Positive Earth, Negative Earth

 

“I’ve learned a lot in these last four years. Most importantly, I’ve learned that I’m not alone. One in six men have an abusive sexual experience before they turn 18. Secrecy, shame and fear are the tools of abuse, and it is only by breaking the stigma of childhood sexual abuse that we can heal, change attitudes, and create safer environments for our children.”

Anthony Edwards Writes about Sexual Molestation at Hand of Gary Goddard

~~~

A true account by Denny Moody

What do I recall of the summer of ’67?  Well, I’ll feel safer if you came back into that memory with me. I share the details so that others will see what’s coming.

 

By the summer of 1967, at age 14, I felt that I had shaken off the junior high school gawkiness and was ready to take on the world of girls. The world of “them” had been in my social gaze while I was trying so hard to be like and bond with junior high male classmates.

That summer was the first time I acknowledged my human existence – myself as apart from others and responsible. That frame of reference also brought a new-found loneliness. It didn’t help socially that hormones and organic circumstances made my incoming high school freshman’s face breakout. And though my skin would eventually settle down, life in that the skin would never be the same after the summer of 1967.

It was June, 1967, when I first met Ken. He pulled into the parking lot of the Bible Church driving his ‘63 convertible T-bird, the AM radio blasting. Getting out of his car, his lanky body navigated over toward us guys and then over to right in front of me.

“Hi, I’m Ken.”

“Hi.” I responded looking at my best friend Bill. “I’m Denny.”

“Do you think that we’ll get everyone together and get over to the park? He asked.

“I think the girls are figuring out who they are going to ride with.”  I responded looking at the ground.

‘Yeah, I think your right.’ “Are you just starting high school?

“Yeah, I’m a freshman.” I started kicking loose gravel.

“I’m a senior this year. I transferred from York High School because they finished building the high school here in town.”

“I’m in summer band and I’m on the cross-country team,” I answered, trying to leverage my freshman standing.

“You can ride with me to the park.”

“OK.” was my answer, with an instant pride at being selected by a senior to ride in a rag-top. I asked my best friend Bill to ride with us. With the T-Bird filled with just the guys and with me in blue jeans and a white tee shirt, I was on top of the world, or at least a James Dean world. The girls in our group just had to notice – a freshman riding around with a senior. Yet, years later I finally realized that the girls perceived something about Ken that I was too childlike to notice. They avoided him. When they later saw that I hung around Ken that summer they must have thought the same about me as they did about Ken. This explains a lot and way too late.

That summer there were many such church teen outings. I joined them all in hopes of making new friends before entering high school. It was after several of the group outings that Ken started calling me and asking me to come over to his house. He said that he had a Triumph TR3 that he was rebuilding and that he needed some help. I told him I didn’t know anything about cars except something about oil changes but he begged for me to come over. I finally accepted his invitation on one hot, boring summer day. I was eager for friends and to learn about cars. I figured that I would be driving soon enough.

I rode my bike across town to Ken‘s house. I pulled up to his parent’s house and found the garage door open with Ken standing inside. His hands were black, holding an oily car part in his hand. The TR3 was parked in the garage with the hood up. I said “Hi” and then asked about his parents. He explained that his mother was at work and that his father worked the men’s locker room at a country club. He told me, “They are never home during the day”. I felt a little unsettled not knowing the neighborhood or Ken that well. It must have showed. Ken immediately began talking about the TR3 and what he was trying to do.

Looking at the Triumph, Ken explained: “The Triumph has a positive earth electrical system and I’m trying to connect this radio I just bought. There are only three items on a stock positive earth TR3 electrical system that care what the polarity of the system is: the ammeter, the coil and the generator.” I just nodded my head and looked informed. The most I knew about what he was saying was that there were positive and negative forces in the world. Opposites attract and like polarities repel.

I went on to handle a few car parts trying to look into the whole matter. My hands soon became like his, greasy, with fingernails covered with the black muck of spent oil. I remember being extremely interested in seeing the sporty little car repaired, especially if Ken would let me drive the car. At fourteen, I was eager to drive fast sporty cars. At that time, I believed a new friendship was forming and one focused on cars.

After we completed the polarity conversion for the radio Ken invited me inside the house.  There, we washed up.  He then offered me something to drink. He handed me a glass of lemonade and we sat down in his kitchen, talking for a while. After about half-an-hour, Ken asked me if I wanted to play cards. I told him I didn’t know how to play cards. He said “I can show you.” I thought that here was something else that I could learn from another guy. So, I agreed.

Ken left the room and came back shortly with a deck of cards. He began to shuffle the deck in ways I had seen on the TV show Gunsmoke. He began to tell me about the different hands and their value and the rules of five-card stud, his favorite game.  He dealt the cards and I gathered them up, holding them, fanned out in my hand, just the way I saw Maverick hold them in the TV western.

I quickly lost every hand I played but Ken he convinced me to keep trying. After seven games and only one win, Ken asked me if I wanted to bet on the next hand. I said “I don’t bet.” He came back, “It will only be for candy.” He threw a handful of M&Ms on the table. I hesitated and then said, “Why not.” I continued to lose the rounds and my pile of M&Ms disappeared. I said I had to get home for dinner. I grabbed my bike and headed back across town toward home. It felt good knowing that I had a new friend and that I had learned ‘guy’ stuff in the process.

The rest of June I hung out with the teens from our church. I sought ways to be with the girls as much as possible. Then in July Ken began calling my family’s house often. He was inviting me to come over to his house. I finally went over to see him.

