A Southern Seminary Professor's Quote About Music Ministers Should Be Cause for His Removal?
I received two emails yesterday regarding a Southern Seminary professor's statement to Southern Baptist young people studying for ministry. During class the professor said to the students:
"If you find a music pastor that isn't fat or feminine... You better hire him!"
The professor's statement was publicly posted on a student's twitter account and facebook page--a student who was in the classroom and heard the remark himself. The Southern Seminary student did not identify the professor, but the accuracy of his story has been confirmed by others.
The kind of attitude displayed by the professor is unconscionable. When I send my son to seminary to study to become a pastor, or when I recommend a seminary education to church members looking to enter full-time ministry, I want to be able to recommend a place where I know they will receive a first-class education within a first-rate environment. The above stereotypical remark, which borders on crudeness, is sadly the mark of ivory tower elitism and is devoid of any manifestation of the Spirit of God.
The administration of Southern would do well to make a strong statement against such remarks in the classroom, even if it was made in jest, and either discipline or terminate the professor who is being paid with Cooperative Program funds. Southwestern Seminary is below 1,000 seminarians for the first time since the early 20th Century, and if this kind of spirit is not nipped in the bud at Southern, the mother SBC seminary will not be far behind SWBTS in declining enrollment. If the professor is terminated, I would suggest Southern hire Dr. Sheri Klouda. At least Hebrew will be taught our seminarians instead of crude English.
83 comments:
While I'd disagree with lots of things about the comment made, I'm also going to disagree with you.
If we're going to claim to cherish academic freedom, that means a professor's viewpoint, even on a sensitive issue like staff personnel policies, should be allowed to be wrong. This should be challenging our students to go back to Scripture and find the truth for themselves.
After all, seminaries are where we train future ministers how to understand Biblical languages, theological ideas, and Church history so that they can take the Word of God, guided by the Holy Spirit of God, and understand truth themselves, and strengthen the church they serve to do those 3 things. Not where they learn to blindly parrot and mimic their professors.
Right? Isn't that what seminary is for?
I see your point, and it's that this is not how one should teach or prepare students. Unless the context of the comment shows otherwise, it's poor behavior.
I would wonder, honestly, though, if we can ever get over firing people and develop other methods of correction? And, yes, I know that this is how it's been done for at least 30 years. I just think there's got to be a better way than depriving people of their careers and livelihoods over single remarks, even when those remarks betray bad attitudes.
Of course, terminating someone over their born biological gender doesn't make much sense either.
John
In a few mega's I know that there were strict unwritten rules about who could appear on stage.
No fat chicks were allowed even if they had operatic training and/or beautiful voices.
One choir director was told he had to lose 40 lbs before he could lead worship.
Such deep spirituality in the Body of Christ. Now, I know they are learning it in seminary..er cemetary, I should say.
On another note: Anyone seen this:
http://www.baptistlife.com/forums.htm
Then go and take a look at comments and pay special attention to Mrs. Oswalts.
Priceless!
john said "If we're going to claim to cherish academic freedom, that means a professor's viewpoint, even on a sensitive issue like staff personnel policies, should be allowed to be wrong. "
There is none, nada, zero, zilch, academic freedom in any SBC institution, not the IMB, the NAMB, the SEMINARIES.
UnLESS, they are in total goose step with the all powerful leaders who dictate from on high in SBC life.
OH, I agree the prof should be removed. However, I saw and heard a lot worse when I was at seminary. No one who was boot lick, goose stepping the right was was removed.
Darrell...
Let's just say I am well aware that reality and my comment don't even get close enough to wave.
John
Dude, really? I mean let the comment go. I'm not sure I see the problem, Wade, with the guy speaking in jest about the weight problem of many of our SBC ministers. His comment (other than the effeminate part) reminds me of a quip from Ed Stetzer, something like, "Hey, you know why I go to the SBC? So I can feel thin." It's a pretty harmless thing to say in jest, in my opinion.
Regarding the comment about effeminate worship leaders...well, yeah, it's pretty repulsive when a guy sounds like a twinkie leading the congregation in worship.
John H.
"Terminating someone over their born biological gender doesn't make much sense either."
I agree.
Much of what I have written in this post is tongue in cheek, but after rereading the post, I see it doesn't come through as clearly as I would like. I went back, after reading your comment, and added a question mark in the title.
I would agree that the professor should not be fired--just as Sheri Klouda should not have been fired.
Thanks for clarifying that much of what you wrote was tongue in cheek. You're right, Ms. Klouda shouldn't have been fired. Neither should Dr. Bullock (Sp) from SWBTS. I enjoyed her church history classes.
James,
Glad the clarification helped!
"well, yeah, it's pretty repulsive when a guy sounds like a twinkie leading the congregation in worship."
So... it appears that one has to look a certain way, sound a certain way, come across a certain way in order for God to use them publicly.
