God Has a Better Way: Official Statement to the Media

Filed under News, Revolution & Justice on July 25th, 2009 by Michael L. Brown

Editor’s Note: This statement was delivered at the God Has a Better Way rally in Charlotte on July 25th.  The statement can be found on the God Has a Better Way website by clicking here.

STATEMENT TO THE MEDIA, JULY 25, 2009

GOD HAS A BETTER WAY RALLY, CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA

DR. MICHAEL BROWN, DIRECTOR, THE COALITION OF CONSCIENCE

www.coalitionofconscience.org; www.godhasabetterway.com

We are here today to reach out and resist – to reach out to the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community with compassion, as neighbors and friends and fellow-workers, and to declare God’s great love for GLBT people. And we are here to resist the gay activist agenda and to send a message to the nation.

As followers of Jesus, we first confess our own sins – our lack of ardent love for homosexual men and women, our lack of compassion for their struggles, our adding to their sense of rejection through insensitive words and deeds. We acknowledge the fact that homophobia is alive and well in some churches, and we renounce and repudiate that hateful and destructive attitude.

Our love also compels us to speak the truth, and we do not believe that all sexual orientations should be celebrated. We do not celebrate the fact that some people believe they are women trapped in men’s bodies; we do not celebrate the fact that two men or two women cannot reproduce their own unique offspring and that same-sex families guarantee that a child will never have either a mother or a father; we do not celebrate the fact that some people choose to surgically mutilate their God-given organs and must take hormones for the rest of their lives just to be at peace with themselves; we do not celebrate the sexual confusion that exists in many young people today, to the point that they can only identify themselves “as genderqueer”; we do not celebrate the pain and brokenness that exists in the lives of many of those attending Pride Charlotte today – completely apart from societal rejection – and we proclaim to our GLBT friends that God has a better way, that there is a place of wholeness and transformation to be found in Jesus. And we are here for the long-term to help them on that journey.

And because of our sense of justice and rightness, we take strong exception to the gay activist agenda. We watch its trajectory, we see where it has gone and where it is going, and we say, “It stops here in Charlotte.”

Since gay pride events have been rallying points for GLBT activism, we take our stand here today and declare:

We don’t believe that elementary school children should be taught to find their “inner-trannie” (meaning their inner transgender identity) as advocated in GLSEN’s training materials

We don’t believe that it is in the best interest of our society to seek to eradicate gender or to multiply it exponentially.

We completely reject the Los Angeles Unified School District Reference Guide when it states that Gender identity “refers to one’s understanding, interests, outlook, and feelings about whether one is female or male, or both, or neither, regardless of one’s biological sex.”

We don’t believe it is good or right for four-year-old children to have their preschool teachers read them books like One Dad, Two Dads, or to be lined up by sneaker color rather than gender so they don’t feel “boxed in.”

We don’t believe in “Queering Elementary Education,” to use the title of a well-known book.

We believe it is outrageous when an African American woman is fired from her university position of vice-president of human resources because she writes an editorial objecting to the concept that sexual orientation is equivalent to skin color.

We believe it is outrageous for the media to cover up the gay identity of a sexual predator who repeatedly raped his adopted, five-year-old African American son and offered him for sex through the internet – for fear of making homosexual couples look bad.

We believe it is outrageous for the mayor of San Francisco to welcome warmly a public fair featuring nude, sado-masochistic displays, and to do so in the name of “diversity.” And what does it say of our country today when our president, in the White House, could say “We are very proud of you” to a man who leads an organization devoted to making harder core pornography more readily available and who says that bestiality is fine as long as the animal doesn’t mind?

We don’t believe in fining a Christian photographer in New Mexico for politely declining to shoot a lesbian commitment ceremony, or punishing an Anglican bishop in England for choosing not to hire an openly gay youth worker, or for putting a lifetime ban on Christian leaders in Canada, forbidding them from expressing the biblical teaching on homosexual practice and threatening them with imprisonment.

We don’t believe in laws that could jail the owner of a Christian bookstore for choosing not to hire a cross-dresser as a receptionist.

We don’t believe in a Hate Crimes bill that is so flawed that even the ACLU is concerned that it could restrict freedom of speech.

We don’t believe it is right for major Charlotte-based companies like Bank of America and Wachovia and Duke Energy to pour tens of thousands of dollars into a radical organization like the Human Rights Campaign, an organization that has stated that supporters of male-female marriage are “right wing extremists” and that mandates that businesses must have special bathroom accommodations for employees undergoing sex-change surgery.

We are saddened by the fact that some of those who came out of the closet forty years now are now trying to put conservative Christians in the closet.

We don’t believe in tampering with the foundations of human society – male-female marriage and family – and creating a new institution previously unknown in human history.

We utterly reject the new theologies that advocate “Queering Christ” and writing “Queer Commentaries” on the Bible, and we say to Charlotte and the nation, “By God’s grace, it stops here.”

So, we say “Enough is enough” to the destructive goals of gay activism, and we say to the GLBT community, “Jesus loves you and God has a better way!”



Spread the Word:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Mixx
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Twitter

Tags: , , , , ,


Possibly Related Posts:

46 comments
Leave a comment »

  1. How dare these people presume to put limits on God’s infinite love. They are bad Christians, and intolerant bullies.

  2. Hey John,

    What limits would you say this event puts on God’s infinite love? Interesting comment. 

    Marc

  3. [...] protest organizers, who dubbed their effort as “God Has A Better Way,” released a statement last night with a long list of well-worn grievances, and declaring that the push for equality “stops [...]

  4. Why is it that fundamentalists can’t seem to recognize that every bad thing that has happened to humanity is linked to fundamentalism? Why do fundamentalists have a pathological need to exceed all others in their hubris and have an unparalleled ability to be obtuse? Who else but a fundamentalist will look you in the eye and claim that they know the mind of God?

  5. “and we proclaim to our GLBT friends that God has a better way, that there is a place of wholeness and transformation to be found in Jesus.”

    Many, Many LGBT people of faith have found that amazing way- have found that Jesus is our wholeness and our TRANSformation!  The better way that God has lead us on is away from narrow views, and into the vastness of God’s love, including God’s love for us as we are created- beautiful Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and GenderQueer people!

  6. Hey guys,

    Have any of you in this God Has a Better Way movement considered that you are setting yourselves up as the opposition to the very community you claim you are trying to reach?

    If you’re lovingly reaching out to GLBT community, then I would expect signs like, “Give the Christ a Chance,” and “I Turned Straight, So Can You!”  and “Go to <ThisSite.Com> to learn how to love normal marriage.”

    Instead, the message relayed is, “We know what you’re up to, and we’re not going to take it.  You will not pervert or schools or ruin our Christian expression.  We love you, but we’ve had it with your agenda.”

    Whether you understand the Bible or not, you’re showing a true inability to predict how moderates, both gay and straight, are going to respond to this.

    Can you “reach out” and “resist” the same people at the same time?  Does that make sense? If you put out your arm to resist, it’s a lot closer to a shove than a handshake. 

    This is why while you may increase the public’s fear of homosexuality, you will not bring any gays closer to Christ.  Instead, you will just change the political climate to be more comfortable for biblical Christians. 

    And is this resistance truly a spiritual movement or a political movement?