We again worked on his TR3, this time cleaning the carburetor. He asked about my family. While cleaning out the butterfly valve with some solvent, I told him about my family.

When Ken and I finished the carburetor repair we cleaned our hands and then grabbed a couple of Cokes from his parent’s icebox. I soon noticed a deck of cards on the kitchen table. With our cold drinks we sat down and played several hands. After winning a few rounds, Ken wanted to know if I “wanted to play for stakes?” “I don’t know. I just like playing,” I responded.

Ken then pestered me to “up the ante” and I kept saying “No”. After several more hands he asked me again and I said “what are you talking about.” He said that if I were to lose the next hand that I would have to do whatever he wanted and that if he was to lose that he would do whatever I wanted. It felt weird to me but at the same time I knew that I always had the power of “No”, so I said “OK”. I desired his friendship and socially, I thought it would help to have a senior as a friend in high school. And, he would probably ask me to do something like polish the TR3.

I lost the next hand. He then told me what he wanted me to do: “I want you to clean the house. Sweep, vacuum, everything.”

I looked at him incredulously. “What?’

“You lost. You said you would play and now you lost. You must do what I want.”

I resisted, looking everywhere for a way out of the bet. “I’m not going to clean your house.”

“You have to,” he insisted. “You gave your word. You’re a Christian, aren’t you?” He left the room and came back to the kitchen with a tiny men’s Speedo swimsuit. “I want you to wear this while you’re cleaning.”

My face flushed lobster red. I said, “No way!” I immediately began trying to lower the debt to just cleaning the house. I felt like running. I also felt that I needed to somehow save face, to be a Christian and honor my word. I had no idea of the consequences this bet imposed on me. Rattled, I got up from the kitchen chair I promised to come back another day and help him with the TR3 and maybe even play cards again, “Without betting,” I added while heading for the garage. I got on my bike and sped off towards home.

 

That July I was invited to play trumpet in the concert band after an audition. Soon I began to generate friendships in the band and with the cross-country team during their summer training runs. Along with the church teens group I was developing many positive relationships.

 

At the start of August, twenty days before school started, I got a phone call from Ken. He wanted me to “come over”. “The TR3 is ready to roll. I’ll take you for a ride.”

Thinking that this would be a harmless way to honor my unpaid “bet”, I said,” OK”. I headed over to his house and found the Triumph parked on the street. Ken walked out of the garage and asked me if I was ready and I nodded “yes”.

We got in the sports car and Ken started the engine. Ken drove the TR3 out of the neighborhood and headed for the nearby highway. About an hour later we returned to his house. Ken parked the car in the garage and we went in for a Coke. I knew at this point that I would not play cards. So, when he asked I said, “No.” He persisted in asking and I persisted in resisting. Then he said that he had a roulette game in his bedroom. I had heard about roulette from a TV show but I knew nothing about the game. Ken persisted in his desire to show me. I went with him to his bedroom thinking that I would see this thing and then head home.

When we got to his bedroom, Ken uncovered the roulette game from a box that was stored under a bunk bed. He spun its center wheel, showing me how it worked. He handed it to me and I sat down on his bed to hold the wheel on my lap. I spun the wheel to see where the red, black and white balls would land. As I did, Ken sat down next to me. I quickly moved over to make room for him. Ken then moved closer. He then put his arms around me and started wrestling me down to the bed. I was shocked.

Taller than me, Ken leveraged himself on top of me, grappling every which way to confine me. I squirmed under him, thrashing my arms every which way, trying to push myself out. I was yelling “Stop it!” over and over.

Ken began to use his feet against the footboard of the bed and his tall frame as a lever to hold me down against the bed. He then grabbed one of my legs and pulled it up onto the bed. As I lay face down across the bed, I struggled in vain to get out from under him. I had wrestled many kids when I was younger so I reacted to his “take over” by trying to roll out sideways from his body. When I started to do this Ken grabbed a rope from the wall side of his bed. He must have hidden the rope for a time like this.

While on top of me, Ken tried to loop my neck and hands to the headboard. I continued to struggle, turning sideways, but with no luck. Then, I felt his pelvis thrusting into my backside. I immediately pushed myself up from the bed with all of my strength and put a shaky leg on the floor and then another. I wrenched my head out the headlock he put on me. When I finally pulled myself free I ran out of his room. I headed straight for my bike and took off for home. The summoned surge of adrenaline enabled my feet to pump the pedals faster than ever.

That night, I ate dinner silently. I have never mentioned what had happened that summer of ‘67, not to my parents or to anyone until now. I felt shamed and wounded.  I felt dirty, dirtier than when I worked on his car. I felt used. I felt used as a car part, as a means to an end.

At fourteen years of age I had some understanding that someone would take advantage of me and my desire for friendship. Some of my Junior High pals, my fickle friends, would offer me sex with a girl to lure me into their clique. I said “No” to their offers. I came to expect their attempts to sway me in their direction. What I wasn’t expecting was that some guy, using the ruse of friendship, would want me to join his private clique by raping me.

I have always wanted to have close friends–male or female. In fact, friendship means more to me than marriage does. With Ken, friendship meant forced and unnatural things, things born out of his brokenness.

From that summer on, throughout high school and into college, I always made a point of never being alone with Ken and others like him (I gained a “sense” of things.). My ‘67 summer was forever flawed. Would I be? Would a new friendship become a vehicle for an attempt at violating my boundaries? More would try but I would distance myself from them. Thankfully, there have been trustworthy and correctly-connected friends in my life. Friends like Bill. Friends like Steven (now with the Lord).

 

The above account is true. Denny Moody is a pseudonym.