I cannot fathom how anyone who doesn't fit your mold could possibly feel welcome in this kind of christian community.
As with the professor, you obviously have no idea how prejudicial, and just plain mean your comment is.
Elastigirl,
Please forgive any offense I caused you.
My only point was in responding to what I didn't realize was intended by Wade as tongue in cheek.
An overweight bald preacher...James
My question is, how does one define femininity (or "twinkie-ness," as a previous commentor put it)? What standards are applicable? If God gives a man a high tenor speaking & singing voice rather than a deep baritone, does that count? Or if he can't grow a decent beard? If he wears ties that have a paisley pattern instead of bold stripes, is that feminine? Maybe the standard ought to be whether he enjoys chess more than football, or perhaps if he is a vegan instead of a red meat-eating manly man.
The professor's statement reveals a level of shallowness and superficiality that is absolutely mind-boggling.
I spent four years as a student at Samford University, majoring in religion, 3& 1/2 years at Beeson Divinity School and 2 years at Duke Divinity School. Never did I hear a remark like that.
It makes you wonder if this is an isolated incident or a recurring theme.
Not saying you are wrong but just would like to know your source about SWBTS's enrollment.
Amy
Amy,
From two people who are in the know, but the public will likely never see the actual full-time seminary enrollment figure because it is publicly blended with part-time, college and women's homemaker degree numbers like chocolate pieces in cookie dough. The separate stand-alone number is sealed tighter than alaska king crab in vacuum packed zip-loc baggies stored in grandpa's Texas freezer during the middle of summer.
Honestly, why not hire an effeminate person?
Is it a SIN?
Chances are that the person was raised on bad food loaded with chemicals like estrogens that cause changes in a male testosterone pattern.
So go ahead and hire the effeminate man, and put him on a healthy diet.
That's Christian. Very Christian.
Somebody who was 'marginalized' because they looked 'different' gets a job, and then the badly-fed human being gets sound nutritional advice, and nobody is made fun of, or laughed at,
and everybody wins.
:)
But, James, it's rather plain that by your comment you are admittedly repulsed by people who don't fit your mold of what is an acceptable set of traits for a human being to have. A very strong statement to be made so casually.
I'm not offended so much as would be the dignity of millions of men who don't qualify for your definition of manliness.
*****
There's a troubling fixation on "manliness" in large sectors of American christianity these days. I'm sure it instills a certain amount of fear in the male population who hear things like this. (Do I measure up? What about me do I need to cover up?)
While I was at a christian conference center this summer for a week, one of the staff prayed for a couple who were involved in missions in Mexico. In the prayer for the husband, the staff member thanked God for his "manliness". It was jarring to the listeners. The understanding is clearly that if a man does not fit this mold (whatever it is) for "manliness", then his own particular, unique "manliness" is not deemed worthy enough to even be thankful for. There's no reason to even thank God for him. No reason for the man to thank God for his own self. The logical conclusion is astonishingly hateful. Whereas the REAL truth of the matter is that he has been fearfully and wondrously made.
I was astonished that such a reputable non-denominational christian conference center would use this kind of christian pop-culture rhetoric, which is 100% divisive.
I'm astonished this kind of rhetoric is apparently alive and breeding free of conscience-check in christianity. Ashamed, really.
Wade,
If you can come up with the 2 illustrative phrases in your reply to Amy just for a blog, I've got to hear you teach sometime, preferably something you really enjoy.
More tightly sealed than....wow.
And thanks for adding the question mark. That does clarify, although I did think it was a bit out of character for you to call for someone's firing over comments.
John H
One last agreement, then I'll take my yes-man ways on to other tasks.
Dr. Klouda should not have been fired, even from my own point-of-view, which would call for some roles to be exclusively male or female. There's no grounds I can find to extend those roles into a seminary professor role, and the false hair-splitting to make it about which subject was just nonsense.
I do think we should have limits on how wide-ranging dissent within our seminaries (and colleges) should go, but those limits are very broad. (For example, I'd stand that all official faculty be Christians, even Baptists, but not expect that they all be Calvinist, not Calvinist, young-earth, old-earth, egalitarian, complementarian, etc.)
That is, if we want to claim our goal is to train people to function for themselves, dependent only on God and His Holy Word.
If we want everyone to bow to one of 6 locations, that's another story entirely. One which you can write me out of.
John H
John H.
You probably know me better than you think. :)
I don't want the professor fired. I want the professor to change his behavior in the classroom and think twice before he acts so incredibly foolish.
The firing aspect to this all is leftover effect from Sheri Klouda being terminated over gender. If we fire a professor because she's female and don't fire this professor who should be teaching the Bible but instead belittles music ministers by labeling SBC worship pastors fat and effiminate--then we should at least apologize to Hebrew professor Sheri Klouda and rehire her.
