Most Pastors Say Their Churches Never Discipline Members for Sinful Misconduct, Survey Finds

Most Pastors Say Their Churches Never Discipline Members for Sinful Misconduct, Survey Finds

No kidding. Goodness knows most church people these days do not speak out against hetero fornication.

They are afraid of offending or hurting the feelings of any and all fornicators sitting in their pews. They also expect anyone and everyone past the age of 25 and single to be sexually sinning – there is no expectation of any adult being chaste.

(Link):  Most Pastors Say Their Churches Never Discipline Members for Sinful Misconduct, Survey Finds

Excerpts:

by Samuel Smith, April 2018

Protestant churches in the United States rarely reprimand their members for misconduct as a survey indicates that more than half of pastors say they don’t know of an instance in which their church has disciplined a member.

LifeWay Research unveiled a new poll Thursday in which over 1,000 Protestant senior pastors, ministers and priests were interviewed about their church’s handling of formal discipline.

The responses were weighed by region to reflect population. The sampling size includes a 3.2-percentage-point margin of error.

When asked over the phone when the last time their church formally disciplined a member, 55 percent of pastors said that “a member has not been formally disciplined since I came as pastor nor prior as far as I know.”

Continue reading “Most Pastors Say Their Churches Never Discipline Members for Sinful Misconduct, Survey Finds”

Advertisements

Preacher Mark Driscoll Disparages Virgins and Virginity (Again) – The Feelings of Fornicators Always Take Precedence With the Anti-Purity Culture, Anti-Slut- Shaming, and Pro- Cheap Grace Crowd

Preacher Mark Driscoll Disparages Virgins and Virginity (Again)

Disclaimer 1.
If you have found this blog post by way of another source, please note that the person sharing it likely does not necessarily agree with all opinions expressed below.

Disclaimer 2.
I do not personally agree with ALL of Purity Culture teaching (or with how it is taught), but I still believe that Bible does prohibit sex except for married couples (married being ‘one man to one woman’).
Unfortunately, many of the anti-Purity Culture proponents I see online seem to think the Bible does not teach sexual ethics at all, or, they seem to feel that everyone should just ignore what the Bible says about sexual morality and do whatever they want.


This is the sort of post I would rather not make. It’s the sort of post I sit around hoping another blogger will address, but it looks like it falls to me.

Preacher Mark Driscoll has disparaged virgins and virginity before (see (Link): this post on my blog)- his views on adult singleness are also narrow and un-biblical.

As I’ve noted in a much older post (please see (Link): this post), about the only people I see defending fornication (pre-marital sex) are those who are either on an “Anti Purity Culture Crusade,” or are they themselves self-admitting fornicators.

How convenient that adults who have not lived up to the Bible’s standard of no- nooky- prior- to- marriage are the very same ones who shame adult virgins for being virgins, for wanting to marry a fellow virgin, and/or for being upset that their intended spouse is not a virgin.

I’m pretty tired and worn out by self-professing fornicators lecturing me (or people like me), a 40-something actual, honest- to- God virgin, about sexual sin, sexual standards, and grace.

Here is a link to the piece I am discussing in this post:

(Link): Mark Driscoll Admits to Being Sexually Active Before Marriage in Message on Marrying a Virgin (hosted on the site “The Christian Post”)

Continue reading “Preacher Mark Driscoll Disparages Virgins and Virginity (Again) – The Feelings of Fornicators Always Take Precedence With the Anti-Purity Culture, Anti-Slut- Shaming, and Pro- Cheap Grace Crowd”

Married Church Staffer Arrested for Secretly Filming Upskirt Videos of Girls, Women in Church Bathroom and While They Kneeled During Services – Equally Yoked is BUNK

Married Church Staffer Arrested for Secretly Filming Upskirt Videos of Girls, Women in Church Bathroom and While They Kneeled During Services – Equally Yoked is BUNK 

Way farther below in this post is a link to a news story about a married church staff guy who was a pervert. (I think I first saw this news story via @watchkeep’s Twitter account.)

My Christian parents brought me up to think if I wanted to marry, that the best place for me to meet potential spouses would be at a church. I suppose the assumption with that is that the type of men who attend church regularly are going to be “safer” or better moral choices than the type of dude you might meet at a bar.

However, in the last few years of running this blog, I have seen (Link): so many news stories of church-going Christian men who get arrested for abuse or perversion, I now have my doubts about that.

Secondly, single women out-number single men in churches. I know that every church I’ve been to in person, I’ve been one of the few singles there. The only men in attendance and 80 years old, which would be fine if I were 80 too, but I’m not, and May December relationships (Link): make me want to barf.

Below  is a news report of a church staffer who was caught secretly filming “upskirt” videos of girls and women in church bathrooms and during church services. That is bad enough as-is, but the report says that the church discouraged the women from contacting the police over this.

Continue reading “Married Church Staffer Arrested for Secretly Filming Upskirt Videos of Girls, Women in Church Bathroom and While They Kneeled During Services – Equally Yoked is BUNK”

Some of My Thoughts Regarding ‘Why do evangelicals lose their faith?’ – Podcast by Unbelievable

Some of My Thoughts Regarding ‘Why do evangelicals lose their faith?’ – Podcast by Unbelievable 

The other day, I posted this (part 1 to this post):

I have re-listened to the podcast this evening and wanted to comment on some of what I heard.

In the program, there is a guy named Rodney who was once a conservative Christian, who drifted into liberal theology, and who now says he has a “deistic philosophy” and he says he is “agnostic about most religious questions.”

He says he has same sex attraction, and was put off to Christianity for (among other reasons):

How American conservative Christianity tends to over-identify with, or promote, the Republican Party (right wing American party), and that some preachers are too condemning of homosexual persons.

Rodney also says he does not accept the notion of an eternal Hell.

A few times, Rodney mentions that he has a deist- like view of God. He thinks all of us humans are rats, the earth is a big laboratory, and God is a scientist in a white lab coat observing us all but not intervening.

Rodney thinks if God is involved with human life, that God should do things like cause all members of ISIS (terrorist group) to drop dead of heart attacks. He does not believe that God helps people to pass school tests, find parking spaces, or cures diseases.

The show had a Christian author and guest on named Os, who replied to some of Rodney’s points.

_Some of my thoughts on the show and the topics Rodney raised._

1.) Politics and Liberal Vs Conservative Christianity

I am right wing politically and have been a Republican (GOP) my entire life.

I have very large misgivings about the GOP the last few years, though, so I’m not totally sure where I stand politically, though I do not ever see myself becoming a liberal or a Democrat.

I do agree with Rodney that too many conservative Christians conflate Christianity with the Republican party.

But then, a lot of liberal Christians or liberal Christian denominations entwine a lot of liberal beliefs and causes with the faith too, (such as support of abortion, the Democratic Party, liberalism, and homosexual marriage).

Continue reading “Some of My Thoughts Regarding ‘Why do evangelicals lose their faith?’ – Podcast by Unbelievable”

2015 Poll: 70% of American Women Who Have Abortions Identify As Christian

2015 Poll: 70% of American Women Who Have Abortions Identify As Christian

And 40% are regular church goers.

I’m not sure what percentage of these women are married vs. single.

Anyway, it would appear that self professing Christians are no more successful at following the Bible’s or Jesus’ teachings than Non-Christians.

If any of these women are un-married, wow, the church needs to once more re-emphasize that single adults are directed by the Bible to sexually abstain – be celibate.

If these women were celibate, they wouldn’t be having sex, and hence, obviously, would not be becoming pregnant and not feel the need to get abortions.

But too much Christians today are too afraid to speak out against sexual sin, including (Link): preachers, because doing so (Link): may upset the sensitive feelings of Delicate Debbie,  Weepy Wendy, Sensitive Steven, Fornicating Fred, or Mopey Mike.

If, as many conservative Christians believe, being a mother makes a woman more loving, godly, and mature, why do so many Christian women who become pregnant get that child aborted?

Christians really need to re-think how they measure passage into maturity, adulthood, and how they measure sanctification, because getting married or getting pregnant (ie, having a baby) does not necessarily make a person more mature, loving, or godly, as these sorts of examples on my blog continue to show.

(Link):  4 in 10 women who have had abortions are regular churchgoers

  • by Harry Farley
  • Four in ten women who have had abortions are regular churchgoers, new figures by (Link): LifeWay Research reveal.
  • The church is more likely to be a place of gossip, judgement and condemnation than care or help for women who are considering abortion, the study shows.
  • This is despite the fact that 70 per cent of women who have had abortions claim a Christian religious preference and 43 per cent were attending church at least once a month at the time of their abortion.
  • ….Perhaps because it is such a taboo, the church is becoming increasingly irrelevant for women deciding whether to have an abortion.

Continue reading “2015 Poll: 70% of American Women Who Have Abortions Identify As Christian”

Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says – Confirms What I’ve Been Saying All Along, Re: Churches: Contrary to Progressive Christians, Churches / Christians Do Not Support or Idolize Sexual Purity, Virginity, or Celibacy – they attack these concepts when not ignoring them

Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says – Confirms What I’ve Been Saying All Along, Re: Churches: Contrary to Progressive Christians, Churches / Christians Do Not Support or Idolize Sexual Purity, Virginity, or Celibacy – they attack these concepts when not ignoring them

Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says

(Link):  Pastors avoid Biblical positions on today’s issues to keep tithes up

(Link): Barna: Many pastors wary of raising ‘controversy’

(Link): Study: Pastors avoid controversy to keep tithes up

I linked to this same article in my previous post and discussed it from another angle,

This time, I am bringing this story up for another reason.