~~~

 

Years later I would learn that Ken would go on to become an attorney and then a mayor of a small village outside of Chicago. Ken had always boasted to me of his being a lifelong Democrat. He said this deliberately, knowing that my family and I were Conservative Republicans. No matter, in any election, he would never get my vote of confidence.

Mercy Me or Else

 

“Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other.” Psalms 85:10

 

In these days of full grown 60’s love and its love child Ad Hoc Gospel mercy like rights are now demanded. And this “mercy” is demanded of Christians who pose a threat to the LGBT community by not agreeing that homosexuality is accepted in God’s kingdom on earth.

In the domain of “peace and love” LGBT advocacy a Christian saying so is “judgmental” and therefore not merciful. The Christian is therefore deemed unJesus-like. For the advocates, the millenniums-old Christian narrative must be changed, adapted and ’queered’ so that mercy can be given without knowledge of wrongdoing.

No one has to tell me that life is hard. We all look for relief from what life brings us. Yet, those who advocate for mercy towards those who practice homosexuality look for relief for those who bring hardship onto themselves. “But”, some tell me, “they are born with homosexuality. They can’t help themselves. They were born “this way”. So, they want Christians to back off and give homosexuality a pass. And yet, there is no doubt that same-sex attraction is a pernicious addiction that is fostered to full-grown habit by #LGBT advocacy.

Homosexuals “shall not pass” into the kingdom of God. Truth, reason, nature, Scripture (1 Cor. 6:9-11, among other texts) – none of these will give homosexuality a pass. Neither will science. There is no “gay gene.”

Does not the word “mercy” imply a transgression has been committed? The word, “grace”, another Biblical-panacea term is swapped by religious advocates for “mercy” as the means to the same end. These two words are used interchangeably to invoke a softness towards behavior ‘formerly thought’ unacceptable by the ‘unenlightened’.

There will always be a demand for mercy without the truth of the transgression. But for the thief on the cross, his transgression was known. It was nailed above his head and he acknowledged it. He asked Jesus for mercy and received it.

The bad character on the other cross wanted mercy without truth: “Get us out of this!” 

Aren’t you the Messiah? He said. “Rescue yourself-and us too!

But, mercy without truth is actually sympathy for the devil.

“`

One wonders if the flight from woman, the de-feminization and de-humanization of society, toward a cold exo-human reason plays a major role in redefining mercy as licentiousness.

And Nothing but the Whole Elephant

 

Jesus said to them, “If the world hates you, know that it hated me before you. If you were from this world, the world would be fond of its own. But the world hates you for this reason: that you’re not from the world. No: I chose you out of the world.” John’s gospel account 15: 18-19

~~~

From the many conversations I have had on Twitter, the word on the street is that “God is love and is all about love. We love, so we are doing what God accepts.” So, where does the world’s hate come in?

The hate spoken of in John’s gospel is generated by a protection of one’s place in the world against “outsiders”. Over and over again I have had that hatred and vitriol directed at me on Twitter. I cannot show you the Tweet replies. They are vulgar and pernicious. The replies come from a place beneath this world.

The hate-filled replies occur when I say something other than what is considered loving by those protecting their place in the world. Replies are derived from a worldview. And, one’s worldview depends on whether you accept being called out of this world knowing that that those in the world will hate you or if you are in this world for its approbation:

Called-Out Ones worldview: “For God so loved the world, that He gave…”

Social Justice Warrior (SJW) worldview: “For the world so loved me, when I…”

In order to make the world-accepted SJW worldview sustainable, mainstream churches create a Jesus who is palatable, marketable, consumable and renewable. The ministers do this by parsing Scripture into love notes. Their resultant Scripture messages, whether in a sermon or in a blog or on Twitter, remind me of a bag Valentine Sweethearts – candy hearts.

These churches promote “inclusion” because in a consumer-driven society, choice of how you live, choice of what you accept and who you accept, choice of right and wrong-choice becomes the ultimate approbation in this world.