    If you do a search the New Testament at biblegateway.com for the word “resist,” you’ll see there are only two things Christians are told to resist, one’s individual sinful nature, and the Devil.  This does not include even “evil people,” or sociological opponents.  Even Jesus did not resist his persecutors and only chastised holy leaders of his own religion at the time, not ordinary folk who disagreed with him.

    In the later epistles as well, I don’t recall Paul trying to get the temple prostitution of Corinth shut down.  In fact, his epistles seem to have a consistent message of “Take care of your own sin, and help other church members.  Let authority do its own thing.”  I know the bible mandates heterosexuality for Christians, but does this GHBT movement have any biblical foundation?  Any at all?

    Maybe it would be better to have one rally for your political mission and another for gay evangelism.  One seriously overpowers the other, and doesn’t even seem to be something an apostle would do.

    –Dan

  7. The religious right has been shooting themselves in the foot since they decided to 180 sane thinking. The Bible isn’t totally wrong, it’s just not quite right. But don’t hurt yourself trying to change a fundies mind joining in their conflict, just pass ‘em by and focus on changing the laws. Oh and yes, um, pray for them, that is . . . after Mathew Shephard and the like.

  8. Many of Mr. Brown’s statements don’t feel like “love”; and definitely don’t feel like understanding.  Mr. Brown, what if a gay couple invited you to dinner at their home?  Would you attend?  Would you be willing to learn about their (probably rather boring) lives?  Would you listen to stories about their life experiences?

    Finally, would you ever dare to walk a mile in their shoes?

  9. A few responses to your comments.

    First, thanks for taking the time to post!

    Gypsy, do you think it’s a bad thing that it was a Bible-believing Christian (what you call a fundamentalist) named William Wilberforce who fueled the anti-slavery movement in the British Empire and who launched the movement that freed slaves worldwide? Was that a bad example of religious fundamentalism? Or that William Carey, a Bible-believing Christian working in India, was the one who got the Hindus to outlaw the burning of women when their husbands died? Or that a large percentage of hospitals worldwide were built by Bible-believing Christians, or that a large percentage of programs to feed the poor were founded and are supported by Bible-believing Christians, or that more than 200 of the first colleges and universities in America were founded by Bible-believing Christians? And is it arrogance and hubris to bow down before God and accept His witness in the Scriptures? Isn’t that rather a sign of humility, not leaning on our understanding alone but submitting to His will instead?

    Lura, do you think God makes people transgender to the point of wanting to have sex-change surgery? If God created someone male on the outside, isn’t it an insult to Him to alter what He created? Wouldn’t it be best for that person to be changed on the inside in order to be in harmony with the body that the Creator gave them? I have a few more questions for you, but can we start with this one? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

    Dan, of course, we’ve wrestled with this issue from day one, and thankfully, we’ve been able to combine both the “reach out” and the “resist.” Yesterday’s rally was primarily a prayer and outreach event, and in the midst of a three hour event, I read a two page statement, posted here – and that was heard at the event almost exclusively by our own people. What everyone else encountered was our compassionate, one-on-one witness, with a desire to continue in dialogue in the coming days. That has been our posture in the city for five years now, and because our tone and one-on-one involvement is consistently loving and respectful, we can air our differences against that backdrop. Also, we always make clear that our issue is with gay activism, and that most GLBT people are not activists.

    DavidMichael, be assured that whatever laws are passed, we will continue to speak and do what is right. We are committed to doing what is right and just and loving, not what is popular.

    Jerry, I’d accept the invitation with joy, and I’d probably hear the same thing from a local gay writer I befriended years ago when we went out to lunch together or from the transgender man (and strong Bible advocate) that I spoke with over dinner with last year. Get the word out to any GLBT folks you know in Charlotte, and as time permits, I’ll gladly accept the invitations.

    I’ve actually invited a number of gay leaders out for meals together (I’m still looking forward to them accepting my invitation), while others in our community have invited folks over to their homes for a meal. Why in the world wouldn’t we do this? I’ve also had lengthy dialogue through email with others, and I personally invited gay and gay-affirming clergy to our church in 2007 for an open forum on “Can You Be Gay and Christian” (sadly, they all declined the invitation, but even the local media recognized our attempts to lovingly engage the GLBT community).

    I do take strong issue with many of the goals of gay activism, as outlined here, but that does not lessen my love for the people and it does not lessen my commitment to sit down and dialogue with them.

  10. Thanks Dr. Brown,

    One last question, and then I’m on my way to a very long, possibly permanent vacation from this site (only so much I can say here before it becomes repetitive).

    Could you address my question of if whatever you’re doing is Biblical?  This is a socio-political resistance movement aimed at citizens of a secular country not in your church.  As I mentioned in my above points, this appears to be completely unprecedented in the New Testament.  Plus Jesus and Paul seemed to have real problems with resisting anyone’s agenda, even clearly evil people.  They only reprimanded explicit members (usually leaders) of their own close religious group, and didn’t seek legislation against heretics, lustful Corinthians, or any of the craziness going on at the time. 

    You might say that the first century was a different period, but I still ask, is there any New Testament precedence to this mission you’ve given yourself?

    Thanks,

    –Dan

  11. Dan,

    A good question!

    First, the Bible of the NT believers was the Tanakh — or the Old Testament, for the sake of Christian readers here who might not be familiar with the term — and the Tanakh was full of examples of the prophets addressing social issues. The NT paradigm is that the prophetic spirit is now on all Spirit-immersed believers.

    Second, this is part of the commission Jesus gave us to be salt and light (see Matt 5:13-16, along with the comments to this passage on the Coalition of Conscience website, under our Mandate).

    Third, we see John the Immerser rebuking Herod for his adulterous marriage and Paul speaking to Felix (who was present with his adulterous wife, Drusilla) about “righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come” — and this was part of his message about faith in Messiah Jesus!

    Fourth, this is just another aspect to the great kingdom of God, repentance themes of the NT. It also ties in with the theme of revival, in which spiritual awakening spills out into soceity with social implications, as happened in Acts 19 in Ephesus.

    Fifth, for me, this is not a socio-political movement of any kind but rather a prophetic justice movement, standing as the conscience of society. On the political end, I do very little at all, amounting to far less than 1% of my time and energy.

    I would also point out that many great social movements — like the freeing of the slaves in England and America — were birthed by Christians feeling a biblical mandate to do what was right and good. We follow in that tradition, even when our good is evil spoken of. As for evil itself — not evil people, but evil itself — it is always to be resisted.

    These are just bulleted thoughts, but I trust they will help answer your question.

  12. Thanks Dr. Brown.

    I’m outta here!

    –Dan

  13. [...] the end of the event, an official statement to the media was read by Dr. Brown, followed by prayer and proclamation from Lou Engle for righteousness to be [...]

  14. [...] “hour is urgent” and that Christians must “turn back the tide of homosexual activism.” In a written statement following his intolerance invasion of Pride, Brown wrote, “Enough is enough to the destructive [...]

  15. Dear Dr Brown,

    I am a believer in Sydney Australia. I love receving your emails and was really excited to hear of how people conducted themselves in Charlotte recently. Here in Sydney we have the world’s largest gay and lesbian mardi gras parade. Please pray for our gay folk here in Sydney as I do for Charlotte and indeed anyone seeking Christ througout the world.

