Interesting talk btw Athiest Prof & Christian Student
-
this is an older article, but a real shocker if you ask me..
john paulk, leader of ex-gay ministry quits
By News Editor
John Paulk, possibly the most well known "ex-gay" man in the United States, has announced on Monday he is resigning from his leadership role in Focus on the Family, a group that "converts" gay people to heterosexuality.
John Paulk, a self-described ex-gay has announced on Monday he is resigning from Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family to move with his wife and three sons closer to family in the Pacific Northwest.
John Paulk's media credentials include a Newsweek cover feature (with his ex-lesbian wife Anne), a series of religious right-sponsored ads that appeared in newspapers across the US and his 1998 autobiography, Not Afraid to Change: The Remarkable Story of How One Man Overcame Homosexuality.
"My time at Focus on the Family has been the most rewarding professional and ministry experience of my life. I will always have a heart for men and women struggling with homosexuality, but after working 16 years on this contentious issue, it's time for me to pursue other endeavours," Paulk said in a statement released Monday.
The 40-year-old, who joined the conservative Christian group in 1998, will leave his post as manager of the Homosexuality and Gender Department at FoF, on May 6.
Paulk and his wife, Anne, who claims to be a former lesbian, drew national attention in 1998 for appearing on the cover of Newsweek and full-page ads in newspapers like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal with messages about "overcoming" homosexuality and appearing in Oprah, 60 Minutes and other TV shows.
They promote the belief that gays and lesbians can leave homosexuality through prayer and counselling, a belief rejected by the medical establishment.
In 2000, Paulk caused a scandal after being spotted and photographed in a gay bar in Washington, D.C. He initially said he didn't know it was a gay bar, but later admitted he knew. Later, he claimed that he had gone in to use the bathroom although other patrons said he spent nearly an hour at the bar.
Paulk was removed (but later reinstated) as chairman of Exodus International, an interdenominational Christian organisation with chapters around the world including Singapore and Australia. The incident was also a major setback to the "ex-gay" movement.
Paulk is the author of "Not Afraid to Change: The Remarkable Story of How One Man Overcame Homosexuality" and co-creator of FoF's Love Won Out seminars.
Mike Haley, who helped create Love Won Out, will take over Paulk's position.
"(Paulk's) leaving is nothing more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It's a sinking proposition, the thinking that homosexuality can be changed through therapy." Said David Smith, spokesman for the national gay rights group Human Rights Campaign. -
from sites on medival history:Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Prove it.
Direct impetus was given the crusade by the famous sermon of Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont (now Clermont-Ferrand) in 1095. Exaggerating the anti-Christian acts of the Muslims, Urban exhorted Christendom to go to war for the Sepulcher, promising that the journey would count as full penance and that the homes of the absent ones would be protected by a truce. The battle cry of the Christians, he urged, should be Deus volt [God wills it].
In the year 1095, people were shocked in Western Europe by the words of Pope Urban II, "The Muslims have conquered Jerusalem". Pope Urban wanted the Christians to retake Jerusalem from the Muslims. People shouted "God wills it". All over France these were the words of the Christians.
Third Crusade
The Third Crusade, 1189–92, followed on the capture (1187) of Jerusalem by Saladin and the defeat of Guy of Lusignan, Reginald of Châtillon, and Raymond of Tripoli at Hattin. The crusade was preached by Pope Gregory VIII but was directed by its leaders—Richard I of England, Philip II of France, and Holy Roman Emperor Frederick I.
Pope Innocent III launched the Fourth Crusade, 1202–1204, which was totally diverted from its original course.
...the sack of Zara (1202), for which Innocent III excommunicated the crusaders...
Soon afterward Innocent III and his successor, Honorius III, began to preach the Fifth Crusade, 1217–21. King Andrew II of Hungary, Duke Leopold VI of Austria, John of Brienne, and the papal legate Pelasius were among the leaders of the expedition, which was aimed at Egypt, the center of Muslim strength.
looks very much to me that the popes not only did not say "no don't!". they were the ones saying "go forth and kill! God wills it!"
proof enuf? or u want more? -
so i did. i can't help it if he wants to be lazy. although, i suppose he wouldn't help me in proving my point even if i am right and he knows thats the truth. Thats just human nature isn't it? U don't help your opponents even when u know he's righter than rain.Originally posted by Icemoon:dunno leh .. I would like to use your argument in arguing against the Pope's infallibilty, but then .. haiz .. let's see what the RCs have to say?
Honey? Macross?
Edit: wah .. so Macross just said "prove it" above - posted before my original reply
-
it does. they are conservative is the answer.Originally posted by Icemoon:don't seems to ans your qn.
but im curious. what do u suppose those who are silent, who neither condemn nor condone, are actually thinking? are they thinking they don't want to get involved in a tiresome debate, or are they thinking they want to condone but don't want to face a backlash from others of their religion? -
Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:If Christianity was merely meant only to be a personal thing, why did Jesus build his Church on Earth?
Let's state the defination of being a Christian and believing in Christianity
What makes a Church?
What is the function of a Church?
Is Church also = The Body of Christ?
