Tuesday, May 1, 2012

Shock and awe...

Take one high school journalism convention... take one outrageous and bullying bigot in favor of the latest liberal baloney... take an assembly of young people with a common interest in journalism divided by someone whose only interest is to shock and divide... take some courageous students who know enough to leave when they have had enough... take one who supposedly stands for freedom to ridicule their free choice not to listen... and what do you have?  Well, watch it all below...  Be careful because the BS meter may go off the charts... but the source of it is not Scripture...


For a news report of the whole event read here.

If you want to hear what he termed an apology for offending the "pansies" who walked out, read here (not much of an apology and just as offensive as the video).

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Worse yet.....This guy is paid by the White House to travel all around the country and give these lectures to college students. NO wonder that the mainstream media has lost all credibility in recent years.

This speech is the result of Historical/Higher Criticism at work. Such tools are used to ignore scripture. Are the LCMC and the NALC paying attention?

Rev Mathew Andersen said...

Lest we forget, the most horrendous example of bullying, the crucifixion of Christ, happened at the hands of not only the leading conservatives (the Pharisees) but the leading liberals (the Saduccees) of the first century as well.

The victims of tirades like Savages are not primarily the straight conservative Christian kids who walked out or who were called names, although they were the target. These kids will have the support of their parents and their churches and will be treated like heroes.

Nor are the liberal pro-gay kids the ones most affected, although they too were victims in one way in that they were trained through the example of an adult in how to hate and how to bully with impunity. Teaching our youth such horrible behavior is a reprehensible action that should bring shame upon all who witnessed this man's bile silently.

No, the kids who were most affected and victimized by this man's bullying are the Christian kids who face homosexual desires yet, out of love for their Savior, wish to live according to God's will, including His command that sex not be practiced outside of marriage and never, under any circumstance between two people of the same gender.

As more of this kind of rhetorical diarrhea is spread about, these kids are put into a position where there is nowhere to turn. Their conservative friends and family, alienated by such a display as this, become less able to distinguish between the struggles of those who are tempted and the behavior of those who glory in sin. These kids will, therefore, be terrified to go to their pastor, their parents or their Christian peers for help and will continue to struggle alone. They will also be bullied and attacked by the liberal teachers, journalists and peers in their life who are inspired by this man to dump hate and scorn on "ex-gays" more than they do the conservative Church.

Yet studies show that these kids, rather than the out and proud gay kids, are the ones who are most in danger of self harm and suicide.

While behaving vilely toward Christianity, this man has contributed to the misery and self hatred of the very kids he pretends to want to help. But he will probably never recognize nor repent of this any more than the Saducees did their participation in the crucifixion.

Robert Lee Bennight said...

"This speech is the result of Historical/Higher Criticism at work. Such tools are used to ignore scripture."

Like any "tool" it can be misused and abused. Actually, it seemed like to me this young man was using a fairly literal, a-historical approach in his tirade. True, he was saying that the Bible "got it wrong" back then in all things from slavery to sex, but that is not an historical approach other than saying people in the past were stupid and we in the present are not.

His argument, rather, is rooted in the question, Why are some parts of Scripture followed more literally than others? And given the pick-and-choose-a-verse style that infects so much of American Christianity, this question can seem to be on the surface a completely valid one. And, no matter how ridiculous and horrible it sounds, I fear he is right: there will be some who will say we should be stoning our non-virgin daughters to be consistent with Scripture.

So I do not blame this vile tirade so much on the use of historical text criticism as I do on the failure to use Scripture to interpret Scripture.

Can most, or even some, in our congregations answer this man's charge of Scriptural hypocrisy, and explain why commands regarding shellfish and stoning our children are not as authoritative as commands prohibiting homosexual acts?

I wonder how many of those kids who walked out did so because he knew this man was full of it and they knew why and how he was misusing Scripture. I suspect, however, more walked out simply because they felt uncomfortable because what they always believed seemed to be challenged by the apparent reasonableness of this man's argument. It seemed reasonable because the way this man approaches Scripture is the same way so many Christians approach it - pick and choose; the only difference is that some accept what they pick and choose as completely true and this man rejects what he picks and chooses as completely false; but, it is the same method.