~~~

Coming to a church near you: a populist theology which promotes the acceptance of the gay lifestyle, universal health care and illegal immigration all as works of Christian charity from the pulpits of body-of-Christ-divisive politics (race, gender, class, sexuality, etc.). This populist theology uses the high-sounding term “social justice” so as to neutralize detractor’s objections and to force a consensus, a groupthink around the premise of political correctness redefined as God’s love.

I encounter this populist theology every day now. If you are on Twitter “fighting the good fight”, you may receive the same replies from Catholics that I did. They go something like this:

1.       “God is love. I know many committed gay couples who love each other.”

2.      “Jesus never talked about sexuality or homosexuality, therefore it is a non-issue. If Jesus was concerned about homosexuality he would have said something.”

3.      “Jesus is about loving your neighbor. Jesus is not judgmental. Jesus is fully accepting, inclusive. He’s about loving the homosexual. Who are we to judge?” (from Pope Francis’, “Who am I to judge?”).

4.      “Loving your neighbor means universal healthcare. You are not charitable if you are against universal healthcare. You must be a Conservative who hates people.”

5.      “Jesus and Paul are not the same. Jesus is love and Paul is rules. Jesus is universal love. Paul, on the other hand, is a picayune fundamentalist and fundamentalists are authoritarians. Jesus would say “Live, love, eat, pray and let live.”

6.      “Jesus is social justice. He talked about helping the poor. Dorothy Day is a hero. Many of our heroes are beatified saints, saints who did good deeds while alive. Jesus demands good works from us. “Faith without works is dead”.”

7.      “Women are talking in church. Women are being ordained. Scripture is being updated and should be inclusive of homosexuality, as well.”

 

My first thought when I encountered these replies: “The Catholic church has done great harm to its charges by not teaching the whole of Scripture, the whole council of God.” Scripture has been defined down to a constructed abstraction of Jesus’ words.

One of the main reasons the populist theology has taken root in the Catholic and all (yes, all) of the mainline churches, I believe, is the lack of Scripture knowledge coupled with a deficit of personal faith-history. Deism is pervasive in the church: “God and His Word are far away from reality and not relevant to what I am experiencing”; “You don’t understand same-sex attraction. You can’t change me so, accept me for what I am.”

Post-modernist pop-theologians rightly question history and what has been passed down through millennia but without a sufficient regard for and knowledge of the discipline of the study of history – factual non-repeatable events. Their pick-and-choose history approach leads to utter confusion about who Jesus is, what happened the first century and to whether or not Jesus even existed. I have witnessed such dissociative history making on Twitter. Such groping at history and at Scripture reminds me of the Indian parable of the blind men and the elephant: each of the blind men encounter a different part of the elephant (trunk, tail, etc.) and then return home and proceed to project their ‘understanding’ of the elephant as the elephant while claiming the other five blind men must be mistaken. Blind_men_and_elephant2

Populist theology also has historical Leftist ties (“Unconstrained vision” is the term used by Economist Thomas Sowell to define the philosophy of the Left). Political philosopher Jean-Jacque Rousseau wrote, “man is born free, but is everywhere in chains.” Another philosopher, Marquis de Condorcet, believed that men in their natural state with a “natural inclination” would seek out the social good. For them, man’s nature was not the problem. Rather, institutions needed to be reformed so that man’s better nature would come out. Hence, pop-theology presses for reforms: the church must be reformed to help men to realize their better nature. “We are so much smarter now,” is the inference.

Enter the church’s “social justice” moment. And the “social justice” proffered is done under the guise of the common good but it is in reality a narrowing of focus down to subjective individual rights and individual happiness, in parallel with what is happening politically in Europe and the U.S. currently. The “common” part of their “common good” are those who share the same self-directed interests. Others must conform to their self-interests for the common good.

My second thought after reading the above replies: “It is time for another reformation – putting the Bible (again) into people’s hands and teaching them how to read it for themselves.”

It would seem that many of the above respondents view Scripture through the lens of a post-modern Epicurean Catholic world view, a worldview which replaces historical narrative (in this case, derived from the “faith once delivered”) with a relevant “social gospel” or populist theology promulgated as authentic Christianity. And with little knowledge of Scripture many Catholics are ‘falling’ for what they have been taught by the top-down government and media of the Catholic church and its social justice-primed priesthood.

