lg_20140304_121207_13069

Christian Publisher Plans Pro-’Gay’ Book, Employees ‘Under Threat’

avatar
Print Friendly and PDF

EXCLUSIVE – WaterBrook Multnomah Publishing Group is planning to release, through its liberal imprint Convergent Books, a manuscript titled God and the Gay Christian The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships.

Is the Christian world about to suffer through another World Vision moment?

The book’s author, Matthew Vines, is a homosexual activist and Bible revisionist known for manipulating Christian terminology to advance the counter-Christian homosexualist agenda.

Despite his frequent use of a Christian-like lexicon, Vines surprisingly admits to running an apostate enterprise that he calls The Reformation Project. An unabashed denier of Biblical teaching on sexual morality, Vines has publicly acknowledged that his goal is to “reform church teaching on sexual orientation and gender identity.”  The book is scheduled to be published on April 22, 2014.

In an email sent to BarbWire, a source with unspecified ties to Multnomah wrote the following:

With a little help… I recently followed a few breadcrumbs – connected some dots – and the picture turned out to be pretty disturbing. I know for a fact that there are certain individuals (whistleblowers, if you will) who believe this information should become public, but there is immense pressure from within Multnomah Publishers to keep this under wraps, and not allow entities in the NRB Association/Evangelical orbit to learn about it.

Multnomah is a long-trusted name in the world of Christian publishing. It is now called WaterBrook Multnomah Publishing Group. Over the years the company has published scores of Biblically orthodox works by authentic Christ-followers like Randy Alcorn, Kay Arthur and Dr. David Jeremiah. The company has also published manuscripts by Mother Teresa.

Continued the email:

A little over a year ago, WaterBrook [Multnomah] announced the formation of a new imprint, called Convergent. From this article [in Publishers Weekly] you can see where it’s going: “Stated [WaterBrook Multnomah president Stephen W. Cobb], ‘The audience for Convergent Books represents a growing movement of consumers. These readers typically don’t see themselves as either liberal or conservative, evangelical or mainline. Yet they frame their spiritual journey in Christian terms, and they’re absolutely passionate about what theologian Brian McLaren has called, “the sacred endeavor of loving God and neighbor, stranger, alien, outsider, outcast and enemy.”

Publishers Weekly further explained the connection:

The imprint will be based in Colorado Springs, Colo., and headed by Stephen W. Cobb, who has been president and publisher of the WaterBrook imprint since 2001. With the acquisition of Multnomah Books in 2006, a Multnomah imprint was added to Cobb’s portfolio. …

The email to BarbWire provides more context:

An “imprint” in the publishing world is like a mask – the name and logo of the entity may be unique, but the same staff, editors, executives, promoters, are behind the book as are behind those put out by other “imprints” (i.e., directly from Multnomah, and wearing that brand/mask). So Multnomah is now consciously trying to hide from NRB [National Religious Broadcasters] and its members the fact that it is putting out this new project. Insiders are reporting threats should they release any such information outside the company, but I believe Multnomah authors have a right to see the full picture of the company with whom they’re partnering. (Though we should try and protect those who are under threat.)

It is reasonable to speculate that Multnomah is trying to cover up its fast-growing connection to sexual sin activism, and furtively avoid the kind of widespread scandal and Christian backlash that took place after World Vision abandoned clear Biblical teaching on sexual immorality. World Vision had recently embraced the sodomy-centered and counter-Biblical notion of so-called “same-sex marriage,” only to quickly reverse course and publicly ask the global Christian community for forgiveness.

Multnomah appears poised to make the same mistake.

Print Friendly and PDF



Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read More

comments

  • Magnus Elric-William

    “The Reformation Project” ….. A lie told often enough soon becomes a truth…………

  • climate3

    So much for religious liberty, huh. Apparently Barber seems to think the religious liberty only applies to folks who believe as he does?

    • thisoldspouse

      Religious liberty isn’t relevant inside of a religion – Christianity has the right, the obligation, to insist on orthodoxy when it comes to basic doctrine.

      Religious liberty is relevant when it comes to government restricting the practice of Christianity, such as forcing Christians to violate their convictions as we have seen lately.

      • Theodore Fenton

        How have Christians been forced to violate their “convictions”?

        • foodArts

          I’m not sure how you would define ‘Christians being forced to violate their convictions’, Theodore, but being sued for not wanting to participate in a gay wedding ceremony, and losing, pretty much defines being forced to violate ones convictions…don’t you think?

          • Theodore Fenton

            If you’re referring to the photographer, what in your mind gives her special rights such that she doesn’t have to obey local public accommodation ordinances?

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            (S)he could have been referring to the cake baker who was forced by court order to bake a cake for a gay wedding. I would think the name “Food Arts” may have more interest in cake baking than wedding photography, but I could be wrong. Food photography usually involves using a Macro filter on a lens, where the pictures are “larger than life”, where wedding photography tends to be more “normal”.

            I would be a little upset if I were a cake baker and was forced by law to bake a cake for a ceremony that I didn’t believe in, for two major reasons:

            1) The “clients” have already shown that they are hyper-litigious, as evidenced by their reaction when they were told that maybe the cake baker wouldn’t be a good fit. There are several cake bakers the couple could have chosen, some physically located closer to the event, but they went out of their way to cause a problem.

            2) In a normal wedding, the goal of the couple is to make sure people are as content as possible — even to the point of arranging the seating chart to avoid conflict. It seems to me that deliberately going to a Christian cake baker, with the intent of suing the cake baker if he refused, may be contrary to the point of a wedding. But then, my experience is limited to normal weddings only.

            Due to the extremely litigious nature of the “clients” in general, if I were a baker, I would wonder if I was adding any ingredients that may cause a problem — some people have nut, egg, wheat, and other food allergies. Even with as many disclaimers as I would put into the contract, I would be wary that someone may invent a reason to sue afterwards.

            All of this points to why I’m not a cake baker in AZ. Because if I was, and I were forced to bake a cake for anyone, the last thing the “clients” would wonder is why this cake tastes of almonds.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            All joking aside, however, when Public Accommodation ordinances are directly conflicting two aspects of the First Amendment (freedom to associate, and freedom of religion), I think the Constitution wins.

            And if you think that it shouldn’t be this way, then I expect you will be perfectly OK with a bunch of fundamentalist evangelicals joining gay fraternities, gay civic organizations, gay activist groups, etc., under that same law.

          • 19gundog43

            How about Hobby Lobby and other Christian businesses being forced by Obamacare to provide birth control. Looks like the trolls have arrived.

          • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

            the folks who own the business hobby lobby and other profit making concerns, who benefit from operating with a business license also have responsibilities that come with that license to make a profit from the general public. they are free to become a private club, only selling to those and only employing those who share their beliefs. as it is, the for profit public companies who are refusing to provide basic health care for their female employees – who do not share their employers beliefs – are asking the government to assist them in violating the religious convictions of their employees, replacing them with the owner of the for profit business.
            not getting everything you demand is not persecution

          • 19gundog43

            No business should have the imperial government tell them what kind of
            benefit they HAVE to provide their employees. That is tyranny! If you don’t like
            the benefits your provided by the business, LEAVE! Get another job or buy your
            own birth control. Bottom Line!!

          • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

            spoken like a true authoritarian. or a spoiled 12 year old

          • 19gundog43

            Spoken like a person who values FREEDOM! Don’t like something get the government to bring it’s tyrannical powers down on people. The spoiled 12 year-olds are the whiners who what everything given to them. Grow a brain Cupcake!

          • cherieloren

            No, spoken like an intelligent person who believes in less government and more personal responsibility. The spoiled 12 year olds are the ones who are lazy, ignorant, uninformed, and need the government to change their diapers because they’re all full of it.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            Once again in a desperate effort to win your argument you resort to an ad hominem attack. In addition, like a true partisan progressive you twist the meaning of words and concepts. Your resorting to taqiyya is sad.

          • LouiseCA

            Are you kidding?
            Is there anyone more spoiled and demanding in this country these days than atheists and homosexuals?

          • portertx

            Yeah and if you want your Erectile Dysfunction medications (Viagra,etc) (as covered under medicare and such) Why should I have to subsidize it…..

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            Now saltpeter would be something to add to the cake for a gay “wedding” :-D . The Skeptical Chemist points out correctly that cyanide may be a bit too strong of a point to make.

            Hey, Chemist, if you really are one, is there a chemical you’re aware of that acts as a binary poison in the presence of amyl nitrate? Like if someone was taking amyl nitrate later on in the night?

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            You’re right, but who mentioned anything about such? Oh, the government has. They’ve also said prisoners have a right to sex change operations at taxpayer’s expense.

          • ChristianMan

            No one said you should have to except this screwy administration.

          • Memphis Viking

            And if you don’t understand the difference between medicine that treats an actual physical problem and birth control…

          • portertx

            Wow talk about ignorance…the pill is used to several medical issues…btw an erection is not necessary to achieve “release”… Regulation of menstrual periods:

            Most combination birth control pills contain three weeks of active pills (those that contain hormones) and one week of inactive placebo pills (those that do not contain hormones). The bleeding of the period occurs when the hormones are no longer taken during the week that the sugar or placebo pills are taken. A woman can increase the length of time between periods by taking active pills for more weeks. Some drug companies make pill packs that contain up to 3 months of continuous active pills. Women on these pills only have four periods a year, which can be convenient during such times as final exams, sports activities, or social events.

            Treatment of irregular periods:

            Birth control pills can be used to make irregular or unpredictable periods occur on a monthly basis. Women who have menstrual cycles longer than 35 days might not be making progesterone, which prevents the uterine lining from growing too much. Excess growth of the uterine lining can cause heavy bleeding or increase the risk for developing abnormal patterns of growth in the uterine lining, including cancer. The most common reason for irregular and infrequent periods is Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS). Because a birth control pill contains progesterone-like medication, it can help regulate the menstrual cycle and protect the lining of the uterus against pre-cancer or cancer.

            Treatment of heavy periods (menorrhagia):

            Birth control pills contain a progesterone-like hormone, which makes the lining of the uterus thinner and causes lighter bleeding episodes. In rare cases, some women may not experience bleeding during the period in which they take the placebo or sugar pills. Currently marketed pills allow a woman to have a period every month, every 90 days, or once per year, as desired.

            Treatment of painful periods (dysmenorrhea):

            A chemical called prostaglandin is produced in the uterus at the time of the period, and can cause painful menstrual periods. Prostaglandin can cause contractions of the uterus that produce the menstrual cramping that most women experience. Women who produce high levels of prostaglandin have more intense contractions and more severe cramping. Birth control pills prevent ovulation which in turn reduces the amount of prostaglandin produced in the uterus. By doing so, birth control pills relieve menstrual cramping.

            Treatment of endometriosis:

            Another cause of painful menstrual cycles is endometriosis. When the tissue lining the uterus (endometrium) grows outside of the uterus it is called endometriosis. Just as progesterone limits the growth of the uterine lining, the progesterone-like hormones in birth control pills can limit or decrease the growth of endometriosis. Because of this, birth control pills can reduce the pain associated with endometriosis for many women.

            Treatment of premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD):

            Many women who have PMS or PMDD report an improvement in their symptoms while they are taking birth control pills. It is thought that birth control pills prevent the symptoms of PMS and PMDD by stopping or preventing ovulation from taking place.

            Treatment for acne, hirsutism (excess hair) and alopecia (hair loss):

            All birth control pills can improve acne and hair growth in the midline of the body (hirsutism) by reducing the levels of male hormones (androgens) produced by the ovary. All women make small amounts of androgens in the ovaries and adrenal glands. When these hormones are made in higher than normal amounts, or if a woman is sensitive to the androgens produced, she may start to grow hair above the lip, below the chin, between the breasts, between the belly button and pubic bone, or down the inner thigh. Birth control pills reduce production of male hormones and increase the production of the substances in the body that bind the androgens circulating in the bloodstream. Within six months of use, there is usually a reduction in the abnormal hair growth. However, when a woman has more excessive male hormone symptoms, she should see a gynecologist or primary care doctor. These symptoms may include male pattern baldness, smaller breast size, increased muscle mass, growth of the clitoris, or lowering of the pitch of the voice.

            Other health benefits of birth control pills:

            Women who have used birth control pills have been found to have fewer cases of anemia (low red blood cells), ovarian cancer, and uterine cancer. These beneficial effects occur because the birth control pill works by decreasing the number of ovulations, amount of menstrual blood flow, and frequency of periods.