    Dr Brown I would love to invite you to come to Sydney, to see this beautiful place and share in some truly wonderful fellowship.

    Keep up the good work.

    God Bless,

    Grant

  16. It’s amazing how flexible simple logic is when faith is involved. And dude, please tell your Christian friends that nobody is against male-female marriage. That’s insane. You can’t really think that. Seriously?

  17. Howdy Dr. Brown,

    I am afraid I agree with Wayne Besen.  The danger of your action and your preaching – and you know this very well – is that you are laying the foundation for violence against gay, lesbian, and transgender people.  As you and other preachers are increasing your rhetoric, the number of hate crimes increases too.

    You say:

    We don’t believe in tampering with the foundations of human society – male-female marriage and family ……          I can then assume you believe my family and the families of my friends are not as good as your family.  You believe that our children do not deserve to be able to say their parents are married.  You believe I do not deserve the security of Social Security benefits when my husband died.  Dr. Brown, such offends me and my daughter.
    We utterly reject the new theologies that advocate “Queering Christ” and writing “Queer Commentaries” on the Bible …..  Dr. Brown, this is within your church.  Reject these theological concepts from your Sunday School.  I am guessing you reject transsubtantiation and the real presence of God in the Eucharist plus the other six sacraments from your church’s teaching.  I expect you reject Joeseph Smith’s testimony and new gospels too.  So reject this one too.  No problem.

    We don’t believe that elementary school children should be taught to find their “inner-trannie” (meaning their inner transgender identity) …….  Dr. Brown, if that is the case, do not encourage your school district to adopt this in its curriculum.  Easy.  But it is hardly necessary to eliminate all lgbt people in the USA because of a decision the school board should be making.

    We don’t believe that it is in the best interest of our society to seek to eradicate gender or to multiply it exponentially.  …….  Dr. Brown, change is not easy.  I understand that.  I am biologically and psychologically male.  However, my friends are biologically female and psychologically male.  I support their bringing the two into harmony.  You want them to have counseling so the mind and spirit are changed.  They want to change the body.  I do not see a qualitative difference – a very real and significant portion of that which we call human is being radically changed either way.  It is their personhood – not yours or mine – let them decide what gets changed.  Yes Dr. Brown, this is a hard one t swallow at first – but trust me, these are really nice people.  You will learn to love them.
    We completely reject the Los Angeles Unified School District Reference Guide when it states that Gender identity “refers to one’s understanding, interests, outlook, and feelings about whether one is female or male, or both, or neither, regardless of one’s biological sex.” ……..  Dr. Brown, I sure am glad you were not around after my Mom had her hysterectomy.  Darn tooting her being a woman has nothing to do with her having a womb, nothing a all.  I have a minor birth defect that mars my penis – but I am still a man – I feel it inside.  Dr. Brown, don’t be so quick to say how we define male and female until you have had your genitals blown off or your wife or daughter has had to under go horrible surgery due to cancer.  When that occurs you will see that yes indeed we are male and female in our minds first and foremost.
    We don’t believe it is good or right for four-year-old children to have their preschool teachers read them books like One Dad, Two Dads, or to be lined up by sneaker color rather than gender so they don’t feel “boxed in.”
    We don’t believe in “Queering Elementary Education,” to use the title of a well-known book.  ……  Agin, Dr. Brown, take it up with your local school board.  Don’t try to eliminate all lgbt people in the USA.  That’s a bit of overkill, don’t you think?
    We believe it is outrageous when an African American woman is fired from her university position of vice-president of human resources because she writes an editorial objecting to the concept that sexual orientation is equivalent to skin color.  ….  Dr. Brown, do NOT bear false witness.  Crysal Dixon did more than that.  She held a position at the university where she was in charge of protecting the gay an lesbian students and faculty and staff from discrimination.  Then she writes a public opinion piece saying, in essence, that gays and lesbians do not deserve anti-discrimination protections.  Her “opinion” was in direct opposition to the university’s policy which she was paid to enforce.  It was NOT just sexual orientation vs race.  Dr. Brown, this is an example of purposeful false witness and you should be ashamed of yourself. 
    We believe it is outrageous for the media to cover up the gay identity of a sexual predator who repeatedly raped his adopted, five-year-old African American son and offered him for sex through the internet ……  Dr. Brown, I really think this “they did not report he was gay” is a myth.  I read about the professor being gay and living with a man in most all the articles I read about this tragic and horrific crime.  This crime is as horrific as the rape of the 8 year old in the Liberian community in Arizona this week past.  Just horrible.  I hope this GAY guy never sees another day out of jail.  But I read about his being GAY all over the Net in many many newspapers.
    We believe it is outrageous for the mayor of San Francisco to welcome warmly a public fair featuring nude, sado-masochistic displays, and to do so in the name of “diversity.”   ……  Dr. Brown, you just do not understand San Francisco.  The straight Bay to Breakers race features more nudity than any gay street fair AND more marijuana.  Just a San Francisco tradition.  Folsom and Dore Alley are both held South Of Market … you have to look for the fair and make an effort to get there.  No tourist or familoy out for walk is going to stumble on it.  People are there on purpose, want to be there, know what to expect, and enjoy themselves a great deal – and have for years.  They raise a great deal of money for many charities.  I do not understand why it concerns you so.  Your bake sales don’t bother me in the least.

    And what does it say of our country today when our president, in the White House, could say “We are very proud of you” to a man who leads an organization devoted to making harder core pornography more readily available and who says that bestiality is fine as long as the animal doesn’t mind? ….. Are you proud of every silly thing you wrote or said decades ago?  I’m not.  We all have the right to have been young and foolish.
    We don’t believe in fining a Christian photographer in New Mexico for politely declining to shoot a lesbian commitment ceremony,   …….  Dr. Brown, a women was open for business and discriminated based on sexual orientation – in violation of New Mexico law.  Would it be OK if I asked you to leave my restaurant if I saw that you were carrying a Bible – if I were real polite and told you I did not serve Christians?  Would it be OK if I politely told you I did not photograph Baptist weddings – that mini-pool gave me the creeps?  If you are open for business, you have to obey the non-discrimination laws – plain and simple.

    or punishing an Anglican bishop in England for choosing not to hire an openly gay youth worker, or for putting a lifetime ban on Christian leaders in Canada, forbidding them from expressing the biblical teaching on homosexual practice and threatening them with imprisonment.  We don’t believe in laws that could jail the owner of a Christian bookstore for choosing not to hire a cross-dresser as a receptionist.   ….. These ae all under foreign law … no First Amendment!!!  Just will not happen in USA!!!
    We don’t believe in a Hate Crimes bill that is so flawed that even the ACLU is concerned that it could restrict freedom of speech.   …..  So Dr. Brown, you don’t want “sexual orientation” ADDED to the hate crimes law.  Are you OK with “religion” already being part of the hate crimes law?  Maybe you think we should take “race and religion” off the hate crimes law.
    We don’t believe it is right for major Charlotte-based companies like Bank of America and Wachovia and Duke Energy to pour tens of thousands of dollars into a radical organization like the Human Rights Campaign,  ……BE VERY CAREFUL HERE DR BROWN I do not believe you want to get into the business of telling people where to give their money to non-profit organizations and churches.  That is a very slippery slope.