When they do (see replies above) they end up with a Jesus who is fantasy blend of Dorothy Day, Ghandi, Mr. Rogers and a Democrat with a Jesus bleeding heart – an ends-justifies-the-means person. In other words, they end up not with a literal historical Jesus, but rather a figurative Jesus and one disposed to making you and your world feel good about doting on yourself. And, if you can get other people to dish out love and charity and “understanding” and, most importantly, cash, then you have done right by pseudo-Jesus.

Every self-designated Catholic I have encountered on Twitter appears to know little or nothing of Scripture. For them, it seems, raw Scripture, ‘unrefined’ by the Catholic priesthood, seems to be tied to evangelicals who are considered fundamentalists and therefore, presumptively, not connected with their Jesus’ all-assuming love. What they know and repeat is what a priest or Jesuit tells them, and their reply is usually about social justice, a catch-all for not being judged but for being loved.

Without making this post too long, here are some of my quick replies to the above points. Feel welcome to add yours in the comment section below.

1.      The plea bargaining “God is Love” defense is foiled when you define love, not in terms of codependence and sexuality, but as desiring the ultimate good for another. This of course leads to a definition of what is good. I reply with Jesus’s request of the Father, “Set them apart for yourself in the truth; your word is truth.” (John 17:17)

2.   When someone says that Jesus never talked about homosexuality I remind them that Jesus’s mission was to the lost sheep of Israel, the ones who were supposed to be “a light to the Gentiles”. The Israelites knew the law, the Torah. The law forbids homosexuality. This was common knowledge in the first century. Jesus did not need to repeat it. Paul, on the other hand, an apostle to the Gentiles did need to speak about the matter (e.g., Rome, Ephesus, etc. had temples to pagan gods which involved all manner of sexual immorality.)

3.   Here we have justification by plea bargain. Jesus prays for his own that they will be sanctified, separate – taken “out of the world” worldview.

4.      If you know Scripture then you know that Jesus did not heal everyone in the world during his earthly time. He told us that we can do the same and greater things than he has done when filled with the spirit. Beyond the fact of outright healing, there is the matter of personal healthcare. Universal healthcare replaces a person’s personal responsibility for their health with a non-caring impersonal government bureaucracy. This costly tax-payer bureaucracy will need to control your behavior, your paycheck and the doctor’s practice to control costs. As such, it is loving to not desire socialized coverage.

5.      When I hear someone say that Jesus is Gospel and Paul is not relevant I remind them that Jesus met Paul on the road to Damascus. In the fullness of time Jesus encountered Paul. I remind them that Paul right then and there became an eyewitness of Jesus and therefore an apostle. I remind them that Jesus sent Paul to be Jesus to the Gentiles – the heathen, the pagans, the unclean. I tell them that Paul wrote the theology of the newly established Kingdom of God on earth in his letters to the infant churches.

6.      I remind them that the gospel is “Jesus is Lord”. All else falls in line and in order under this proviso:  salvation, sanctification (called out of the world) and then social gospel (to affect the world under the direction of the Kingdom’s Lord.)

When Jesus tells the rich man “Sell all you have and give it to the poor” we understand the means to the rich man’s salvation: renunciation of his coveting relationship of wealth- a relationship which came between Jesus and the rich man, sanctification (separation from the love of his money and the hold it had on him) and then faith with works – a complete detachment from self-preservation- giving his wealth to the poor, a product of the new Kingdom focus.

7. Women vs. gay acceptance and Scripture: I remind them that there is a difference between culturally defined and morally defined. There is a difference between cultural practice and culturally-imposed taboos and doctrinal principles and God-directed temperantia-God’s ordered structure for the being of man. Paul wrote about the former in his letters to the church at Corinth. Anything perceived as ambiguous was directed back to a person’s Holy-Spirit directed conscious.

 

It is no secret that the Evil One’s mission from the very beginning is to ask, “Did God really say you couldn’t…?”

Pop-theology proposes to modernize and conform the church to be a welcoming inclusive place for whatever the prevailing winds of PC doctrine bring to the church’s door step. Be it known:  the called-out ones – the ecclesia – will remain faithful under the Lordship of Jesus.  The churches that wallow in the world will have their candlestick taken away. In the dark their mutual admiration society will be left grappling with elephant parts.

