exactly I have said you are "not-Human" in any interaction here.

I find it funny that you refuse to do anything but cry victim, as if I have dehumanized you, degraded you, or treated you at all poorly. When in fact I have done none of these things. I understand that you have no doubt been mistreated previously, which I openly condemn. I am simply trying to have a rational discussion with you about in issue.


I find it amazing that 1. I am not a nasty, hate-monger, anti-gay, dehumanizing, fundamentalist. However, looking at the more modern definition given by Richard Dawkins, I am asking:

Who is the Real Fundamentalist??

You be the Judge.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Terms Defined - LDS Testimony

In Mormonism, the term Testimony is defined in "True to the Faith" (2004 Edition) as:

A Testimony is a spiritual witness given by the Holy Ghost. The Foundation of a testimony is the knowledge that Heavenly Father live and loves us: that Jesus Christ live, and that He is the Son of God, and that he carried out the infinite Atonement; that Joseph Smith is the prophet of God who was called to restore the gospel; that we are led by a living prophet today; and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Savior's true Church on the earth. With this foundation, a testimony grows to include all principles of the gospel.

She Will Keep the Baby!

I have to admit, I have no idea who Kourtney Kardashian is. I don't know that I have even heard the name before (does this mean I have been living under a rock?) However, in doing my normalish blog reading I came across this story from People Magazine. There was something very striking about this woman's comments and about the graphic detail in which she describes her situation.

First, it is clear from the statements of both Ms. Kardashian and her boyfriend Scott, that neither is pro-life; clearly they are pro-choice. Yet Ms. Kardashian's comment on her choice is very clear -
For me, all the reasons why I wouldn't keep the baby were so selfish: It wasn't like I was raped, it's not like I'm 16. I'm 30 years old, I make my own money, I support myself, I can afford to have a baby. And I am with someone who I love, and have been with for a long time... My doctor told me there is nothing you will ever regret about having the baby, but he was like, 'You may regret not having the baby.' And I was like: That is so true. And it just hit me. I got so excited"
It seems that for Ms. Kardashian that being unwed caused the question, and that the answer was at least partly that she couldn't justify murdering a young human being, which is to be praised in this culture where women are told that they have the right to play God. Let me just say, Congratulations, you have made a wise choice Ms. Kardashian, your child thanks you.

Now there has never been a truer statement then what that doctor said; regret only comes from murdering your child.

I would like to just put forth, an argument from Scott Klusendorf:

Put simply, there is no morally significant difference between the embryo you once were and the adult you are today. Differences of size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency are not relevant such that we can say that you had no rights as an embryo but you do have rights today. Think of the acronym SLED as a helpful reminder of these non-essential differences:4

Size: True, embryos are smaller than newborns and adults, but why is that relevant? Do we really want to say that large people are more human than small ones? Men are generally larger than women, but that doesn’t mean that they deserve more rights. Size doesn’t equal value.

Level of development: True, embryos and fetuses are less developed than you and I. But again, why is this relevant? Four year-old girls are less developed than 14 year-old ones. Should older children have more rights than their younger siblings? Some people say that self-awareness makes one human. But if that is true, newborns do not qualify as valuable human beings. Six-week old infants lack the immediate capacity for performing human mental functions, as do the reversibly comatose, the sleeping, and those with Alzheimer’s Disease.

Environment: Where you are has no bearing on who you are. Does your value change when you cross the street or roll over in bed? If not, how can a journey of eight inches down the birth-canal suddenly change the essential nature of the unborn from non-human to human? If the unborn are not already human, merely changing their location can’t make them valuable.

Degree of Dependency: If viability makes us human, then all those who depend on insulin or kidney medication are not valuable and we may kill them. Conjoined twins who share blood type and bodily systems also have no right to life.

In short, it’s far more reasonable to argue that although humans differ immensely with respect to talents, accomplishments, and degrees of development, they are nonetheless equal because they share a common human nature.