(Link):  Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says

I’m not surprised. Every time I see the progressive Christians, the ex Christians, and left wing secular feminists complain that Christians over value a woman’s virginity, I want to laugh. I see the total opposite.

Virginity for men and woman is being attacked by Christians, not upheld, defended, respected or esteemed.

(Usually, the entire subject is ignored FOR MEN. Men are not expected to be virgins by anyone on either side of the debate. Men get a pass, even from progressive Christians and secular feminists; ironic.)

Virginity, celibacy, and sexual purity are being written off even by most conservative Christians as being unrealistic, impossible standards for any man or woman to meet, so they have reversed course and say fornication is really not such a big deal.

Further, Christians have sanctioned phrases such as “born again virgin” or “secondary virginity” to console sexual sinners.

With the exception of a tiny minority of far, far out fringe kook groups, like the weirdos who want to see the USA governed by Old Testament laws and penalties, I am not seeing Christians who are demanding that people stay virgins until marriage, speaking out against pre-marital sex, or making sexual purity an idol that they insist Christian girls pursue.

Here are some excerpts from:

(Link):  Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says

  • by Tom Fontaine
  • Aug 24,  2014
  • Few pastors preach about today’s most challenging political and social issues because they worry about losing members of their flocks and the money they donate, according to a researcher who focuses on issues of Christianity.
  • “Controversy keeps people from being in the seats. Controversy keeps people from giving money, from attending programs,” California-based researcher George Barna said this month in an American Family Radio interview.

Continue reading “Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says – Confirms What I’ve Been Saying All Along, Re: Churches: Contrary to Progressive Christians, Churches / Christians Do Not Support or Idolize Sexual Purity, Virginity, or Celibacy – they attack these concepts when not ignoring them”

Stop Pretending Sex Never Hurts, by D.C. McAllister

Stop Pretending Sex Never Hurts, By D.C. McAllister

This is the sort of editorial that would be mocked at Stuff Christian Culture Likes group (you can read my review of that group here). But I agree with some aspects of it.

(Link): Stop Pretending Sex Never Hurts

Excerpt:

    Every day we hear about something that is harmful to us, something the government needs to regulate or outlaw, something for which an avalanche of public service announcements must be unleashed on the American people as they drive home from work, watch television, or scan their favorite websites.

  • Don’t eat sugar. You’ll get diabetes and die.
  • ….Meanwhile there’s not a peep about one of the most dangerous activities people engage in all the time—premarital sex. Or extramarital sex.
  • Or, dare I say the word—fornication? Or does that make me sound too judgmental?
  • Probably, but the word fits because sex is loaded with moral implications: The possibility of dysfunctional relationships, of sexually transmitted diseases, of an unwanted pregnancy or abortion. The possibility of guilt, shame, depression, and suicide.
  • … When I hear people talk about sex as if it’s no big deal, as if it’s no different than eating a steak or going for a drive on the freeway, when I see ads comparing voting to losing your virginity, or when I hear social conservatives slapped down when they voice their objections to a licentious culture, my heart grieves.
  • That’s because I’m picturing the girl walking home alone after having sex on the beer-drenched floor of a fraternity house with a guy too drunk to remember her name. The tears on her cheeks. The tightness in her chest, the sick feeling deep inside, and the already-hardening effect of knowing she will do it again.
  • The Stats Are No Joke
  • An estimated 8,300 young people between 13 and 24 reported to the Centers for Disease Control in 2009 that they had been diagnosed with the HIV infection.
  • From 2008 through 2011, among adult and adolescent males, the annual number of diagnosed HIV infections attributed to male-to-male sexual contact increased. At the end of 2010, nearly 873,000 people reported having HIV.
  • …Women who abort are four times more likely to die within a year than women who don’t get an abortion. Women who aborted in the year before their death were 60 percent more likely to die of natural causes, seven times more likely to die of suicide, and 14 times more likely to die from homicide. Abortion is linked to smoking, drug abuse, suicide, violent behavior, and eating disorders.
  • ….People Have a Right to Know
  • Yes, a woman has a right to do what she wants with her body. Yes, men and women can engage in all kinds of sexual behavior if they want to. But does that mean we should ignore the consequences? Remain silent to the costs? Refuse to issue warnings because we’re afraid we’ll be called judgmental or worse?
  • …If we’re going to warn people of the perils of Big Gulps and French fries, shouldn’t we warn them of the dangers of sex?

(((click here to read the rest)))
——————————
Related:

(Link): No Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity – Christians Attack and Criticize Virginity Sexual Purity Celibacy / Virginity Sexual Purity Not An Idol

(Link): The Myth of Safe Sex by D. Foley

(Link): Celibate Shaming from an Anti- Slut Shaming Secular Feminist Site (Hypocrisy) Feminists Do Not Support All Choices

(Link): A Day In The Life Of An Abstinence Ed Teacher by S. Gomez

(Link):  Some Researchers Argue that Shame Should Be Used to Treat Sexual Compulsions

(Link):  Our Bodies Were Not Made for Sex by T. Swann

(Link): Why Sexual Desire is Objectifying and Hence Morally Wrong by R. Halwani

(Link):  An Example of Mocking Adult Virginity Via Twitter (Virginity Used As Insult)

(Link):  Syphilis Sparks Concern in Popular Vacation City

(Link): Inconsistency on Feminist Site – Choices Have Consequences

(Link): Slut Shaming and Virgin Shaming and Secular and Christian Culture – Dirty Water / Used Chewing Gum and the CDC’s Warnings – I guess the CDC is a bunch of slut shamers ?

(Link): I Shouldn’t Need An Excuse To Be A Virgin – (Secular Editorial Defends Virginity – More Rare Than a Unicorn Sighting)

(Link): Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin

(Link): Christian Preacher Admits He Won’t Preach About Sexuality For Fear It May Offend Sexual Sinners

(Link): Stop Rewarding People For Their Failure – Christians Speaking Out of Both Sides of Their Mouths About Sexual Sin – Choices and Actions and How You Teach This Stuff Has Consequences – Allowing Sinners To Re-Define Biblical Terms and Standards

Another cruddy Christian “Have We Made an Idol Out of Sexual Purity?” editorial (this time, from Relevant magazine) – And An Analogy For Married Christians Who Don’t Get It

Another cruddy Christian “Have We Made an Idol Out of Sexual Purity?” editorial (this time, from Relevant magazine) – And An Analogy For Married Christians Who Don’t Get It

The analogy is way, way down the page. I might put it in a separate post in the future.

First, a word about terminology. This is a somewhat minor point I make in passing, but it’s recurrent on various Christian blogs I visit, it drives me nuts, so I wanted to point it out.

Other Christians are very confused about the phrase “sexual purity.” They want to argue that “sexual purity” is not the same thing as “virginity,” but in articles like this one I link to below, they go on to equate “sexual purity” to virginity themselves.

The lady who wrote the following insists that sexual purity is not the same thing as virginity, or should not be thought of as such, but then says that you are not damaged goods, or your sexual purity is not lost, over a single act (ie, having sex, ie, which is defined as, or understood as, losing your virginity prior to marriage).

So… authors like this one argues ( the symbol != is computer coding / scripting language for “is not equal to”),

sexual purity != virginity
But that
sexual purity = virginity

Christian authors who are trying to say that virginity is not all that important in the end scheme of things cannot themselves even stay consistent on the point of whether or not to consider
virginity = sexual purity (or as a sub-set of).

They flip flop on this point a lot. If you don’t believe that sexual purity = virginity, why bother lovingly patting the heads of fornicators to reassure them that losing one’s virginity before marriage is nothing to feel ashamed about?

Why not just write a big old editorial denying that sexual purity is the same thing as staying a virgin until marriage, or why not try to argue that the Bible does not prohibit pre-marital boinking?

The link to the odious editorial by a Christian publication (I have additional comments below the long excerpt):
(Link): Have We Made an Idol Out of Sexual Purity? Why purity is so much more than virginity. BY DEBRA K FILETA

Excerpts:

If you grew up in church, you’ve likely heard one of these horrific analogies somewhere along the way:

Your sexual purity, once it’s given away is like…

“Tape that’s lost it’s stickiness.”

“Paper that’s been torn.”

“Gum that’s been chewed.”

“A gift that’s been unwrapped.”

While I get the mentality behind these messages, my problem with these analogies, and in fact, this entire discussion, is that it presents “purity” as a one-dimensional physical act.

First you have it, then you don’t. Vanished. Gone. Over. Done with. In a blink of an eye, the prospect of being “pure” and holy has been wiped away.

This mentality is so dangerous because it fools us into believing that our entire worth as believers and as “eligible” bachelors/bachelorettes is wrapped up on this one, single part of who we are.

Please don’t misunderstand, I believe it is important to honor God with our bodies, but since when did our holiness have anything to do with who we are, instead of everything to do with who Christ is?

— end article excerpts—

I left a few comments on that page, including:

christianpundit commented…

No, Christians have not made an idol out of sexual purity, not even when using analogies about chewed up gum and so forth. I’m over 40 years of age, still a virgin, because I was waiting until marriage to have sex but am still single.