    We are saddened by the fact that some of those who came out of the closet forty years now are now trying to put conservative Christians in the closet.  ….. This is just silly.  You do not understand the closet or you would not say this.

    Dr. Brown, you preach peace while confronting.  Confrontation is minor violence.  What you seek is harm for my family.  That is unacceptable.   I really wish you would build a large and wonderful faith community and let the secular community grow as it will.

    Richard in Northern California

  18. Bob,

    Would you like to redefine marriage that so that it no longer carries the only meaning it has in human history — namely the union of a man and a woman — and change that definition to the union of two people? Once you answer this, I can respond to your point. Thanks!

  19. Richard,

    Thanks so much for taking the time to respond at such length. I really do appreciate it.

    I will not respond to Wayne Besen’s hysterical and ridiculous “inciting to violence” charges (which you echo), anymore than I would respond to charges that I was leading a neo-Nazi Taliban movement of Jewish Martians who were ready to overthrow the government in the name of Freemasons Mermaid Dwarfs.

    The rest of your email, however, is absolutely worthy of interaction, although time does not permit me to get into a point for point response, to which you can then respond again, and then I in turn will respond. Suffice it to say here that, just as you have issues with my statement, I have issues with your responses, but I believe we can have these differences in a civil way.

    One of my relatives is a transsexual (MTF; I’m not sure what stage of change he’s in right now, but he has shared a little of his tearful journey with me); another (now deceased) relative was a former gay man who did successfully change; I have dialogued at length with others who challenge my viewpoints, and I would welcome the opportunity to do the same with you if circumstances ever allowed for it.

    If all the laws turn against my own moral and societal views, I will continue to practice my faith, by God’s grace, and I will continue to reach out to those who differ with me. As followers of Jesus, it is our life practice to renounce hatred and anger and violence, to put down the sword and to take up the cross.

    You and I live in a relatively free society, we have the right to vote according to our values, and we have the right to differ with each other, within the bounds of legal propriety. Your analogy about my differences with Catholicism and Mormonism is germane: I don’t agree with aspects of these faiths (more so with the latter than the former), but I have Catholic friends, I often interact with Mormons on my daily radio show (in a non-hostile way), and where we can work together for the common good of society we do. My posture towards you as a gay American would be just the same.

    As to the nature of my confronting GLBT issues, as much as it may surprise you, this came knocking at my door rather than me going to look for it. Moreover, I could supply you with incendiary quotes from some of the best known GLBT authors and activists in the country that make it clear that their revolution is coming my way. Yet even so, I understand that from their point of view, they are fighting for their civil rights; from my point of view, I am standing for the best interests of the society. Either way, I trust we will continue to pursue our respective visions with civility.

    One last note regarding your final paragraph: I do confront issues, you are correct; I do reach out to people in Jesus’ name and preach peace. You are correct again! From your viewpoint they are contradictory; from mine they are harmonious. Perhaps with further reflection you can see things from my point of view, at least in part.

    As for building a faith community that does not interface with the secular community, how can that be? And where does one draw the lines between the two? And how is each identified to the exclusion of the other? And if Jesus calls His faith community to be the light of the world and warns us not to put our light in a hidden place, how, pray tell, can we be loyal to Him and fulfill your wishes? If faith communities in America had stayed out of the “secular community,” many of our greatest universities would not exist; many of our finest hospitals would not exist; slavery would not have been abolished and there would have been no civil rights movement.

    Once again, I appreciate you taking the time to write at such length, I appreciate your tone, and I do hope that one day we can discuss these issues face to face.

  20. Richard,

    One more question (upon re-reading your post). More than once you write, “Don’t try to eliminate all lgbt people in the USA.”

    Where in the world did you ever get the idea that I was seeking to “eliminate” LGBT people (or anyone else, for that matter) in the USA? Differing with gay activism is one thing; “eliminating” people is not in the same universe. Please do clarify.

  21. Dr. Brown

    I really love it when Christians ask this question:

    “Would you like to redefine marriage that so that it no longer carries the only meaning it has in human history — namely the union of a man and a woman — and change that definition to the union of two people?”

    Let’s see … what has “marriage” meant in human history?  Hmmmm  Well, for the Kings of Israel like David and Solomon it meant one man, many wives, and many more concubines.  And God smiled and said this is good!  In human history, eh?  Well, for the Chinese, marriage has often meant #1 wife and #2 wife, etc to one man. …. same in Persia, if I read my history correctly.  In fact, for most of humanity, for most of human history, “marriage” has meant one man, many wives + a few concubines.  It was good enough for Father Abraham and you say it isn’t OK for me?   Hmmmm, pretty judgemental of you and in direct opposition to the Word of God.   So if we want to keep the meaning of marriage that has lasted the longest in human history then let’s do it:  One man – many wives – many concubines – women are property without rights, they can be beat for discipline or locked away – they are chattel as are their children.  THAT is the meaning of “marriage” that has held sway longest in human history.

    One man-one women in a nuclear family came about in the 1950′s – it is a real recent invention.  And with the pill, children are no longer a necessaary part of marriage.  With elderly people getting hitched, children are no longer a necessary ingrediant of marriage.  With sterile couples and couples who do not want children, children are NOT necessary for a marriage to be valid.  All it takes are two people.

    Now we want to include two loving people as married.  Seems reasonable to me.

    Another thing Dr. Brown.  You keep giving Christians credit for ending slavery.  But the Bible is very clear in both the Old Testament and in the New Testament – slavery is A-OK with God Almighty and His Church.  It was clearly preached as OK in the Southern Baptist vs the American Baptist and in the Southern Methodist vs the Northern Methodist … it was not until what … the 1960′s … that the Methodists finally became the United Methodist Church again.  Slavery ended when the industrial age made machines to do the work slaves used to do.  But the Bible clearly supports human slavery.  I would be a bit more careful waving that flag.

    I am not in NC but live on a mountain top in Northern CA.  Me, 3 dogs and 1 cat.  My beloved husband died in January 2008.  Even though we were registered as Domestic Partners with all the rights of married persons, the sheriff-coroner refused to recognize me as next of kin.  I had to call my brother in law in New York State to choose a funeral home and make arrangements.  Imagine that Dr. Brown … you and your family negated completely at the moment of greatest stress.  You can’t imagine the horror.  All because we were not “married.”  I was a nobody, a room mate to this man I love more than life itself.  I still shiver in remembering it.

    Oh yes, that’s right Dr. Brown … just part of the gay activism.  Who cares if people’s lives are torn apart.  Who cares if men’s hearts are torn asunder and can never be made whole again.  As long as that darn “agenda” is stopped, what’s a few battle casualties?

    Dr. Brown, from what you have written here, you want:

    Our kids and their friends NEVER to hear about gay or lesbian families or children in public schools.

    Businesses to be free to discriminate all they want based on sexual orientation or gender identity.  You want landlords to be able to refuse to rent to a lesbian couple with kids.  You want a bank to be able to refuse to give a mortgage to couple of gay men wanting to buy a home together.  You want restaurants to have the freedom to refuse service to customers who appear to be transgender.  You want hotels and bed and breakfasts to feel completely at ease to refuse service to a lesbian couple or a single gay man.  That’s what discrimination laws like the one in New Mexico are all about.