          • Memphis Viking

            Birth control prescribed for medical reasons is already covered by insurance.

          • cherieloren

            Well said. Thank you!

          • ChristianMan

            If this is the case, then Restaurants should not be able to refuse service.

          • Memphis Viking

            You should tell that to the Democrats, who think that not getting free birth control constitutes a war on women.

          • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

            what? that employers should follow the law and not try to force their personal beliefs onto the employees at their secular business, who do not share their bizarre views that women should not be able to control when they get pregnant? i don’t think they need reminded of that.

          • Memphis Viking

            Thanks for proving my point that Democrats want laws to make the government force people to supply their every demand, or they whine about it.

          • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

            you seem to think the employer has a place between a patient and their doctor. i disagree.

          • Memphis Viking

            You seem to think that not paying for something equals keeping you from getting it. By your reasoning, you’re coming between me and home ownership because you won’t pay my mortgage.

          • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

            fascinating.

          • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

            fascinating

          • The Skeptical Chymist

            If you did indeed follow through on the threat implied in your last paragraph, I think it would be pretty easy to find the evidence to support a conviction of murder by cyanide poisoning.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            I don’t know that it would get all the way to murder. Amyl nitrate is what is given to victims of cyanide poisoning to help clear the cyanide out of the system. And if it was a gay “wedding” with gay men, I’m willing to bet that there would be plenty of amyl nitrate on hand at the reception. And if you are a chemist, I’m sure you can understand exactly what I’m implying here.

          • The Skeptical Chymist

            I am indeed a chemist, and I know exactly what you’re talking about. However, it is amyl nitrite, not amyl nitrate that is the correct substance.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            Sorry – I always get that confused — I remember, though, that nitrates are usually about twice as much as day rates. Chemistry isn’t my primary field of study, although I do find it interesting. Even more interesting, though, is the tendency of certain groups of people to gravitate towards almost group-specific recreational pharmaceuticals — people on crack are usually a different subset of the population than people on cocaine, even though the active ingredient is the same, as an example.

          • 19gundog43

            It’s called the First Amendment Skippy. Look it up!

          • cherieloren

            Read my response to Sue Jeffers above, this should cover it.

          • LouiseCA

            So, you think it’s okay for a homosexual employee to force their other employees to remove family pictures from their desks because they offend the homosexuals?
            And you think it’s okay for homosexuals to spit on mothers and children going into Sunday School? And for homosexuals to sling vials of aids-tainted blood over congregations? And to throw feces on pro-family politicians? And to drag “Jesus” through the streets in mock crucifixions at Easter time? And produce Homosexual paradies of The Last Supper? And produce “Homo-erotica Bibles”? And to infiltrate city planning boards of small towns in order to bully Christian businesses and churches?
            Do we need to go on?

          • franklinb23

            Bob Jones University was CONVINCED that interracial marriage was wrong. Were their rights violated when they had to admit them lest they lose their tax exempt status?

          • thisoldspouse

            Yes, their rights were violated.

          • LouiseCA

            In this, they were wrong. God is not against interracial marriage.

          • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

            no, that pretty much defines living in a society and following the laws set down by those in the society in which you live. if you expect to enjoy the filthy lucre and perks of being a properly licensed business doing business with the general public, you must also abide by the responsibilities that come along with those perks and rights.

          • garysvent

            Making a living is now filthy lucre? Guess we know where you stand on economic freedom.

            Perhaps you have not heard: men have been encouraged for a very long time to follow God when the government of men is not in accord with His Word. When forced to chose, the Christian will chose Christ, not some nut who thinks sodomy is natural.

            By the by, the filthiest of lucre is that which government steals tomorrow (April 15) from its citizens, and then misspends on itself and its sycophants. THAT is truly filthy lucre.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            Excellent rely to Sue Jeffers. From Jeffer’s previous replies and this one it’s obvious she’s not a Christian and is likely a socialist.

            As for what the Infernal Retribution Sackers (IRS) extorts, isn’t that according to a former Democrat congressman merely keeping the money which “belongs” to the government while “generously” allowing citizen peasants to keep some to “selfishly” spend on their own needs? After all, aren’t we supposed to acquiesce to the socialist Democrat plantation ideas?

            My apologies for the above sarcasm, but I haven’t much respect for the IRS, particularly now that it’s a Democrat political hit squad. No doubt it’ll be used not only to silence pastors in the pulpit regarding certain issues, it’ll be used to persecute other Bible believers who dare participate in the public square..

          • cherieloren

            No, when the government forces laws on the people that forces them to go against their God given right to religious freedom in order to keep their properly licensed business, this is tyranny. The business owner has the right to refuse service to anyone that is requesting service that violates their religious beliefs. If a business can post a sign saying “no shoes, no shirt, no service” why can’t a business refuse service to those who would violate the rights of the business owner? There are plenty of businesses that would bake a cake for a gay wedding, etc., and for these gay couples to attempt to force a business that doesn’t agree with their lifestyle / agenda, they are trying to violate the business owners rights and run them out of business. As for filthy lucre, this is idiocy on your part. Scripture says if you don’t work, you don’t eat. Thank God there are still people willing to work to provide for their families instead of depending on the government, or should I say the hard working taxpayers to provide for them and their broods of children. And as for following the laws set down by society, society is evil and corrupt because they stopped following the laws of God. These latest “laws” are evil as they strip believers of their rights in favor of bowing down to the lgbt community which is godless.

      • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

        which of the thousands of christian denominations gets to do that? the incredible self righteous prideful arrogance of your assumption that your peculiar brand of christianity is the only one misses the mark. widely.

        • Roberto Enrique Benitez

          Obviously you didn’t understand, possibly intentionally, what thisolspouse was writing about. Climate3 implied a common misconception about the CONSTITUTIONAL notion of religious liberty. It’s much the same about the misconceptions of freedom of speech and the 2nd Amendment.

          The Bill of Rights applies to government entities – at all levels. Thus a private company or institution can say that if certain reasonable speech codes are violated people can be fired. Also they can prohibit the carrying of firearms on their premises. Often it might not be wise, but that’s another matter.

          What Climate3 was objecting to is the idea that true Bible believing Christians have the right to claim that the Bible is clear on sexual morality and have the right, no, obligation to speak out and expose those who try to subvert the clear teachings of the Bible. In other words, he’s slyly opposing religious liberty.

          Thisolspouse was properly opposing Climate3′s view. Your ad hominem attack on thisolspouse indicates you agree with climate3 that those who believe that sexual immorality is permitted by the Scriptures and that objecting to it is wrong. By that criteria and capitalization of certain words I must assume you’re not a Christian. So I hope and pray that you find the real Jesus and see the light and the truth.

          Shalom

        • thisoldspouse

          “Thousands of Christian denominations?” Not that obviously false piece of propaganda again.

          But, okay. Name them.

    • Ray – Jesus is the Son of God.

      There is only one road to heaven, all other
      roads lead to hell.

      http://www.chick.com/the_story_of_jesus/

    • Ray – Jesus is the Son of God.

      The further a society drifts from the truth,
      the more it will hate those who speak it.

      • TheSignofZorro

        That is so true :)

    • 19gundog43

      Looks like the first troll of Spring.

    • TheSignofZorro

      Religious Liberty applies to Everyone … However, this is a Christian Company and Publisher who has the commitment to publish books that are in harmony with Biblical discourse and principles, because they are intended for Christians … It is well known that God in the Bible condemns homosexuality … just take a look at the following: “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” Leviticus 20:13 … this command was one given to Moses along with the 10 Commandments … There are plenty of other companies and publishers who do not have this commitment to Biblical Principles … they would be agreeable to publish such a book.

      • Lynx Eye

        This is true, but how many Christians have turned a blind eye to Newt “It’s Never Too Late To Say You’re Horny” Gingrich and the more recent Republican Liplock? Adultery (having sex with ANYONE outside the bounds of marriage) is a sin, period. It needs to be addressed both to the culture and within the Christian community with equal force, as it just as corruptive in either venue.

        • Roberto Enrique Benitez

          What your’e implying is quite appropriate and in accordance with the Scripture, 2 Chronicles 7:14, “If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

          In other words, in order to have God help heal and restore the US we Christians have got to convince the church, the body of all believers in Christ, that we must clean up our own act while still exhorting the common weal.

          As for Republican politicians, they too must abide by the principles they espouse if they want to be effective. We can point out that the Democrats and liberals are far more immoral all we want, but we must look to our our failings as well.

          Thanks for the reminder.

          • Lynx Eye

            You have to remember a lot of the Democrats have a worldview that ignores sexual ethics, so one should expect no different from them. By the same token, Newt and Congressmen Liplock certainly DID know better, and did it anyway. Although Liplock, one of his friends revealed, only started playing Christian when election time got near. That’s why Christians need to start taking Reagan’s example of “Trust, but verify” when it comes to who they are voting for.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            You’re so correct. Thanks.

        • TheSignofZorro

          I agree with you :) … Gingrich never denied his divorce … What he acknowledged was that: 1. He is a big sinner and has done many things wrong in his life according to God’s biblical principles. 2. He asked God through Jesus Christ to forgive him from all the bad things he had done. And 3. He believed that God had forgiven him and saved him from himself and from hell itself (based on what Jesus said in the Bible) … So Gingrich acknowledged that he was and he is a Sinner Forgiven and Saved by God Himself through Faith in the One and Only Perfect Sacrifice: Jesus Christ :) … In addition, Gingrich did not try to Force his beliefs on everyone else … all he did was to express what those beliefs were :) … He did not force any non-Christian company / editorial to publish his books or else … and he did not threaten to run them out of business if they didn’t caved to his desires. There is a Big Difference! … This is what I have learned about radical Gays and radical Muslims (specially men) : They are the most INTOLERANT people on the earth.

      • Roberto Enrique Benitez

        You’re absolutely correct. The problem is that gay activists have through stealth acquired the company and are trying to change it’s Traditional Christian agenda to one more simpatico to liberal humanist theism. Many Christian and conservative businesses are facing this type of takeover tactic by forces hostile to their beliefs.

        Another tactic used by the gay lobby is to pick out businesses that are explicitly Christian and to force them into violating their beliefs. This is what’s already happened with photography and baking businesses. They could’ve gone to businesses that were likely closer and who would’ve welcomed their business. Yet the gay activists targeted certain businesses because of their traditional Christian beliefs. They weren’t accidental encounters.

        We can expect to see more of this type of fascist/socialist coercion in the future with a fascist/socialist government more than willing to help their allies stifle freedom of speech and association in order to force, or should I say “nudge,” their progressive agenda on all.

        Thanks for your appropriate comment.

        • TheSignofZorro

          I appreciate it :) … What you are describing is exactly what Jesus Christ described in John 10:10 … “The THIEF comes not, but to STEAL, and to KILL, and to DESTROY: I have come that you may have LIFE, and that you may have it MORE ABUNDANTLY.” … It seems to me that radical Gays and radical Muslims are the most hateful and intolerant people in the world … and the above description said by Jesus Christ fits them perfectly.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            Sadly, you’re right about gays’ intolerance. The activist gay community has been called the Gay Mafia and the Gaystapo.

            Their goal is not to not be persecuted (which isn’t happening), but to be accepted as a normal moral lifestyle by all, including people of faith. They want the Church to be silenced not only in the public square but also in the pulpit. They’re even demanding that religious organizations hire them even as pastors and rabbis. Of course the issue of this company is a typical example of what to expect.

            However, there’s no way that the Church can remain relevant to to a sinful and dying world if it acquiesces to such demands. It’s that simple, we can’t and won’t change or ignore the Scriptures to suit their demands.

            As for Islam, it was founded by an illiterate insane bully, liar thief, betrayer, torturer, slaver, adulterer, pedophile and murderer who worshiped the local moon god, who was and is none other then Satan. As the Bible say, by their fruits they shall be known.

          • TheSignofZorro

            Thanks … I agree with you again :) … You are right … Gays are not being persecuted … it is the Christians who are being persecuted by the Gays and by the Muslims … as I was thinking about your response, this biblical reference came to mind from 2 Timothy 1-9 … “1But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
            6They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. 8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these teachers oppose the truth. They are men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.”

    • LouiseCA

      This has nothing to do with religious liberty.

  • Jeff Noncent

    that is exactly what the Bible says do not add, or subtract to the Bible it is here Bible prophecy is being fulfill right in front of our eyes

  • CajunPatriot

    How can a church call itself Christian, or publisher call itself Christian or anyone call him/herself Christian and not obey the Word of God as it pertains to easily understandable sexual morality and living?