In the past several years, Christians (seemingly influenced by secular feminists and “slut shaming” rhetoric) have been criticizing virginity, virgins, and celibacy and mocking these concepts and saying they are unimportant.

We’ve now arrived at a situation where Christians (and Non Christians) demand and expect everyone to respect all forms of sexual behavior and sexual expression EXCEPT FOR virginity and celibacy.

Adult singleness is also under attack, from everyone from Al Mohler (who slams singleness in his interviews) to guys like pastor Mark Driscoll who blogs the unbiblical view that single people cannot and should not serve as preachers.

Driscoll also wrongly teaches in one of his blog posts that older, adult celibate adults lack sex drives because God supposedly, magically removed their sex drive (this is false; single adults over 30 still experience sexual desire).

Further, Driscoll holds the unbiblical, wacko strange view that if a person is still single over 30, that God has destined them for singleness, and at that, to martyr them off for spreading the Gospel in some deep jungle, in some remote nation. None of this is supported in the Bible.

Christians are attacking singleness, virginity, and celibacy; they are most certainly NOT making an idol out of any of these things, and I wish Christian bloggers, magazines, and authors would stop arguing otherwise.

Continue reading “Another cruddy Christian “Have We Made an Idol Out of Sexual Purity?” editorial (this time, from Relevant magazine) – And An Analogy For Married Christians Who Don’t Get It”

Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin

Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin

(Before I get to the link proper, here is a long introduction by me.)

I agree with this guy’s editorial (linked to farther below). I’ve written of this phenomenon before on my own blog, going back a year or maybe as long as three years ago (see links at the bottom of this post under the “Related Posts” section).

I do not like legalistic jerks. I don’t think Christians should be rude, mean, hateful jerks to other people, even when condemning certain behaviors as being sinful.

However. HOWEVER.

I can’t say as though I’m a whole-scale supporter of legalism’s opposite characteristics, either – which amounts to extreme leniency and “watering down of standards” in the name of Love and Tolerance.

I have seen some Christians so very afraid of hurting the feelings of Non-Christians (or even that of fellow Christians) who are in sin, or in confronting Christians who are openly supportive of behaviors the Bible condemns, they tip toe around the sin in question to an absurd degree – where they end up practically supporting, condoning, or excusing said sin (whatever it may be).

These Christians are hyper-sensitive to other people’s feelings, and it is a huge annoyance to me.

This tendency to treat other people’s feelings with kid gloves has gotten so bad in Christendom (particularly in regards to sexual sin), that some preachers have admitted they are afraid to speak out against sin in public, in their blogs, TV shows, books, or from the pulpit.

It’s also very common among Christian lay persons, or by ex-Christians or liberal Christians, who confuse God’s propensity to love and forgive with the notion that God (and Jesus Christ) are hunky-dory with behavior the Bible thoroughly condemns, such as hetero pre-marital sex or homosexual sex acts, for example.

(Transgenderism is a sexual state which has become the new liberal Christian, moderate Christian, Theology of Hurt Feelings Christian, ex-Christian, and left wing secular Sacred Cow that you may not criticize at all.)

It’s also intriguing to me that on the spiritual abuse blogs I have visited, whose owners and members champion the downtrodden (i.e., adults who have been mistreated by churches, or victims of sexual abuse whose abuse was swept under the rug by their fellow church members), have forum or blog participants, who will, on one hand, quite understandably call for the heads of such abusive church members on a platter, rightly call out Christians as being naive fools about abuse in churches, but – many of these same people are also very dismissive of, or blind to, abuses by Muslim militants and homosexual militants.

They are very naive of abuses by Muslims and homosexuals. They seem to have a huge blind spot in those areas.

How they can so easily spot and repudiate Christian and church bungling of spiritual and child sexual abuse, or of preachers who exploit their church members, but fail to recognize the dangers of Muslim and homosexual militancy in American society and other regions of the world, I will never understand.

The blindness and naive nature by folks on those sorts of forums and blogs also extends to Roman Catholicism.

I have had a few Roman Catholic friends in the past, and they are fine people, but their church? No.

The Roman Catholic Church used to burn people at the stake, but one Roman Catholic individual recently thanked a (Protestant) blogger for bringing to everyone’s attention the anti-Roman Catholic commentary expressed by yet another blog (a Protestant one which was critical of perceived sinful RC behavior).

I mean, really? Some Protestant writing a critical comment about Roman Catholic behavior in general on a blog is thought somehow worse than the Roman Catholic Church in years past doing things such as:

-Covering up priest sexual abuse of children, or….

-Burning people to death for refusing to convert to Roman Catholicism, or for (Link to Wiki page): translating the Bible into English, or….

-The same Roman Catholic Church that historically has held the position that the Gospel (which includes sola fide) is anathema (to be damned)?

        (Off site link for more on that:

      Roman Catholic Church condemns the Gospel itself

          )

        Seriously?

        But you can’t easily point these issues of the Roman Catholic Church out at some forums or blogs – the ones who are into The Theology of Hurt Feelings – as it might offend a Roman Catholic somewhere.

        The Roman Catholic Church historically persecuted a lot of people (see again: burning people to death at the stake for things like not converting to Catholicism), but criticism on the internet of their church is considered by some of them to be the height of persecution against Roman Catholics.

        At any rate, I agree with the gentlemen quoted below.

        There is most certainly a Theology of Hurt Feelings, where-in some Christians are so incredibly concerned with not offending various classes of sinners (e.g., hetero fornicators or active homosexuals), they think Christians speaking out publicly (on blogs, radio shows, in church services, etc) is “unloving” and therefore Christ would object to it.

        The mind boggles at this. Jesus Christ died on the cross to pay for hetero fornication and homosexual sex acts, among other sins of humanity. But these “lovey dovey” types want other Christians to pipe down about all this and act as though God is totaly fine with, and accepting of, all manner of sin.

        The Bible presents a God who is not only loving, forgiving, and gracious, but also one who is Holy, just, and who does not tolerate sin, he does not like sin, and he won’t put up with sin indefinitely. God is not fine and dandy with sin. And the Bible does in fact call out hetero pre-marital sex, and all homosexual sex acts, as sin.

        I suspect that this well-meaning, yet wrong-headed, tendency to want to be Very Loving, Very Accepting, and To Spare People’s Feelings, is partially responsible for what gave rise several years ago to the ridiculous, non-sensical, un-Biblical habit of referring to fornicators as “Born Again Virgins,” “Spiritual Virgins,” and similar monikers (see links below, this post, for more about that).

        (Link): Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities

        Excerpts.

            BY ALEX MURASHKO , CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER 
            July 25, 2014|8:33 am

          Advocates for behavior considered immoral by Christians who believe the Bible is God’s inerrant word, have successfully used the idea of “love” to affirm homoerotic behavior, to redefine marriage and family, to justify pedophilia, and as theologian and pastor James Emery White recently pointed out, to justify assisted suicide.

          The problem, White writes in his blog, Church & Culture, is that the “love” described to normalize these behaviors is “not the biblical idea of love.”

          Continue reading “Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin”

          After Pastor’s Son Comes Out as Homosexual, Southern Baptist Church Breaks With Denomination on Homosexuality – Once More Christians Allow Their Feelings To Cancel Out What God Says In The Bible on Sexual Morality – Christians worship feelings now, not God

          After Pastor’s Son Comes Out as Homosexual, Southern Baptist Church Breaks With Denomination on Homosexuality – Once More Christians Allow Their Feelings To Cancel Out What God Says In The Bible on Sexual Morality – Christians worship feelings now, not God

          I actually tire of hearing about homosexuality from secular and Christian sources.

          My interest in mentioning the topic at all is not so much homosexuality itself but how Christians deal with it, because I think it shows how sloppy and un-biblical Christians have become towards HETERO sexual sins.

          First, I will include a few links about this story with some excerpts, followed underneath these links and excepts with some of my commentary about the situation:

          (Link): Southern Baptist ‘Church’ Votes to Keep Pro-Homosexual Minister Danny Cortez, Go ‘Third Way’

            By Garrett Haley, Christian News Network On June 5, 2014

            The leaders of a Southern Baptist congregation in southern California have voted to not dismiss their ‘pastor,’ despite recently stunning his congregation in announcing from the pulpit that he believes homosexual behavior is not a sin.

            Danny Cortez leads New Heart Community Church-a small congregation in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. Last year, Cortez concluded that he no longer agreed with the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality and was instead “gay affirming.”

          (Link): Baptist Pastor Abandons Scripture on Homosexuality After His Son’s Stunning Revelation

          This is from the Huff. Post site, which is usually liberal and hostile towards traditional values and Christianity:
          (Link): California Baptist Church Changes Views On Homosexuality After Pastor’s Gay Son Comes Out

          (Link): After Pastor’s Son Comes Out, Southern Baptist Church Breaks With Denomination on Homosexuality

            BY MORGAN LEE , CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER
            June 5, 2014|12:40 pm

            A Southern Baptist church in California has broken with the denomination’s stance on homosexuality and has decided to accept the LGBT community without judgment. The church made the change after its lead pastor announced that he no longer holds to the teaching that homosexuality is a sin.

            Danny Cortez, who leads New Heart Community Church in La Mirada, explained his journey in a letter to progressive Christian blogger John Shore, founder of Unfundam

          Here are my thoughts, which are nothing new, because I’ve mentioned this before in previous posts.