    You want every city in America to only hold street fairs and events that conform to the ideals and standard of behavior acceptable to your faith community.  But what about the standards of the mosque down the street?  Or the Wiccan Coven in the next street over?

    I could go on but I am tired …. the point is, Dr. Brown, that you want gays and lesbians and transgenders painted into a tiny corner.  Eliminated.  Invisible in schools.  Invisible on TV and in the movies.  Discriminated against by businesses AND by employers.  Forced step by step back into the closets of the 1950′s.  Eliminated for the public’s view.

    It is the only logical end to what you are preaching.  Elimination.

    Richard

  22. Richard,

    Yes, I noticed that  you were in N. California rather than N. Carolina and corrected the post.

    I’m not going to get into a thorough point by point response, but I will offer a few quick thoughts.

    1) With regard to the Bible and slavery, if  you want the whole story, you can watch my lecture online for free: http://coalitionofconscience.askdrbrown.org/resources/2008_lecture_monday.html.

    2) With regard to marriage, it was not the historic norm for one man to have many wives, but again, you did prove my point: Marriage has always been about the union of a man and a woman (which was my point) rather than the union of two people. But it’s clear from your post that  you have some issues with the institution itself.

    3) With regard to educating children, there are lots of things we don’t teach them in school. Why should they be taught to “discover their inner-trannie”? Or, conversely, why shouldn’t they be taught about polygamy — or hosts of other practices and lifestyles? Just because a small percentage of the population does something doesn’t mean everyone should be taught about it.

    4) I don’t doubt that you deeply loved your partner, but it is not the role of the government to sanction every loving relationship or to provide special benefits to every loving relationship. I’m sure you can think of loving relationships you wouldn’t want to sanction.

    5) It’s clear that you do agree that people of faith should not be able to hold to their religious convictions. With regard to Elaine Photography in New Mexico, the lesbian couple had a host of other choices for getting photos done. Sadly, in your new world order, a Christian doesn’t have the right to politely decline to do something contrary to their faith.

    6) As for gay presence on the media, really now, you should know better than this. GLAAD and other organizations have made TV and movies into a veritable propaganda machine for GLBT issues, to the point of totally disproportionate presence. The most recent GLAAD survey indicated that of HBO’s original series, 42% of the programming contained gay characters — in contrast with about 3% of the national population identifying as gay or lesbian.

    7) You are free to hold whatever fair you want in a city, as are Muslims and others, and we are free to reach out and these events and proclaim our message as well. That’s part of our free society.

    You can use the word “eliminate” all you want to, but that’s your word, and not mine. And you can tell me what I really want as far as discrimination laws, but again, that’s your definition and not mine.

    What you are basically telling me is that I’m not free to hold to my convictions and to live them out, and you want a world where my views would be kept in the closet of the “faith community.” That, sir, will not happen.

  23. Dr Brown

    We shall agree to disagree about the length of time 1 man many wives has been the norm for humans over the last … oh 10,000 + years.  Let’s agree to disagree over how many communities and societies have graciously supported man-man and woman-woman couples.  You and I will never agree on these facts.

    With regard to slavery, I will not listen to your lecture … I will read the Bible and read history.  I will read the history of the Northern Abolition movement in the USA AND I will read the Southern Christian response.  Both are fascinating.  I will read Biblical exhortations for slaves to obey their masters also not to mention Leviticus.  Human slavery has been a part of human history for a very long time.  God seems to be A-OK with it.

    Education – we do our kids a grave disservice when we teach them that “family” means mom-dad-kids.  Two reasons: for many (if not most) kids in the classroom, that is not what their family looks like.  It makes them feel weird.  Second, it does not prepare the kids for the real world.  There are may types of families- single parent, kids raised by grandparents, kids with two dads or two moms (70,000 in CA alone) kids in foster care, adopted kids, families without kids … lots of “families”   Kids should be taught that “family” means all kinds of combinations – including gay ones.  “Inner trannie”?  I’ll give you that one!  LOL

    Your #4 is such a deep and personal insult – such a direct stab at my grieving heart that I will stop here.

    The point, Dr. Brown, as shown in your #4 and again in your #5, is that your words of peace are a lie.  I heard your #5 in my youth in South Carolina only directed at African Americans like our President.  In fact I heard your #4 directed at inter-racial marriages in my youth.  It strikes me that the words of bigotry do not change though the targets do.

    Dr. Brown, you are using the Bible and your position to color your personal bigotry as “rightousness.”  But it isn’t righteous, not at all.

    Dr. Brown, I shared with you a moment of deeply personal pain – of being negated and treated as a no one when my husband died (contrary to the laws of California)  That share was of a very painful moment in my life.  And you replied in #4 above.  That is cold and heartless, sir – and says more about your goals than anything else you can ever write.

    Good day.  Please keep your icy heart far away from me and mine.

  24. Richard,

    I’m truly sorry if my comments sounded cold to you. It was not my intent to be insensitive, and I see how my short reply could have sounded harsh to you. Please forgive me for this. FYI, just today I sat and spoke with a local lesbian activist about the pain that her community suffers, and she was able to be candid with me because she knew that I really did care.

    So, I’ll not reply to the rest of your post (which, if I understand correctly, will suit you just fine), and I will simply ask God to flood your life with His love and goodness in a way beyond anything you have ever experienced.

  25. Dr Brown

    It is right and proper that our last two posts not appear on this site – we both crossed the line.  “Vitriolic” ?  That is quite a word!  You preachers certainly do have a colorful vocabularly. 

    As to where I got my ideas about your positions, it is obvious you oppose same sex marriage.  Courts in many states have ruled that the word “marriage” conveys dignity and respect to families.  They are correct.  I told you I had a Domestic Partnership with my deceased husband and you replied that some relationships should not be sanctioned by the state or given any special rights by the state.  From these two positions of yours I reasoned that you believe gay and lesbian families are second class and not as good as straight families.

    As far as discrimination goes, in your video advertising the Charlotte action and above, you express disapproval for New Mexico’s discrmination law for which a photographer was fined.  You wrote to me: “Sadly, in your new world order, a Christian doesn’t have the right to politely decline to do something contrary to their faith.”  If you believe a Christian should have the right to discriminate against lgbt persons as photographers, then reason follows you would hold the same for all businesses – hotels, restaurants, banks, etc.  And if discrimination is OK against consumers then it must follow it is OK for employers.  Simple logic.  Either discrimination against lgbt people is OK or it isn’t.  I do not see gray here.

    Regarding teaching about lgbt families in schools, you wrote: “3) With regard to educating children, there are lots of things we don’t teach them in school. Why should they be taught to “discover their inner-trannie”? Or, conversely, why shouldn’t they be taught about polygamy — or hosts of other practices and lifestyles? Just because a small percentage of the population does something doesn’t mean everyone should be taught about it.”  I took you at your word.

    That’s how I arrived at the things I wrote about you.  I wanted you to know.

    As to the rest, I should have said it more lovingly if such is possible.  But it needed to be said.  It is not for me to attempt to change you – not at all.  When I do see something as glaring as what I wrote, I will point it out.  You will make of it what you will – change for the better or stay the same – your free choice.