    Do we so easily forget these passages as well as others:

    Romans 1:

    18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

    19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

    20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

    21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

    22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

    23 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.

    24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

    25 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.

    26 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:

    27 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.

    28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

    29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

    30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

    31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

    32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

  • Norm

    Up is down, black is white, sin is ordained and no becomes yes. Newspeak and 1984 are here (only 30 years later than predicted) the ministry of truth and the ministry of information are in full swing. So it goes, as I have perhaps mentioned before…I re-read a favorite book of mine and in the last chapter all this stuff is laid out pretty plain and the end is as good as it gets. Keep the faith.

    • Shofar threading

      “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”
      Isaiah 5:20

  • Pingback: SO GAY: Christian Publisher Plans Pro-’Gay’ Book, Employees ‘Under Threat’ | Clash Daily

  • Jeanette Victoria

    But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the
    name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an
    idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a
    one. 1 Corinthians 5:11

    • portertx

      Yet Jesus ate and associated with such people….who was right?

      • Jeanette Victoria

        Christ associated with sinners who REPENTED! Not with sinners who claimed their sin should be celebrated

        • Shofar threading

          Right you are.

      • daveymason

        Portertx:
        Your reply is a perfect example of how this kind of theological drift occurs, when someone who is tangentially familiar with scripture pulls a verse out of context to make it fit their views and create their own version of god (little g intended). This is dangerous and it leads to things like Vines’ book.

        • portertx

          Also a fragmented denominational model of Christianity…where each denomination claims they are following the right way…..and you should follow them verse someone else.

          I often wonder if the Bible is so clear – why are there so many variants of “being the right way to follow”.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            Why? Because we’re fallen people and resort to infighting out of pride and even greed. That too is described in the Bible.

            We understand that what you’re trying to do is to say that because we Christians are far, far from perfect, that means the Bible is at fault or is untrue. We won’t buy into your disbelief.

            So please have a Saul experience on your road to Damascus.

          • portertx

            I am sorry I don’t believing visions.

            I agree Christians are far from perfect. As to the fault or truthfulness of the Bible, was not the point – the point is that even Christians cannot agree and even “litmus” test each other as to who is the more Christian.

            As soon as someone has any variant interpretation they are dismissed as unchristian by those who do not agree with that interpretation.

          • Shofar threading

            You say you don’t believe in visions. Tell me, do you believe in God?

          • portertx

            Probably not your version of a God.

          • Shofar threading

            That’s what I suspected — and gather you come here from a liberal site. BTW, I didn’t say a version of “a” God but God. There is only one true God. I pray you meet Him but think you’d have to do some deep soul searching. <

          • portertx

            No I have been aware of this site since it launched. Many religions claim that they have the direct line to the true God or Gods/Godesses…..I acknowledge that you believe your God is the true God. I support your right to believe as such.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            It’s more than obvious that you don’t believe in anything the Bible says. That’s been your focus so it’s an important point. So my statements are far more germane that some of your digressions in discussing issues.

          • portertx

            Do I take the Bible as literal no I do not. Do you take the Bible as literal?

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            I’ll answer your question although you haven’t the integrity or courage, like most progressives following Alinsky’s Rule for Radicals, to answer mine. Yes, I take the Bible literally; literally as allegory where it’s allegory, literally symbolic where it’s symbolic, literally as figurative where it’s figurative, and literally as stories where it’s stories.the same is true of similes, metaphors, parables, fables, irony, and hyperbole.

            For example, many times Jesus effectively used stories to illustrate his point. were all of them literal events. Not at all.

            However, did I ask you if you took the Bible literally? Go ahead and prevaricate but no one here has been arguing about literal interpretation of the Bible. So why the disingenuous change of topic? Oh, I forgot, you’re a progressive. What I said and what you’ve made abundantly clear is that you don’t accept anything in the Bible and are too apprehensive to answer questions or address issues put to you.

            I completely understand the limitations you progressive freethinker (atheist)s face.

            By the way, is that your partner you’re with? I like both your distinguished beards.

          • portertx

            Actually I am agnostic verse being an atheist.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            While I’, a conservative Christian, probably obvious, I can understand your belief. My father-in-law, a brilliant man, was also agnostic as he believed that God or a Supreme Being was so far above us that it was impossible for us to really comprehend.

            Like you he looked to different moral and religious codes that he did believe gave us humans directions on how to interact for the good of all.

            By the way, I do have a beard but not as good. Take care.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            In the Biblical story of the Tower of Babel, there is the concept (meme?) of all the people working on the Tower being scattered because G-d changed their language (and not all to the same language). This was done to make working on a common goal impossible.

            It makes me wonder if this story was allegorical — in other words, was there a point long before recorded concrete history (meaning, it would go into a realm of myth / religion / whatever), where humankind knew 100% of “the truth”, but all the peoples of the world were separated, and parts of the truth were given to parts of mankind (but not all to all of mankind). This is important because I think there would be a very interesting study that could be made of comparing major religions from groups of people that were at one point in the same geographic area, but are no longer, and looking at the similarities.

            For example, there is a Biblical story about the fall of Jericho, where the sun stayed frozen in place for 3 hours longer than “usual” — there was some unnatural day lengthening. At around the same time that this supposedly happened, Mayans (several time zones away) noticed one night that the sun didn’t rise, which gave rise to their starting to sacrifice people to their sun god.

          • portertx

            I guess the other thing that is questionable is if we are all descendants of Noah – I find it very hard to fathom how so many disparate religions exist that differ from the “God of Abraham” model that would have solely existed after the great flood.

            There are plenty of inconvenient truths that cannot be explained away – How do you explain Aboriginal culture which has exist for at least 60 thousand years?

            Again these are stories is there any fact/truth in them I am certain there is … but are they 100% fact doubtful.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            To this day, I have to confess to hanging onto a belief that I had a few years ago (because I’ve seen no evidence to contradict it) that this planet kind of served as a test platform for a bunch of supernatural beings that are seeing how well their programming of humans fares against the other supernatural beings’ programming of humans…

            The really scary thing is that there is actually Biblical support for this — the very first of the 10 Commandments, in fact (You shall have no other gods before Me) — what “other” deities are there? The understanding was that each group of people — the Canaanites, followers of Moloch, Egyptians, etc., each followed their own gods — what if that following was actually real? Not all of them, of course, but, what if there is a supernatural being that created the universe, physical laws, tolerances, etc., like a “Physics Engine” in a video game, except, well… call it a “Universe Engine” or just a “World Engine”… and the players all create their own moral codes / laws, program some various physical and intelligence attributes by compiling their own DNA code, maybe even allow them to tap into the code of the game itself (in game design, this is referred to as a “cheat code”, but in the World, this would appear like “magick”), and then “place” them in predefined sections on the planet, and see how they do competing against each other?

            Genesis 3 and 4 talk about “Angels” coming down from Heaven and… err.. “interacting” with some of the human women — they basically corrupted the game to the point where it had to be “reset” with Noah, because they knew all the cheat codes, and weren’t very careful about keeping them to themselves (they appeared magical, did several miracles, etc).

            But Noah’s story is only the story of the Jewish tribes’ rescue. In 40 days and 40 nights, if all major deities instructed a representative sample of their “people” to get on an ark and drift around, it’s highly improbable that those people would ever encounter people from other deities during that time — they may truly believe they were the only people on Earth (when in actuality, they’re just the only ones from the player named Yahweh of this simulator). It’s all very interesting to think about :)

          • Shofar threading

            And Who or what is your guide for morality?

          • portertx

            Freethinking

          • Shofar threading

            Is your friend helping you with answers?

          • portertx

            Why would you ask that? I am quite capable of forming my own opinions and ideas…nor do I need to rely on superstition to guide my actions. I do however acknowledge that you believe a certain way and I support your right to believe as such.

        • Shofar threading

          You are assuredly right. <

      • QuadGMoto

        And Levi made him a great feast in his house, and there was a large company of tax collectors and others reclining at table with them. And the Pharisees and their scribes grumbled at his disciples, saying, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” And Jesus answered them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”
        — Luke 5:29–32

        • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

          +1 for the correct context of that quote. However, I’m willing to bet that Porter won’t understand it.

          • QuadGMoto

            Yeah. That kind of requires a willingness to understand.

        • Shofar threading

          Read Jeanette’s comment.

      • John Wilks

        Jesus associated with such people in the hopes of making them disciples.

        Paul said don’t associate with such people who already claim to be disciples (not the word “brothers.”

        So both are right.

        Christians should lovingly reach out to non-Christians in the hopes of reaching them.

        And Christians should lovingly rebuke other Christians who have slide back into sin, in the hopes of restoring them.

      • Karl

        Jesus went where He was needed:

        Luke 5:

        30But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to their sect complained to his disciples, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?”

        31 Jesus answered them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

        John 3

        17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. 19 And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. 20 For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. 21 But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.”

        Romans 8:

        5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6 For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
        God Bless

        • Barbara

          “Callling sinners to repentance” – that’s what isn’t happening here.

    • Truth Offends

      I’d like to tell you something privately. Are you still on Twitter?

      • Jeanette Victoria

        Nope you IM via Facebook or email me

        • Truth Offends

          I saw you up-voted a comment on bacon page. I just wanted you to know that I added a post on that page you might be interested in reading. (I’m going to delete these two posts here in a little while.)

  • Oscar

    The Disney corporation delieberately formed Touchstone Pictures, so it could “honestly” state that it doesn’t make R-rated movies. Multnomah is just about as honest. Cowardly and dishonest. Storm clouds are gathering.

    • sagecreek

      Storm clouds for Disney? BWAHAHAHA. Don’t go to work on Wall Street, that’s all I’m sayin’.

  • 19gundog43

    Jesus said there would be followers in name only. We are seeing this
    falling away with our own eyes. Spineless pseudo-christians will kiss up to the
    World to make a buck! At the final judgment these kind of so-called “christians”
    will be the ones who hear “Depart from Me, I never knew you”

    Can’t wait for the trolls that haunt sites like this to crawl out from under
    their bridges/basements and start calling us haters, homophobes, blah, blah!

    • franklinb23

      No, you’re all just inconsistent. If you took the Bible at face value as you do the passages on homosexuality, you’d tolerate slavery, polygamy and genocide and oppose abused women divorcing their abusers (Luke 16:18, Matthew 5:32).

      Oh, and you’d give all your money away to the poor since Christ directed His followers to do that on more than one occasion. I know … some passages are just too inconvenient, aren’t they?

      • 19gundog43

        Nice try building a useless straw man Cupcake. We live under the New
        Covenant, not Mosaic Law genus. Luke 16: 18 says nothing about abuse! Jesus only
        told the rich young ruler to sell his possessions to test his love of them.
        Peter always had his boat and house. Dream on Skippy You really suck an empty
        arguments. LOL St. Paul under the NEW Covenant made it plain homosexuality was
        still an abomination. Nothing has changed and no matter how you people whine and
        screech it will always be an abomination in God’s sight. Keep trying to justify
        the practice of bowl movement sex it will always be a disgusting disease ridden
        practice.

        • franklinb23

          Luke 16:18 says that divorce is impermissible unless there was infidelity. No “outs” if your husband is just slapping the hell out of you.

          In terms of sex, well … oral sex is commonly practiced by heterosexuals as well. I’m doubting you’d know anything about that, though.

          • sagecreek

            If they did, there would be far fewer on them on this website, I’m guessing.

        • portertx

          You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show.

          Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

          Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

          In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of beating slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong.

          The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

        • portertx

          Another tenet clearly prohibits women from being ministers or otherwise speaking in church (“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak”– 1 Corinthians 14:34). Yet how many women are allowed to preach in the Christian church?

          • 19gundog43

            Nothing but useless straw men. Bowl movement sex is still an abomination with God. NO EXCUSES!!

          • portertx

            You seem to be fixated on that a lot. I don’t believe lesbians do that in general..

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            There’s nothing in the Bible against lesbians being with each other. Just sodomites.

          • sagecreek

            That’s because straight old white guys get off on seeing pictures of two girls.

            Seriously. That’s the only reason.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            Ah — I see your point. I had forgotten that back when Moses wrote Leviticus, in about 4000 BC or so, the Internet was really slow. Like, dial-up speeds and such. So Moses, being a straight old white guy, decreed that pictures of lesbians are perfectly OK to download. It’s right there in the Bible, in Daniel, chapter 15:

            “Yea, if thy download speed is crappy, and ye find thyself on a gay website, get thee to the lesbian section post-haste! In this way, shall ye prevent hurling on thy keyboard.”

