User Profile: Alex

Alex

Member Since: May 11, 2011

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [3] May 20, 2015 at 5:52pm

    I understand the pleas to have a spirit of forgiveness for this pastor. We all should want the same mercy, and that’s good. He has it from me. Even so, I hope I don’t hear anybody get indignant about the pile on that is happening. While these matters are best handled discretely, the truth is, he set himself up for this internet feeding frenzy. For now, he’ll have to deal with it himself. You should probably let the sharks disperse before you come to his aid.

    As a Mormon observer who is as capable of sin as anyone else, may I offer a bit of advice to Evangelicals on handling this, for what it’s worth. Before I do, I want to be clear that I don’t think you are hypocrites just because he is. My advice is this: if you’re going to call homosexual activity a serious offense in your public professions, please don’t trivialize violations of this standard with glib and insulting defenses like, “We’re all sinners.” Naturally we’re all sinners, but when your fiery sermons call out homosexuality by name, and tell them they’re going to hell if they don’t repent, you had better be serious about it. If, in response to this Pastor’s indiscretions, you instead act as if his forgiveness is already secured, or as if his repentance won’t require him to tread a thorny path, beset by blood, sweat, and tears, then you cheapen the mercy of Christ. You make Evangelical Christianity into a good-old-boy’s club that isn’t serious about transformation. I’m sure you don’t intend it that way.

    Responses (1) +
  • May 20, 2015 at 10:33am

    I’m a Cub Scout leader, and I can tell you right now I won’t comply. I was at a Boy Scout Camporee last month with my son and we did the water balloon slingshot. It was a blast. As a Cub Scout leader I wasn’t planning on having a water gun fight this summer, but now I definitely will. What are they going to do? Throw me out?

  • [2] May 19, 2015 at 4:32pm

    There’s no guarantee that a change in doctrine or policy will either help or hurt church attendance. Making decisions based upon those kind of calculations is unwise, misleading, and very often fraught with surprises. You need to ask yourself who you intend to follow, with a realization that each man receives wages of him whom he lists to obey.

    If you want to be popular, and fear that you will be “out of touch” if you don’t change your tune, remember that there is no guarantee that having done so, you will still be popular. I think Presbyterian Church USA believed the flattering words of those who told them that if they changed their tune on gay marriage all the “more-open-minded-than-thou” would come flocking. We can see now how that worked out.

  • [2] May 18, 2015 at 3:01pm

    Joel 2:28-29

    28 ¶And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:

    29 And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.

  • [6] May 18, 2015 at 12:49pm

    Where does it say that the gifts of the Spirit no longer exist?

  • [8] May 18, 2015 at 12:18pm

    We all have individual responsibility for the counsel we take from dreams. If you are uneasy about God appearing in a dream, that is ok. The dream was not for you. While I have had a dream that told me accurately of that which was to come, not all my dreams are equally meaningful. If you have a dream that does have meaning, you will know it.

    Responses (1) +
  • May 14, 2015 at 7:22pm

    808Patriot,

    I have given neither feminism nor pornography any power. I reject them, and am a man in spite of them. It’s not my problem, but I still have to live in a world that has ceded its power to feminists and pornographers.

  • May 14, 2015 at 6:41pm

    Spqr1,

    And this one:

    “The moment we face it frankly we are driven to the conclusion that the community has a right to put a price on the right to live in it … If people are fit to live, let them live under decent human conditions. If they are not fit to live, kill them in a decent human way.”

    …and…

    “The Nazi movement is in many respects one which has my warmest sympathy.”

    …and…

    “Stop being Jews and start being human beings.”

    …and…

    “Instead of exterminating the Jews, he (Hitler) should have said, I will tolerate Jews to any extent as long as no Jew marries a Jewess. That is how he could build up a strong, solid German people.”

    …and…

    “There is not a more interesting country in the world today to visit than Soviet Russia, and I find traveling there perfectly safe and pleasant…Tomorrow I leave this land of hope and return to our Western countries of despair.”

    …and…

    Headline of The New York Times, December 10, 1933: “Shaw Heaps Praise Upon the Dictators: While Parliaments Get Nowhere, He Says, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin Do Things”

  • May 14, 2015 at 6:32pm

    Spqr1,

    And this one:

    “I appeal to the chemists to discover a human gas that will kill instantly and painlessly. Deadly by all means, but humane not cruel.”

  • May 14, 2015 at 6:25pm

    Spqr1,

    I know who that Fabian Socialist, George Bernard Shaw, is and I am not impressed. He was in favor of eugenics. Should I be impressed with the following quote?:

    “You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there and say Sir, or Madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can’t justify your existence, if you’re not pulling your weight, and since you won’t, if you’re not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then, clearly, we cannot use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us and it can’t be of very much use to yourself. ”

    You can have your eugenicist George Bernard Shaw. His endorsement of a particular religion is pretty much meaningless to me.

  • May 14, 2015 at 5:15pm

    Why on earth should I be impressed with George Bernard Shaw?