Anonymous said...

The man's implied argument is a straw man.

The idea that Christian kids are bullying gays is unfounded. Students who actually go to church and attend Bible studies are learning about love, forgiveness and compassion. They are not being taught to bash gays. Now they are being taught self control in relation to extramarital sex and other such activities. But to take that and convert it into saying that Christians are bullying gay students is just invention.

The biggest danger to gay students is homosexual activity. According to the CDC 20% of male homosexuals are HIV positive but half of them don't know it. They also suffer other health conditions due to such behavior and emotional and mental problems. Teaching people to avoid such behavior and to cope with unnatural desires in healthier ways is merciful. Celebrating homosexuality gives those who are tempted the false impression that they can live that lifestyle in a healthy way. That simply isn't true. And it is abusive to tell them lies.

The out and proud people are not healthier. They just have different problems. The man himself is case and point. He is abusive towards others. That is a sign of being emotionally maladjusted.

There is nothing healthy about unnatural desires, and there is nothing healthy in pursuing them or indulging them. The people who suffer from these desires need the same help that alcoholics need, support to abstain and channel their energies into healthy activities that interest them.

Anonymous said...

"I fear he is right: there will be some who will say we should be stoning our non-virgin daughters to be consistent with Scripture."

The only ones who do that are those who want to make Christians look like fools. When have you seen them use that argument against the Orthodox Jews who actually try to follow the OT laws? It is just rhetorical BS.

Christians are consistent in teaching the Christian faith which has never been friendly to enforcing ever bit of OT law. Didn't someone call such folks "Judaizers" ? I bet this guy would run screaming from being called a Judaizer!

Anonymous said...

Robert Lee Bennight said...

"This speech is the result of Historical/Higher Criticism at work. Such tools are used to ignore scripture."

Like any "tool" it can be misused and abused.

I say.....

I disagree. Handguns were also made for killing, and saws are made to cut boards. They were not made for anything else. Historical/Higher Criticism? Same thing.

Actually, it seemed like to me this young man was using a fairly literal, a-historical approach in his tirade. True, he was saying that the Bible "got it wrong" back then in all things from slavery to sex, but that is not an historical approach other than saying people in the past were stupid and we in the present are not.

The argument I continue to hear is that these are modern times and the Bible is not longer "relevant." The Bible was for a bunch of farmers and sheepherders. In the 21st century, we know better now. Most passages of the Bible do not apply anymore.

In fact, Savage is arguing that much of the Bible always had it wrong, both in Biblical times and today. "Bullshit" is the way he described it.

Perhaps Mr. Savage could work for the ELCA?

Anonymous said...

Mere decency on the secular level is a valid argument for Savage to be removed from the Obama administration.

Breitbart has an archive of documentation of his depravity and bullying. One file, Savage's Nastiest Bullying Recorded Video (aimed at Santorum), is XXX.

The man is anti-Christian to the max.

Susan

http://www.breitbart.com/Search?q=savage

http://www.breitbart.com/Search?q=savage

Robert Lee Bennight said...

"I disagree. Handguns were also made for killing, and saws are made to cut boards. They were not made for anything else. Historical/Higher Criticism? Same thing."

Guns are made for killing, but they can be used to protect the innocent or terrorize them. Saws cut, but they can be used to prune a tree as well as to cut it down.

"Anonymous", the question still remains, How many of our laity can adequately articulate and defend why some passages of Scripture are more authoritative than others? Whether it is the ELCA approach in making all Scripture relative through a complete reliance on historical text criticism or an extreme literal approach that obscures the Gospel through inane arguments about whether or not we can eat shellfish, both fail to interpret Scripture through Scripture and both obscure the proper use of Law and Gospel.

Also, I think we are deluding ourselves if we think some who call themselves Christian do not abuse Scripture to justify their own hatred and abuse towards homosexuals. We need to speak out again this because when we do not people cannot tell the difference between using the Law to point out sin that leads to repentance and forgiveness and abusing the law just to satisfy personal bigotry.