What makes a Christian?
_
Being a Christian is indeed a personal intimate relationship with God. So So i presume from your statement, it serves dual-propose of believing in God?
You see, a cross is made up of two pieces of wood. The vertical piece represents our relationship with God. And I agree with you in a way. A relationship with God should be the basis for believing.
But what about the horizontal piece? It represents our relation with others. We do not have to strive alone. We can journey together. It is not easy to be a believer, that is why we come together and learn from each other.
I don't know where this theology of 'two pieces of wood' come about.
Figuratively, it is right to further explain the basis of being a Christian.
Cheers -
It must be said that the Popes' noble, reasonable purposes for the war, however, became entangled with the purposes of those with secular interests and more interested in dynastic feuds, economic concerns over Mediterranean trade, or destroying the Eastern Roman Empire. Many "bad guys" jumped onto the Crusade bandwagon and evil was done by some of the Crusaders: the sacking of Constantinople (including the destruction of churches) and the murder of Jews along Crusade routes most definitely took place and are deeply lamentable. There is no excuse for such behaviors except human evil, but this evil was not sanctioned in any way by the Church, in no way reflects on Church teachings or her purposes for the Crusades, and resulted in the excommunication of many Crusaders responsible.Originally posted by HENG@:so i did. i can't help it if he wants to be lazy. although, i suppose he wouldn't help me in proving my point even if i am right and he knows thats the truth. Thats just human nature isn't it? U don't help your opponents even when u know he's righter than rain.
Let me ask you, what was the objective of the Crusades? -
To capture Jerusalem back from the Moslems?Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Let me ask you, what was the objective of the Crusades? -
more from my friend:
friend: are pp saying homosexuality is a sin because of the law mentioned in lecvitus. haiz..
me: ah
friend: that bit of stuff is called the jewish law, and the jewish law is no longer followed by christians because jesus christ fulfilled the prophecy. Is there anything in the new testament(NT) that condemns homosexuality?
me: i dunno. is there? u're the bible reader, not me
friend: in the NT, the law is debunked many times in the bible. In fact, the OT itself mentioned that law is fulfilled when christ is born. Christians are not required to follow the law. but rather to act in good faith and love everybody like himself, which jesus himself preaches in the NT. -
noble? can u truely say they only had noble purposes for war? now its my turn to say:Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:It must be said that the Popes' noble, reasonable purposes for the war, however, became entangled with the purposes of those with secular interests and more interested in dynastic feuds, economic concerns over Mediterranean trade, or destroying the Eastern Roman Empire. Many "bad guys" jumped onto the Crusade bandwagon and evil was done by some of the Crusaders: the sacking of Constantinople (including the destruction of churches) and the murder of Jews along Crusade routes most definitely took place and are deeply lamentable. There is no excuse for such behaviors except human evil, but this evil was not sanctioned in any way by the Church, in no way reflects on Church teachings or her purposes for the Crusades, and resulted in the excommunication of many Crusaders responsible.
Let me ask you, what was the objective of the Crusades?
prove it. -
here is a site by LGBT xtians. perhaps u might want to have a look to understand their views, esp Chin Eng.
i'll say now that their views are in no way my own views.
http://www.whosoever.org/index.shtml -
You haven't answered my question.Originally posted by HENG@:noble? can u truely say they only had noble purposes for war? now its my turn to say:
prove it.
What was the objective of the Crusades? -
erm.. ur friend is very selective in his readings i seeOriginally posted by HENG@:more from my friend:
friend: that bit of stuff is called the jewish law, and the jewish law is no longer followed by christians because jesus christ fulfilled the prophecy. Is there anything in the new testament(NT) that condemns homosexuality?
me: i dunno. is there? u're the bible reader, not me
friend: in the NT, the law is debunked many times in the bible. In fact, the OT itself mentioned that law is fulfilled when christ is born. Christians are not required to follow the law. but rather to act in good faith and love everybody like himself, which jesus himself preaches in the NT.
1 Corinthians 6:9 (NIV)
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders.
hope i answered his query -
Ah heng: Ask your friend on 1 Cor and RomansOriginally posted by HENG@:more from my friend:
friend: are pp saying homosexuality is a sin because of the law mentioned in lecvitus. haiz..
me: ah
friend: that bit of stuff is called the jewish law, and the jewish law is no longer followed by christians because jesus christ fulfilled the prophecy. Is there anything in the new testament(NT) that condemns homosexuality?
me: i dunno. is there? u're the bible reader, not me
friend: in the NT, the law is debunked many times in the bible. In fact, the OT itself mentioned that law is fulfilled when christ is born. Christians are not required to follow the law. but rather to act in good faith and love everybody like himself, which jesus himself preaches in the NT.