          Because the church has been so obsessed with traditional (hetero) marriage and catering to the 1950s ideal of the “nuclear family” the past several decades, they ceased supporting adult singleness and adult celibacy for hetero-sexuals.

          In recent years, even conservative Christians (some who are Southern Baptist, some are Reformed or Calvinist) have even been criticizing and mocking (hetero) adult singleness, (hetero) adult singles, (hetero) virginity, and (hetero) celibacy (see for instance my posts on Al Mohler and Tim Challies for examples).

          Such Christians have been trying to ease the guilty consciences of (hetero) fornicators by downplaying the Bible’s teaching and insistence on sexual purity, including remaining a virgin until marriage.

          Because Southern Baptists (and other Christian groups) have failed to support the concept of adult virginity and adult singleness, as well as failed to actually support adult virgins themselves, naturally homosexuality and transgenderism and other issues have taken over and cropped up in and among churches.

          All this comes back round in a circle, however.

          First, the church emphasizes hetero marriage out the ying yang, talks smack against (hetero) virginity and (hetero) singleness, so that homosexuality of course makes inroads in churches. Churches left themselves wide open to this situation.

          Then, as homosexuality becomes viewed as the norm in churches, HETERO adult singles such as myself see churches not only excusing HETERO sexual sin but HOMO sexual sin as well and wonder, “why should I remain chaste when the church is not only not criticizing and correcting sexual sin, both homo and hetero, but giving such un-biblical behavior a stamp of approval.”

          I an not the only individual to pick up on this.

          Several months ago, a celibate adult HETERO single woman argued in an editorial on Christianity Today that as churches become more and more accepting of homosexual sin, they are eroding reasons for HETERO single adults to remain sexually pure. (I have a copy of that editorial somewhere on this blog.)

          My other observation is that I am tired of Christians defining their theology based upon emotion or feelings.

          I do think it’s important to treat all people with respect and consideration, please do not misunderstand me. I have no problem with church members who show kindness and compassion to homosexual people. That is all well and good.

          But to step from treating people with compassion and politeness to going against the Bible and telling these people (and from the pulpit) that their behavior is not sin is beyond wrong. I actually consider that evil. To flatly contradict what God plainly says in the Bible is not only evil it is dishonest.

          My position is if people are going to have hetero pre-martial sex or engage in homosexual sex, that is their prerogative, but it is not their right to insist that the Bible is vague on these topics, or that God or the Bible is fine and accepting of sexual sin (whether hetero or homo).

          I’ve also posted links to this blog before to stories of preachers who have admitted in public that they refrain from preaching against sexual sin, for fear they may hurt the feelings of, or anger, fornicators and adulterers and homosexuals.

          Where does the Bible teach that “feelings” cancel out sound doctrine?

          Yes, there are numerous teachings directing Christians to love other people, and to “teach the truth in love,” but where does the Bible say that God is fine with Christians shutting up about the truth – in changing what God has condemned to say God now approves?

          I am not aware of a single concept in the entire Bible where God says his views on morals change, or that God is fine with Christians declaring sanctified and acceptable what God says is wrong, sin, evil, or an abomination.

          As a matter of fact, the Bible says, things like,

            “I am the LORD, and I do not change.” (Malachi 3:6)

            “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.” (Hebrew 13:8)

            “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20)

          No, there is not a single Bible verse which says anything remotely such as,

            “And if your son admits to being a child molester, start teaching from the pulpit that child rape is no longer a sin”

            or,
            “And if your son admits to being a thief, start teaching from the pulpit that stealing is no longer a sin”

            or,

            “And if your son admits to being a hetero fornicatior who has sex with prostitutes, start teaching from the pulpit that fornication and prostitution are no longer sins.”

          By the same token, there is no verse or concept in the Bible that teaches if your own beloved son is guilty of X behavior (which God condemns) it’s okay to stand at the pulpit and declare God is fine with “X” and “X” is no longer a sin. Your feelings for your son do not get to over-ride the Bible’s authority on topics.

          As a matter of fact, there is a story in the Old Testament of a temple priest who allowed his two sons to repeatedly defile the temple, and God killed the guy off. God doesn’t care how much you love your son, if you keep permitting the son to sin, God will deal with it.

          This is from (Link): 1 Samuel Chapter 2:

            Eli’s Wicked Sons

            12 Eli’s [temple priest] sons were scoundrels; they had no regard for the Lord.

            …. 17 This sin of the young men was very great in the Lord’s sight, for they were treating the Lord’s offering with contempt.

            …. 22 Now Eli [temple priest], who was very old, heard about everything his sons were doing to all Israel and how they slept with the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting.

            23 So he said to them, “Why do you do such things? I hear from all the people about these wicked deeds of yours. 24 No, my sons; the report I hear spreading among the Lord’s people is not good. 25 If one person sins against another, God may mediate for the offender; but if anyone sins against the Lord, who will intercede for them?”

            His sons, however, did not listen to their father’s rebuke, for it was the Lord’s will to put them to death.

            … 27 Now a man of God came to Eli and said to him,

            …34 “‘And what happens to your two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, will be a sign to you—they will both die on the same day.

            35 I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who will do according to what is in my heart and mind. I will firmly establish his priestly house, and they will minister before my anointed one always.

            36 Then everyone left in your family line will come and bow down before him for a piece of silver and a loaf of bread and plead, “Appoint me to some priestly office so I can have food to eat.”’”

          As we can see from that story, God does not excuse, pardon, or overlook the sins of adult children just because they have daddies who love them and are willing to tolerate the sin themselves.

          I’m also tired of hetero singles being expected by some quarters to remain celibate, but homosexuals are getting permission from some churches to have sex.

          I am fine with people being friendly, polite, and compassionate towards people – there is no need for Christians to browbeat or scream hateful messages at sinners for their sin – but I am also tired, and repulsed by, Christians allowing sentimentality and their feelings to guide their judgement on moral matters or to cancel out what God has declared in the Bible.

          I suppose one of the main points of my post is that so long as churches and preachers keep tripping all over themselves to act accepting of homosexual behavior, they have removed any reasons for heterosexual singles to remain celibate, and I see no reason why married hetero couples should stay sexually faithful to their partners, given that churches are now adopting an “anything goes” sort of view.
          —————————————–
          Related posts, this blog:

          (Link): Christian Double Standards on Celibacy – Hetero Singles Must Abstain from Sex but Not Homosexual Singles

          (Link): More Anti (Hetero) Singleness Bias From Al Mohler – Despite the Bible Says It Is Better Not To Marry

          (Link): Christian Preacher Admits He Won’t Preach About Sexuality For Fear It May Offend Sexual Sinners

          (Link): Sometimes Shame Guilt and Hurt Feelings Over Sexual Sins Is a Good Thing – but – Emergents, Liberals Who Are Into Virgin and Celibate Shaming

          (Link): Why Do Christians Ask if Homosexuals Can Change Their Orientation – Why Not Explain that Celibacy is an Option?

          (Link): Christian Gender Complementarian Group (CBMW) Anti Virginity and Anti Sexual Purity Stance (At Least Watered Down) – and their Anti Homosexual Marriage Position

          (Link): Anti Virginity Editorial by Christian Blogger Tim Challies – Do Hurt / Shame Feelings or Sexual Abuse Mean Christians Should Cease Supporting Virginity or Teaching About Sexual Purity

          (Link): Typical Erroneous Teaching About Adult Celibacy Rears Its Head Again: To Paraphrase Speaker at Ethics and Public Policy Center: Lifelong Celibacy is “heroic ethical standard that is not expected of heteros, so it should not be expected of homosexuals”

          (Link): New website launched to help Christians experiencing same-sex attraction / Editorial about Celibacy by Ed Shaw

          (Link): Stop Rewarding People For Their Failure – Christians Speaking Out of Both Sides of Their Mouths About Sexual Sin – Choices and Actions and How You Teach This Stuff Has Consequences

          (Link): Are Most Churches Too Judgemental About Sexual Sin? (of the hetero variety)

          (Link): No, Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity (they attack both concepts)

          (Link): Southern Baptists (who don’t TRULY support sexual purity) Announce 2014 Sex Summit

          (Link): Southern Baptists open to reaching out to LGBT – but still don’t give a flying leap about HETERO CELIBATE UNMARRIED ADULTS

          (Link): The Christian and Non Christian Phenomenon of Virgin Shaming and Celibate Shaming

          (Link): Christians Who Attack Virginity Celibacy and Sexual Purity – and specifically Russell D. Moore and James M. Kushiner

          (Link): Article: Our Born-Again Virgin Bachelor – Secondary or Spiritual Virginity

          (Link): Criticism of Purity Teachings by Christians via a Woman’s Personal Testimony

          (Link): More Snarky Virgin – and Celibate – Shaming, Courtesy the “The anti-purity movement” Facebook Group – the blog page “My Secondary Virginity” – and a Proud Slut Parody

          (Link): Slut Shaming and Virgin Shaming and Secular and Christian Culture – Dirty Water / Used Chewing Gum and the CDC’s Warnings – I guess the CDC is a bunch of slut shamers ?