 

 

Added 10-4-17:

Known in the Things Made

 

“What can be known of God, you see, is plain to them, since God has made it plain to them. Ever since the world was made, his eternal power and deity have been seen and known IN THE THINGS MADE. As a result, they have no excuse: they knew God, but didn’t honor him as God or thank him. Instead, they learned to think in useless ways, and their heart grew dark. They declared themselves to be wise, but in fact became foolish. They swapped the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of the image of mortal humans-and of birds, animals, and reptiles.” -Paul’s letter to the Roman church

“A man who lies to himself is often the first to take offense.” Zosima, the Elder, The Brothers Karamazov, F. Dostoevsky

~~~

Let’s start here:

 

Some observations, after debating pro-homosexuality Catholics on Twitter:

1/Appropriating Scripture to fit within your worldview is perilous. I see this happening all the time in Twitter replies to me: appropriating Christian love to accept homosexuality, to justify national health care and redistribution of wealth, aka, socialism. Of course, LGBT appropriated ‘love’ does not justify them loving a Christian or a Christian way. LGBT love is only one way.

2/Many preachers of Scripture use their own Post-modern and Epicurean worldview to template Scripture and then make life application love potions from that admixture.

3/The post-modern view is one of deconstructionism: nothing, including the Bible, has any authority because such authority has been up till now been viewed only through the eyes of dead white men who must, according to feminist ideology, have been Patriarchal to a fault. Professor’s claiming authority deconstruct meaning from any text offering you nothing or nihilism. In effect, one is told that your present experience is more than enough compared to the millennia of knowledge, wisdom and tradition passed down through the ages to present day.

4/ Following in deconstructionism’s path, language is being changed–emptied of meaning or meaning nullified-to promote homosexuality:  from “marriage” equaling the sacred union of male and female as understood for millennia to “marriage” equaling the secular union of two men or two women under the banner of “equal rights”, thereby equating male/female marriage to homosexual ‘marriage’, equating love for a different but complementary other to self-love narcissism.

5/Homosexuality has been around throughout Scripture’s long and many cultured history. Never once is it condoned and shown as normative in Scripture. Never. God’s rejection of such behavior-sexual immorality-does not change with the calendar, as God’s covenant with men has never changed

6/In Scripture, homosexuality is presented as a form of sexual immorality. Sexual immorality, like all sins, is a form of idolatry-placing a much-revered image between you and God. In spite of this self-serving and toxic myopia, today, many in the church give homosexuality a pass. They prefer to render homosexuality as an adaptation-a coming to terms-of one’s sexuality. Therefore, Scripture must be updated to validate this ‘enlightened’ position as another form of need-love ministry which is then on social media likened to what minorities, immigrants, the poor, the suffering, etc. must feel.

Practicing sexual immorality (idolatry of any kind) automatically keeps one out of the kingdom of God. Scripture is very clear and empathic about this. Yet, Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, Universalists and a host of new age churches suppose themselves magnanimous with God’s grace. God’s grace is never cheap and affordable. His grace cost him everything to sanctify a people to himself.

As self-styled oppressed and hurting minorities, the LGBT community will tell us over and over that we do not understand them-their needy love nature bent towards the same-sex. They will call us (and me almost daily) “homophobic”, a pseudo-psychological term used to shut down further conversation and to claim that we have the mental problem and not them.

7/Three key New Testament passages concerning homosexuality: Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10

8/Romans addresses the aberrant nature of homosexuality and man’s wickedness in the context of first century Epicureanism. With the gods ‘away’ the men with men will play. The Roman church is surrounded by images, cults, idolatry, prostitution, and homosexuality, not unlike our modern-day “diverse” culture. Paul’s letter to Roman church outlines his vision of the church and of the Kingdom of God on earth. Jews and Greeks and Romans are to come to together in the unity of holiness and in their acknowledgement of God’s covenant faithfulness which now means that Jesus is Lord. The unity and diversity revealed in Romans are exactly what the culture is trying to fashion, on its own terms. The Satan is a plagiarist who then perverts what God has written on the human heart.

9/From Genesis to Revelation, Scripture presupposes that heterosexuality is normative (1 Corinthians 7; Ephesians 5; 1 Peter 3; et al.) and highlights such relationship:  The Wedding feast at Cana, Christ and His Bride. Jesus was not born out of a homosexual relationship. Mary submitted herself to God purposes, not to her own purposes, even though the social-media of her time-gossiping-would have condemned her.

10/ New age thinking, Oprah style, synthesizes all kinds of gnostic elements, elements of good and evil to form a theology they can ‘live with’. I find this thinking in many tweets, where a person tells me that homosexual marriages is as good as male female marriage: it’s “love” that matters, and “Isn’t God love?”

11/The LGBT-ers and their corporate sponsors demand that transgendered ‘women be allowed to use the women’s room. They posit that such person will have mental anguish if not allowed to do so. What they will not posit or acknowledge is that if males who are trying to look like a female enters the women’s room, millions of women would suffer mental anguish. Bottom line: the LGBT-ers demand that the common good be thrown away for the individual’s ‘right’ to pee wherever one feels, to lessen one’s mental anguish. For the LGBT, the needs of the one outweighs any consideration of others.

12/The Obvious:  nature alone reveals that homosexuality is anti-human. No homosexual relationship will produce offspring. The words of procreation– “Be fruitful and multiply”- was stated at the beginning of God’s written communication with us

Of course, homosexual advocates will posit that gay men and gay women can have adopted children, that such configurations, now denoted as “gay families”, are equal to male-female families. This appropriation of male-female families to connote equality with male-male families reveals the loss of meaning to the word “equal.” “Equal” now means: plagiarizing God to obtain a waiver from all accountability.

13/Fourth of July message: a nation which turns its back on Christianity and its coexistence with the neutral State to promote secularism’s “values” and individual rights will lose all its authority as a nation state. Radical secularism will induce governing paralysis. It is happening in Europe and we, in the U.S., are seeing this happen before our eyes.

To be continued…

 

 

 

Added 7-3-2017:

Here’s are interesting column:

Queer divorce in the time of Pride

“What does a lesbian bring to a second date?” my then-girlfriend joked early in our relationship. A U-haul.”…

 

“The complicated human experiences of LGBTQ folks often come at the cost of producing images that heterosexuality will accept. In places like Chicago, most LGBTQ folks are allowed to thrive as long as they follow the same rules as their progressive, straight-identified allies.”

Added 7-4-2017

Resources added 7-8-17:

BORN OR BRED? Science Does Not Support the Claim That Homosexuality Is Genetic

Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth Paperback – February 1, 1996 by Jeffrey Satinover, M.D.

A Christian psychiatrist examines the latest research, refuting the alleged genetic basis for homosexuality and assessing the social power homosexuals have gained.

 

 

 

 

Dragon-Skin or What Not to Where

 

Maybe you can relate. As often happens when I am out and about I come across a homosexual* waiter or cashier. They want to be queer-noticed. They present themselves with false feminine affected speech and limp-wristed affectations. I am immediately repulsed by such an unnatural demeanor as I am by the sight of graffiti-tattoos on the human body.

I do not find such behavior cute, charming or creative. Such behavior is not distinctive of the homo sapien species. It is actually of the animation genre – shallow, fabricated, meant for sale, a sham within a sham.

It doesn’t take much insight to see that homosexuals scream for attention, validation and for positive affirmation. Homosexuals compensate for their neurosis by idolizing their missing symbol-male or female, as the case may be, and by preening to gain the missing symbol’s attention. When I encounter such unnatural behavior, my impulse is to look away when I pay the bill. But, I have wondered about my response.

If I smile and act polite in these situations, is that encouraging them to continue in this behavior when I know such behavior depraves their humanness? If I look and act disgusted, does that incline them decide to harden their ways?

Of course, I am not responsible for their reaction. I am responsible for my Kingdom behavior. So, my Kingdom of God response is to look him or her in the eyes, human to human, and to pray in the spirit for the waiter, the cashier, for the boy or girl under the dragon skin. Under that ‘protective’ veneer of inhumanity is a human.

