Monday, September 29, 2008

Against Mr. Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church




The war we have going on now in Iraq is gut wrenching in that we want the war to end yet we also want to be safe and that freedom comes at a very high cost. It costs our soldiers their blood, sweat and tears and I for one am very thankful to them for their service and their sacrifice. I, along with millions of others, hold them in high honor and they truly are heroes. They fight for our freedom, they fight over there so we don’t have to have the fight here and yes they also fight for people like Reverend (and I use that term with disgust) Phelps to wear shirts that say, “God hates fags!” and protest the funerals of our dead soldiers.

Now the irony here is that Mr. Phelps (I will no longer use the word “reverend” because he has no idea what that word means) and his band of zombies he calls a “church” are able to wear those shirts, preach their hate and disrupt the funerals of fallen soldiers because he lives in a free and democratic society and the very soldiers they mock and bring dishonor to have spilled their blood so they can have a church that preaches such hate. It would be a different world for Phelps had Hitler’s war machine won or had America been overthrown by Muslim extremists. Sadly this type of argument will go no where with Phelps and people like him because he feels far superior to all others for he alone has the one true message of God, the Almighty. He alone knows and has the truth and all others are an “abomination” for he and his followers alone preach the “true gospel”, which is that God hates everyone but Phelps and those who hold to his theology, ideology, and his formula of truth.

You can’t win an argument with a person or persons who are irrational so I’m not even going to attempt that because I’ve seen them on TV and they can’t be civil. Rather I’m going to attack their arguments and claims which they base on the Bible and if any of the Phelps family or their followers wish to disagree then I welcome them to post up a rebuttal and show me where I’m in error using logic, reasoning and Scripture. This though is where it becomes difficult for people who are irrational, like Phelps, because they have a God complex and who am I to dare question them?!

So, let’s have at it, shall we?

God hates fags?

Phelps argues that the Bible says, “God hates fags!” To prove his point he is even so kind as to give us the Bible verses which I’ll list here as this is directly from godhatesfags.com

Quote:
In summary, sodomites are wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly (Gen. 13:13), are violent and doom nations (Gen. 19:1-25; Jgs. 19), are abominable to God (Lev. 18:22), are worthy of death for their vile, depraved, unnatural sex practices (Lev. 20:13; Rom. 1:32), are called dogs because they are filthy, impudent and libidinous (Deut. 23:17,18; Mat. 7:6; Phil. 3:2), produce by their very presence in society a kind of mass intoxication from their wine made from grapes of gall from the vine of Sodom and the fields of Gomorrah which poisons society's mores with the poison of dragons and the cruel venom of asps (Deut. 32:32,33), declare their sin and shame on their countenance (Isa. 3:9), are shameless and unable to blush (Jer. 6:15), are workers of iniquity and hated by God (Psa. 5:5), are liars and murderers (Jn. 8:44), are filthy and lawless (2 Pet. 2:7,Cool, are natural brute beasts (2 Pet. 2:12), are dogs eating their own vomit and sows wallowing in their own feces (2 Pet. 2:22), will proliferate at the end of the world bringing final judgment on mankind (Lk. 17:28-30), have been finally given up by God to uncleanness dishonoring their own bodies among themselves, to vile affections, and to a reprobate mind such that they cannot think straight about anything (Rom. 1:23-2Cool, have wholly given themselves over to fornication and gone after strange flesh (Jude 7), must be pulled as faggots from the fire (Jude 23), and have no hope of Heaven unless they repent (Rev. 22:15), which they can't do in their prideful state (Jer. 6:15). They need to hear this truth if they are to have any hope of penitence, faith in Jesus Christ and salvation (I Timothy 4:2-4).