The problem here lay not in the professor's ample sense of humor. No one is denying the stereotype. The problem is, the SBC has committed (?) to spreading the love of Christ to a group of people in our world who deal with terrible struggles with unwanted temptations. Preying on the characteristics stereotypical of some, and others in the fine arts vocations is NOT the way to share the love of Christ--especially when most churches are shamefully ill-equipped to deal with homosexuality do to the bigotry of those "among" the flock charged with shepherding and caring.
That statement set the SBC back a few years. It is gross negligence and dereliction of duty. The professor should be censured and through repentance, apologize to his class and the SBC.
~K
Kevin said, "especially when most churches are shamefully ill-equipped to deal with homosexuality do to the bigotry of those "among" the flock charged with shepherding and caring."
How should we deal with homosexuality? Is it bigotry to preach that such behavior is sinful?
Hi JOHN,
you wrote this:
"How should we deal with homosexuality? Is it bigotry to preach that such behavior is sinful?"
I don't think that a Christian community can help homosexual individuals as long as they think these people are 'responsible' for their sexual orientation.
But there are Christian communities that condemn homosexual practice, but not those who have the 'tendency'.
In making that distinction, the door is then opened for providing a community family to support the individual who chooses to remain celibate, rather than act on their tendencies. In a community like this, the person becomes 'an individual' as accepted as anyone else who struggles and needs Our Lord's care.
So, I think it DEPENDS on how homosexuality is viewed by each Christian community as to whether they are ABLE to provide ministry to homosexual people. Can the community see the PERSON with a problem (?)
or do they only see a SIN instead of the struggling human being (?)
Hi Christiane,
You are consistently one of the nicest posters on the blogs I frequent. You are very considerate even in disagreement. Thank you.
As far as the homosexual thing I think you hit the nail on the head concerning the different takes Christians have on this subject. I personally believe that homosexuality is a behavior rather than an orientation. That's how I believe it is presented in the scripture. We can minister to people who experience temptation in any form, but I don't think temptation makes a person a homosexual.
"Chances are that the person was raised on bad food loaded with chemicals like estrogens that cause changes in a male testosterone pattern.
So go ahead and hire the effeminate man, and put him on a healthy diet."
W H A T ????!!!!!!!!!
SO thats why Adam Lambert is the way he is...dude can sing though!
da da da da da dude looks like a lady da da da ( in my best Steve Tyler voice)
Most professors are "subject area experts" but not trained as teachers, and many have no clue. The jist of instruction I got before graduating from teacher college: ". . . And, if nothing else, just try not to say anything stupid to your students!" But I guess it CAN be considered "academic freedom" to speak like an almost complete idiot in front of adults training for--and in some cases already serving in--vocational Christian ministry.
People pay MONEY to attend Southern Seminary? Really?? CP dollars actually are sent there by the SBC, with church messengers' approval?
WadeL
Whoooa! Stupid comment . . . yes. Cause for termination . . . well I am glad my church didn't turf me for some of the stupid things I said or did.
Jeff Straub
Oh top it, you guys know I'm thenthative!
Hi JOHN WYLIE,
Thank you for your very kind remarks, but the truth (the terrible truth) is that I am hopelessly inconsistent when it comes to 'nice'.
Am currently STILL in repentance for having practically called someone a witch on a blog last year. I know it was a sin to do it, as I may be responsible for some real damage, because the person seems to be worse now than before I did it.
And also am in repentance for arguing too stridently with the very kind David Miller over the doctrine ESS which I oppose big time.
I just got too far into the argument 'without consideration' for his deeply-held beliefs. He didn't deserve that at all,
least of all from someone like me.
The nuns would kill me if they ever found out I had treated anyone like that. :)
I think seminaries are important. But I also think seminaries mold our young men...and women...into the wrong molds. They mold them as man would have them molded instead of how God would have them molded.
Whatever happened to just letting the Holy Spirit lead. Does it really matter if someone is fat? Is God looking down at a fat music leader and saying, "Well, he does all right, but he's so fat!" I don't think so. If a man's heart is in the ministry, God will bless him whether he's fat, skinny, short, tall, and even as far as can't carry a tune in a bucket.
As teachers in anything (especially seminary) we should emulate Christ. He was not rude, he was not crude. He was patient and loving. He was straight and to the point.
That said, I think what he said was distasteful. But I also know that we have all...ALL...said things we later reflected on and probably wished we hadn't said. I think he should be reprimanded, but not necessarily hung out to dry.
~Kristi
North Carolina
Wade,
I appreciate the fact that you have strong convictions, but can you please lighten up? I can't stand to hang around with people who are so uptight and dull to sarcasm. That kind of attitude comes close to making you a postmodern Pharisee.
I'd appreciate, in the interest of pure freedom of speech, if you let this comment stand.
MM
"I can't stand to hang around with people who are so uptight and dull to sarcasm."
then why come here?
" That kind of attitude comes close to making you a postmodern Pharisee."
You did not think it was Pharisetical to make the judgemental comment the prof made?