            Or, you could be full of crap. Which, considering where your sympathies are, seems entirely possible.

          • sagecreek

            Wow. Are you 13 years old?

          • 19gundog43

            It is what it is. A foul disgusting disease filled practice. Deal with it!!

          • sagecreek

            Honey, I hope you’re about 82, because then that’s okay. If not, you’re a bigot. I know that hurts to hear, but yep, you are.

            Homosexuals have always been with us, and guess what? God loves them, too.

            Now, instead of worrying your pretty little head about what other people are doing at night, go help the poor or visit the sick, or pick up some trash or something. Make Jesus happy.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            You’re dangerously close to accidentally stepping on some truth here… If homosexuals have always been among us, how is that possible, if being gay is genetic? Wouldn’t it have died out after Greece? (the ancient country, not the musical movie).

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            If you want to talk about “Christian” churches not living up to Christianity, check out the Anglican Church — they have a gay bishop!

            Just because a “Christian” church does something, doesn’t mean they’re really a Christian church — I would think that a Church has to follow what the Bible says in order for it to be a Christian church.

            So you’re right — the Anglican Church is not a Christian church, as you rightly point out.

          • portertx

            Or any church that has a woman preacher right?

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            The Anglican Church, I believe, was the first church to have a female preacher. I’m not too sure about that, to be honest with you. Full Disclosure: I’m a Catholic currently studying for a Doctorate in Theology, so I am a bit biased in this. However, the verse that talks about women leading churches says (roughly): “But I will not permit a woman to teach nor have authority over me, for it was the woman who sinned…”

            Here, Paul is talking about his own preference in his letter to Timothy. He is not necessarily saying that women can’t be preachers, or even priests, but there’s a fine line there — if all a priest is doing during a service is relaying information handed to him by the Bishop (or higher), who is really doing the teaching? In this case, the priest is merely a conduit. And a woman, in my opinion only, can make a very good conduit for information.

            As to authority? There are several churches (even Catholic ones!) where there is a female “head usher”, who has authority over the other ushers. Is this wrong? I don’t think so, because I believe the word “authority” in that verse is referring to “G-d’s Authority to Interpret the Bible”, not necessarily holding a secular position of authority over someone in a job.

            The primary reason that Catholics don’t allow female priest is because the Priest acts on behalf of Jesus in a two key sacraments: Communion (he is acting as Jesus’ conduit in transubstantiation), and Reconciliation (he is acting on behalf of Jesus in forgiving sins). A female priest would not be able to bless the Host, and would not be able to act as Jesus in forgiving sins (both of which are controversial from a Biblical point of view).

          • sagecreek

            No, they are way more Christian than you. And why are you spending time here, gaybashing, rather than out feeding the poor? I wonder what Jesus would say about that?

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            Sadly, I’m having to stay here and concentrate on my studies. Bear in mind that Jesus spent a lot of time at the Temple teaching. And Jesus Himself said “The poor will always be among you”. However, I do my part to help out in the community as well.

            I define “Christian” as “one who follows Jesus’ words, and the Bible in context”. The Anglican Church was founded by King Henry VIII because he couldn’t divorce one woman in order to marry another (who he subsequently beheaded). In other words, the Anglican Church was founded to sate an evil man’s lust.

            Apparently, it hasn’t changed since. BUT! They have a songbook! So it’s all good, right?

      • Roberto Enrique Benitez

        Your lack of the Scriptures is astounding.

  • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

    Hmm… Seems like Paul may have something interesting to say about that:

    “(9) Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men (10) nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (11) And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”

    - 1 Corinthians 6, 9-11, NIV

    Two points of interest here:

    1) Obviously, “men who have sex with men” is not something that is uniquely wrong, but it IS wrong. So Matthew Vines needs to reconcile this somehow, and

    2) “And that is what some of you WERE“, implying that some of the people in Corinth were men who had sex with men, but are no longer. This implies that people, even people who may “lean that way”, can still change, and have been changed, and in so doing, have become saved. It means that people who are homosexual are NOT necessarily “born that way”, but even if they truly believe that they were, they do not necessarily have to act that way.

    • 19gundog43

      Outstanding! Homosexually is an outright affront against the natural reproductive laws of God. The only sin that is called an abomination by God. No matter how the Left and homosexuals sugarcoat it, it is a dirty disgusting sin in God’s eyes.

      • franklinb23

        So is gathering wood on the Sabbath. Moses had a man stoned to death for doing just that.

        You know what God doesn’t find offensive, apparently: slavery, genocide and polygamy. How many wives did Solomon, Abraham and David have? How many children civilians did He have Moses target for slaughter? How many times in your “holy book” did God supposedly command His armies to take slaves for themselves?

        • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

          I don’t know about Abraham and David, but Solomon had 200 wives and 700 “concubines” (women given to him, as King of Israel, as tribute from another tribe/country). And he couldn’t have been with them all — even if he was with 3 in a night, that would still be 3 years before he could even get to them all. I wonder what they were doing by themselves all that time….

          Fortunately, Jesus came by about 2000 years ago, and died on the cross for our sins which were deserving of death (like, for example, gathering wood on the Sabbath). He also died for your sins, too. All you have to do is believe. But first you have to admit that you sin (and that’s the main problem, isn’t it?).

      • portertx

        Yet homosexuality has been found in over 1500 species …why would GOD create animals which are homosexual?

        • DC/Tex

          you have correctly described homosexuality as animals

        • 19gundog43

          Soooooo, Cupcake, you admit you hump like animals. LMAO

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            Again, not really, because animals also have been known to have sex with their brothers and sisters — so obviously, PorterTX is advocating that since animals do THAT, then we should allow it in human society as well. Come to think of it, he does look a lot like the other beard in the picture — maybe they’re brothers?

            There is no argument for gay marriage that can’t also apply to brothers getting married to each other, or sisters getting married to each other.

          • portertx

            Yawn…come on you can do better that…….

        • hankrbradley

          The study of twins relating to sexuality is telling! Thousands of sets of twins all around the world have been studied and it has been found that not only do twins share the same nurturing in the womb, but genetically speaking they are 100% the same, the same DNA 100%, there is no difference in anything when they are born. So what do you do with the set of twins where one is Gay and the other Hetero? If you are a twin and it is possible to be born gay they both would be gay. These studies take into account hundreds of twins where one is gay the other hetero, the samples are well documented and numerous enough to show that being gay is a choice and not decided in the womb.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            Also, bear in mind that if there ever becomes any proof that homosexuality is in the genetic code, this will actually be pretty bad for homosexuals:

            1) Saudi Arabia and other “tolerant” countries will use this test to deny visas to gays,
            2) It will become possible to test for this in the womb, so people can make the determination on whether or not to bring their baby to term based on their likelihood to die early of AIDS,
            3) Insurance companies can use this to charge a higher rate for gays (like they do for smokers), due to their higher risk of very expensive disease later in life (or to deny coverage altogether)

            AIDS prevention will become “gay prevention” — remember, in an atheist-run country (or at least an atheist-run department of HHS), it’s perfectly acceptable to terminate human life if the quality of that life is judged (by people other than the person involved) to be diminished. This is because there is no absolute moral standard defending the sanctity of human life.

        • hankrbradley

          So are you saying that homosexuality is akin to animalistic behavior? And projecting human sexuality causes and issues onto animals is not entirely accurate and you know it porterx, lol. Actually studies show that in most cases they revert back to opposite sex relationships if that is what you want to call them doing. Interesting that sheep are the animals that engage in it the most, so is that where homosexuality got it’s start with animals and humans are just following their example?

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            Well, not really — just MALE homosexual behavior — the kind explicitly written against in the Bible. There are NO documented cases of animal lesbians (animals having sex for pleasure in a way that is not also a sign of domination in a pack).

            But to be fair, there’s nothing against lesbians in the Bible, either. In fact, it seems to be pretty explicitly called for by Isaiah: “The LORD has blessed me with a skilled tongue” :)

        • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

          And how many of these species mate for life?

          None?

          Thought so.

        • Roberto Enrique Benitez

          Your lack of knowledge or understanding of the Scriptures is tragically showing. It’s the result of The Fall. As the Bible states, all of nature groans.

  • KingdomPassion

    I am so fed up with this Gay agenda.
    But let him write his book, and then others will write their tearing apart his theology, and show people who desperate these people are.
    What the enemy means for destruction God will bring forth Good.
    Remember, even the devil used scripture(out of context) and The Truth, will always come forth and shed light on words taken out of context.

    • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

      And, those people can write books of their own, and cite his — so there’s no need for people to buy his book – they can just wait for the responses with citations.

  • trueWorldview

    We can contact Waterbrook Multnomah to politely inform them of our concerns.

    1-800-603-7051

    Info@waterbrookMultnomah.com

    • sagecreek

      What exactly ARE your concerns? Most publishing houses are hanging on by a thread these days.

      • trueWorldview

        After reading the above article, one would still need to ask such a question?

  • DC/Tex

    The homosexual (not PC gay) “AGENDA” is the worst disease infecting and destroying the morals and family values of the USA and the world.
    Homosexuals WERE NOT BORN THAT WAY, they CHOOSE their UNNATURAL unhealthy vile lifestyle, so, homosexuality does NOT qualify as a civil rights discrimination issue.
    Homosexuality will NEVER be natural, healthy, accepted, or OK.
    Homosexuals had equal rights, now they have special rights and want more. Every special right awarded to homosexuals infringes on our rights.
    God loves everyone, as we all should, including homosexuals. God hates all sin, as we all should, including homosexuality and He says it is an abomination,

    • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

      another call for help from narnia

      • Roberto Enrique Benitez

        Obviously you don’t understand the Narnia Chronicles nor the God and Savior they speak of.

        Perhaps with the advent of Passover and Easter you might want to reflect on your condition.

    • franklinb23

      Christians aren’t born that way, either. Why do you get special rights for your chosen religious affiliation?

      • DC/Tex

        you have the same religious rights, no special rights there

      • hankrbradley

        franklin23 so you admit Gays aren’t born that way! Christianity is a choice just like being gay is! Roflmao, you just admitted being gay is a choice!

  • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

    yes, how dare he publish his deeply held convictions? doesn’t he know you and your buddies are the only ones that get to do that?

    • 19gundog43

      Let him publish them in a homo magazine where his peers are. We really don’t give a rat’s rear what his “deeply held convictions” are.

      • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

        obviously the owners of the publishing house have a less narrow minded authoritarian mindset than yourself. simply don’t buy the book when it is released.

        • John Boy

          Sue, Since you are Bible scholar you probably have read where demonic spirits spoke to Jesus Christ thru the lips of people. I you don’t want to look at Biblical references look in the mirror.

    • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

      I may have deeply held convictions that 2+2=5, but I doubt I could get very many publishers to publish something about it. I would have to be a politician to have a book do well that has no redeeming content.

      (you do know that book sales don’t have to be reported as campaign contributions, right?)

  • 19gundog43

    This spells out what the wonderful, loving, open-minded homo-Nazis are really about. They don’t want their true motives brought into the light of Truth!

    The
    Gay Manifesto

    First
    Published in Gay Community News, February 15-21, 1987

    We shall sodomise your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow
    dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your
    dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas,
    in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in
    your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your
    houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

    Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of with men. Then go and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too, and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand the depth and feeling, the mind and body of another man.

    All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be
    passed which engenders love between men.

    All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically,
    philosophically, socially, politically and financially. We will triumph only
    when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy.

    If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly
    hearts and defile your dead, puny bodies.

    We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man
    openly caresses man; we shall make films about the love between heroic men
    which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile,
    heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens. We shall
    sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in
    your parks, your squares, your plazas. The museums of the world will be filled
    only with paintings of graceful, naked lads.

    Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable and de rigueur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles. We will eliminate
    heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule, devices
    which we are skilled in employing.

    We will unmask the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals. You will be shocked and frightened when you find that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators, your mayors, your generals, your athletes,
    your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your
    priests are not the safe, familiar, bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed
    them to be. We are everywhere; we have infiltrated your ranks. Be careful when
    you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting
    across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.

    There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings. Highly intelligent,we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less. Those who oppose us will be exiled.

    We shall raise vast private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers.

    The family unit-spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and
    violence – will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination
    and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and
    grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal
    setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.

    All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar
    and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class
    heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the
    dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.

    The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay
    poets. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society
    of homoeroticism will be indulgence in the Greek passion. Any man contaminated
    with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of
    influence. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be
    tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.