Saturday, August 22, 2009

One Table Many Heresies

In the Booklet "One Table Many Blessings" there are a collection of 'devotionals' for the ELCA Assembly that meets until the 23rd of this month. The booklet says this about itself:
Mingled with the devotions you will find twelve stories and pictures from the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. Each is a story of a family: of individuals within church families, of couples with and without children, of extended families of kin. Some are clergy, some laypeople. All give witness to the importance for the church to recognize and support the ways their ministries and families are called by God and are poured out in service to the neighbor. In Christ, we are one family, and our families take many shapes.
I would like to bring to light one of these stories. The story is of two lesbians ('Rev.' Phyllis Zillhart and 'Rev.' Ruth Frost) who are both Ordained ministers. They have been together for 25 years this fall, and have a fifteen year old daughter who they raise with two gay 'men.' While there is much to be said about this unnatural parenting arrangement, I would like to set that aside and focus instead on something that they say about there daughter. This is their statement:
The “village” that has helped raise our daughter includes LGBT people of faith and our allies. She has marched in Pride parades every year of her life. She is clear about who her parents and her village are to her. She is not clear what the Lutheran Church as a whole is to her. Her generation will decide what place the Church will have in their lives based on the justice and hospitality they see extended to or withheld from LGBT people.
Notice what they link the activity in the church body to... It is how the church treats "LGBT people." Now, last I checked, and maybe I have missed some memo - but is it not the Gospel that dictates our Church activity. After all, why would we call a gathering of non-christians, in the name of there invented Christ? It Certainly isn't The Church. Maybe it is a church, like a Jehovah's Witness Kingdom Hall is a church. The Church is those who are regenerated by Christ, who are in relationship with him.

"Reverends" with all due respect, It is not the way we treat GLBT people, but rather it is those who are Christ's Sheep who will come into the Fold. Moreover, If we do not call for both your repentance, and the repentance of all sinners, the church will be of little eternal meaning in the future.

There is another part of this One Table Many Blessings, that I would like to address, it is the 95 Persons who signed the document acknowleding their Homosexual, Bi-Sexual or Transgendered status and having been "separated from the ELCA roster in one way or another, through removal, resignation, retirement (sometimes early), postponement, leave, being dropped from candidacy,or are awaiting call." These people have rightly been disciplined, for their lack of repentance, and now, thanks to this choice by the denomination, they will be told that they are no longer in sin by being in a same-sex relationship. It seems to be that the result of liberalism, is the acknowledgment of sin, as non-sin.

For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. (2 Timothy 4:3-4 ESV)

A Brilliant Piece of Christian Philosophy

I have to say that hanging around Tony Jone's Blog has for the most part been, frustrating. Seeing the Ignorance of biblical theology, meaningful hermeneutics, and Christian Worldview both deeply sadden me and frustrate me. However, there have been a few glimmers of hope. One such glimmer came from an outside link, it was to a final for a Christian Ethics class at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. It is regarding transgender issues from a pastoral perspective. The Professor of the class is Dr. Russell D. Moore, who is a Dean of the School of Theology. The writing of the question was masterfully deep and complex, yet it held a realistic quality. It was Emotional and Intellectual, and powerfully Gripping. Yet, as wonderful as the question was, the Answer was even more so. I would suggest that this would be a great piece to show the beauty of Christian Philosophy, it's depth and richness. Thank you Dr. Moore.

Friday, August 21, 2009

We All Saw This Coming - News from the ELCA

The title says it all, if you know anything about the ELCA, you know that it is moving the way of liberalism. When they began accepting the the homosexual lifestyle, by becoming open and affirming in the 90's it was only a matter of time until what happened today, occurred. Based on a vote of 619-402 the motion that asks "the assembly whether, in principle, this church is committed to finding a way for people in such publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as professional leaders of this church" has passed. Yet another American Denomination has abandoned the clear teaching of scripture, today is a day for morning. Sinners will not be called to repentance, as their sin will not be called such.


There is headline news from Yahoo, put forth today.

The Following is a quote, from that article.

Tim Mumm, a gay man and an assembly delegate from Whitewater, Wis., said the Scripture that guides opponents of the more liberal policy was written by mortals, at a much earlier time, and doesn't reflect what many Christians now believe.