          (Link): Preacher Mark Driscoll Basically Says No, Single Christian Males Cannot or Should Not Serve as Preachers / in Leadership Positions – Attempts to Justify Unbiblical, Anti Singleness Christian Bias

          An Open Letter to Male Virgins by Anna Broadway

          An Open Letter to Male Virgins by Anna Broadway

          I want to preface the editorial farther below by saying our culture, both Christian and secular, ridicules and shames FEMALE ADULT VIRGINS and FEMALE celibates too, not just MALE ones.

          Once you have gotten to your late 20s as a woman and are still a virgin, you are looked at askew by society – both in and out of church.

          I say this too because I see older male, usually Christian, virgins on other sites and blogs whining, crying, and boo-hooing at how tough they think male celibates have life! Oh please, as if you guys have it more difficult? You do not.

          Women virgins over 25 / 30 years of of age get teased, left out, and treated like loser-freaks by Non-Christian and Christian culture, PLUS, we ladies get the added shame messages in church sermons and Christian propaganda on blogs and in books, that we are not fulfilling our “God given duty” or “Godly role” to make a baby!

          We ladies get the shame, insults, and scorn double.

          Men do not face anywhere NEAR the amount of pressure by Christian culture to breed and pop out kids.

          Men never (or not as often as women) have to make excuses as to why they are not a daddy, but we women get asked that all the time in regards to parenting, why are we not mothers, don’t we like kids, when do you plan on having a kid, don’t you know you better hurry your bio clock is running out, etc. We ladies get the ‘baby’ questions constantly.

          It is not only MALES who face discrimination and stereotypes for being virgins. We women virgins get lambasted for it as well. We female virgins are assumed to be frigid, weird, lesbian, have too much baggage, we must be obese and ugly, or neurotic.

          By the way, while the young man himself in the recent news story is responsible for his actions – the 22 year old guy who shot up a bunch of people because he was frustrated at being a virgin and not getting dates – I can’t help but wonder if the Celibate- and Virgin- shaming I see on anti-sexual purity blogs, and the overall anti-virginity attitudes I see on blogs and Facebook groups only contribute to the problem.

          Maybe if culture was more accepting of virginity and did not humiliate or shame people who never lose it, or who don’t lose their virginity until they are 25, 35, 55 years old, this guy would not have felt the need to go out and shoot a bunch of people.

          But as I have been reporting on here the last couple or more years, Christians have jumped aboard the “virgin and celibate shame” train, too.

          It is no longer only secular culture that mocks virginity and says staying sexually pure is impossible, it is every other preacher on TV or in church now, too.

          Christians are now taking “pot shots” at the concept of sexual purity and virginity on their blogs, and saying nobody can be expected to stay a virgin their entire life, or past age 25.

          Maybe if the church stood on a hill and screamed, “It’s okay to be a virgin and single your whole life, feel no shame,” you wouldn’t have 22 year old men thinking they are a loser-nothings for being a virgin… maybe that kid would have realized he was okay as he was, he would not have gotten worked up and angry and murdered several people as he did.

          The Christian church should be presenting virginity as a perfectly fine, viable option for adults in our culture, to act as a counterpoint to our sex-saturated culture, but often, they do not.

          Christians – the married ones, and the preachers – also shame older virgins for being virgins and for being single, and they never discuss singleness and celibacy. Preachers are always giving sermons on MARRIAGE and MARRIED SEX.

          (Link): An Open Letter to Male Virgins by A. Broadway

          Excerpts:

              • What do you tell the male virgin in a sexed-up 21st-century “bro culture”? Is there anything an older sister of sorts could say to encourage men frustrated by their unwanted celibacy? Here’s my attempt.

          To the male virgins out there:

          • I suspect you feel a lot of shame about the term “virgin.” These days, it’s hard not to. Even among young adults, virgins are a clear minority; according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, only one in 10 American men enters marriage a virgin; most start having sex in late high school. The numbers show women behave very similarly.
          • … Whatever our various reasons for ending up so, adult virgins must navigate a culture that regards sex as central to human fulfillment. But abstinence from this supposedly penultimate experience raises slightly different identity issues for men and women.
          • For women, men’s disinterest can seem like a knock on our beauty and desirability. Depending on where we find our value, that rejection can throw our own self-worth into question. But where women may blame unwanted abstinence on some lack in ourselves, men seem to read sexual inexperience as a fundamental failing, or even evidence of women’s universal aversion to or even contempt.

          Continue reading “An Open Letter to Male Virgins by Anna Broadway”

          Christian Mouthpiece – Russell Moore – Who Says Christians Are Prideful About Virginity Has Audacity to Make Pro Sexual Purity Arguments on TGC (Gospel Coalition) Site

          Christian Mouthpiece Who Says Christians Are Prideful About Virginity Has Audacity to Make Pro Sexual Purity Arguments on TGC (Gospel Coalition) Site

          Russell Moore is being a hypocrite on this topic. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth about it.

          (Link): Can We Trade Sexual Morality for Church Growth? by Russell Moore, hosted on TGC site

          Here is an excerpt or two from that page with observations by me below the excerpts:

            by Russell Moore

            From time to time we hear some telling us that evangelical Christianity must retool our sexual ethic if we’re ever going to reach the next generation.

            Some say that Millennials, particularly, are leaving the church because of our “obsession” with sexual morality. The next generation needs a more flexible ethic, they say, on premarital sex, homosexuality, and so on. We’ll either adapt, the line goes, or we’ll die.

            …Always Difficult

            The same is true with a Christian sexual ethic. Sexual morality didn’t become difficult with the onset of the sexual revolution. It always has been. Walking away from our own lordship, or from the tyranny of our desires, has always been a narrow way. The rich young ruler wanted a religion that would promise him his best life now, extended out into eternity. But Jesus knew that such an existence isn’t life at all, just the zombie corpse of the way of the flesh. He came to give us something else, to join us to his own life.

            …But even if it “worked” to negotiate away sexual morality for church growth, we wouldn’t do it. We can only reach Millennials, and anyone else, by reaching them with the gospel, good news for repentant sinners through the shed blood and empty tomb of Jesus Christ.

            If we have to choose between Millennials and Jesus, we choose Jesus.

            …No Amendment

            Some think the Christian sexual ethic is akin to our congregation’s constitution and by-laws, that it can be amended by a two-thirds vote. But this isn’t the case. Sexuality isn’t ancillary to the gospel but is itself an embodied icon of the gospel, pointing us to the union of Christ and his church (Eph. 5:29-32).

            This is why the Bible speaks of sexual immorality as having profound spiritual consequences (1 Cor. 6:17-20), ultimately leading, if not repented of, to exile from the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10).

            Sexual immorality isn’t simply a matter of neurons firing. A Christian view of reality means that the body is a temple, set apart to be a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit. Sexual immorality isn’t just bad for us (although it is); it’s also an act of desecrating a holy place.

          And Moore’s editorial goes on like that for several additional paragraphs.

          I don’t think a guy who advises Christian virgins that they are “idolizing” virginity if they are upset or disappointed that their betrothed is a non-virgin – as Moore has done preivously (see link below) – is really in a place to opine about how churches should not “trade sexual morality for church growth.”

          Even sadder is that a well-known Christian apologetics group was tweeting a link to this Moore editorial yesterday, as though they approve of it.

          I tweeted them a link to my rebuttal:
          (Link): Christians Who Attack Virginity Celibacy and Sexual Purity – and specifically Russell D. Moore and James M. Kushiner

          A person who claims to represent Christian sexual ethics and who scolds a virgin Christian for wanting, or hoping, to marry another Christian virgin, and accusing her of “idolizing virginity” or “being prideful” about it, has no place to write

            “Sexual immorality isn’t simply a matter of neurons firing. A Christian view of reality means that the body is a temple, set apart to be a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit. Sexual immorality isn’t just bad for us (although it is); it’s also an act of desecrating a holy place”

          and similar things.

          Continue reading “Christian Mouthpiece – Russell Moore – Who Says Christians Are Prideful About Virginity Has Audacity to Make Pro Sexual Purity Arguments on TGC (Gospel Coalition) Site”

          Typical Erroneous Teaching About Adult Celibacy Rears Its Head Again: To Paraphrase Speaker at Ethics and Public Policy Center: Lifelong Celibacy is “heroic ethical standard that is not expected of heteros, so it should not be expected of homosexuals”

          Typical Erroneous Teaching About Adult Celibacy Rears Its Head Again: To Paraphrase Speaker at Ethics and Public Policy Center: Lifelong Celibacy is “heroic ethical standard that is not expected of heteros, so it should not be expected of homosexuals” (ie, it’s supposedly an impossible feat for any human being to achieve)

          The Bible not only demands celibacy from homosexuals, but from un-married HETEROs as well, (or, in the case of married HETEROs, when the married couple is apart, or one is too sick and cannot have sex, etc).

          I am over 40, was engaged, have a normal libido, and am still a virgin mainly because I believe the Bible teaches that pre-marital sex is sinful.

          It is a fallacy that lifelong celibacy is impossible. It can be difficult at times, but not impossible, nor is it necessarily a cruel teaching, as both secular Non Christians and some Christians continually maintain. A human being can live without sex; sex is not a necessity.

          This actually proves a point I’ve raised before on the blog. And here it is:
          So many hetero Christians, when they write of sex and celibacy, assume that lifelong celibacy is a special superpower that only a few tiny amount of people are capable of (because God supposedly grants them the ability, or removes their sex drive).