    We shall rewrite history, history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies
    and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of the great leaders and
    thinkers who have shaped the world. We will demonstrate that homosexuality and
    intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is
    a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man.

    We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the
    oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb,
    heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and
    manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.

    Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.

    • thisoldspouse

      The truth expressed in “jest.” Yes, it’s their camouflage.

    • David

      yawn, old worn out and totally taken out of context. Find some real evidence gundog, this ain’t it. Best to stick with the Bible.

      • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

        Yes, they spent all that time writing it, just on a lark. Even as fiction, it speaks to a very deranged mind. I wonder how long after publication of that article the author died of AIDS?

        • David

          I didn’t say the man was stable and I don’t know when or how he died, though it wouldn’t be hard to track down if I was so inclined. My point is only that it’s not some proclamation of the agenda of all LGBT people.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            I get your point — that the vast majority of homosexual/alternative people are not trying to find a way to undermine “the straights”, as it were. Most would like to be left alone, in peace, and get on with their lives.

            However, there is a very vocal and active minority that do want to disrupt the lives of ordinary Americans (even ordinary LGBT lives). And certain parts of this very vocal and very active minority have a lot of money and a lot of influence (Geffen) to attempt to make this happen. When TV executives are falling all over themselves to “normalize” homosexuality in scripted TV shows, and even to affect “reality” shows (who was the first winner of Survivor? The gay guy. Who saw that coming? I did.), in order to get an award from GLADD (or GLAAD, or GLADOS, or something like that), we have a problem.

            My point is, that it doesn’t have to be a proclamation of all LGBTOMGWTFBBQ people, or even a majority of them, in order to be a problem if the few people with the most control over our culture (hollywood producers/directors, people that write and publish textbooks, people who decide which news stories air, etc.) are all “on board” with the agenda.

            My major problem is not necessarily with those that are gay, but those who are leftist who are just using their gayness as a way to promote leftism over American society.

  • Stacy Lynn Harp

    I recently had an author tell me that a Christian publisher wouldn’t print her book because she offered hope to the homosexual in the book. Unfortunately, the god of this world, “money” is in “Christian” publishing. There’s a ton of junk that comes out from these publishers, so this isn’t shocking at all.

    • thisoldspouse

      It’s probably not so much the money, as the vicious sniping by homosexual barbarians, threatening not just the publisher, but the publisher’s suppliers. This is their current tactic.

      • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

        Too True — if you so much as imply that the mental disorder known as homosexuality can be cured, prepare to be set upon by the worst that the left has to “offer”.

        Even though a cursory review of ancient Greece shows that the majority of people who were gay when younger can get married, have kids, and live a normal adult life once they mature.

        Also, what are the statistics on people who “came out” at a later stage in life? “Oh, I may have been married twice and have 12 kids, and got to pound half the cheerleading team in college (looking away wistfully)… butt! I found my true nature when I turned 72, and have been gay since.”. These are ALSO people who changed their minds later in life, and they also prove that certain activities, for some people ARE a choice.

      • peteykins

        Boy, some hairdresser must have given you a really bad haircut in the past.

        • thisoldspouse

          I’m a man; I go to a barber, not a prissy hair dresser.

  • Kevin Gamble

    God destroyed a city of homosexuals, I don’t think he would stop and say, oh wait, it’s OK now…

    • 19gundog43

      Two actually. Sodom and Gomorrah. Double hitter. If God doesn’t judge America as well he should apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.

      • Roberto Enrique Benitez

        How true. I wonder if having a fraudulent Muslim bisexual socialist president with fascist/socialist progressives running the nation down isn’t part of God’s judgment on America. Of course far worse may come if we don’t heed God’s warning in 2nd Chronicles 7:14.

        • selahgreene

          Thanks for the laugh, R. And you are so right, O is judgment on the US, and it is going to get far worse. One more conservative Supreme Court Justice replaced by an Obama or a Clinton, and the first amendment will be toast. Those posting the Word of God here and on other forums will be silenced and likely imprisoned for hate speech. And that will put us in pretty good company, as Jesus offended so many with His ‘hate’ speech that He suffered the ultimate persecution.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            Sadly, you’re also so correct. Not only did Jesus suffer, so did His apostles and disciples. He told us that though it wasn’t his desire that nevertheless because of corruption and evil in the world followers of God and Jesus would suffer persecution.

            So far ours has been light in the US, but in the Muslim world it’s been horrific. No doubt the same will come to America unless Christians and conservatives clean up their own act and unite to oppose evil in all its manifestations.

        • sagecreek

          Wow. Now we get to the heart of this website. OMG OBUMMER IS A MUSLIN.

          Just admit it, this has nothing to do with God. This has to do with your discomfiture that a black man is in the White House. Period.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            I can’t speak for Roberto, but my personal discomfiture with BO is his Communism. Song of Solomon is an entire book of the Bible where King David (a Jewish guy) is talking about how much he loves his wife (a black woman).

            Roberto doesn’t strike me as a Democrat, so I don’t think he would be against blacks — the Democrats have the market cornered on hatred against blacks:

            * KKK (the militant arm of the Democrat party)
            * Jim Crow (introduced by democrats),
            * Anti-Civil Rights legislation,
            * Pro-Abortion (abortion disproportionately targets blacks for death, to the tune of 400,000 people a year)

            And if you’re thinking “They can’t hate blacks! Obama is half black!”, yeah, and half white. He’s also a warrior for abortion, and has passed and supported laws that allow for many more blacks to be killed. I mean, heck, after 15,000,000 black deaths sacrifices, the Democrat party had to throw blacks a bone, right?

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            It’s worth noting, too, that while Christians believe that life begins at conception, because that’s what Science says, Muslims believe that a fetus is a vessel without actual life until the age of “Ensoulment”, which happens at about 120 days in the womb.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            Actually, you spoke pretty well for me. I agree with your post.

            I’m of mixed heritage, Heinz 57 my father from Puerto Rico always said. That includes Spanish, French, English, Tianian, Morrish, Jewish, and yes black. As you surmised, I’m not a, shudder, socialist Democrat. Rather, I’m a registered Republican for the sake of voting in primaries, but consider myself a constitutional conservative of the 17th to 19th century classical liberal type.

            By the way, Moses was also married to a black woman from Ethiopia. When Mose’s sister Miriam and his brother Arron complained about his being married to such a dark woman Miriam’s hand was turned white as snow to show the difference. Of course it was leprosy. After she repented she was healed.

            By the way, after I was divorced the only woman I dated and considered marrying was black, not African American, but African from Kenya. One of several of the criteria for choosing a mate as far as I’m concerned isn’t race, but faith.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            I had forgotten about Moses! Thanks for that :)

            What sagecreek is making great efforts to ignore is that your problem with Obama (and mine) stems from his beliefs:

            1) His religious beliefs, which are a mix of Islamic Socialism (yes, it’s a thing) and Black Liberation Theology

            2) His Fascism – a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people (Obamacare will be used to get people to change their behaviors, and it will all be “for your health” in the same way we hear about “for the children” today), and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government (witness the way that Conservative groups have been targeted by the IRS)

            3) Socialist – a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies. (think Obamacare, and the Administration’s direct governmental support of “green energy” initiatives, while at the same time making traditional energy more expensive through regulation).

            4) Progressive – just another way of saying “socialist”, but applied to even more of someone’s life.

            I can’t see anything wrong with your assessment of Obama, and I would not support any president with these views, regardless of skin color. The only thing I may have an issue with is the characterization that he is bisexual, as that needs a little more proof, but there is plenty of circumstantial evidence to where I can understand why someone would believe that about him. And his own preferences in that regard would speak to how he enforces certain rules, especially if he chooses not to enforce rules he doesn’t agree with, due to his own preferences.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            Sadly, sagecreek is a partisan demagogue and Obama apologist who when he can’t present a cogent response needs to play the race card. That’s a major tactic of the Left.

            As for our situation, I’m one who believes what we’re facing is a fascist/socialist regime. That might sound like an oxymoron, but let me clarify.

            I believe Mr. Obama isn’t a pure socialist but rather a Fabian one. The difference is that pure socialists want socialism right away, often by force even though it’s not an extreme as communism or Marxism.

            Fabian socialists on the other hand realize that many societies won’t accept such rapid change and thus try to introduce socialism slowly and deceptively. That’s what’s been occurring in the US since about the time of Pres. Wilson.

            Another factor to consider is that fascism and socialism are related. They’re two sides of the same coin. However, when many hear the word fascism they think of the sound of jackboots in the street like what occurred in Nazi Germany. While Nazism is fascism, fascism isn’t necessarily Nazism. To better explain fascism, here’s a good definition I found on the internet. “Fascism is an economic model in which the state dictates the utilization of privately held assets to achieve public policy goals.”

            This is what’s been happening in the US for some time, starting well before Mr. Obama came to power. From there the state takes over certain sectors of the economy such as the healthcare industry. Eventually healthcare providers, drug companies, and medical device companies become part of the state with all healthcare provided by the state with the eventual elimination of medical insurance companies, along with the demise of many property and life insurance companies as a side consequence.

            Other industries are bought or nationalized like auto or energy companies. We saw a trial run with the auto companies with the bailouts and “Government Motors Company,” now largely owned by unions as planned by this old Mayor Daley style Chicago Mob Democrat Party Machine regime. In addition, certain Democrats like Waters and Hinchey have publicly called for the nationalization of the petroleum refining and even the drilling industries. We also have most passenger rail service owned by the government.

            In the end the state takes over the major means of production, although it may permit small companies and stores to be privately owned, but under strict government regulation. That’s socialism/communism.

            That as I wrote is the road the USA in on; a road to becoming the USSA. It’s being done in the name of providing safety and all it requires is that people give up a few essential liberties. I believe someone once cautioned against that.

            As for the claim about Mr. Obama’s sexuality, there’ve been many credible stories about it. His mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a communist bisexual pedophile. That can have a strong influence on a young teenager. Former college classmates have said he had a homosexual roommate and homosexual encounters. Rev. Wright’s church that he attended was known to arrange traditional marriages black homosexuals to give them the cover of “normalcy.” Also men have said they had homosexual encounters with him but they’re now dead under mysterious circumstances.

            So as you say, there’s a lot of circumstantial evidence, but to be fair that doesn’t prove anything conclusively. But I tend to believe it’s true.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            I also tend to believe it’s true — in fact, there’s more evidence for him being homosexual than him being American — photos show him with a wedding ring even back in his college days. Which presents an interesting quandary:

            Either he was “married” to a man (probably his Pakistanian roommate), or he is Muslim — there is a custom among some Muslims to wear a simple band on what we would call the wedding ring finger (but is not a similar custom in Islam) in an effort to “blend in” to Western society when you are practicing Taquiyya. It would be like a woman putting a Bindi on her forehead when visiting India, without truly understanding the significance of it in Indian culture.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            Why is it that you partisan demagogues when you can’t respond cogently often need to play the race card? Are you that desperate, aliterate, or inerudite? Or is it that by nature you’re that base?

            

I just guess you can’t fathom people not acquiescing to a Muslim socialist racist who has violated his duties, runs a lawless regime like the old style Mayor Daley Chicago Mafia Democrat Party Political Machine, and violated the Constitution. Nor does it seem you can admit that there’s a God who does judge people and countries on their morality and also on their following of Him.

            

Let me categorically state that from Herman Cain to Ben Carson, Artur Davis, Alan Keyes, Colin Powell (?), Condoleezza Rice, Michael Steele, JC Watts, to Allen West that I believe all would have made far better presidents than Barack Obama and better than even Mitt Romney or John McCain. In addition, conservative Republicans like this Heinz 57 Puerto Rican would have supported them. But progressive Democrats like you just can’t admit this as it doesn’t fit your Democrat plantation taqiyya narrative. So it sticks in your craw, hence your need for a puerile and mendacious ad hominem attack.

            By the way, for your edification, if that’s possible, most Muslims are Asian. In addition Arab, Persian, and Pashtun Muslims are Caucasian, although many have mixed heritage. I guess you just assume those who oppose the intolerant murderous religion of Islam believe all Muslims are black.

            Of course many are black, particularly in Africa who are also Muslim. Mr. Obama, of mixed heritage, is one of them. Also, despite your dishonest implication, I don’t make fun of his name, Mr. (intentional) Barack Hussein Obama, Junior.

            So why don’t you admit that you’re a prevaricating inerudite partisan demagogue with no rectitude? Are you just a partisan caitiff?

        • portertx

          Wow and your proof? Of all of the above lies is?