~~~

“C.S. Lewis put this so poetically in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. There’s a boy named Eustace, and everybody hates him and he hates everybody. He’s selfish, he’s mean, and nobody can get along with him. But he finds himself magically on a boat, the Dawn Treader, taking a great voyage. At one point this boat pulls in to an island, and Eustace wanders off and finds a cave. The cave proves to be filled with diamonds and rubies and gold. He thinks, “I’m rich!” And immediately, because he is who he is, he thinks that now he’ll be able to pay everybody back. Anyone who has laughed at him, stepped on him, slighted him, will now get their comeuppance. Eustace then falls asleep on a pile of treasure—which he doesn’t yet know is the hoard of a dragon. And because he falls asleep with greedy dragonish thoughts in his heart, when he wakes up, he’s become a dragon—big, terrible, and ugly. Soon he realizes there’s no way out. He can’t go on the boat, he’s going to be left on the island alone, he’s going to be horrible all of his life. He falls into despair.

One day the great lion Aslan shows up, leads him to a clear pool of water, and tells him to undress and jump in. And suddenly Eustace realizes that “undress” means “take off the dragon skin.” He begins to gnaw and claw off the scales, and he realizes that he can shed his skin. Working at it, he finally peels off this skin—but to his dismay, he finds that underneath he’s got another dragon skin. He tries a second time and a third time, to no avail; the same thing still happens each time. In the end the lion says, You’re going to have to let me go deeper”

-from Timothy Keller’s “King’s Cross: The Story of the World in the Life of Jesus”

 

“Well, he peeled the beastly stuff right off – just as I thought I’d done it myself the other three times, only they hadn’t hurt – and there it was lying on the grass, only ever so much thicker, and darker, and more knobbly-looking than the others had been. And there was I smooth and soft as a peeled switch and smaller than I had been. Then he caught hold of me – I didn’t like that much for I was very tender underneath now that I’d no skin on — and threw me into the water. It smarted like anything but only for a moment. After that it became perfectly delicious and as soon as I started swimming and splashing I found that all the pain had gone from my arm. And then I saw why. I’d turned into a boy again. . . .”