          When the fact is, God does not gift of choose anyone to be single and celibate, nor give them a special grace, gift, or power to abstain.

          Remaining celibate all comes down to WILL POWER, SELF DISCIPLINE, and SELF CONTROL, and it is something anyone and everyone can accomplish. *(As to the role of “personal conviction” please see the note at the conclusion of this post)

          With some celibate adults, particularly Christians, there may be other factors at play that aid them in abstaining, such as wishing to avoid contracting a sexually transmitted disease, being obedient to Jesus Christ out of love and devotion, etc.

          There is no magical solution that keeps me celibate this long.

          The problem is, most people are selfish, lazy, and undisciplined. They get horny, cave in, and have sex.

          This comes from an article at Slate:
          (Link): The Collapse of Anti-Gay Religion

          Excerpts:

            By William Saletan

          ….For 15 years, the Ethics and Public Policy Center has hosted the Faith Angle Forum, a regular conference on religion and public life. Several weeks ago, the group met again to discuss current issues. Transcripts of the conference have just been posted on EPPC’s website. They underscore the extent of the anti-gay collapse.

          …. During the Q-and-A, Michael Gerson of the Washington Post, a former senior aide to President George W. Bush, raised his hand to ask about “the idea of strong genetic predisposition” to homosexuality. This belief, he testified,

              is changing the way not just liberal Christians, but conservative Christians think about this issue, particularly homosexuality.

          If there’s a strong genetic disposition, then you have a situation with an expectation—pastoral expectation—of lifelong celibacy, which is a heroic ethical standard that’s not applied to heterosexuals.

            That seems unfair according to Christian ethical principles.

          Yes, lifelong celibacy most certainly is applied to heterosexuals.

          Heterosexuals get the same exact Bible as the Homosexuals, and that Bible says sex outside of marriage, with marriage being understood as one man, one woman, is a sin.
          ____________________________________
          * RE PERSONAL CONVICTION and Sexual Behavior

          (*A brief word about convictions:
          personal conviction, in regards to sex, without self control, self discipline, will power means nothing, no matter how strongly held your conviction is.
          You can be personally and deeply convicted all day long that pre-marital sex is immoral, but if you lack self control, will power, and self discipline to not engage in said behavior, you will cave in and commit fornication. Personal conviction alone does didley squat when it comes to sexual sin.)
          —————————
          Related posts this blog:

          (Link): Douglas Wilson and Christian Response FAIL to Sexual Sin – No Body Can Resist Sex – supposedly – Re Celibacy

          (Link): No Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity – Christians Attack and Criticize Virginity Sexual Purity Celibacy / Virginity Sexual Purity Not An Idol

          (Link):  Some Researchers Argue that Shame Should Be Used to Treat Sexual Compulsions

          (Link): Christians Selling Out Hetero Celibacy By Defending Homosexual Behavior – Re: Jars of Clay Controversy

          (Link):  Newlyweds Forced to Be Celibate After Bride Diagnosed With Cervical Cancer Just Days After Honeymoon

          (Link): Editorialist at WaPo Argues That Single Christian Adults Can Have Sex So Long As They are Chaste About It – Also Speculates that Jesus Was “Probably” Celibate

          (Link): Sometimes Shame Guilt and Hurt Feelings Over Sexual Sins Is a Good Thing – but – Emergents, Liberals Who Are Into Virgin and Celibate Shaming

          (Link): Sometimes the Bible is Clear – Regarding Rachel Held Evan’s Post

          (Link): Sex, Love & Celibacy by Christian Author Dan Navin

          (Link): Nobody Bats An Eye at Condemnation of Hetero Sexual Sin – Observations from Duck Dynasty Controversy

          (Link): Southern Baptists open to reaching out to LGBT – but still don’t give a flying leap about HETERO CELIBATE UNMARRIED ADULTS

          (Link): Christian World Vision Charity Okay and Dandy With Homosexual Marriage But Not Okay With Singles Fornicating

          (Link): Church Touts Homosexuality as a Gift, Not a Sin

          (Link): The New Homophiles: A Closer Look (article) Re: Christian Homosexual Celibates and Christian Homosexual Virgins

          (Link): Christian Double Standards on Celibacy – Hetero Singles Must Abstain from Sex but Not Homosexual Singles

          (Link): The Activist Who Says Being Gay Is Not A Sin – double standards for homo singles vs hetero singles

          (Link): Christians Who Attack Virginity Celibacy and Sexual Purity – and specifically Russell D. Moore and James M. Kushiner

          (Link): Why So Much Fornication – Because Christians Have No Expectation of Sexual Purity

          (Link): Why Do Christians Ask if Homosexuals Can Change Their Orientation – Why Not Explain that Celibacy is an Option?

          (Link): Being Against Gay Marriage Doesn’t Make You a Homophobe (editorial by a homosexual man)

          Why People Rationalize Sexual Sin – You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours

          Why People Rationalize Sexual Sin – You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours

          This was an interesting interview by Janet Mefferd with Robert Reilly,
          (Link): Hour 3- Robert Reilly discusses his book “Making Gay Okay.”

          Reilly unfortunately does get into the perspective that heterosexuality is so necessary and awesome because it is the basis for families, with families supposedly being the basis for society – a view that I don’t totally agree with, see: (Link): Family as “The” Backbone of Society? – It’s Not In The Bible

          Other than that, I pretty much agree with what all else Reilly had to say.

          The points Reilly raises brings to mind a point I too recognized years ago but never thought to blog about before.

          Reilly starts out mentioning that not only do homosexuals rationalize homosexuality, but later he also gets into how heterosexuals have also been helping to rationalize homosexuality.

          Around the 10.25 mark, Reilly tells Mefferd in the interview (link above) that one reason a lot of heterosexual people are jumping up to defend homosexuality now is that they don’t want anyone judging their (hetero) sexual sin (such as adultery or pre-marital sex).

          Continue reading “Why People Rationalize Sexual Sin – You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”

          Confusing Sexual Assault and Sexual Abuse with Consensual Sex and Then Condemning Sexual Purity Teachings – and other, related topics

          Confusing Sexual Assault and Sexual Abuse with Consensual Sex and Then Condemning Sexual Purity Teachings – and other, related topics

          SUMMARY:

            A lot of Christians (usually theologically and politically liberal or moderate) and Non-Christians think that because Christian sexual purity teachings (which includes the teaching that having pre-marital sex is sinful) causes victims of sexual abuse to feel sad, ashamed, or bad, that Christians should drop biblical sexual teachings altogether, or stop insisting that pre martial sex is sinful. I disagree.

          While I am sympathetic to victims of sexual abuse, the Bible none – the – less still teaches that CONSENSUAL sexual activity outside of marriage remains immoral.

          I was skimming over the “Stuff Christian Culture Likes” facebook group today, where I saw a link there to this discussion on Reddit:

            (Link):

          How Christian Purity Culture Enabled My Father’s Abuse, submitted by J__P (aka King Coupons?)

          Here are some excerpts from that page:

            [by JP / King Coupons]

          So, as the daughters [of the self professing Christian men] were kept inside, while the sons worked, the fathers pushed the men with the motivation that one day they’d get to have their daughters, as if that was the only proper motivation.

          I later learned, in college, after I’d already abandoned my faith in God, that this man had regularly abused his daughters, both physically and sexually.

          They were still virgins, though, of course, by the technical standards of the Southern Baptist church.

          Even though he abused them, he’d never “taken their virtue.”

          I even found out that, on the few occasions I had been to their house, I had managed to visit both just after he’d abused them, and just before. That was the man I was supposed to look up to. He was the godly, masculine influence in my life.

          This comes up repeatedly on liberal, emergent, and ex-Christian forums and blogs: throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

          That is, because some self-professing Christians do not, have not, or will not live out biblical ethics that they parrot the rest of the week, this is taken to mean by the liberal Christians, ex Christians, and emergents (and amazingly, even some conservatives these days), that those biblical ethics can, or should, be ignored by everyone all the time.

          I just recently left a post addressing this topic at Sarah Moon’s blog,

            (Link):

          The Answer To Sexual Shame is Not MORE Sexual Shame, Carson T. Clark

          In that post, sexual abuse was discussed and mixed in with sexual purity.

          Here are some excerpts from the page by Clark at Sarah Moon’s blog, with some of Moon’s comments in the mix:

            [Content Note: Sexual and Spiritual Abuse]

          [My understanding is that these are comments by Moon:]

          When I was 16, I dated an abuser who was constantly coercing me into having sex with him.

          I had been raised in fundamentalist purity culture, so I thought of sex as something gross and scary.

          My boyfriend at the time tried to combat those feelings by sending me on guilt trips and by holding me to his manipulative, subjective standards of “responsibility.”

          …Yes, I had a lot of hang-ups about sex because the the culture I’d grown up in, and it was liberating and healthy for me to learn later in life that my sexuality could be a good thing.

          But the fact that purity culture hindered my acceptance of my sexuality does not excuse the way this person treated me for over a year.

          Being in a relationship like this was a horrible process. I constantly felt guilty for not having sex, and then guilty for having sex.

          Even when I consented to sexual activity, I felt violated.

          I never felt like I really had a choice in the matter. I thought it was my responsibility to have sex with him, or I felt afraid of what might happen if I didn’t. I felt trapped, like I didn’t belong to myself and was no longer a person.