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            I could write a book of proofs but you’d reject it out of hand. Suffice it to say that Mr. Obama did write a book outlining many of his views; did associate with socialists, communists, atheists, and Muslims from birth; did have a bisexual pedophile as a mentor; did get his political start in a communist party, and did associate with domestic terrorists.

            Of course you’ll defend this man who has expressed his disdain for the Constitution and has violated it in numerous ways, including having committed treason as defined by the Constitution.

            As for your second sentence, what’s your question, or is it an accusation?

          • portertx

            So you are basing all this on someones “associations” wow thats a major leap of faith. If Obama says he is a Christian who are you to say he is not? By which ruler are you using to make that assertion? what makes your ruler so “true”?

            So Tony Perkins of the FRC has been associated with “KKK Groups” should does that make him a White Supremacists?

            If Obama has committed treason then he should be tried as such.

            Just as any Republicans which signed pledges to Grover Norquist are also treasonous

            And these people have signed a sworn oath that contradicts their oath of office. And therefore, in fact, they do have mental reservations, and they do have purpose of evasion and they are not sincerely taking their oath of office. And if they persist in that, and if they are held to that by this outside person who is not a member of the government, then they are, in fact, breaking their oath of office and they are not serving what they swore to serve the American people.”

            Are you willing to peruse that also? Or are you using a different ruler for each of these.

          • Roberto Enrique Benitez

            Why are partisan progressives so aliterate? Or is it that progressives are naturally disingenuous?

            As I wrote, I base my opinions not only on Mr. (intentional) Obama’s reported associations, which are critically important, but also on his writings, his speeches, and his actions. However, I understand that the Left commonly discounts associations and even character, unless of course it involves conservatives and Republicans.

            Then associations like parents and grandparent became a deciding factor in calling them things like Nazis as what happened with Bush and Schwarzenegger. Also there’s this minor rule in the Scriptures that states by their fruits they shall be known. But seeing as how you reject the Scriptures I realize you won’t acknowledge this rule. Likely you’ll either ignorantly or more likely dishonestly, say that Scriptures don’t permit us to judge others.

            As to what I’m willing to pursue, yes, I’m more than willing to see both Democrats AND Republicans who violate their oaths of office investigated and legally dealt with if called for. I’ve no doubt that’d include many in both parties, including many presidents.

            Of course appointing communists or Islamic radicals to high positions who want to radically change the USA by scrapping the rule of constitutional law and instituting an authoritarian central government is not likely a violation of the oath to support and defend the Constitution in your view. And I’m not just speaking about Mr. Obama’s appointments. So I’m willing to see unconstitutional and especially treasonous acts pursued.

            However, as was said by a prominent Democrat Senator that if Clinton was impeached no Democrat Senator would ever vote to convict a Democrat president. Compare that to the GOP Senators who told Nixon that if impeached they’d vote to convict him. That’s what forced him to resign. Them my only objection was that Congress shouldn’t have accepted his resignation but rather should have impeached and convicted him and had him indicted on criminal charges in federal court in order to send a message to politicians that such violations of the Constitution wouldn’t be tolerated. It’s too bad progressives and most Democrats don’t see it that way.

            But so much for my biases and different set of rules. It’s sad that what you accuse me of is how you operate.

            As for Tony Perkins, are you too fearful to state was his association with the Klan was? Was he a Klan member or even a Klan officer like an Exalted Cyclops or Kleagle? Oh, I forgot that was a serving Democrat senator who served the Klan in those capacities, not Perkins. Perkins bought a mailing list from state representative and former Klan member David Duke to reach some far right Republicans while managing a campaign for another Republican.

            Is it that you believe those far right Republicans shouldn’t have been contacted or even allowed to vote? Be honest now.

            Perkins big mistake, which the campaign was rightly fined for, was trying to conceal where the list came from to avoid embarrassment. So does that in your opinion, likely gotten from the far left group the Southern Poverty Law Center, make Perkins a White Supremacist? Or do you believe all conservatives who oppose Obama are White Supremacists?

            But heck, I suppose Perkins actions were far worse than Clinton’s concealing of foreign campaign donations from the Red Chinese army and then giving them access to sensitive missile and guidance technology, an act of treason by the way, right? Or do you deny that also?

            As for Norquist, whom I don’t agree with by the way, what were his acts of treason as defined by the Constitution? Can you name even one? I can name what Mr. Obama, Pres. Clinton, Sec. Clinton, Sec. Kerry, and Speaker Pelosi did which were treasonous acts, but Norquist? Or do you even know what constitutes treason or the differences between treason and sedition are?

      • thisoldspouse

        Actually, more than two. It was an entire valley of towns, Sodom and Gomorrah being just the most notable ones.

        • WXRGina

          Right, Spouse. The Bible says, “Sodom and Gomorrah and the towns around it…” It was a very bad large area.

          • thisoldspouse

            I’m sure it was very much like San Francisco, but without the bridge.

  • Sam

    Homosexuality and all forms of immoral sex are sins according to God’s Word. I will never put my faith in men, but only in God. I am sure the mob would like to write a book excusing them for the many murders and crimes they have committed, if only they could find a scripture to back them. I despise the gay agenda and what they are trying to do. Gays would get more respect if they just admitted that they aren’t normal and quit trying to force everyone to accept it as normal.

    • Randell A. Klingsmith Jr.

      Read this, and tell me that you don’t know someone who has violated one or more of these “laws.” Judge not, lest you be judged…..hypocrites.

      Leviticus 19

      New International Version (NIV)

      Various Laws

      19 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Speak to the entire assembly of Israel and say to them: ‘Be holy because I, the Lord your God, am holy.

      3 “‘Each of you must respect your mother and father, and you must observe my Sabbaths. I am theLord your God.

      4 “‘Do not turn to idols or make metal gods for yourselves. I am the Lord your God.

      5 “‘When you sacrifice a fellowship offering to the Lord, sacrifice it in such a way that it will be accepted on your behalf. 6 It shall be eaten on the day you sacrifice it or on the next day; anything left over until the third day must be burned up. 7 If any of it is eaten on the third day, it is impure and will not be accepted. 8 Whoever eats it will be held responsible because they have desecrated what is holy to the Lord; they must be cut off from their people.

      9 “‘When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. 10 Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner. I am the Lord your God.

      11 “‘Do not steal.

      “‘Do not lie.

      “‘Do not deceive one another.

      12 “‘Do not swear falsely by my name and so profane the name of your God. I am the Lord.

      13 “‘Do not defraud or rob your neighbor.

      “‘Do not hold back the wages of a hired worker overnight.

      14 “‘Do not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block in front of the blind, but fear your God. I am theLord.

      15 “‘Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.

      16 “‘Do not go about spreading slander among your people.

      “‘Do not do anything that endangers your neighbor’s life. I am the Lord.

      17 “‘Do not hate a fellow Israelite in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in their guilt.

      18 “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighboras yourself. I am the Lord.

      19 “‘Keep my decrees.

      “‘Do not mate different kinds of animals.

      “‘Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed.

      “‘Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.

      20 “‘If a man sleeps with a female slave who is promised to another man but who has not been ransomed or given her freedom, there must be due punishment.[a] Yet they are not to be put to death, because she had not been freed. 21 The man, however, must bring a ram to the entrance to the tent of meeting for a guilt offering to the Lord. 22 With the ram of the guilt offering the priest is to make atonement for him before the Lord for the sin he has committed, and his sin will be forgiven.

      23 “‘When you enter the land and plant any kind of fruit tree, regard its fruit as forbidden.[b] For three years you are to consider it forbidden[c]; it must not be eaten. 24 In the fourth year all its fruit will be holy, an offering of praise to the Lord. 25 But in the fifth year you may eat its fruit. In this way your harvest will be increased. I am the Lord your God.

      26 “‘Do not eat any meat with the blood still in it.

      “‘Do not practice divination or seek omens.

      27 “‘Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.

      28 “‘Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the Lord.

      29 “‘Do not degrade your daughter by making her a prostitute, or the land will turn to prostitution and be filled with wickedness.

      30 “‘Observe my Sabbaths and have reverence for my sanctuary. I am the Lord.

      31 “‘Do not turn to mediums or seek out spiritists, for you will be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God.

      32 “‘Stand up in the presence of the aged, show respect for the elderly and revere your God. I am theLord.

      33 “‘When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. 34 The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.

      35 “‘Do not use dishonest standards when measuring length, weight or quantity. 36 Use honest scalesand honest weights, an honest ephah[d] and an honest hin.[e] I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt.

      37 “‘Keep all my decrees and all my laws and follow them. I am the Lord.’”

      • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

        The “Judge not lest ye be judged” is mistranslated into modern English. To find it’s true meaning, we need to stop the verse and melt away translations, and go into the original Greek. Fortunately, this is easy to do by picking almost any translation except the King James Version which has known errors, as evidenced by the number of people that insist that only the King James Version is the right one (don’t ask, it gets complicated).

        What it really means is not to judge people by a standard that you yourself won’t follow. Since I don’t act in a homosexual way, I am free to judge those that do.

        Also, the “Various Laws” that you cited there are the 10 commandments, which are usually considered a little more important than “various laws”. And most of the laws you have cited above are not considered “abominations”. You should check out Deuteronomy 20-22 if you want to misquote something like that. Or get ideas for your next party. Hint: Bring your sister!

      • LouiseCA

        We don’t need to judge. The Bible already does that. But we’re told to be discerning and give no place to the devil.
        Not judging does not mean avoiding the calling out of sin for what it is. That does not mean we’re off the hook for our sin. Quite the contrary. It means, if we’re going to name someone else’s sin, we’d better be sure we don’t do the same thing. If anything, it should make us pay attention to our own walk.
        But we’re not hypocrites simply for saying that something is wrong by God’s standard.

        • sagecreek

          Oh, no, you are judging, and judging a lot. In pretty hateful ways. I don’t see you standing up and calling out the Republican party for their incessant war on the poor. But here you are, gaybashing.

          I wonder how Jesus feels about that?

          • trueWorldview

            Wow! You sincerely to desire to honor Jesus, obey Jesus, follow Jesus, and deny yourself for the sake of His Kingdom!

          • Sunny

            Jesus wants you to follow Him…repent of your sins (we all have them) and Sin No More. He loves you+

          • Shofar threading

            How convoluted people sometimes get in trying to prove their point. Here you are chastising Louise for judging and you are doing the very same thing in even greater scope by accusing the entire Republican party for a “war on the poor”! We ALL, Christian or not, are sinners in one form or another but many of us are repentant. She spoke the truth but you apparently didn’t want to hear it.

            On gays: “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.” Leviticus 18:22

        • portertx

          But you and I know you don’t speak of other sins with such zealousness……how many adulters do you know (divorced/remarried) do you tell them every time you see them…do you pass laws against them and their families? Very very unlikely…

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            If you and/or your partner are not Christian, then Christians in general do not have a reason to judge you. Christians do need to help other Christians maintain their relationship with Christ, which can look like judgement to outsiders. But Christians are not supposed to judge outside their group.

            In Corinth, in Paul’s time, there was a man who was having a sexual relationship with his father’s wife. Now, bear in mind that in this time, a man could be married to more than one woman, so he may have not have had sex with his own mother, but Paul wasn’t being very specific about it.

            At any rate, he was given the opportunity to change, refused, and then was expelled from the Church. AT THAT POINT, the rest of the church was NOT to judge him anymore, to talk about him, or even to allow him to live rent-free in their minds. This is because he was outside the group of the Church — he didn’t claim to be Christian, so he wasn’t causing Christians to have a bad name by his bad actions.

            It would have been acceptable to tell him that that relationship could lead to very confused kids, or kids with genetic disorders (if we knew what those were back then), but it was not acceptable to tell him how to be closer to Jesus, because he had already turned his back on Him.

            However, once the man repented of his sins, he was permitted back into the Church (but that happened at the second letter to the Corinthians, where Paul very explicitly said to let him back in the Church if he’s trying to do better again).

            My point is, that due to many of Paul’s letters, and the way that Christianity is to be lived in general, groups like the Westborough Baptist Church have no Biblical reason for telling a bunch of non-Christian gays that they are condemned. And since we know that they act more like a cult than a church, we can use them as an example of why, as Christians, Paul said not to judge those outside the Christian church.