"Regarding the comment about effeminate worship leaders...well, yeah, it's pretty repulsive when a guy sounds like a twinkie leading the congregation in worship."
Teddy Roosevelt had a high squeaky effiminate voice. And he went around constantly saying "DEEE-lighted"!
Yet, he charged up San Juan Hill and hunted big game in the Badlands.
Marvin Meriweather,
I not only don't understand your comment, I am so loose and carefree I have no desire to have you explain it.
:)
John, are you trying to say that homosexuality it a choice? That people just wake up one day and say "I think I am going to be gay. It sounds like a grand life AND it rally cheeses the religious people off- bonus!"
yeah......no. It is an inborn characteristic. Did you make the conscious decision to be straight?
Anon 12:14,
"John, are you trying to say that homosexuality it a choice?"
In light of the fact that I believe it's behavior and not an orientation, that's exactly what I'm saying, homosexuality is a choice. If it were simply an irresistible inborn characteristic, God would not condemn it in the Bible. People choose who they sleep with.
Characterizing homosexuality as an orientation has been the most successful p.r. campaign the gay lobby has ever pulled off, because they make people not responsible for their sin. Yes homosexual behavior is a choice, the same as fornication, lying, stealing, or pedophilia.
Has anyone even considered the fact that the professor made the comment in jest? I don't find his statement offensive at all. In fact, I tend to agree with it.
Of course he could have said "if you find a music pastor that isn't fat or feminine or GAY... You better hire him!" Since there are a lot of music pastors that fit all three of those that would be politically incorrect.
John....I am guessing that you do not know many gay people. Many homosexuals realize they are 'different' at a very young age.
I guarantee you that people do not choose to be gay for kicks and giggles. It is something that so many struggle with- even to the point of killing themselves over their struggles.
Sin can be inborn. Addiction has a genetic factor, just as an example.
This blog should be renamed "Tattletale" because that's about all that happens on here.
Without a doubt, signed comments by known commenters are far superior than anonymous chaff.
Signed (twice),
Wade Burleson
wwburleson@gmail.com
www.wadeburleson.com
Pastor, Emmanuel Baptist Church
2505 W. Garriott,
Enid, Oklahoma 73703
(580) 237-0602
Grinning and laughing. :)
Anon 10:21,
"John....I am guessing that you do not know many gay people. Many homosexuals realize they are 'different' at a very young age."
"I guarantee you that people do not choose to be gay for kicks and giggles."
I do know several homosexual or bisexual people. I have a cousin on my mother's side who has been out of the closet for 30 years. But again, I do not define a homosexual as someone who is tempted to commit homosexuality. No I believe it is an action, a behavior. It is to be dealt with like any other temptation to sin.
I recognize that people may not have a lot of control over who they are attracted to, but they do have control over who they sleep with. I don't believe same sex attraction is genetic, I believe it may have more to do with dysfunctional relationships with a parent (i.e. the lack of a father, etc...). But even then, a person chooses to engage in homosexual behavior.
Anon, I respectfully disagree with you, but I respect your view and I understand your point.
So in other words...
At the Southern Seminary, it's never ending because the fat lady in the horned-hat holding shield and spear is never allowed to sing her epic solo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_ain't_over_'til_the_fat_lady_sings
:)
signed, the occasionally weight-challenged, always feminine singer with Viking ancestry
We are all so hyper sensitive these days. Lighten up people! For cryin' out loud. I have heard worse and probably even said worse in my classes.
Last year when the leader of Iran stated that they had no homosexuals in Iran, it puzzled one particular redneck Southern Baptist deacon. "If they ain't got no homosexuals in the entire country, who leads the singin' in their churches?"
Sorry for the use of the term "redneck." I should use the pc term of "agro-american."
I remember the fundamentals taking professor's comments and demanding their removal because they were "Liberal." I even remember the great men of God that were Presidents of the Seminaries horribly treated because of lies and distorted half-truths. To a certain extent there's the thought that what's good for the goose is good for the gander, but really to is resorting to getting on a high horse and whining make us better than them?
I once had a college prof say, with a straight face and in all seriousness, "My sisters are conservative, but that is because they are uneducated."
Some here seem to think that it's hypersensitive to take offense at a prof's statement and even excuse it as a **possible** joke. But when you're in a class full of people who hang on the prof's every word, you feel the strong intimidation and know that it would be academic suicide to open your mouth to challenge even the most outrageous comments. Yet that prof has tremendous influence and many will adopt his or her biases without question.
Leaders, religious or secular, have to be held to a HIGHER standard. This isn't about sensitivity but influence.
Like I said yesterday; Oh top it you guys know I'm thenthative.
I have started a new blog to address this topic
www.nosissiehousecoatwearingmusicleaders.org
Wade,
I caught the humor in your response to me, but I was serious about you lightening up about this comment.