          … If you don’t think it is okay to coerce a woman into sex before marriage, but feel that people have the right to coerce married women into having sex with their spouses, I want you to stop and think about why.

          …Clark states that “[f]or the longest time…a marital rape culture existed. Just awful.”

          I’m sorry to say, that marital rape culture still exists, and Clark’s words serve to reinforce it.

          That this person’s boyfriend was an abusive jerk who wrapped his jerk-holery up in “purity” talk does not mean sexual purity teachings themselves are bogus.

          This is part and parcel of the (Link): Genetic Fallacy, by the way.

          If serial killer Ted Bundy were alive today, and if he were to tell you that murder is morally wrong, would you disagree with him and claim the opposite because of the source?

          Would you say, “Nah, murdering people is fine! I’m not going to listen to you, because you have murdered people before, you hypocrite.”

          I doubt that this person’s boyfriend was even a Christian to start with.

          Before you trot out the “No True Scotsman” fallacy, bear this in mind:

          Jesus Christ and Apostle Paul warn in the Bible that not all who claim Christ are actual followers, but are in fact, wolves in sheeps’ clothing who you need to either steer clear of or rebuke

            (see for example

          this link (Matthew 7:21)

            ,

          this link (John 14:15)

            ,

          this link (John 14:23)

            ,

          this link (1 Corinthians 5:11)

            ,

          this link (1 Corinthians 5:1-5)

            ,

          this link (Matthew 7:15)

            ,

          this link (Matthew 7:15-18)

            – I could list several other verses, but you get the idea).

          Quoting Christ (from Matthew 7:21-23):

            “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.

          Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’

          And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

          I am semi-agnostic these days myself, after having been a Christian since my childhood, which makes it a little easier for me to stand apart from Christianity now and assess some of its flaws, or rather, how self-professing Christians are mishandling the faith.

          But then, I can also call Christian-critics on the carpet a bit easier, too.

          Sometimes the people who criticize particular Christians, or how certain teachings are presented by Christians, are absolutely “right on the money,” but sometimes, their criticisms are a huge crock or are inaccurate.

          And in this group I include all of them; full blown agnostics, hard core atheists, luke warm atheists, feminist Christians, liberal Christians, and emergents.

          When you’re not in any one, particular camp any longer, it becomes ten times easier to spot all the fallacies and biases from all sides.

          Returning to Moon’s view that a rape culture exists – I guess she means in Christian marriages, and she mentions this because Clark raised this point first?

          I am unaware of mainstream, every day, Baptist or other conservative Christians, who believe a man has the right to rape his wife or that he should. The Bible certainly does not contain such a teaching, that’s for sure.

          Continue reading “Confusing Sexual Assault and Sexual Abuse with Consensual Sex and Then Condemning Sexual Purity Teachings – and other, related topics”

          Christians Selling Out Hetero Celibacy By Defending Homosexual Behavior – Re: Jars of Clay Controversy

          Christians Selling Out Hetero Celibacy By Defending Homosexual Behavior – Re: Jars of Clay Controversy

          I forget exactly where I first saw this on Twitter, but here it is:
          (Link): Gay Marriage What Does God Say Not Jars of Clay by Shane Idleman

          I don’t like to post solely about homosexuality on my blog. Some of the only times I blog about the topic is how it reflects upon, or intersects with, issues pertaining to hetero celibacy, or how Christians today are dealing with discussing sexual sin.

          As I’ve pointed out previously on this blog the last couple years, the vast majority of Christians – not just Non-Christians, but conservative Christians now – are now attacking sexual purity, celibacy, and virginity.

          Some of them do this on the basis that teaching about those topics causes fornicators, that is, those who willingly had sex before marriage, to feel guilty, offended, or ashamed.

          This page by Idleman points out that some of the same strategies being used to excuse or downplay heterosexual sex sins are also being used to excuse, condone, or downplay homosexual sexual sins.

          Here are some excerpts:

            Gay Marriage What Does God Say Not Jars of Clay by Shane Idleman

            Dan Haseltine (singer for Jars of Clay) used Twitter recently to support gay-marriage; stating,

            “Because most people read and interpret scripture wrong. I don’t think scripture ‘clearly’ states much of anything regarding morality.”

          Many say that we cannot take a position on homosexuality because all positions will hurt someone.

          Here’s my question: “Are those who defend homosexuality, or who say nothing, truly loving the homosexual, or are they simply seeking to avoid conflict?” If they are more worried about being liked than being truthful, do they really care for homosexuals more than the person who is willing to risk their reputation, and quite possibly their safety, in order to speak the truth in love?

          Continue reading “Christians Selling Out Hetero Celibacy By Defending Homosexual Behavior – Re: Jars of Clay Controversy”

          Southern Baptists open to reaching out to LGBT – but still don’t give a flying leap about HETERO CELIBATE UNMARRIED ADULTS

          Southern Baptists open to reaching out to LGBT – but still don’t give a flying leap about HETERO CELIBATE UNMARRIED ADULTS

          Hat tip to radio host Janet Mefferd (I first saw this link tweeted by her earlier today).

          (Link): Southern Baptists open to reaching out to LGBT community

            Leaders at the Southern Baptist Convention are slowly appearing to embrace the idea of a new conversation on gay rights.

            The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, an entity of the SBC, met this week in Nashville for its first-ever conference on sexuality. The gathering brought together more than 200 pastors and religious leaders to discuss “sexual brokenness,” in addition to divorce and pornography.

            Homosexuality dominated the 3-day meeting, with some pastors pushing colleagues for a new tone on reaching out to the LGBT community. “I just think we have to reject redneck theology in all of its forms,” Pastor Jimmy Scroggins told the group Monday night. “Let’s stop telling Adam and Steve jokes.”

          Oh, okay, they’re open “to reaching LGBT,” and we all know they expect married women to “graciously submit” to their husbands, they are discussing divorce, and even their (Link): new site about biblical womanhood is mostly about married mothers, but I guess never-married, celibate / childless women past the age of 30 can go take a hike.

          I don’t have much more to say about any of this here, just please see my previous posts:

          (Link): Southern Baptists (who don’t TRULY support sexual purity) Announce 2014 Sex Summit

          (Link): Southern Baptist’s New Sexist “Biblical Woman” Site – Attitudes in Total Face Palm of a Site One Reason Among Many This Unmarried and Childless Woman Is Saying Toodle-Oo to Christianity

          (Link): Southern Baptists – Still Majoring in the Minors and ignoring the never married (singles) – Why Church Membership is Down

          (Link): Never Married Christians Over Age 35 who are childless Are More Ignored Than Divorced or Infertile People or Single Parents

          (Link): Southern Baptists Perpetuate Myths About Genders, Sex, and Adult Singles at 2014 ERLC Summit – All Women Are harlots, men cannot control themselves

          (Link): Divorce Rates in America Decreasing But Divorce Rates on Increase Among Southern Baptists
          —————————————-
          Related links this blog:

          (Link): What Churches Should Do for Singles by T. Campolo

          (Link): Why Do Christians Ask if Homosexuals Can Change Their Orientation – Why Not Explain that Celibacy is an Option?

          (Link): New website launched to help Christians experiencing same-sex attraction / Editorial about Celibacy by Ed Shaw

          (Link): The New Homophiles: A Closer Look (article) Re: Christian Homosexual Celibates and Christian Homosexual Virgins

          (Link): Church Touts Homosexuality as a Gift, Not a Sin

          (Link): Christian Double Standards on Celibacy – Hetero Singles Must Abstain from Sex but Not Homosexual Singles

          (Link): Christian World Vision Charity Okay and Dandy With Homosexual Marriage But Not Okay With Singles Fornicating

          (Link): Virgin – and Celibate – Shaming : Christian Double Standards – Homosexuals Vs Hetero Singles – Concerning Thabiti Anyabwile and Gag Reflexes

          (Link): Are Christian Singles The New Second Class Christian? by Duke Taber

          (Link): Pew for One: How Is the Church Responding to Growing Number of Singles? by S. Hamaker

          (Link): Isn’t It Time the Church Gave Singles a Break? (editorial from another blog)

          (Link): How American Christians Were Influenced by 1950s American Secular Propaganda to Idolize Marriage and Children and Against Singles and the Childless -and how over-emphasis on “family” and lack of respect for singleness started a backlash against both – [both = marriage, having kids] (excerpts from ‘Pornland’ book)

          Church Holds Church Services in Strip Club

          Church Holds Church Services in Strip Club

          M’kay. I was taught from the time I was a girl that sex was for marriage only. Taught this in Christian books, Christian television shows, church sermons, my parents, and obviously, that was the conclusion I got from reading the Bible on my own as a kid and teen.

          I get into adulthood, still single, still a virgin, and I’ll be darned if most of Christianity today is telling singles and teens,

            “Sex is no big deal! Just use “protection.”
            Don’t feel shamed or dirty about pre-marital sex, and God forgives it anyway.
            Let’s do away with purity culture, it’s so damaging to women! It’s forced on women by the patriarchy!”

          Basically, virginity is not only not valued by self professing Christians today, but it’s also been attacked (yes, see (Link): this (Link): this, (Link): this for a few examples – I have more on the site, but that suffices).

          Soooooooo…. I’m bothering to live by biblical sexual values why, exactly? Nobody else is, Christians are not. Christians are making a mockery out of biblical teachings about sex.