          • Shofar threading

            Can you not see what you term “such zealousness” is a result of gays foisting and demanding approval of their lifestyle on those whose values and morals are the antithesis of yours/theirs? You question there being no “laws against” other’s sins and that gays are given short shrift. The last time I looked, adultery was still a sin and condemned by Christians — but don’t count those who claim to be “Christian” but live otherwise, including “church” people and supposed-caring government officials.
            Are you so into defense of your own lifestyle that you are totally unaware of all the sometimes-subtle, many more times overt, anti-Christian bias (even by and of our own present government legislatiive actions) — yet blind to and not acknowledging hand-over-fist enactment of pro-gay legislation since the Obama (one of your cohorts) regime arrived — much to the disagreement of most of the (sadly weak and deceived) citizenry of this country?
            I harbor no ill will toward you, since whether or not you know or accept it, you are a child of the only God and created by His hand; however, in no way can I ever condone what is a hedonistic lifestyle just as Islam is a destructive, mad false religion.
            My dialogue herein ends. May the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob be with you. <
            "And a highway will be there; it will be called the Way of
            Holiness; it will be for those who walk on that Way. The unclean will not journey on it; wicked fools will not go about on it." Isaiah 35:8

      • QuadGMoto

        Who where those laws given to?

        Hint: You already quoted the answer.

  • 4lifeandfreedom

    Perhaps being gay(happy, carefree, merry by definition) is not a sin, but homosexuality is. The Old Testament is still true, and men lying with men and women with women is a no-no to be found in the New Testament. This writer will certainly not buy this publisher’s books.

    • peteykins

      OK, so you are specifically quoting Leviticus. Do you follow all the other proscriptions listed in Leviticus, or just the anti-gay stuff?

      • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

        Probably just the “abominations” which are worthy of death. I realize that I don’t follow all of the dietary laws, because I love bacon too much, but I still try to stay on the right side of the mortal sins. Primarily because Paul wrote to the Corinthians in his first letter that it is not necessary for someone to be circumcised (i.e., become Jewish) before they can become Christian. This also means that most of the requirements not worthy of death are also “optional” for Christians. He reiterates this point in his letter to the Corinthians as well, when he mentions that men who have sex with men will not see Heaven, however there are men among them that were guilty of that sin before, but are no longer, due to their belief in Jesus, and by this belief, they are also saved.

        Which means that there were people who were “gay” back then, who changed their minds and got into more mature relationships, with actual women.

        • peteykins

          So, basically, the “salad bar” approach. Gotcha.

          • Memphis Viking

            The usual argument used by people who don’t understand the difference between Old and New Testament against those who do.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            It’s interesting — it seems like they think that Christianity is like Islam — and what I find even more funny is that left-leaning gay activists (Someone I saw on here called them “Al-Gayda”, and I decided to steal that :P ) are also left-leaning pro-islamist activists as well, which is interesting, as those two groups don’t actually like each other much.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            Try reading past the first sentence — there is Biblical exegesis for it. Also, if this is the first time you’ve seen the word “exegesis”, maybe this debate is above your knowledge level. It’s ok to admit it; there’s nothing wrong with it — it just needs a little more study than you’re willing to give.

            It doesn’t mean, necessarily, that you’re wrong. But it definitely means I’m not wrong.

          • Tom

            There are people who do an entire thesis on this topic, and they will still disagree with you.

  • solly7

    Some posters seem to think that civil things should trump spiritual matters. In the civil area, what if the photographer or baker were approached to do a job for a child molester, murderer or some other abhorrent action? By your reasoning, they should be forced to provide their services in those cases, just as you maintain they should provided their services to homosexuals, a chosen lifestyle that is found equally abhorrent by a majority of people.

    Spiritually, since these are professing Christians who, by their own admission, follow the standards of God, through Jesus Christ, then they would naturally find homosexuality repugnant, as they would any other sinful action, according to the word of God. As Peter told the Pharisees & high priests in the Book of Acts, “When it comes down to following either man’s word or God’s, we must always follow God’s”. You see, we will be with God for all eternity, when we come to Him through Jeśus Christ. He will judge you & me by His rules, not society’s.

  • http://www.folkthewar.blogspot.com/ Sue Jeffers

    what a fascinating display of altemeyer’s theories.

  • Randell A. Klingsmith Jr.

    Read this, and tell me that you don’t know someone who has violated one or more of these “laws.” Judge not, lest you be judged…..hypocrites.

    Leviticus 19

    New International Version (NIV)

    Various Laws

    19 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Speak to the entire assembly of Israel and say to them: ‘Be holy because I, the Lord your God, am holy.

    3 “‘Each of you must respect your mother and father, and you must observe my Sabbaths. I am theLord your God.

    4 “‘Do not turn to idols or make metal gods for yourselves. I am the Lord your God.

    5 “‘When you sacrifice a fellowship offering to the Lord, sacrifice it in such a way that it will be accepted on your behalf. 6 It shall be eaten on the day you sacrifice it or on the next day; anything left over until the third day must be burned up. 7 If any of it is eaten on the third day, it is impure and will not be accepted. 8 Whoever eats it will be held responsible because they have desecrated what is holy to the Lord; they must be cut off from their people.

    9 “‘When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. 10 Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner. I am the Lord your God.

    11 “‘Do not steal.

    “‘Do not lie.

    “‘Do not deceive one another.

    12 “‘Do not swear falsely by my name and so profane the name of your God. I am the Lord.

    13 “‘Do not defraud or rob your neighbor.

    “‘Do not hold back the wages of a hired worker overnight.

    14 “‘Do not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block in front of the blind, but fear your God. I am theLord.

    15 “‘Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.

    16 “‘Do not go about spreading slander among your people.

    “‘Do not do anything that endangers your neighbor’s life. I am the Lord.

    17 “‘Do not hate a fellow Israelite in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in their guilt.

    18 “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighboras yourself. I am the Lord.

    19 “‘Keep my decrees.

    “‘Do not mate different kinds of animals.

    “‘Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed.

    “‘Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.

    20 “‘If a man sleeps with a female slave who is promised to another man but who has not been ransomed or given her freedom, there must be due punishment.[a] Yet they are not to be put to death, because she had not been freed. 21 The man, however, must bring a ram to the entrance to the tent of meeting for a guilt offering to the Lord. 22 With the ram of the guilt offering the priest is to make atonement for him before the Lord for the sin he has committed, and his sin will be forgiven.

    23 “‘When you enter the land and plant any kind of fruit tree, regard its fruit as forbidden.[b] For three years you are to consider it forbidden[c]; it must not be eaten. 24 In the fourth year all its fruit will be holy, an offering of praise to the Lord. 25 But in the fifth year you may eat its fruit. In this way your harvest will be increased. I am the Lord your God.

    26 “‘Do not eat any meat with the blood still in it.

    “‘Do not practice divination or seek omens.

    27 “‘Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.

    28 “‘Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the Lord.

    29 “‘Do not degrade your daughter by making her a prostitute, or the land will turn to prostitution and be filled with wickedness.

    30 “‘Observe my Sabbaths and have reverence for my sanctuary. I am the Lord.

    31 “‘Do not turn to mediums or seek out spiritists, for you will be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God.

    32 “‘Stand up in the presence of the aged, show respect for the elderly and revere your God. I am theLord.

    33 “‘When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. 34 The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.

    35 “‘Do not use dishonest standards when measuring length, weight or quantity. 36 Use honest scalesand honest weights, an honest ephah[d] and an honest hin.[e] I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt.

    37 “‘Keep all my decrees and all my laws and follow them. I am the Lord.’”

    When will the hatred and judgement stop?

    • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

      The “Judge not lest ye be judged” is mistranslated into modern English. To find it’s true meaning, we need to stop the verse and melt away translations, and go into the original Greek. Fortunately, this is easy to do by picking almost any translation except the King James Version which has known errors, as evidenced by the number of people that insist that only the King James Version is the right one (don’t ask, it gets complicated).

      What it really means is not to judge people by a standard that you yourself won’t follow. Since I don’t act in a homosexual way, I am free to judge those that do.

      Also, the “Various Laws” that you cited there are the 10 commandments, which are usually considered a little more important than “various laws”. And most of the laws you have cited above are not considered “abominations”. You should check out Deuteronomy 20-22 if you want to misquote something like that. Or get ideas for your next party. Hint: Bring your daughter! (oh, wait…)

      • tomd

        “What it really means is not to judge people by a standard that you yourself won’t follow. Since I don’t act in a homosexual way, I am free to judge those that do.”

        Ahh, I see. So by your logic, as an Atheist I’m free to judge you Christians all I want. Good to know.

        • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

          Yes, but not for the reason you cited.

          If you are an atheist, then Christians are not “in your group”. What Paul was saying here (in the rest of the verse) is that Christians were not supposed to continue judging people who they have already expelled from their group — those who were outside their group. So in theory, Christians are not supposed to judge you against the standards of Christianity, because your standard of morality is different (or, if you are an atheist, non-existent).

          Does this mean that Christians can’t, for example, act as a judge in a court of law? No – that’s someone doing their job, and comparing your actions against the laws of the land.

          Does this mean you can’t judge a Christian, since Christians are outside your group? No – because you have (presumably) not taken on the rule to not judge people outside your group (I apologize for the double-negative here, but it’s the only way to convey this).

          Remember, Judging in this case is telling people that they have done wrong, in an effort to help them maintain their closeness to Jesus. Since you have no closeness to Jesus, as an atheist, it is a wasted effort to try to tell you you’ve done wrong against (for example) my morality, because you don’t share my morality. I can try to tell you, for example, that being gay is statistically likely to result in your earlier death than being straight, based on the CDC numbers, but it is a complete waste of time and effort for me to tell you not to be gay because Jesus doesn’t want it — it just frustrates both of us, and it is time better spent helping those who would appreciate it.

          • QuadGMoto

            In order to call people to repentance, it is necessary to point out that there is a reason why repentance is needed.

            “I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”
            — Luke 5:32

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            That is true — witnessing to people is not the same as judging them, though. Too many people look at those two as equivalents.

    • windywillows357

      Randell, do you know the difference between OT Law and NT Grace?
      Now for your ‘judge not’ mistake, which most non-Christians make.
      Matthew 7:1-2 is talking about using Godly judgement vs worldly judgement.
      Jesus is not teaching that we are to abandon our critical faculty or discernments. Would you let a drunk drive your kids to school? Or a child molester baby sit your children? If not, WHY? Are you not judging?

  • tomd

    “Is the Christian world about to suffer through another World Vision moment?”

    If I recall, it was starving children in Africa that suffered from the World Vision fiasco, not Christians. It’s also false concern, since the point of this article is to *create* another “World Vision moment”.

  • sagecreek

    The only “threat” those employees are under is being laughed out of the book club, their gym, their entire social circle. That’s about it.

    • David

      you mean no one has ever been fired for expressing their opinions against the activist LGBT dogma? or for disclosing something that the company deems “secret”?

      • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

        Apparently, Sage is not familiar with Mozilla. It’s ok, Sage — you’re definitely too busy to keep up on the news. Maybe your time would be more suitably spent in a different forum?

  • LouiseCA

    This is very distressing. Do these publishers think they can’t be boycotted? I had a rep from a certain publisher be rude to me at a convention. I never forgot it. When I opened my business, I never made a purchase from that company, ever.
    Are Christian publishers, schools and other businesses being infiltrated with atheists and homosexuals? Or do they think all Christians just want their ears tickled?

  • Jeff Noncent

    Bible prophecy is being fulfill right in front of our eyes

    • sagecreek

      Grammar is being abuse right in front of our eyes.

      • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

        Ah, the last bastion of a desperate progressive — the grammar / spelling check. Jeff, this is what victory looks like — congratulations :)

      • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

        BTW: Add a “d” to the end of “abuse”, and you’ll be just a little more correct :-P

        • sagecreek

          Wow, that joke just soared right over your head, didn’t it, “Dr.”?

  • selahgreene

    Convergent Publishing. That’s cute. As in ‘all the views of the world converging under the ‘Brand’ of Jesus for the Christian “consumer.”‘ And these Christian consumers are “absolutely passionate about what theologian Brian McLaren has called, “the sacred endeavor of loving God.’” I don’t think so. I don’t believe they have a clue as to what loving God is. They ignore the definition that the Savior Himself gave us: “If you love Me, obey My commandments.” And He made His commandments even tougher, stricter, and more stringent that the originals (in Matthew 5).