Before I reply I want everyone to understand that there are rules and laws for interpretation, not only of Scripture, but all written material. There’s a big fancy word which describes the art and science of interpretation which is, “Hermeneutics” (there is also a word used for this which is "exegesis"). It basically means that when one reads (in our case here the Scriptures) they are not to isolate a passage or verse, to remove it from its context or to give it a meaning not intended by the author. One should not come to Scripture with a preconceived notion or idea of what Scripture OUGHT to say on a given subject for if this rule is violated then the Bible can be made to say just about anything. One also takes into account the original language, the etymology of words used, the writers intended audience, etc. So one may violate the laws of interpretation regarding, say homosexuals, when reading the Bible if they come at it with the preconceived notion that God hates fags.

“God must hate fags, because I hate fags. They’re disgusting and an abomination. I’ll see what Gods word says on the subject!”

So when one has that preconceived idea and then reads this passage from Scripture:

Gen. 13:13 - Now the men of Sodom were wicked exceedingly and sinners against the LORD.

The Bible confirms it! Their belief is a righteous one and has been confirmed by the Bible. God hates fags and they are wicked therefore I shall picket funerals of homosexuals!

Here’s my question to Phelps. Where do we read “fags” or even “homosexuals” in the Genesis passage? Also, is it just “men” that are “wicked exceedingly” or women and animals also that are in Sodom? It should be noted that in the Hebrew culture women were never counted so when it reads, “There was a gathering of 2000 men” there could of also been 1000 women. I’ll quickly demonstrate where Phelps is wrong and has no idea what he’s talking about based on his erroneous use of Genesis 13:13.

First, as I stated already, no where does Gen. 13:13 say anything, even in the original language, about “fags” or “homosexuals”. It only speaks of “men” who are “wicked” and “sinners”. Second, ALL mankind are wicked and sinners before God, not just homosexuals nor, in this case, just the men of Sodom. Third and lastly, the sins of Sodom were many, not just sodomy alone as we read in these passages.

Ezekial 16:49 "Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy.

Ezekial 16:50 "Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me Therefore I removed them when I saw it.

So what Phelps has done is took the act of sodomy joined it with the use of the word “men” in Genesis 13:13 to conclude that all men of Sodom are “sodomites” but not in the sense of just citizens of that city but rather as all men of Sodom being “fags”. Yet we don’t see any mention of any sexual sins in Ezekial 16:49, 50 do we? Does this mean that there were no sexual sins in Sodom? Of course not for there were but God did not seek to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah based solely on homosexual activity. Also, if we are to hold to one passage proclaiming that certain sex acts are sin then according to Ezexial 16:49 & 50 arrogance and being haughty are also sinful. One could then argue that because Phelps is arrogant and haughty in that he alone has the truths of God he is then guilty of sin. This type of reasoning though would be conjecture and illogical yet this is the very thing Phelps is doing.

Quote:
Homosexuals are abominations to God!


Phelps goes on to state that homosexuals are abominations to God according to Leviticus 18:22.

Lev. 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

Phelps is correct here. The act of homosexuality is an abomination to God. Yet we also read in Proverbs 6:16 – 19 this:

16There are six things which the LORD hates,
Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him:
17Haughty eyes, a lying tongue,
And hands that shed innocent blood,
18A heart that devises wicked plans,
Feet that run rapidly to evil,
19A false witness who utters lies,
And one who spreads strife among brothers.

In fact, ALL sin is an abomination to God, not just homosexuality. Phelps though seeks to single out homosexuals as being especially dirty and nasty. Again does God see homosexuality as a sin? Yes He does, just as he sees heterosexuals committing adultery and fornication a sin also. Now one could argue that Phelps is causing or "spreading strife" among "brothers" which therefore is an "abomination" to God yet Phelps reply would be that he alone (and his followers) are the only true brethren of God therefore he has not committed any sin! This is the type of reasoning and illogical stupidity one gets when dealing with someone who has lost all rational thought.


Quote:
Homosexuals deserve death!



Phelps argues that homosexuals deserve death, they deserve the wrath of God as does all of America for letting homosexuals practice their sin. His basis for this again lies in his erroneous reading of the Bible.