          You can listen about this story on Chris Rosebrough’s show here:
          (Link): Church in a strip club? (audio – pod cast)

          I’m not sure if this story from The Christian Post is related to the story discussed by Rosebrough above, but I think it is:
          (Link): Church Hosts Services on Stage at Local Strip Club for Easter Sunday

          Excerpts

            BY KATHERINE WEBER, CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER
            April 23, 2014|4:42 pm

            A gentleman’s club in Ontario, Canada, opened its doors on Sunday to allow a church to gather. The couple leading the church says it is an attempt to attract those who would feel uncomfortable in a traditional church setting.

            Jack and Sharon Ninaber, who are part of the Elora Road Christian Fellowship, held their first church service at The Manor gentlemen’s club in Guelph over Easter weekend. Sharon, Jack’s wife, told the local CTV television station that when she originally suggested the couple begin holding church services at the strip club, she was joking.

            After discussing the idea further, however, the couple decided the unorthodox services would be a creative way to reach those who would shy away from a traditional church setting. They are specifically hoping to attract residents from Sue’s Inn, a nearby transitional house for the homeless and the addicted.

          Why are Christians so obsessed with strippers? If they are not harping on strippers, it’s African orphans. WTF?
          —————————–
          Related posts this blog:

          (Link): Preachers Who Use Strippers, Hula Girls, Topless Hunky Men, and Strip Poles During Church Services and Give Sex Diplomas to Teens – Yes, Really

          (Link): Stop Rewarding People For Their Failure – Christians Speaking Out of Both Sides of Their Mouths About Sexual Sin – Choices and Actions and How You Teach This Stuff Has Consequences – Allowing Sinners To Re-Define Biblical Terms and Standards

          (Link): ‘Strip Church Network’ Focuses on Stripper Outreach Outside of Las Vegas Sex Industry

          (Link): To Get Any Attention or Support from a Church These Days you Have To Be A Stripper, Prostitute, or Orphan

          (Link): Article: Christians Outreach To Porn Actors and Strippers – But Not To Older Christian Singles

          (Link): U.S. Churches Cancel Services for Football -( Superbowl )- People who are unchurched, dechurched, and preachers who say not attending church is a sin

          Sex After Christianity by R. Dreher

          Sex After Christianity

          This starts out discussing homosexuality or homosexual marriage and moves on to broader sexual topics, and how Christianity impacts societal views of sex and so forth. Very interesting read.

          (Link): Sex After Christianity by R. Dreher

          Excerpts:

            Gay marriage is not just a social revolution but a cosmological one.

            By ROD DREHER • April 11, 2013

            … In a dinner conversation not long after the publication of American Grace, Putnam told me that Christian churches would have to liberalize on sexual teaching if they hoped to retain the loyalty of younger generations.

            This seems at first like a reasonable conclusion, but the experience of America’s liberal denominations belies that prescription. Mainline Protestant churches, which have been far more accepting of homosexuality and sexual liberation in general, have continued their stark membership decline.

            It seems that when people decide that historically normative Christianity is wrong about sex, they typically don’t find a church that endorses their liberal views. They quit going to church altogether.

            This raises a critically important question: is sex the linchpin of Christian cultural order? Is it really the case that to cast off Christian teaching on sex and sexuality is to remove the factor that gives—or gave— Christianity its power as a social force?

            Though he might not have put it quite that way, the eminent sociologist Philip Rieff would probably have said yes. Rieff’s landmark 1966 book The Triumph Of the Therapeutic analyzes what he calls the “deconversion” of the West from Christianity.

            Nearly everyone recognizes that this process has been underway since the Enlightenment, but Rieff showed that it had reached a more advanced stage than most people—least of all Christians—recognized.

            Rieff, who died in 2006, was an unbeliever, but he understood that religion is the key to understanding any culture.

            For Rieff, the essence of any and every culture can be identified by what it forbids.

            Each imposes a series of moral demands on its members, for the sake of serving communal purposes, and helps them cope with these demands. A culture requires a cultus—a sense of sacred order, a cosmology that roots these moral demands within a metaphysical framework.

            … Rieff, writing in the 1960s, identified the sexual revolution—though he did not use that term—as a leading indicator of Christianity’s death as a culturally determinative force.

            In classical Christian culture, he wrote, “the rejection of sexual individualism” was “very near the center of the symbolic that has not held.” He meant that renouncing the sexual autonomy and sensuality of pagan culture was at the core of Christian culture—a culture that, crucially, did not merely renounce but redirected the erotic instinct.

            That the West was rapidly re-paganizing around sensuality and sexual liberation was a powerful sign of Christianity’s demise.

            It is nearly impossible for contemporary Americans to grasp why sex was a central concern of early Christianity. Sarah Ruden, the Yale-trained classics translator, explains the culture into which Christianity appeared in her 2010 book Paul Among The People.

            Ruden contends that it’s profoundly ignorant to think of the Apostle Paul as a dour proto-Puritan descending upon happy-go-lucky pagan hippies, ordering them to stop having fun.

            In fact, Paul’s teachings on sexual purity and marriage were adopted as liberating in the pornographic, sexually exploitive Greco-Roman culture of the time—exploitive especially of slaves and women, whose value to pagan males lay chiefly in their ability to produce children and provide sexual pleasure.

            Christianity, as articulated by Paul, worked a cultural revolution, restraining and channeling male eros, elevating the status of both women and of the human body, and infusing marriage—and marital sexuality—with love.

            Christian marriage, Ruden writes, was “as different from anything before or since as the command to turn the other cheek.”

            The point is not that Christianity was only, or primarily, about redefining and revaluing sexuality, but that within a Christian anthropology sex takes on a new and different meaning, one that mandated a radical change of behavior and cultural norms.

            Continue reading “Sex After Christianity by R. Dreher”

          No Man’s Land – Part 3 – Liberal Christians, Post Evangelicals, and Ex-Christians Mocking Biblical Literalism, Inerrancy / Also: Christians Worshipping Hurting People’s Feelings

          No Man’s Land – Part 3 – Liberal Christians, Post Evangelicals, and Ex-Christians Mocking Biblical Literalism, Inerrancy / Also: Christians Worshipping Hurting People’s Feelings

          BIBLICAL LITERALISM AND INERRANCY

          Another common thread I see on forums for spiritual recovery sites (or ones by ex Christians, liberal Christians, etc), is a rejection of

          1. Biblical literalism
          2. Biblical inerrancy

          This is all so much intellectual dishonesty in another form it makes me want to throw up.

          I spent years studying about the history of the Bible, Bible translation, and so forth.

          I came away realizing that the Bible is inerrant and yes, we can trust the copies we have today; the Bible is not filled with historic blunders and mistakes, and all the other tripe atheists like to claim.

          It is not entirely accurate for critics to paint the Bible as a purely man-made document, that contains mistakes because it was copied and re-copied numerous times over the centuries.

          While there is an aspect of truth to that description, the end conclusion, or how that description, impacts the NIV or NASB Bible version you have sitting on your coffee table right now, is not how critics of the Bible paint it.

          Atheists and ex-Christians who are critical of the Bible are disingenuous and duplicitous in how they paint some of their arguments against the Bible, and they should be ashamed for it, as some of them claim to be truth lovers.

          Not too long ago, an ex-Christian woman at another site was declaring that Christians cannot “trust” the Bible because the originals (called the Autographa) do not exist.

          Oh please! I pointed out to her that is not so: as far as the New Testament is concerned, scholars have many thousands of copies of the Autographa (some dating within decades of the originals), and by use of lower textual criticism, they can reconstruct the READINGS of the Autographa.

          It is not necessary to have “the biblical originals” themselves to know what they said, as she was dishonestly arguing (but she later accused me of being dishonest!).

          I pointed this FACT out to her (about it not being necessary to have the autographa to know what the autographa said), where upon she shot back the falsity that one cannot trust the translations anyway because they are done by “conservatives.”

          Oh, but she is willing to grant liberal scholars or liberal theologians the title of un-biased, as though they do not have an ax to grind against the Bible and dating its documents and so forth?

          Because the liberal scholars do in fact start out their examinations of the Bible from an anti- Christian bias.

          The woman with whom I was corresponding on this matter doesn’t seem to understand that the practice of lower textual criticism is a science – a liberal who uses that methodology would come to the same conclusion as the conservative who uses it.

          So here we have an example of one type of ex-Christian I am talking about:

          This woman claims she was a Christian at one time, now fancies herself atheist or agnostic (and some kind of expert on the Bible), but who now spews inaccurate or untrue things about the Bible, because she disdains all of Christianity in general.

          My view: Do not lie about the Bible’s history, accuracy, and textual evidence just because “Preacher Fred” at your old church was a big meanie to you X years ago (or insert whatever other emotional baggage you carry against Christians that now colors all your other views about the faith and Bible here) – please!

          Give me a freaking break.

          I am genuinely compassionate towards people who have been hurt by churches, but not to the point I cover for their dishonesty about how they discuss church history, the biblical documents, etc.

          Because some of these folks claim to have been hurt by Christians in general, or a particular denomination, or what have you, they feel fine now rejecting biblical literalism and inerrancy.

          Continue reading “No Man’s Land – Part 3 – Liberal Christians, Post Evangelicals, and Ex-Christians Mocking Biblical Literalism, Inerrancy / Also: Christians Worshipping Hurting People’s Feelings”