    Brian McLaren is as much ‘theologian’ as Lucifer was, teaching pop theology “if it feels good, do it in the name of Jesus;” denying the truth of the Bible; promoting another gospel. Jesus taught many times that we are to live in the spirit, to deny the flesh, to deny the carnal. He clearly and forcefully condemned all fornicators to the Lake of Fire, and fornicators are those engaging in any and all sex outside of the marriage between a man and a woman (Jesus’ definition). “But people who are cowardly, unfaithful, detestable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars will find themselves in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur.” Rev 21:8. Jeff (below) is very correct. The fulfillment of the prophecies of the lawless ones, and the mockers of the last days is coming about.

    • sagecreek

      Well, that wasn’t Jesus. That was the men who supervised the multiple transcriptions and translations of the Bible. Hard to distinguish for some folks, no doubt.

      And you know what’s worse than fornication? Being ugly to your neighbors. Now that one is pretty clear.

      • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

        Absolutely — that’s why Jesus, upon seeing the money changers in the temple, engaged in a calm, rational debate about why it’s a bad idea to dishonor G-d’s house.

        Oh, wait, he upended their tables, and cursed them. Sounds like he may have been a little ugly to them. Why was it OK for him to do that? Because they were doing wrong, and he wanted it to stop.

        • sagecreek

          Did you just compare yourself to Jesus? That’s sad, bro.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            I think I just debunked the Buddha-like image of Jesus’ teachings that people who don’t understand Christianity like to bring up. And, apparently, it makes you uncomfortable that someone with actual Biblical knowledge is here to dispel your misconceptions.

            Can I get an Ohmmmmm-Men? :)

  • Pingback: SO GAY: Christian Publisher Plans Pro-’Gay’ Book, Employees ‘Under Threat’ | What Did You Say?

  • Dannyboy

    If two men who love each other can get married, should three be able to ? What do homosexuals say about that? I think they are biased against polyamory. Gee, imagine that, gay bigots.

    • sagecreek

      False equivalency for $200, Alex.

      • David

        not so much, polyamory has wide support in sections of the LGBT communities, including the MCC denomination. I wouldn’t call it a slippery slope, that term annoys me, but if the laws can be changed to allow legal protections for same sex unions what justification is there to limit it to two?

        • thisoldspouse

          Why does the concept of “slippery slope” annoy you, when the idea is relevant? Either a) you don’t know what that term means, or b) for politic’s sake, you want to avoid its implications.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            I’ve had this issue with the concept that the slippery slope is indeed a fallacy, just because an appeal to authority claims that it is a fallacy. I believe that the reason that “slippery slope” was added to the acceptable list of fallacies by some of the more progressive minds in Education and Debate is to make it unthinkable that someone may catch on to the Progressive (large, slow change) idea in an attempt to head it off and stop it.

            Progressives do not want us to realize their end goals, as that would prevent them from going down a slow, progressive path. So it’s very convenient that the one thing that would stop progressivism from reaching its goals (us recognizing what those goals are, and debating against those goals instead of each incremental step), is considered by progressives to be a fallacy — a logical error.

            In fact, I find it Orwellian on its face that we are so strongly discouraged from thinking ahead to where the progressives have thought, and debating their ends, instead of their means.

          • QuadGMoto

            There really are two kinds of “slippery slopes”.

            One is the fallacious idea that because X happened, then Y must happen when it isn’t necessarily the case. For example, if you take the cover off that saw, you will be cut by it. The accident does not necessarily result from the act, even though there is a clear relationship between the two.

            The second is a logical slippery slope which is not a fallacy. In this form, the reasoning that justifies X also justifies Y.

            In this case, the slippery slope is the second form. The justification for making same-sex marriage legal is “love”. Polyamorous marriages can also be justified in exactly the same way: “love”. Therefore, logically, if the justification for same sex marriage is accepted, then the exact same justification for polyamory means that it also must be accepted.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            Agreed — also, there is no logical reasoning for gay marriage that could not also be applied to same-sex couples that are also siblings (two brothers, or two sisters) — it’s interesting to watch gay activists squirm when you ask them to show you why it’s wrong to let two brothers get married.

          • QuadGMoto

            A couple of days ago I was debating a guy who kept falling back on the reasoning that Jesus didn’t explicitly address homosexuality, therefore it was okay. When I pointed out that he didn’t explicitly address beastiality either, the squirming really commenced.

          • David

            it’s overused. One could just as easily say it was the beginning of a slippery slope when the gov’t first got involved in the marriage business. It then gave them the power to interfere with religious practices like with the Mormons and polygamy. Civil marriage is simply a legal contract. How the church handles marriage is separate and should remain so. Though what if some cult in the US tried to institute child marriage like some Muslim countries allow. Sorry I wandered from the original question. I just don’t like the term, personal issue :)

          • thisoldspouse

            But, when Christians insist on practicing their convictions unopposed, and protect by religious freedom laws, you are the first to scream “talibangical!! Theocracy!!! It’s heading that way!!!”

            So, please spare us with the dismissive language concerning slippery slopes. You use it incessantly.

          • David

            not sure who you’re talking to since I’ve done none of those things.

    • tomd

      Well, since polygamy is biblical, you can probably make a case for polyamory too.

      • QuadGMoto

        There is a significant difference between describing and condoning. The Bible describes a multitude of sinful acts, including murder. I doubt you would consider those descriptions to be the Bible saying that they are okay.

        The Bible never says such marriages are acceptable to God any more than divorce was (permitted because humans are knuckheads, er, hard hearted). But there are multiple places where the Bible defines (teaches) that marriage is one man/one woman/for life.

        • tomd

          This is hard to support. There are many happy polygamists in the OT whom God clearly endorses and sets up as role models. If He disapproves, He didn’t seem to make a big deal about it in the OT at least.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            I’m going to have to agree with you here, Tom – it’s not only supported, but there were rules relating to how to handle multiple wives. For example, if the first wife you marry bears you a son, but you dislike her, and your more favored wife bears you a son afterwards, you are still required to treat your firstborn son as your firstborn (bigger inheritance, etc.), even if you don’t like his mom much.

          • QuadGMoto

            As with the rules governing slavery, this was a case of God limiting the damage done by human hard heartedness, not an indication of God’s full design.

          • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

            True — as with the full context of “an eye for an eye” — the reasoning behind that was to limit the retribution so that it wouldn’t be escalation.

          • QuadGMoto

            All of the Biblical heroes had flaws. They were human. They sinned. But it was not their works that made them heroes of the Bible, it was that they believed God:

            For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:

            “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
            and whose sins are covered;
            blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”
            — Romans 4:2–8

            Remember:

            He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”
            — Matthew 19:4–9

            “Hardness of heart”, knuckleheads. God puts up with and forgives sin despite our stupidity if we are willing and eager to follow Him. That does not mean it is okay to do things that are contrary to God’s teaching/command. There are still consequences. For example:

            Now King Solomon loved many foreign women, along with the daughter of Pharaoh: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, from the nations concerning which the LORD had said to the people of Israel, “You shall not enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you, for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods.” Solomon clung to these in love. He had 700 wives, who were princesses, and 300 concubines. And his wives turned away his heart. For when Solomon was old his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not wholly true to the LORD his God, as was the heart of David his father. For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. So Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the LORD and did not wholly follow the LORD, as David his father had done. Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem. And so he did for all his foreign wives, who made offerings and sacrificed to their gods.

            And the LORD was angry with Solomon, because his heart had turned away from the LORD, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods. But he did not keep what the LORD commanded. Therefore the LORD said to Solomon, “Since this has been your practice and you have not kept my covenant and my statutes that I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you and will give it to your servant.
            — 1 Kings 11:1–11

        • portertx

          Yet God blessed them abundantly….

    • Kathy Q

      some day you will probably see that 3 people will have some form of legal arrangement. there are a few shows on TV lately with men who have more then 1 wife. i think this one show, the guy has 5 wives which i can’t imagine but apparently he can handle 5 nagging women. :)

      • portertx

        Biblically Polygamy is supported. GOD condoned it.. I mean he even condoned and blessed David had multiple wives and also had live-in concubines (whores).

        • http://www.norad.mil/ Dr_Falken

          As did Solomon — had 200 wives and 700 concubines. He was considered to be the wisest of the kings, but anyone who has put 20 or more women together on, say, the show Survivor knows that is a Bad Idea™.

          To be fair, the word “whore” is not really applicable to a concubine — “slave” would be more accurate, because a concubine was usually a woman who was “paid” to the Jewish tribes as a tribute so that they wouldn’t invade/destroy/rain down hellfire upon neighboring tribes. “Whore” implies that the woman had some say in it, and is doing it willingly, and personally benefits from it — most concubines were conscripted into “Service” by their home countries.

          This is also why there was a huge admonition about marrying between neighboring nations that had completely different laws / morality — there was a chance that the Jewish people would pick up some of the bad habits of the neighboring communities. Some of the practices of neighboring lands are explicitly forbidden in the Bible as well (such as sacrificing your firstborn to Moloch in exchange for prosperity).

    • portertx

      Is that you really desire? – I mean you people always go to the slippery slope argument – ….wait for it…..soon someone will thrown in marrying their dog too…

  • Pingback: Anonymous

  • ARNOLD CARL TAPP

    >>> THIS FOOL VINES IS DEFINITELY NOT A CHRISTIAN . THERE ARE MANY SCRIPTURES IN THE WORD OF GOD WHICH CONDEMN HOMOSEXUALITY .
    A MINISTER WHO APPROVES HOMOSEXUALITY OR PERFORMS A MARRIAGE OF SAME SEX COUPLES IS NOT A CHRISTIAN AND IS JUST AS GUILTY AS THE HOMOSEXUALS HIMSELF . WHO WOULD YOU CHOOSE TO BELIEVE ————–MICHAEL VINES OR THE LORD GOD JEHOVAH ???

    • David

      you call him a fool yet type in all caps. seems to me the same word applies.

      • True Opine

        God’s Word declares that LGBTs will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God (period).

    • sagecreek

      Pretty sure you don’t get to decide who is Christian and who is not. You don’t have that kind of power.

      • True Opine

        The Word of God has that power and it clearly and unequivocally states that homosexuals or (LGBTs) will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God (period).

  • Jim Huston

    I refer Multnomah and all nominally Christian homosexual apologists to Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 for Mosaic Law’s position on homosexuality; to Luke 16:17 for Jesus’s position in regard to the permanence of Mosaic Law (also to John 8:7 for His position on the punishment decreed in Leviticus 20:13); and to Romans 1:27 for the basis of the Christian position, which reflects Mosaic Law, on homosexuality.

    None of this means that Christians should reject or vilify homosexuals. Although Scripture makes it clear that the commission of homosexual acts is a sin, it also makes it clear that we are all sinners. Jesus taught us not to judge others, for just that reason (Matthew 7:1-2, Luke 6:37, John 8:7), and also taught that the Lord will forgive ALL sinners except those who blaspheme the Holy Spirit (Mark 3:28-29); He intentionally ministered to sinners, as those most in need of Him. We are enjoined to follow His teaching and His example.

  • Bob G.

    Christianity from its origin has been and is “divergent” to the world’s philosophy. This name “Convergent” says it all: sellout!!

    • Ombudsman

      Quite right. And long before Christianity existed, God went to great lengths to call the people of Israel out from the world, to set them apart, to keep them a distinct nation and line of descendants, to cultivate a “divergent” culture characterized by circumcision of every male, a diet distinguishing between clean and unclean animals, an exacting standard of housekeeping, and a fence confining the pool from which they could marry a mate. God’s true children have always diverged from the mainstream consensus.

  • Vicky Fisher

    Chick tracks LOL. Ray you need to update your reading material. A little less propaganda and more substance. A good start Dr. Thomas Howard .
    Have a blessed Easter Ray. :)

  • Pingback: » Multnomah Books Attacked Over Pro-Gay Title In Related Imprint Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion

  • Barbara

    They’ve been publishing questionable stuff (not just biblically orthodox) for years under the Multnomah brand, so it’s really no surprise that they wouldn’t have eyes to see clearly on this either.

  • True Opine

    This is an abomination. The Bible is very clear about sexual perversion.

  • True Opine

    Christians, we need to get out of the Lazy Boy and vote for the candidate that supports godly moral values and that is a main contender in the political scene. If not, the liberals will continue to advance with their agenda. Forget small independent parties, they are not going anywhere. We need to vote for a real possibility of representation. It’s always a Republican or a Democrat. I would completely encourage a Republican over a Democrat any day. Democrats favor: GAYS, ABORTION, EUTHANASIA, GOVERNMENT DEPENDENT SOCIETIES (destroys free market and any chance of true prosperity) think of mother Russia and Putin when you think Democrats.

EmailTitle2

Sign up for BarbWire alerts!