    Responses (4) +
  • [2] May 13, 2015 at 4:42pm

    Grover_Standpipe,

    The two cases you cited are different in degree and severity, but not in principle. They are both forms of religious persecution. The whole point of standing up for those who have religious objections to baking a cake for a gay wedding, is to prevent things from getting to the point that there are shots to the head.

  • [2] May 13, 2015 at 2:02pm

    I want to say at the outset that I think Franklin Graham is right about the likely persecution that would flow from a Supreme Court decision to legalize gay marriage nationwide. That said, I think it is would be wise for us individually to scrutinize our personal understanding of what persecution is.

    While persecution is a very real phenomenon and is happening here and around the world, believers should be careful not to call things persecution that aren’t. Always keep it real. Those who cry wolf do real harm and insult to those who actually suffer the real thing. We should always strive to be modest and conservative in the estimation of our own “persecutedness”. There’s always going to be someone who’s had it worse, and there are so many that already have.

    Real persecution is not something you ever can choose, agitate for, or deliberately provoke. Moreover, if you’re keeping score, you’re probably not being persecuted. The genuinely persecuted have individual strength of character and fortitude that empower them to quietly and independently do what is right. Because of their independence and inner strength, they don’t require public acclaim and recognition. They would just as soon live peaceably and equitably with others’ differences. It is that independent moral agency that acts in obedience to principle or belief without public approval that intimidates the persecutor, and provokes his ire. It is something he can’t control, so he persecutes.

    Responses (2) +
  • [10] May 13, 2015 at 11:50am

    Feminism AND porn are problems that work in tandem against manhood.

  • [1] May 11, 2015 at 4:19pm

    Right on, Travis!

    Responses (1) +
  • May 11, 2015 at 3:43pm

    snooop1e,

    You have so eloquently laid out the fundamental problem with sola fide. Believing we cannot merit salvation on our own (which is true) is not the same thing as saying that our acts have nothing whatsoever to do with obtaining it.

  • [-1] May 11, 2015 at 3:16pm

    There is nothing controversial about the content of the statement on this sign, especially since it is in line with well-established Biblical precedent. Putting homosexual behavior on the same plane as eating shellfish is a relatively recent innovation, and is far more controversial. If you were speaking to Christians 50 years ago, 100 years ago, 1000 years ago, and 2000 years ago, you wouldn’t find them conflating homosexual relations with the lesser infractions of the Mosaic law.

    Granted, as a Mormon, I’m used to bucking tradition doctrinally, especially where I believe tradition to be wrong. That is your right as well. For example, I would tell you that the creeds are misleading, and in some cases flat out wrong, even though they’ve been believed by most Christians for a millennium and a half. There’s a lot of wiggle room in the record for debate on some subjects by believing people, but I have yet to hear a cogent believing argument against the sinful nature homosexual behavior from the Bible that doesn’t require the believer to throw out a lot of boiler plate doctrines with it. It’s really hard to misunderstand Paul on this.

    Having said that, I don’t think it is wise to call out homosexual behavior by name on a marquee. Adultery is just as serious, and I’m willing to bet that the marquee is not an equal opportunity offender there. If you want to be evenhanded, you should put the scripture itself on the marquee, which lists other sins as well.

    Responses (3) +
  • May 11, 2015 at 3:12pm

    There is nothing controversial about the content of the statement on this sign, especially since it is in line with well-established Biblical precedent. Putting homosexual behavior on the same plane as eating shellfish is a relatively recent innovation, and in reality is far more controversial. If you were speaking to Christians 50 years ago, 100 years ago, 1000 years ago, and 2000 years ago, you wouldn’t find them conflating homosexual relations with the lesser infractions of the Mosaic law.

    Granted, as a Mormon, I’m used to bucking tradition doctrinally, especially where I believe tradition to be wrong. That is your right as well. For example, I would tell you that the creeds are misleading, and in some cases flat out wrong, even though they’ve been believed by most Christians for a millennium and a half. There’s a lot of wiggle room in the record for debate on some subjects by believing people, but I have yet to hear a cogent believing argument against the sinful nature homosexual behavior from the Bible that doesn’t require the believer to throw out a lot of boiler plate doctrines with it. It’s really hard to misunderstand Paul on this.

    Having said that, I don’t think it is wise to call out homosexual behavior by name on a marquee. Adultery is just as serious, and I’m willing to bet that the marquee is not an equal opportunity offender there. If you want to be evenhanded, you should put the scripture itself on the marquee, which lists other sins as well.

  • [-4] May 11, 2015 at 2:11pm

    Why on earth then do you conflate evangelicals and ISIS then, when you know darn well they are not alike? Why the smear?

  • [-1] May 11, 2015 at 11:54am

    As someone who has been told personally that I’m going to hell if I continue to belong to a cult (I’m a Mormon’s Mormon, and most evangelicals think I am going there), I think I can speak on this subject from personal experience. I know what it’s like to be told you’re going to hell. Not once has any evangelical whose warned me of the infernal regions ever threatened my life on account of it. EVER. EVER. EVER. To put it mildly, when you accuse evangelicals of being no different than ISIS, unless you can put forward a systemized plan to eradicate homosexuals, then you are a bald faced liar.

    Responses (1) +
123 To page: Go
Restoring Love