Oh, "Anonymous", I realize the ELCA is not everyone's favorite cup of tea among people who read Pastor Peter's blog. How about instead of the snippy one-liners we just talk to each other, challenge each other, prayer for each other and uphold one another like mature individuals?

Robert Lee Bennight said...

And, I apologize. After re-reading my post I realized I implied that some were not acting like mature individuals because I did not like the way they responded to my post. This was not the message I intended to convey but merely that I would appreciate constructive feedback. Please forgive my careless words.

Anonymous said...

Let me see if I understand this correctly...

1. Bullying is not OK - unless it comes from somebody like Savage who is trying to advance a pro-gay agenda;

2. The Bible is BS because it offends Savage’s chosen lifestyle, but if he offends me with his BS, then I’m a “pansy” and a “bully” all at the same time;

3. It’s OK to be a bully if you are Savage advancing a pro-gay agenda under the auspices of a student journalism conference, but not OK to be a Christian if you’re a hypocrite;

...and if I don’t understand it correctly, then somebody please tell me what I was supposed to have taken away from Savage's remarks that would have enlightened me further, because that’s about all I got out of his message.

Hypocrisy indeed. The news article makes it appear as if Savage talked little of bullying, except for providing a fine example of it in himself, and discussed more the pro-gay agenda he’s trying to advance, which is disingenuous at best, and blatant lying at worst. The group who should take the real heat on this matter is the National Scholastic Press Association for putting this guy on stage, and for responding to the criticisms in the manner they did. Yes, it is true that as future journalists these kids will hear things that they don’t like in the course of their vocation, but it is unlikely that even during the course of hearing such things they will be portrayed as intolerant when they come under direct personal attack.

The only question I have about Savage at this point is whether anyone has brought to his attention that his chosen lifestyle also fails from a Darwinian perspective (not just a Scriptural one) since he won’t be passing on any of his DNA doing any of the things with his “husband” that he told those students about.

James

Anonymous said...

According to the bible, homosexuality was ranked at the same level as engaging in witchcraft and in child sacrifice to Baal. In old testament times, they were considered abominations worthy of death. (NO, I am not advocating the death penalty.) Why did God make such laws. Why do you think God has changed his mind in the 21st century regarding homosexuality.

Historical Criticism is used to justify ignoring many parts of the Bible. It has no other purpose. I understand the position of the ELCA. My comments were aimed at the LCMC and the NALC. Both ELCA-splinter denominations employ HC, which is a dangerous practice.

Robert Lee Bennight said...

Actually, Anonymous, I was not referring to your comment, but to Anonymous'comment about Mr. Savage working for the ELCA; unless of course, Anonymous, you are also anonymously Anonymous, too.

And, I am not defending homosexual acts and I am not pretending that the Bible does not forbid such acts. I am critical of people who use such prohibitions as justification to abuse those who are homosexual; and, no, I am not equating condemning the sin and a call to repentance as abuse. But curbing, beating and treating homosexuals as a special class of sinners I believe is. And, this type of abuse does happen.

And I am in no way trying to defend Mr. Savage, but his screed does raise certain questions about how we respond to such attacks as Christians instead of people with our noses bent out of shape because we have been portrayed unfairly.

Lastly, Anonymous, you cannot understand the ELCA position because the ELCA does not have one. During the 2009 Churchwide Assembly, the ELCA, in an unsuccessful attempt to placate everybody, abdicated all authority regarding Biblical teachings concerning homosexuality and made it entirely a matter for local interpretation. In doing so, they basically have abdicated all authority over any Scriptural interpretations and norms. So, even if the ELCA says something is the norm, it is not because its leaders have rejected the same responsibility to Scripture that once gave them authority. Many congregations in the ELCA know all too well that its denomination functions only in an administrative capacity and no longer functions as the church. Many of us realize that the ELCA is dying by suicide. And, many of us are still praying and discerning about what is the best course of action given this reality and those of our individual congregations.