Leviticus 20:13 - If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.

First, capital punishment in Biblical times was NOT just a random thing taken on by just anybody. The Biblical phrase, “an eye for an eye” was not meant to encourage revenge but rather to discourage it! If a farmer had a sheep stolen and he found it at another farm he could not take back his sheep plus 3 chickens 2 cows and then kill all his sheep but rather he had to let the judges oversee the matter and they would deal out the sentence. So no one but the judges of the Jews could rule death to a guilty party.

Second, I wonder if Mr. Phelps can find me anything within ancient Jewish writing were one man was ever killed under this law? If I remember correctly there is no record of any man being executed under this law. Why? Because the men committing such an act had to be caught in the very act. Not just one offender but both or all.

Lastly, this is a Levitical law and as such many Bible scholars believe this to then be a Ceremonial Law but we are now under the Law or Covenant of Grace so the act of homosexuality is no longer a capital offense although it is still a sin, just as fornication and adultery.

Just about every passage that Phelps refers to he has mutilated and grossly twisted to fit his own warped preconceived ideas of what the Bible OUGHT to say because he holds himself out to be something of an apostle or Christ-like messenger of Gods wrath.

Here is another statement from godhatesfags.org

Quote:
THE SODOMITES' ONLY HOPE IS TO HAVE THE UNAMBIGUOUS TRUTH PREACHED TO THEM, AND PERHAPS GOD WILL SOFTEN THEIR HEARTS AND GRANT THEM REPENTANCE TO DEPART FROM THEIR SIN AND NAME THE NAME OF CHRIST. NOT VERY LIKELY, THOUGH, SINCE GOD HAS GIVEN THEM UP.



I will use this statement to demonstrate how illogical Phelps mind is. If they truly believed that homosexuals, (sinners in general) have no chance at being saved because God has “given up on them” why on earth then are they picketing funerals with their version of the “gospel”?? Who are they seeking to save and/or warn about Gods wrath if in fact God has already given up on them? So it comes down to Phelps needing attention.

What would Jesus do?

Yeah this might be rather corny to some now but it has a great deal of merit on this topic because Christians are to be “imitators” of Christ Jesus. Paul writes to the Corinthians and declares to them:

1 Corinthians 11:1 Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ.

So as I scan my memory of my years reading Scripture I can’t seem to remember reading any funerals Jesus went to and He and His disciples picketed them with messages that God hates them. I can’t seem to remember any apostles doing this either.

In fact the only funeral or better, “tomb” Jesus went to was that of Lazarus but not to condemn him to hell but rather to raise him up from the dead. Instead of causing the people mourning the death of Lazarus more grief Jesus sought to comfort them. Stark contrast to Phelps and his cult followers.

Did not Jesus minister to the sinners? He ate with them, spoke with them and reached out to them. Not to condone their sin but rather to tell them, “Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand!”

As Believers we are told in Scripture to go among the nations and “preach the gospel” but never are we told to preach hate for that is not the Gospel. The Gospel, in a nutshell, is given by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4:

1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand,
2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.
3For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,


Phelps drags the gospel through the proverbial mud and blackens the eye of Christ Jesus and on that day when a loved one of his dies, hundreds of people will flock to the funeral to mock and picket it and then thank God for their death as it will be one less loon on the earth. As much as people would love to do this I’m sure, I would rather hope and pray that people hold up signs that read….”We’re sorry for your loss Mr. Phelps”

Why? Because this world has enough hate and anger in it already and perhaps it’s time we seek to turn that around.

None of these arguments presented will convince Phelps he is wrong for he again has a God complex but what I sought to do was inform people who watch this Phelps guy and then get angry at Christians in general as they lump all Christians together with this "way out in right field" cult. Christians can be intelligent and not just Bible thumpers. Perhaps this will also help others out when they come across people such as the Phelps.