It appears that, often, you search for issues in order to wreak controvery. By stirring the proverbial pot for the sake of discussion, or by creating an issue out of a virtual non-issue, you engage in a form of gossip.
Gossip is sin. And I do understand that authentic discrimination against fat people or women is also sin, but an intentionally lighthearted remark can hardly be called discrimination. Sure, the remark can be and has been taken in a negative regard, but the gossip you have instigated is no more virtuous.
I do say this in sincere love, Brother Burleson.
MM
It's Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve! God took Adam's rib and made for Adam a woman not another man.And of every creature He did make them male and female. Therefore, does not creation tell us that God never intended for anyone to engage in homosexuality. Thus, man has to choose to act in this way. Just like with any other sin it is a choice. Life is about choices and your choices determine your character. It has been well said; Your character is the sum total of a lifetime choices added together.
"Yes homosexual behavior is a choice, the same as fornication, lying, stealing, or pedophilia."
I agree, John. The opposite is a huge lie being propagated in many Christian circles. But, would they agree that one is born with pedophilia..attracted to children... tendancies... so it is not their fault God made them that way?
"It appears that, often, you search for issues in order to wreak controvery. By stirring the proverbial pot for the sake of discussion, or by creating an issue out of a virtual non-issue, you engage in a form of gossip."
Marvin, It is a sin for you to say that. :o)
Pot>kettle>black
Lydia,
I agree 100 % with you on this. The pedophile argument is one that they definitely don't have an answer for, because if people are born homosexuals the same case can be made for pedophiles.
There are no Gay Genes there are just Gays in Jeans!
You all sound like a bunch of backwoods hicks with all your anti-gay rhetoric and postulating. God forbid that any gay person turn to you or your church for help. If being gay is the same as lying and stealing then you'd better get with it and start casting out the majority of your deacons and their wives.
I already have helped several homosexuals by giving them the light of the truth of the scriptures that their behavior is sin and they need to turn to Christ. Do you really think that soft pushing the issue is honest? Telling them "Oh you were just born that way, God understands" is a lie. Romans 1, 1 Cor. 6, 1 Tim 1 are very clear about God's view on the matter. No one's more "anti-gay" than God is.
"If [homosexuality] were simply an irresistible inborn characteristic, God would not condemn it in the Bible."
All sin is simply an inborn characteristic--regardless of which side of regeneration one happens to be.
~ Kevin (You may quote me on that)
You all sound like a bunch of backwoods hicks with all your anti-gay rhetoric and postulating. God forbid that any gay person turn to you or your church for help. If being gay is the same as lying and stealing then you'd better get with it and start casting out the majority of your deacons and their wives.
Wed Sep 22, 05:07:00 PM 2010
Anonymous, You might benefit from talking to some former homosexuals from Love Won Out or other ministries to get a perspective. Many were loved by Christians while in the lifestyle who ALSO told them the truth. It was the truth that changed their lives.
What you are suggesting is insulting to many of them. Their "choice" did change. Are you suggesting that now they are lying about their true "tendancy"?
Hi, I am RobinMichelle. My PW isn't working and I did not have time to bother with it earlier.
Sorry, I should have signed my comments. I will also try to tame my snarky side....
OK, now, While your sexual partner is a choice, your desire and fulfillment from that relationship is connected to attraction. I could chose to have a sexual relationship with a woman, but being 100% straight....I would not get satisfaction from it at all. I could choose a relationship with a man that I am not attracted to and the same thing.
Personally, I think that the way we deal with homosexuals is all wrong. Do we show people from scripture where gluttony is wrong? Compulsive lying? Gambling? etc?
We need to learn to love others the way Jesus loved others. Really study how he related to the sinners. He cared, He had compassion and He touched them on only the level He can. He did not 'show them verses from the Bible.' He reached out to them as people whom He loved.
This isn't to say we should wink and grin at sin, we need to relearn how we focus on it.
We also need to accept that other people have every right to live their lives the way they wish as long as they do not bring harm to others.
RE: pedophiles... it is well known that most were sexually abused themselves, and often chose a victim the same age they were when they were first abused. I also believe that there is something inborn that causes people to react to abuse that way. We do not fully understand the brain, psyche and nurture VS nature debate to know why some people react to trauma the way they do.
However, there is a HUGE difference between homosexuals and pedophiles.....one engages in consensual sex while the other does not. You can't compare the two.
~Robin
"Personally, I think that the way we deal with homosexuals is all wrong. Do we show people from scripture where gluttony is wrong? Compulsive lying? Gambling? etc? "
Absolutely. The scriptures are corrective by nature for all areas of life.
"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine."
(2 Timothy 4:2)
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"
(2 Timothy 3:16)
Personally I don't believe there is such a thing as a person who was gay and has now been made straight. Just ain't happening.
I often wonder if God puts people among us who are 'different' so that He can find out how we will help them . . . or maybe how we will hurt them more.
I have thought about this a lot.