To satisfy everyone. -
MC .. u're a Christian ah?Originally posted by M©+square:Ah heng: Ask your friend on 1 Cor and Romans
To satisfy everyone.
sorry ah .. i am kinda new here -
wah leow .. u read the reply by Uncle Eng right? Why never mention the Cor. verse?Originally posted by HENG@:friend: that bit of stuff is called the jewish law, and the jewish law is no longer followed by christians because jesus christ fulfilled the prophecy. Is there anything in the new testament(NT) that condemns homosexuality?
me: i dunno. is there? u're the bible reader, not me
friend: in the NT, the law is debunked many times in the bible. In fact, the OT itself mentioned that law is fulfilled when christ is born. Christians are not required to follow the law. but rather to act in good faith and love everybody like himself, which jesus himself preaches in the NT.
though the law is debunked, Christ also said He came not to abolish but to fulfill it. Many? Christians think the law was given to show us the futility of following it - you can't even follow all 10 commandments. As the explanation goes, Christ's redemption on the cross washes away your sins, past, present and future, but this does not mean what was sinful in the past is now acceptable. Or else I can argue adultery is right, can I? -
nope. i wouldn't say i am.Originally posted by ben1xy:MC .. u're a Christian ah?
sorry ah .. i am kinda new here
Anyway, welcome. Hope you're not over zealous and pushy.
-
kill the non-believers and convert by force. don't dodge the question either. YOU prove it as well.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:You haven't answered my question.
What was the objective of the Crusades? -
erm.. nah .. juz here to learnOriginally posted by M©+square:nope. i wouldn't say i am.
Anyway, welcome. Hope you're not over zealous and pushy.
hahaa -
Buzz!!! Wrong answer!!Originally posted by HENG@:kill the non-believers and convert by force. don't dodge the question either. YOU prove it as well.
The objective of the Crusades is not to convert by force, nor to merely spill the blood of Muslims (And blood of Eastern Christians and Jews in the process).
The objective is simply, to fight back the Muslim invaders! -
yay .. I hope I get more marks than Ah Heng!Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:The objective is simply, to fight back the Muslim invaders!
I said "recapture back Jerusalem from the Moslems". -
thats strange. what was quoted to be by ANOTHER friend is this:Originally posted by ben1xy:erm.. ur friend is very selective in his readings i see
1 Corinthians 6:9 (NIV)
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders.
hope i answered his query
friend 2: well. Homo sexual rape is a sin. u know why Sodom n Gomorrah are destroyed? cos got this horny bunch of men, want to rape visitors to the house of Lot.
me: but they quoted Romans and 1 Corinthians as evidence that homosexuality itself is wrong
friend 2: is it...unnatural use right? its not that context. many ppl think its about it...
me: but they have said that your usage of Ecclesiastes 7:13 is out of context
friend 2: ok. then ask them if they have taken the verses in corinth out of context?! what is the book of corinthians abt? do u know? did they tell u?
friend 2: i'll smack some Christian sense into their self-righteousness. first of all where is their bloody evidence?
friend 2: well. u go read www.whosoever.org please
frend 2: it is explicitly mentioned as homosexuality? what is lust towards each other, can it be like lust for higher positions in the hierachy?
by the way, is being Transgender a sin? -
doesn't xtianity teach u to turn the other cheek? not to fight fire with fire? to love your fellow man? i don't see any justifications in xtian teachings for going there to smack the muslim invaders. besides, the xtians marched into the middle east 1st didn't they? so u're telling me they went there to fight the muslim "invaders" who are just fighting to get their land back from the real invaders?Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Buzz!!! Wrong answer!!
The objective of the Crusades is not to convert by force, nor to merely spill the blood of Muslims (And blood of Eastern Christians and Jews in the process).
The objective is simply, to fight back the Muslim invaders!
no seriously tell me, which xtian teaching says that u can solve a problem like that with brute force.
so is this not the act of man satisfying their own desires and blasphemously shouting "god wills it" and exhorted by a POPE to do so no less?
and why haven't u proved the popes had nothing but noble intentions yet? or u can't prove it? -
1 Corinthians 6:9 (NIV)
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders.
erm.. Heng ah .. can u tell me wad u honestly feel? did i take this out of context?
Pauls say explicitly; he addresses people that will not inherit the Kingdom of God. he mentions the homosexuals.
how is that out of context?
u dun have to agree with me.. i juz wanna know ur views on this -
i noticed it says "homosexual offenders" not "homosexuals", meaning, like what friend 2 has said, that the sin in question is homosexual RAPE, not homosexuality itself. so that is what i honestly feel. when u say "homosexual" only, isn't that already taking it out of context?Originally posted by ben1xy:1 Corinthians 6:9 (NIV)
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders.
erm.. Heng ah .. can u tell me wad u honestly feel? did i take this out of context?
Pauls say explicitly; he addresses people that will not inherit the Kingdom of God. he mentions the homosexuals.
how is that out of context?
u dun have to agree with me.. i juz wanna know ur views on this -
He didn't address to People...he addressed to Christians who will lose their place in the kingdom if they continue their wicked ways.Originally posted by ben1xy:1 Corinthians 6:9 (NIV)
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders.
erm.. Heng ah .. can u tell me wad u honestly feel? did i take this out of context?
Pauls say explicitly; he addresses people that will not inherit the Kingdom of God. he mentions the homosexuals.
how is that out of context?
u dun have to agree with me.. i juz wanna know ur views on this