"I believe for me to marry a woman would be wrong — even sinful," Mumm said.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Tony Jones and Gay Marriage, Video Blog

I have started to read Tony Jones Blog. If you are unaware of whom Tony Jones is, I would suggest you google the man, but as a short description it would follow (from Zondervan) -
Tony Jones is the National Coordinator of Emergent Village (, a network of innovative, missional Christians. He's also a doctoral fellow and senior research fellow in practical theology at Princeton Theological Seminary. Tony has written several books on philosophy, theology, ministry, and prayer, including Postmodern Youth Ministry and The Sacred Way. He's a sought-after speaker on the topics of theology and the emerging church. Tony lives in Minnesota with his wife, Julie, and their three young children.
Now Tony describes his stance on the issue of homosexuality as follows -

I now believe that GLBTQ can live lives in accord with biblical Christianity (at least as much as any of us can!) and that their monogamy can and should be sanctioned and blessed by church and state.
So what we have is yet another 'christian leader' who believes that Scripture does not condemn homosexual activity as unnatural, improper or unrighteous. Now I say this with the understanding, that I am assuming that Tony believes and subscribes to Sola Scriptura. However, I do not dismiss the idea that Tony could reject Sola Scriptura, Consider the conclusion of an article from Emergent Village titled So Long Sola?, "We should welcome challenges to the doctrine of Sola scriptura. What was a pillar of truth half a millennium ago, has become an untenable deadweight (one is tempted to say, an idol) in the life of the church." It is possible, given the content given to us from other emergents, that Tony subscribes to an emergent form of finding truth, which would involve Scripture, reason, tradition, experience, creation, intuition, and imagination.

Now that there is a bit of introduction about Tony Jones. I would like to respond to a challenge that Tony Issued on his blog about homosexuality and gay marriage, with the first ever video blog from Thoughts of a Christian.

Sunday, August 16, 2009

ACLU says Jail for School Prayer

Grabbing title I know. You would think that in the USA that we would have the Freedom from prosecution for religious practice. This is not what the ACLU says however. I am asking that you call your state Senator, or Congressmen and ask them to act in this case. This is frankly, Immoral.

We Must Act now, Protect Freedom. Prayer is not a Criminal offense. This is not Communist China.

Friday, August 14, 2009

Demon Flower Mantis

I just wanted to throw this up here because I thought it looked so Cool. I mean, God is an amazingly creative Creator. Let us Praise him.

Islam: The Religion of Peace

I have stayed away from posting much about Islam to date mainly because I am not overly knowledgeable about the topic. However, it seems that the Religion of Peace, has struck again. I am a bit confused by all of this, but it seems that the hate for Christians runs very deep. The story of which I am speaking of describes the beheading of four Christian aid workers in Somalia, for refusing to renounce there faith in Christ Jesus the Lord. My response is this, mostly to the families of those who were Martyred by members of the Religion of Peace: If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: 'A servant is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me. If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have been guilty of sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. Whoever hates me hates my Father also.
(John 15:18-23 ESV). To Christ be the Glory, our Fellow Brothers have had there blood shed on account of the savior, what a glorious blessing they have received. Weep not, for they are with the Lord, and are blessed richly by him.

Thursday, August 6, 2009

Family Friendly Radio

I am so tired of 'Christian' Radio, there are several reasons, however, the one that I would like to discuss briefly is not the music per se, but rather how they "sell" themselves. It seems to be an almost universal reference by these stations that they are "Family Friendly." First, I am not completely sure what this means... I imagine it means that they are saying that they don't play music that could be found problematic for children. However, the reality of that statement is that the Classical music station is also "Family Friendly." Second, It seems to me that these 'Christian' radio stations so often speak very little about Christ in any meaningful way, but rather simply take the questionable materials out of the programming. I admit, it is good to remove these things, but is it really enough? I mean are they really working to Glorify Christ, are they preaching the Gospel? It seems that the talk portion of these programs are often difficult to distinguish from any secular radio. This is not to say that I condemn these radio stations, just that personally, I think that they sell themselves as less then Christian, and are not forward enough with Jesus and the Gospel.