John, then why all the screaming about homosexuality? I do not hear near as much squaking about other sin as I do about homosexuality. This is my issue! Why do we have such a sharp point focus on Homosexuality?
I fully agree that it is a sin that needs to be confronted....I also believe that we hyper-focus on some sin and completely ignore others. I ALSO think that passing up people in need when we have the means to help is sin.....no one talks about that. (we know we ought to help but we don't)
Oh and lookie here! My PW finally worked! :)
Christiane,
Jesus said that whatever you do to 'the least' is done to Him. -Matthew 25
We are also told that we may be entertaing Angels -Hebrews 13:2
Hi ROBIN MICHELLE,
you wrote: "We are also told that we may be entertaing Angels -Hebrews 13:2"
I know a lot about this. :)
My Down Syndrome son is able to look at homosexual people, at Islamic people, at people of all races, and people with many disabilities, and he doesn't look down on them and he doesn't judge them, and he doesn't discriminate against them.
So much love . . . so much love . .
http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=t_0K-gPlyb0&feature=fvw
" I ALSO think that passing up people in need when we have the means to help is sin.....no one talks about that. (we know we ought to help but we don't)"
I agree and included that in a sermon 3 weeks ago. If you'll go back and read the comments I was not the who first mentioned homosexuals. But the reason it comes to the forefront alot is probably because of the radical agenda of left wingers trying to force Christians to say it's ok. The subject is on the news every day. Acceptance of such sin is a sign that a nation has reached rock bottom.
Wade,
Hey! You’ve already thanked me once for Acts 21:20 vs. Acts 20:21, so I won’t mention it. :)
Let’s do some ‘Humming’…those zealous for the law, in 200 years, may have taken the words of Jesus, “Unless you…become like little children you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 18:3) [the smallest children are babies] “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved…” (Mark 16:16)
Bingo! Who will dispute what innocent babies believe? All babies need is baptizing to be saved. There is a Christian duty as Jesus said, “Let the children come to me and don’t prevent them…” (Matthew 19:14) Thus the theology of baptizing babies for salvation.
Sound crazy? Hey, I believe it’s not near as crazy as the theology for firing Sheri Klouda.
On the same side of the coin is:
“These people left our churches, but they never really belonged with us; otherwise they would have stayed with us. When they left, it proved that they did not belong with us.” (1 John 3:19)
Were these Christians not ‘zealous for the law”? In 200 years, did they keep the same beliefs and were named Anabaptist?
Noticed the Scripture named “us” three times. Does “us” ring a bell in the Conservative Resurgence? (Patterson told Dilday, “You’re conservative all right, but you’re not one of us”.)
Connect the dots and see that “us”, Klouda, Conservative Resurgence is all about power and control just as it was in the early church with those “zealous for the law” began to lord it over small churches as shown by J.M. Carroll’s Trail of Blood.
isn't homosexuality the only sin in the bible called un-natural?
Oops,
I put the comment above on the wrong post, but on the subject of homosexuals:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/09/23/georgia.pastor.allegations/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn
I hope someday that all this love and tolerance will be showed also to fundies, conservatives, the intolerant, the doctrinaire... people learn best by example, so when the self-righteous "tolerant" learn to practice what they preach, maybe those folks they despise so much would lighten up.
I know numerous Southern Baptist pastors and quite a few who work in denominational leadership who happen to be gay and they are on both sides of the aisle. Its not a choice since our sexual identity is determine by the time we are two years old so please quit saying they chose to be gay. The real issue is whether or not they are involved in their orientation.
I'm sorry but the whole orientation thing is a lie perpetrated by the gay rights lobby. The Bible says nothing about orientation, it presents homosexuality as a behavior. And if it's not a choice why is bisexuality so popular now among many high school students
If God calls something sin, it's sin. We have to "die to sin" and that means hating it and quickly repenting when we fall.
Do liars hate lying?
Do drunks hate their weakness for drink?
Do homosexuals hate their "orientation" as God does?
Do adulterers hate their lack of self-control?
If you don't hate what God calls a sin, you haven't died to it, and the church has a duty to confront anyone who won't give up any of those sins. And God won't accept any excuses, because if we don't love Him "more than these", we don't love Him.
The worst thing is to watch so many of you jump on the hate-gays bandwagon like it is the only sin in a Baptist church. Get out a mirror and look at yourselves.
The Bible says nothing about orientation, it presents homosexuality as a behavior. And if it's not a choice why is bisexuality so popular now among many high school students
Thu Sep 23, 09:09:00 AM 2010
True and good point about the popular choice today with the young.
But I think what saddens me is the lack of belief in the power of the Holy Spirit by some.
I heard from former homosexuals over and over who were saved about the power of the Holy Spirit that changed them totally.
Some even told me they wanted to stop giving their testimony because it made them sick to think back. God had so changed them they wanted to bury that sin forever and never think about it again. Some only give it because they want other homosexuals to know of the power of the Holy Spirit.