    I am sorry that you chose to attack the messanger rather than really read the message.  Very sorry indeed.  But I have done my job.

    Farewell

    Richard

  26. Richard,

    The editor of VOR removed your post because of your personal attacks, which crossed the line. My reply to your post, which crossed no lines of decorum, was removed at my request since it replied to your previous post, which was subsequently removed. So, I haven’t the slightest clue as to what you’re referring to about both of us crossing lines, and it is quite misleading to other readers here to think that I replied to your invective with invective of my own.

    You know full well that I have not hurled any insult your way. I simply hold that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, that we should not redefine marriage in a way that has been historically unknown in human history (as a recognized institution), that kids should not be put into a situation that guarantee they will have either no mother or no father, and that homosexual practice is morally objectionable and should not be taught in our schools.

    Of course, all of this is felt by you as a personal insult, but I cannot deny my convictions, convictions which are based on Scripture and, over the course of time, will, I trust, be demonstrated sociologically.

    You still have some leaps of logic in your thinking (thereby putting words into my mouth and beliefs into my heart that I have neither spoken nor held to), you still fail to realize how the legitimizing of homosexuality means the delegitimizing of any opposition to homosexual practice, and you still do not know me at all in terms of my heart.

    But I do appreciate you taking the time to express your views here, I hold nothing against you for some of the ways you expressed yourself (especially in the post that was removed), and what you have written here certainly helps our readers see your side of the situation more clearly, and for that I am grateful.

  27. Richard,

    If you have any issues with my comment moderation, feel free to send me an email: editor@voiceofrevolution.com

    Marcus French
    Editor: Voice of Revolution

  28. Mr French … no problem with your moderation … this is yall’s forum and not mine, moderate as you see fit.  I moderate where I moderate by my rules and you moderate by yours.

    Dr Brown, I have read my offending post and your response.  If I crossed the line, and Mr. French thinks I did, then so did you.  I am perfectly capable of accepting responsibility.  But that is really a minor issue.

    Dr. Brown, you keep saying that I am making leaps of logic regarding your beliefs on the politics of lgbt rights.  I think we agree that you believe gay families should not be discussed in public schools.  They should be completely ignored.  Is that right?  When kids are taught sex education in public (not private) schools, do you believe they should be taught there is such a thing as homosexuality or should that be ignored?  I am curious.

    Dr. Brown, I took what you said about the photographer in New Mexico to its logical conclusion.  Is that incorrect?  Do you believe civil law ought to provide anti-discrimination protection based on sexual orientation in some circumstances?

    You are a powerful voice in the Evangelical Church in the South and in the USA.  If I am not clearly understanding your position on lgbt civil rights, then I need to sincerely apologize and learn what your position is … on domestic partnerships/civil unions and the questions I have asked above.  I think I understand your Biblical and moral convictions – that homosexual acts are immoral and not pleasing to God.  But I thought I was clear about your civil stance – but you tell me I am mistaken.  Please clarify.

    Also Dr. Brown, in your ministry, do you believe men and women have a same sex orientation that they must deal with in a moral fashion?  I heard a Catholic priest give a homily, preaching that gay men and women were probably created gay – but were called by God to live a celebate life … just as he was called to live chastely.  Do you, Dr Brown, believe men and women can have a natural homosexual orientation?

    And I have a final question for you Dr. Brown.  I honestly am not being a wise acre in asking this.  This question has crossed my mind – I ask it in humility in honesty and in a spirit of Truth.  You may very well choose not to answer this question in this public a forum.  I would certainly understand that.  You may choose not to answer this question to a gay man.  I would understand that.  But I will ask the question all the same.

    Dr. Brown, I am certain that in the weeks leading up to Charlotte’s LGBT Festival, both you and Rev. Engle and many others lifted your hearts in prayer to God.  I am certain you asked God to bless your enterprise and to send Christians to join you so that the “gay agenda” could be stopped in Charlotte.  In your video and the writings I saw, I heard you and others expecting 1,000 or more Christians on that Saturday.  I heard an intent to encircle the Festival with Christians to worship and pray.  I feel certain that many sincere and heartfelt prayers beseiged God to this end.

    On the day of the Festival only 500 or so Christians were moved to come out to worship and pray at the Festival with you.  This low number really surprised me for Charlotte.  With the population centers of Greenville and Spartanburg SC only 2 hours away not to mention all the population centers of NC within 2 hours driving distance plus all the good Christians of Charlotte itself – I thought your initial estimate of 1,000 was on the low side.

    Dr. Brown, you and Rev. Engle are well respected and popular leaders in Evangelical America.  I cannot believe it was you.   What does it tell you about God’s plans, about how God is working within the hearts of Christians that only 500 people showed up at the Festival?

    As I said, tough question … I don’t expect a full answer in public or to a gay man like me ( though I would like one – I do not expect one) but I wanted to ask the question anyway.  The low number shocked me.  Did it surprise you?

    Richard

  29. Richard,

    Thanks for the many questions and for your gracious tone. Here are my responses:

    I’m not keen on the often amoral tone of sex-ed teaching in the schools, and I speak here primarily of heterosexual issues. With regard to homosexuality, I believe it should be taught as something that exists (as if the young teens didn’t know that), but not as an morally acceptable variant to heterosexuality. Re: gay families being completely ignored in the schools, in a sociology class it would be fine to tell the students that there are many different types of families, including even polyamorous families these days (or, explaining that polygamy exists in some cultures, and that here in America there are same-sex families, etc.). But that is not something to teach an elementary school child, where kids are learning the norm not the exception.

    Re: discrimination laws, Elaine Photography had declined to do another shoot because of the horror content involved, and I believe that was her prerogative. In my view, she could also decline to shoot a Hindu wedding ceremony because of the idolatrous invocations. On the other hand, if she owned a restaurant or a bank, she could put up a sign that said, “Shirts and shoes required,” and anyone who violated that would not be welcome. But anyone who did not violate that should be served, period, including a drag queen. However, I do not believe that sexual orientation and gender identity should be specially identified in discrimination laws because of levels of ambiguity in the definitions and because there are choices one makes in the public expression of those categories. So, you took my logic way beyond where it actually went.

    Re: domestic partnerships and same-sex marriages, I don’t believe they’re in the best interest of society, and that’s all the government is interested in when it gets involved in marriage. I know this is tremendously offensive to you as a person, but I do hold to them.

    Re: the morality of same-sex orientation, first, I don’t believe that God creates someone with that orientation, but I do believe in most cases it is extremely deeply rooted, probably the result of several factors (biological and environmental, etc. – really, just the standard view here). That being said, I agree with the Catholic view that same-sex orientation is a disordered condition (again, I’m sorry if those words wound you; I’m simply trying to be candid, as you requested), but it is not a sin to have same-sex attractions. It is a sin to act on those attractions. Does that mean celibacy? If a person truly wants to please God and is not able to see a change in their orientation, then yes, it would mean celibacy, but in such a case, I would hope that God would be so real and rich in that person’s life that the love of another human being would pale in comparison.

    Re: your final question, I’m not in the least bit troubled or surprised by it, and I think it’s a great question. And I have not the slightest problem in answering candidly.