Thank you for reading,
Anthony

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Miss Lohan's Spew

For days I have sought to start an opening blog article but have drawn a blank as what to start with. I then heard of Lindsay Lohans remarks regarding Gov. and Republican VP nominee Sarah Palin and I knew right away that this would be my starting point. Not because Miss Lohan is not able to voice her opinions but rather to point out the sheer ignorance of her (or perhaps someone elses) contradictory statements.

Here are her words from her blog.


I really cannot bite my tongue anymore when it comes to Sarah Palin.

I couldn't be more supportive of a woman in office, but let's face it, it comes down to the person, and their beliefs, male or female.

Is it a sin to be gay? Should it be a sin to be straight? Or to use birth control? Or to have sex before marriage? Or even to have a child out of wedlock?

I find it quite interesting that a woman who now is running to be second in command of the United States, only 4 years ago had aspirations to be a television anchor. Which is probably all she is qualified to be... Also interesting that she got her passport in 2006.. And that she is not fond of environmental protection considering she's FOR drilling for oil in some of our protected land.... Well hey, if she wants to drill for oil, she should DO IT IN HER OWN backyard. This really shows me her complete lack of real preparation to become the second most powerful person in this country.

Hmmmm-All of this gets me going-Fear, Anxiety, Concern, Disappointment, and Stress come into play...

Is our country so divided that the Republicans best hope is a narrow minded, media obsessed homophobe?

I know that the most important thing about this election is that people need to exercise their right to vote, regardless of their choice... I would have liked to have remained impartial, however I am afraid that the "lipstick on a pig" comments will overshadow the issues and the fact that I believe Barack Obama is the best choice, in this election, for president...

Palin's Desire to "save and convert the gays"-really??

According to this Associated Press story, the church of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is hosting a kind of conference devoted to the "conversion of Gays" -- no kidding.

Here's the AP text:

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) ? Gov. Sarah Palin's church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer.

You'll be encouraged by the power of God's love and His desire to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality," according to the insert in the bulletin of the Wasilla Bible Church, where Palin has prayed since she was a child.

Palin's conservative Christian views have energized that part of the GOP electorate, which was lukewarm to John McCain's candidacy before he named her as his vice presidential choice. She is staunchly anti-abortion, opposing exceptions for rape and incest, and opposes gay marriage and spousal rights for gay couples.

http://zennie2005.blogspot.com/2008/09/sarah-palins-church-hosts-anti-gay.html

I feel it's necessary for me to clarify that I am not against Sarah Palin as a mother or woman.

Women have come a long way in the fight to have the choice over what we do with our bodies... And its frightening to see that a woman in 2008 would negate all of that.

Oh, and...Hint Hint Pali Pal- Don't pose for anymore tabloid covers, you're not a celebrity, you're running for office to represent our, your, my COUNTRY!

And in the words of Pamela Anderson, "She can suck it"..


Lindsay- "I have faith that this country will be all that it can be with the proper guidance. I really hope that all of you make your decisions based on the facts and what feels right to you in your heart-vote for obama!"

Samantha- "I love this country- however i wasn't born here and don't have the right to vote- so i beg of you all to really do your research and be educated when you cast your vote this coming november.... and if you're in doubt- vote for obama! Mainly because if she gets elected my green card probably won't get renewed!!!"


xoxo
Lindsay and Samantha


I take issue with a great deal of this Lohan's remarks but I will only cover a few here. First up is this statement:

I couldn't be more supportive of a woman in office, but let's face it, it comes down to the person, and their beliefs, male or female.

Key words here would be "and their beliefs". Not that it's wrong but instead of searching out Gov. Palins "beliefs" and from there making intelligent arguments as to why she disagrees, Lohan goes by second hand tidbits and sound bites and from there establishes Gov. Palin's "beliefs". In short Lohan has crafted a strawman so she can easily knock it down.

Is it a sin to be gay? Should it be a sin to be straight? Or to use birth control? Or to have sex before marriage? Or even to have a child out of wedlock?