Eustace speaking about what he let Aslan do for him – C.S. Lewis, The Voyage of the Dawntreader:

~~~

Consider Jesus word’s in John 16: 8-11 regarding the Spirit and our indwelt mission:

“When he [the Helper] comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong on three counts: sin, justice, and judgement. In relation to sin-because they don’t believe in me. In relation to justice-because I am going to my father, and you won’t see me anymore. In relation to judgement-because the ruler of this world is judged.”

 

Any outworking of sin is idolatry. Idolatry replaces belief in Jesus and the Triune God with man-made symbols.

When Jesus, the perfect Israelite who had no sin-the spotless lamb-came, he came not to judge but to give his life as ransom for many. Those of us filled with the Spirit reveal Kingdom of God justice–the ruler of this world is judged. Jesus is Lord. No one has to live under dragon skin. We tell others that the skin comes off, as it did in our case, and that it hurt, but that abundant life is uncovered.

~~~

Consider that Jesus, who, though he worked many healings (restoring sight to the blind, making the lame to walk), talks about amputation as a form of deliverance to be done by the individual now or later by God. Choose your pain.

‘And if your right hand trips you up, cut it off and throw it away. Yes: it’s better for you to have one part of your body destroyed than for your whole body to go into Gehenna.” Matthew 5: 30

I’m sure some people felt bullied by Jesus when he said this. Others wanted the dragon skin to come off.

~~~

Once again, I am reminded of the pernicious nature of homosexuality and pornography. Within the last few weeks I sadly learned of a fellow Christian-an Anglican priest, a friend and former homosexual-who fell back into sin. He confessed to the trustees of his ministry that his fall was because of stress which led to pornography which then led to a homosexual encounter.

This man has ministered, in the U.S. and in Europe, to thousands of people who have desired to leave homosexuality. I have known this man and have worked in parachurch ministry alongside him. My son played with his son. This man left the homosexual lifestyle after twenty-some years, married and had several children. He developed his ministry into a full-time ministry to help others gain freedom from homosexuality. Now, according to his Board of trustees, he is on extended leave. According to a Facebook post, his wife is divorcing him

~~~

-*I do not use the LGBT disposed word ‘gay” for this human dysfunction. Homosexuality is a psychological disorder that is based in neurosis, a splitting off from the proper symbols put in place by God when He created us in His image.

Homosexual neurosis may include separation anxiety issues or abandonment issues. A homosexual response is a learned response towards the path of least resistance and the least amount of pain. Their response is narcissistic in that the individual choses to pamper their wounds instead of address them as wounds. Their responses are stoked in this Epicurean age where Pride Parades reinforce the idolatry of false, mentally engraved images

If you were to look up homosexuality on Wikipedia, you would find that everything is cool, homosexuality is a non-issue.  That revisionism is the work of LGBT lobbies who do not want the DSM to diagnose them as having a psychological problem. In fact, homosexuals will use the psychological sounding term “homophobia” to claim that you have the mental problem and belong in the DSM and they do not.

The insidiousness of homosexuality is now beginning at a very early age. Its promoters want to seduce middle age kids into thinking that they must be gay if they have feelings toward the same gender. You and I know, parents know, that middle school age kids deal with a LOT of feelings on the new social roller coaster they are on. Kids at that age are trying to define themselves and their relationships. Beware! The LGBT is right there to persuade kids that same sex feelings must be gay and must be validated as such. Beware! The schools, which are supposed to teach the three ‘R’s, are teaching your children LGBT ‘values’.

Why would a boy or girl come from school and say “I’m gay” if they were not informed of that word and that such behavior was promoted as an acceptable “variation” of humanness? There is nothing human about homosexuality. No wonder The Satan promotes the narcissistic antithesis of the image of God

 

 

 

Become informed…

Microphone cut after Mormon girl reveals she’s gay at church

Britt Jones, a bisexual Mormon who runs a podcast called “I like to look for Rainbows” that featured Savannah’s story, said the leaders should have allowed Savannah to finish.

“Queer issues don’t get talked about in the church enough,” said Jones, who is married to a woman and has children. “It was really brave and really admirable, particularly for somebody that young, that she not only wanted to talk about it herself but be a voice for others suffering in silence.”

All Sex, All the Time

“…children inhabit a highly sexualized world earlier and earlier, and social pressure upon them to exhibit sexualized behavior starts earlier and earlier. A schoolteacher friend recently told me how she had comforted a seven-year-old who was in tears because a girl in his class had insulted him, calling him a virgin. She asked whether he knew what the word meant. “

“No,” replied the little boy. “But I know it’s something horrible.”

Obituary of 15-year-old who committed suicide calls out school bullies

“For a young lady so excited about going to high school, things sure went terribly wrong for her.”