    In the past, the largest number of Christians we were able to rally for evangelism and prayer at a gay pride event was 125 – and the great majority of them were students or grads from our ministry school. And, to my knowledge, it was one of the largest gatherings of its kind. Most Christians are not eager to attend a gay pride event and tend to be quite non-confrontational. So, when I began to feel the call to gather 1,000 Christians to Pride Charlotte for 2009, I was quite daunted by the figure. It seemed totally out of range!

    However, since that was what I felt in my heart to call for, I never backed down from the number, even though in the days leading up to the event, I wasn’t sure if we would have even 100 show up. In that light, a little over 500 was quite an extraordinary number, far and away the largest Christian gathering at a gay pride event anywhere in the world, to my knowledge, and already, other Christian leaders in other cities are getting tremendously encouraged by the example that was set. See, e.g., http://americansfortruth.com/news/a-model-christian-response-to-gay-pride-god-has-a-better-way-in-charlotte.html.

    Also, those who worked with me on the event were quite encouraged by the turn-out as well. And as for Lou Engle, he only put out an e-blast encouraging people to join us one week before the event, making it hard for people to come on such short notice. I would be delighted if your expectations for more than 1,000 would have been realized (or will be realized in the future)!

    All that being said, we are looking for ways to improve the effectiveness of the event in the future, although we did just as intended in terms of surrounding the event with prayer and worship. (From the start, we never intended to form a physical wall of people around the event; we intended to position small worship teams and prayer bands around the event, and that we did.) Also, it would have been fine if I had said that our goal was to gather 1,000 for our event, as opposed to announcing it in advance as if it had been a fact, since I never had any earthly assurance that we could draw anywhere near that total.

    I hope this helps!

  30. All said, with antidiscriminaton posters about sexual orientation posted in the elementary schools here in Boulder, Colorado, where my kids are impacted the question now is, Dr. Brown, what do we do about it?  How do we change the drift toward absurdity and evil being upheld as good, and good as evil?  Where “in the last days men shall be lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God?”  What goals and objectives for action which addresses the problem can you now offer, all said?

    Or is it the choir director preaching to the choir, who are carefully seated, orchestrated, and led in an echo of a kind of liturgy?  What change agents can we introduce to now make a difference, that are not yet in play, to face the peril at hand?

    M. Gandhi spent many years in prison and sitting with positive centering meditation to find strength from within to strategize to overcome his anger, over obvious blind injustice, and conditions of oppression from a supposed Christian cultural occupier of his own nation (who misunderstood their own stewardship and the servant model of Jesus).  In other words, Gandhi used the energy released by indignation to capture, control, and cultivate his own ability to resist injustice, to form objectives and rally alike minds to protest and act with passive resistance and begin change.  Further, there was introduced into that “revolution” the politically actie truth-love-force of nonviolent noncooperation.  Followers thereby were jailed and thought of as too radical.  Wasn’t this involved in the motivation of Jesus the man submitting to Jesus the Messiah-King to fulfill all righteousness?

    M. Luther King included M.G. in his own well sourced inspirational reference material for what he positioned and humbled himself to act to do.  There then is a cross cultural case where what Fa. Keating of Snowmass Colorado teaches for internalization for believers from the living word through prayer disciplines can be harnessed for good: through the resulting magnification of self control, reorientation of the heart, creative insight, and centering prayer outcomes.  This seems to be a different behavior of consequence than j rallies and reasoning exclaimed through declarations about the absurdity our culture has permitted, and then embraced at all levels of society.

    In a nation “ruled by law,” with the model of the Sermon on the Mount and Romans 12 as standing for self sacrifice on the altar of calling and service, how now do believers “confront the culture,” going its indulgent way?  How can “the Way” overcome and triumph as to what you have now proclaimed as absurd?  What do you propose for the “Voice of Revolution” listeners and readership?

  31. I have a daughter that is in this lifestyle…….I can love her for her but I wont acccept what she is CHOOSING thats not Gods plan for her life or anyone elses life…its a lie from the pit of hell….satan is a great decepter …BUT our God is greater….AMEN

  32. So, apparently it is OK in this forum to alike object, and highlight agreed upon offenses over issues, and agree on labeling sins according to what God upholds; to address the obvious weird undermining of godly tendencies of our culture with its lack of sound boundaries, the question has been asked by me–with the example of Martin Luther King cited, and his motivational references for his actions made–what do we do about it in this nation governed by law?  Where law permits gross sin, what do we do about it?  No reply has come forth.

    The obvious drift in the USA of a permissive liberty law standard for personal reference alone is to not interfere with lifestyle choices and their related privacy issues as being sacrosanct in our society. 

    E. Stanley Jones, the American Missionary to India, who knew M. Gandhi, was also cited by M. Luther King among his inspriational references for acting on Nonviolent passive resistance over existing law affecting his people. This was an entrenched system which cultivated injustice, and priveledged some at the expense of many others.  Yeshua was clearly motivated too by resistance to such law being upheld in established practices of social bearing in his Nation, over its injustice permeating a National conscience, or lack thereof: all so by the time Herod the Great bolstered the second temple period with a social-political acceptance of leaders with corrupt and vain hearts as National religious leaders.  Roman law and its power for political leadership appointments at regional levels then was used by that appointed leadership to uphold false understanding and regard of what made up an acceptable religious practice.  Where are we as a nation on this matter today? 

    In the Sermon on the Mount much of what Yeshua outlined was in opposition to the traditions which had crept into the acceptably socialized religion of his nation–which was in part Bible based in origins, but altered from its spirit, its literal God given decrees, and related application of understanding in upheld social constructs.

    A question has been asked and ignored regarding what do we do about it, not just how shall we as believers live independent of this status quo?  No answers have been forthcoming from the “Voice of Revolution,” which leads to suspicion that that voice may be about giving voice to what seems obvious to believers, not giving direction for what does not seem so obvious.  If a group of believers is compelled to raise its voice, what actions can it offer or suggest for those heeding such a voice?

  33. OR, shall we just go with what is, perhaps change our religion and utter OOMMMM, or not upset the apple cart by inconvenient choices?  It is as problematic as passivity for those justified by the blood of the Lamb to do nothing at all about these problems and tendencies rampant among us.  I am looking here for suggestions on what to do about the evidenciary drift given in the “God Has a Better Way” treatise.  On what door can this be nailed?  How organizationally can those who agree with it now proceed?  If an organization with a title about Revolution is merely going to cite the problem, without offering solutions, how does it differ from any other “Yes, we believe like we believe, and we are right” religious creed bearing group?

  34. Patience, Jabez. We are providing lots of information through our varied resources that people can read and listen to and be educated by, and we are seeking to provide model responses on a range of relevant issues. So, no one is being ignored. Your questions are quite pertinent, and I encourage you to avail yourself of everything we have put together so far and to pray for our ongoing efforts. Thanks!

  35. Please summarize three actions so given by what you mention, and titles for considered actions.   By patience we inherit the promises, but, specific promises are usually cited for such regard.  Building bandwagonism is not offering clear direction, but consensus alone.

  36. Prayer is a daily reality here, including for your organization.  What is coming up in it has just been written about regarding now offering specific what to do agenda for considered adoption.  We are not only seeking to agree, but seeking to know, understand, and be and do.