But what was even sadder for some of these Born Again saints were the "Christians" who gave them such a hard time about their new life in Christ. They wanted them to remain homosexuals who will always stuggle with their sin.
No one is saying that their new life came easy or that the sanctification was not painful. But the Holy Spirit changed them and we should rejoice that these saints are happily married with children they adore and serving others who remain in bondage.
Lydia,
The fact that I sin does not make my statement about Wade's sin any less true. My opinion may hold less water with you and many others, but the fact remains the same: Wade sins by looking for controversy and stirring the pot.
And just so you know, the reason I don't blast Wade's soteriology or his egalitarian beliefs is simply because he is open-minded and a brilliant thinker. I respect Wade. However, he sins by stirring the pot, as do I.
Bottom line.
I just thought he might want to consider that since he places high priority on integrity. So, Lydia, before responding, you may want to consider addressing the issue at hand. Do you agree or disagree that Wade is sinning by stirring the pot? He may want to chime in about his motives in exposing controversy. Does he need validation as a voice of Christian champions? Does he want recognition as the Sheriff of the Blogosphere? Or did he simply not consider that an honest desire for discussion would be harmful to other people who made innocent remarks?
MM
I remain convinced that it is the perception of 'homosexuals' that allows a Christian community the ability to serve them.
No orthodox Christian community recognizes homosexual 'practices' as permitted.
But among orthodox Christians, there are many who have embraced the concept that the homosexual person is 'disordered' in their orientation, and that it is not their choice to be this way.
That permits these orthodox Christian communities to embrace homosexual people completely 'as they are' without the judgment that they have 'chosen' their condition.
Once these individuals are embraced 'as they are' and surrounded by the community, they are helped in their chosen efforts to live a celibate life.
For those homosexual individuals who are being told it is 'their fault' and 'their sin' that they are 'the way they are',
the confusion must be terrible for them, if they truly believe that God has made them 'the way they are'.
There are two arguments as to how this affects young homosexual people.
Some say that telling them it is their 'choice' allows them the ability to think that they can change that, with the help of the Church.
On the other hand, there is documentation that, in letters written by young suicide victims, they have cried out to God, 'Why did you make me this way?'.
And having been told it is 'their choice', and believing they have no acceptance from the Church as they think 'God made them';
they opt out, as unable to cope in a life that is condemned by those around them, who appear unable to understand what they feel is true about themselves which they make evident in that cry to the Lord in their suicide notes:
'God, why did you make me this way?'
So there it is.
One idea: take a look at ALL types of ministries available now to homosexual Christian people. Take a look at how these approaches are working for these homosexual people AND for the communities of faith that take on the responsibility of ministering to them.
The thought arises that God watches US in our own reaction to those who are 'different',
and He knows the motivations of our own hearts in our responses to these 'others'.
It is in our responses to those who are 'different', that we see mirrored just how far along the
Way we have come, in our own Christian formation,
as individuals, and as Christian communities of faith.
"So, Lydia, before responding, you may want to consider addressing the issue at hand. Do you agree or disagree that Wade is sinning by stirring the pot? "
I don't expect you to understand, Marvin but here goes:
The pot is full of poison. What Wade (he is not the only one) does is expose the poison. This is going to infuriate those who blindly follow our leaders. They will call it gossip, hate, bitterness and accuse us of being arrogant, self appointed police,etc.
I have seen it first hand for many years when anything in leadership is DARED questioned. The level of arrogance in Christian leadership circles is ALARMING and many are following professional charlatans.
What concerns me more than anything is that most do not see this other as sin. Only those who make it public are the ones sinning. How clever! Satan loves that.
"Or did he simply not consider that an honest desire for discussion would be harmful to other people who made innocent remarks?"
That is the problem. You think the remark is innocent. I know better...it is a way of thinking that is ingrained in our celebrity Christian circles. What is is in the heart comes out of the mouth. So, it IS what inside that is unclean.
What about all those who were hurt about the remark? What about those who are kept from music ministry because they do not fit the image they want? I have already mentioned some of the things I saw concerning this.
Marvin, we are going to disagree and that it ok. This remark was a small thing on the surface but a big thing when you take it in the whole of what is happening in our cultish, celebrity centered man following churches and seminaries.
And you might be surprised but I have seriously disagreed with Wade on quite a few things and am very outspoken about it here. Yet, he still allows me to comment here. I cannot say that about 90% of the SBC big wigs who spend all their time trying to squealch dissent.
What are they afraid of?
Lydia,
You are right in your comments that what this man said is just the overflow of what is in his heart.
I made this comment earlier and it was ignored:
"It makes you wonder if this is an isolated incident or a re-occurring theme."
As with the current post (Calvin and Women), and D.R.'s defense of his blog that posts a joke using a racial and derrogatory remark toward women, along with this post, it makes you wonder if there is some underlying bigotry in the more fundamental circles of Baptist life. After all, I don't remember the SBC giving more than a token apology for past racism (a resolution in 1995, the SBC's 150th anniversary).