Gov. Palin never made the rule that homosexuality was a sin, nor pre-marital sex was a sin. Rather Scripture states that it is.
Gov. Palin is a Christian therefore she reads and tries to follow the tenets of Christianity which are set by Scripture. In other words God declared what "sin" is and if we wish to be technical about it according to Scripture we are ALL found to be in sin. So Lohan's beef should be directed towards God, not Gov. Palin.

I find it quite interesting that a woman who now is running to be second in command of the United States, only 4 years ago had aspirations to be a television anchor. Which is probably all she is qualified to be... Also interesting that she got her passport in 2006.. And that she is not fond of environmental protection considering she's FOR drilling for oil in some of our protected land.... Well hey, if she wants to drill for oil, she should DO IT IN HER OWN backyard. This really shows me her complete lack of real preparation to become the second most powerful person in this country.

Wow, this is really odd because according to Lohan's logic any person having a change of path in their lives should not be allowed to do so. If Lohan followed her own reasoning here should she be allowed to have a singing career plus be an actress? I mean which was she first? Is she qualified to be a singer?

Lohan goes on to state that "only 4 years ago had aspirations to be a television anchor" but how is that possible when Mrs. Palin chaired the Alaskan Oil and Gas Comission from 2002 to 2004? She was a journalist back in the late 80's if I am correct so Lohan needs to do more research before throwing up such nonsense.

Hey Lindsay.....Gov. Palin IS wanting to drill in her own backyard, it's called "Anwar" and the place is pretty desolate. Grab a National Geographic book every so often, or an Atlas, and look them over. Ah, ya see what I just did there Lindsay? I ASSUMED you don't know much about geography and that you're limited in your knowledge of current events (which some may argue makes you perfectly qualified to be an actress) based on a few comments you made. That though would be unfair, correct?

I know that the most important thing about this election is that people need to exercise their right to vote, regardless of their choice... I would have liked to have remained impartial, however I am afraid that the "lipstick on a pig" comments will overshadow the issues and the fact that I believe Barack Obama is the best choice, in this election, for president...

Miss Lohan points to an AP news article to support her claim that Gov. Palin is praying to "save and convert gays" but where is that qoute at within the article from Gov. Palin? The article is in error because that church was not holding the conference but rather had a flyer of the conference within their church bulletin.

Also, once again using Lohan's reasoning and misplaced logic, if Sarah Palin is to be judged for what her church teaches and their associations then Lohan must also hold Obama responsible for his old churches teachings and associations. Will she do that?

Oh, and...Hint Hint Pali Pal- Don't pose for anymore tabloid covers, you're not a celebrity, you're running for office to represent our, your, my COUNTRY!
How odd that Lohan makes this statement right after stating this.

I feel it's necessary for me to clarify that I am not against Sarah Palin as a mother or woman.
Really? Who is Lohan to state who is and who isn't a "celebrity"? This is really strange coming from a girl who goes to great strides to be on tabloid covers yet she chastises Sarah Palin for being on them? Sarah Palin is not chasing down the media but rather the media is hunting her down. Stop the double standard Lohan, it's not very becoming of your "celebrity" status.

This closing statement from Miss Lohan says it all really. It shows just how ignorant and out of touch Lohan and many Hollywood people are.

I really hope that all of you make your decisions based on the facts and what feels right to you in your heart-vote for obama!"
First Lohan wants us to base our choice "on the facts" and then includes "feelings" in the tools of decisions. A persons "feelings" are not based on objective facts or evidence but rather......feelings. Feelings are subjective and come and go like high tide.

Then after saying everyone should base their choice on "facts" she then tells everyone to "vote for Obama" ! Hey, what happened to my choice based on facts?

Closing thoughts -

Miss Lohan, it is the right of every American to freely voice their opinions but when you post up such illogical nonsense it doesn't do much for your image or to be taken seriously. Think deeply upon a subject before you speak for it's better to remain quite and be thought a fool then to speak and remove all doubt.

Anthony