  37. Jabez,

    You seem like a studious gentleman. How about looking through all our relevant resources on our Coalition of Conscience website, reviewing our God Has a Better Way site with the reports and resources there, as well as looking at the relevant resources on our main website. I trust you will find much food for thought and action there. We are, in fact, busy day and night in many “revolutionary” causes — both locally and around the globe — seeing the name of Jesus being lifted up in many areas of society. You should be encouraged rather than cynical or critical, dear brother.

  38. Michael Brown,  When I ask my heavenly father for bread, He does not give a stone.  I do not believe my questions, or thoughts critical or cynical at all!  Is it so difficult to come up with action steps, which you could share, and pass on from the resources at your command?  You are much much more akin to and aware of that large body of information that your organization puts forth than I can be.  My own commitments and life differ from yours.  I am by concerns raised requesting specific suggestions.  I still request your guidance to succint expressions found in what you refer to in your reply in the area of forming actions or objectives toward overcoming what your statement to the media mentions.  How to specifically light a candle, instead of objecting to the darkness is in mind.   I have requested your prescribed help regarding a specific response to the problems you have highlighted.  I find it additionally a burdensome kind of yoke to lay these vast writings upon my person who already has studious commitments and disciplines on a weekly basis.  These weekly commitments do, in fact, give information which leads to action in different arenas than what you have addressed in your media statement.  So, lead this horse to water which helps put out these fires buring away at our Nation’s integrity which you have drawn attention to. 

    I apologize if this seems cynical to you, but, one must recognize that we are awash at this point in information on all fronts, subjects, and ideas.  Reorienting attention toward action is my request of your vast resource base.   Lifting up Jesus from the earth did involve choices to act and fulfill righteousness, or, He may have gotten stuck in various Temple debates and discussions.

  39. It seems unrelated to mention that I wrote what I wrote out of care and love for the whole people and plan of our Father, composing His voice and body on our shared planet.  This love extends to you and yours. 

  40. We appreciate your input and your prayers, and in the midst of scores of responsibilities on many different fronts, we are trying to put together action plans that address questions you and others ask (only some of which will be done through this medium; some will be done through our radio broadcast and through other channels). So, since you desire to express your support here and not be critical, you might want to choose different wording rather than saying, “A question has been asked and ignored regarding what do we do about it” – or, worse still, writing, “perhaps change our religion and utter OOMMMM, or not upset the apple cart by inconvenient choices?”
     
    Please realize that we cannot reply to every comment and post here (nor is that the purpose of the comment section), and that if you don’t want to be perceived as critical, you should be more careful with your wording. With regard to your specific requests, on the school front, you should avail yourself of the material found at http://www.truetolerance.org; as we develop further guidelines, we will share that information.

  41. Michael Brown,  Thank you for now working to put together action plans for believers after comment raising critical issues we are concerned about.  I await these with anticipation.  As your radio program is difficult to get to here in the western US when it is aired, and computers are tied up with other duties at that juncture: it will be most valuable to have succint action plans offered by your organization as accessible resources.  If my words triggered such, it is a good result, even though inherent feelings may be touched.  

    My wording was carefully chosen, as I have Yeshua as my example when ears are unresponsive to concerns raised (on the 6th, as were not responded to).  The need for action guidance as a result of all said to the media by you was expressed in trust, and to hopefully stimulate a new thrust which you now state you will be addressing.  To move from analysis or comment in an information age full of information to action plans would indeed be a refreshment of Christlike ministry.

    To stimulate whether to let the conditions described be or to not let these be, was illustrated by the OOMMMM comment, a case in point well founded here in Boulder, Colorado (where there is a large Buddhist university).  The next sentence is the logic of Edmund Burke.  You presented a societal condition, yet left it lingering as such by its very magnification.  Shalom here is obsfucated by such notions of peace many citizens of my community passively buy into.  Please reread the paragraphs following this hyperbole.  Shall I pluck out my eye if it causes me to sin?  Or is something else meant in this introductory expression as to what followed?

    Obviously Martin Luther nailed his famous treatise to a particular door, so that, in time it might open for change.  Asking for your input to action strategy regarding your media magnification of the sin condition in the USA then was the apparent right door.  I would apologize outrightly, however, words can compell change and redirect effort away from information overload to information of life application.

    As for the purposes of the comment section, which you commented on, lively discussion which stimulates a Christlike response would be within the pale of such.  Censorship in the way of nonconfrontational opportunity may crucify everyman, if permitted.

  42. When past watching your well accomplished objections to a Homosexual lifestyle debate with someone who claimed Christ (while he openly embraced a lifestyle of Biblical sin), this head of mine was directed to Jude’s comments on your opponent’s stated assumptive belief that what happened at Sodom to Lot’s daughter was in the pale of normal “warfare rape”.   This was stated as though such action or view in Sodom and Gomorrah was therefore justifiable, or was judged as what he said it was.  Did he miss that fire and “bristone” resulted covering the entire area, sent from heaven?  

    Clearly your opponent was deceived, for, Jude mentions the truth about consequences of such S& G behavior: “I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.  For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you.  They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sorverign and Lord….[as] the angels who did not keep then positions of authority but abandoned their own home–these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.  In a similar way, Sodon and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion [not warfare rape].  They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

    In the very same way, these dreamers [those who 'secretly' slipped in among you', prior mentioned by Jude who practice alike sin] pollute their own boies, reject authority, and slander celestial beings….Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not comprehend, and what things they do comprehend by instinct, like unreasoning animals–these are the very thing that destroy them.”  Inclusion of such false adherents to faith in Christian fellowship are referred to next as “blemishes at our love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm–shepherds who feed only themselves….They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shame; wandering stars, for whom blakest darkness has been reserved forever.”    Jude, likely the very brother of the Lord, calls such ungodly, and appointed for future judgement.  He held back no descriptors as to consequence.

    Reading such scripture by such upholders of a different faith than Jude described, as you debated, must be uncomfortable for your opponent, but, if it results in repentance so be it.  Words have a particular way of addressing what strikes our nerves, for any and all folk, to stimulate change.  In that case “these are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts, and do not have the Spirit.

    But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit.  Keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life. 

    Be merciful to those who doubt; snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear–hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.”   Jude did not mince words, for, his love was purified in the Way of Jesus, who required the necessity of others hearing words of wisdom to heed them.

    The irreplaceable Apostles were viewed by Paul as gentle contenders for the faith.  “Thererfore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart.  Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God.  On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyman’s conscience in the sight of God….For we do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake.”  (From 2 Cor 4).
    Your statement to the Media is in keeping with the above inspired word of God.

  43. Jabez,

    I’m sorry that I don’t have more time to interact here, but just a quick note to say that it has always been our intent to put together action plans for all the various areas we address here, and we do appreciate your interest and your reminder of the importance of putting together those plans.  As we develop relevant materials, we will be sure to get the word out. And again, thanks for your prayers and encouragement and insights.

  44. We should not put a question mark on God’s infenite love for us. I am a strong believer that no matter who we are, God’s love will forever endure us.  

  45. Thanks your post, Estate Taxes.

    May I ask you a couple of questions: Does God’s love force Him to approve of everything you or I do? Are there any actions that might displease Him? And does He ever judge us for our willful disobedience? If so, could these be manifestations of His love too?

  46. [...] God Has a Better Way: Official Statement to the Media [...]

Leave Comment