Too, when people like Ergun Caner use racial slurs and such, even if it is self-deprecating, it sets an example for all the students.
Professors like that would have been terminated immediately from schools that I attended.
Tim Marsh
"As with the current post (Calvin and Women), and D.R.'s defense of his blog that posts a joke using a racial and derrogatory remark toward women,"
Where I can certainly see where ladies would take offense to the remarks made by Clower in the joke, the term shecoon was not racist. If you will listen to it Clower never made a remark about her race. When he referred to her as a shecoon he was referring to her ferocity. Yes the world coon has been used as a racial slur, but this is not an instance of it.
Lydia,
I appreciate your perspective and deeply respect the fact that you're willing to respectfully disagree. That is love in practice, and refreshes my heart.
Now, as to the issue at hand, I believe that in some instances that words do reflect the exact nature of the human heart. At times, though, words are conveyed sarcastically and satirically through parody, jokes, etc. I was open-minded enough to see that particular possibility here.
If we claim to be able to see the intent of someone's heart, we have to consider whether we are on dangerous ground. Some people perceived the remarks offensively, but perhaps they should get thicker skin. Ministers where I come from are taught to have thick skin and soft hearts. Anything less makes a minister unprepared (and perhaps even unfit) for ministry.
But, while we are sharing perceptions of people's intentions, let me share my take on Wade's intentions. I think he thrives off controversy and likes the attention. I think he looks for ways to be a "voice" so he can carry on his perceived image as a hero dissenter of certain leaders. Now, granted, I love his brilliant mind and his courage. I love his willingness to stand alone or at least in the minority of certain convictions. But it seems to me that, at least in this instance, it is very arrogant for anyone to claim that this professor at SBTS was serious in his remark. A passing joke isn't cause for dismissal.
And yet, just to show you my consistent epistemology, I am aware that my perception could be very wrong, both about Wade's less-than-humble intentions and about this seemingly-innocent professor.
MM
"If we claim to be able to see the intent of someone's heart, we have to consider whether we are on dangerous ground. Some people perceived the remarks offensively, but perhaps they should get thicker skin. Ministers where I come from are taught to have thick skin and soft hearts. Anything less makes a minister unprepared (and perhaps even unfit) for ministry."
Oh, I agree with this and am guilty of accusing folks of being thin skinned and overly emotional.
But I also have 20 years experience training in interpersonal communications in corporations and if there is one thing that is truth is that we are responsible for how and what we communicate. We are even responsible to some degree whether or not others understand what we communicate. Seems unfair but it is true. Especially if we are teachers or public figures. This is very important for anyone who is a leader in any way.
And I will admit there are those it is IMPOSSIBLE to communciate with because they are deceptive in their agenda. That is a problem. So it is best not to communicate with them.
The prof is a role model for young minds full of mush who think if the prof said it, it is approved as correct communication. This will not serve them well out in the broader world. (Which the prof is probably not spending a lot of time in since his/her job is pretty insular...a huge problem in higher ed of any kind)
"But, while we are sharing perceptions of people's intentions, let me share my take on Wade's intentions. I think he thrives off controversy and likes the attention. I think he looks for ways to be a "voice" so he can carry on his perceived image as a hero dissenter of certain leaders."
This makes no sense. If he wanted to control his image he would not allow dissenters on his blog like most other SBC leaders don't allow. He even allows people to insult him and accuse him of such things. Did it ever occur to you that this only makes him look better to people? You are helping him look like a hero!:o)
" But it seems to me that, at least in this instance, it is very arrogant for anyone to claim that this professor at SBTS was serious in his remark. A passing joke isn't cause for dismissal."
Did Wade claim he should be dismissed? Does it matter whether it was serious or a joke? Is there always a difference? Caner is a good example of this "joke" problem.
"And yet, just to show you my consistent epistemology, I am aware that my perception could be very wrong, both about Wade's less-than-humble intentions and about this seemingly-innocent professor."
Do you not see that you are helping Wade to look humble? He is allowing you to come here and say such things. On most SBC pastor blogs, you would have been blown out of the water and shamed as a great sinner for daring to question the great man of God. :o)
Te-he-he-he!!!!
If anyone wonders about my grandaddy's observation: "The higher the monkey climbs the tree, the more you see his tail!" I think this pretty well proves it!!
WOW!!!!!
However, I will observe one thing further which is most important:
When I was a large church pastor, 9 of 10 problems seemed to come from the music people!
I have said several times that any smart Pastor should install a set of motorcycle mirrors to the pulpit so he can keep an eye on the chior---chewing gum / passing notes / straightening dresses / thumbing through the hymnal and checking their watches.
Maybe "non-instrumental" Primitive Baptists have a good idea after all!!!
Post a Comment