To the editor:
Concerning the April 23 Journal-World article about Josh Longbottom's visit to Washington, D.C., I would say that as a spiritual leader, he is missing the mark along with the others who were supposedly speaking for the Christian faith. The fact is, homosexuality is a SIN. The gays want recognition, rights and even more. God wants them to be reconciled to him so that they can be set free from their sin.
Josh talks about progressive clergy and Christian diversity. Isaiah said, "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil." Christian diversity involves God-created differences such as different tongues, tribes, nations; or God gifts as stated in Romans 12 and I Corinthians 12. It does not involve sinful sexual orientations. This is clear when one considers Jesus' famous exposition in Matthew 6 on "You have heard that it was said," and "But, I tell you." Also, it is clear from Paul's list of those who will not inherit the Kingdom of God (see I Corinthians 6), or even more sobering, from the list of those who will spend eternity in the Lake of Fire (see Revelations 21). Jesus said it best (as he always does) in Mark 2, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners."
The 250 in Washington, D.C., are the so-called righteous, thinking they (and the ones they hope to help) don't need to be healed of their sin sickness. We sinners know that we need God's forgiveness and power, which allows us to be free from the power of sin.
Carl Burkhead, Lawrence
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
Well this shouldn't be controversial...
RonaldWilson (anonymous) says…
Carl,
I would love to comment, but you said everything that needs to be said. Right on!
queequeg (anonymous) says…
quite pathetic
paladin (anonymous) says…
Woe be unto the homogenized and the homogeniuses for they will not enter the kingdom of heaven but will dwell in the nether regions for all eternity to be vilified castigated scorned shunned laughed at gossiped about teased and bullied until the end of time or until jesus comes unto us to set the record straight whichever happens first as we now pass judgement and what punishment that we may by persecuting and prosecuting his holy word and name as best we can without him actually having done or said anything about any of this though low we know in our hearts that sin is sin and it is against us and is therefore bad and should not be tolerated but should be rooted out and stomped on and driven from the land forevermore. May God have mercy on us all, except those we don't like. Amen.
SettingTheRecordStraight (anonymous) says…
Thank you Carl. Very good.
mom_of_three (anonymous) says…
What the writer quoted could be true of any sin. So why use it only to prosecute homosexuality?
If God believes homosexuality is a sin, then God will decide when the time comes. Until then, why wouldn't we want to treat everyone, including gays and lesbians equally? Aren't we all God's children??
jonas (anonymous) says…
Yes, that covered the religious aspects of homosexuality just fine.
Now. . . . tell us why that matters in practical life, if you could.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
http://members.tripod.com/~anxietyny/...
mom_of_three (anonymous) says…
For years now, the law of the country hasn't followed the "law" of the bible. People get divorces all the time, thiefs usually live to commit another crime, and adulterers aren't ostracized to another part of the world (at least not here). So if "all men are created equal," why aren't all men given equal rights?
Curtiss (anonymous) says…
The list you reference, 1 Corinthians 6, lists among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God:
-adulterers
-male prostitutes
-thieves
-the greedy
-slanderers
-swindlers
I'd say the White House staff and Republican leadership in the House and Senate are mostly not going to make it. From the White House prostitute "Jeff Gannon" to the page-diddlers to the adulterers that impeached Clinton while carrying on their own sinful affairs, to the many people on the WH staff whose full time job is ruining the lives and careers of anyone who speaks out against them, there's a lot of famous faces we won't be seeing in heaven.
mom_of_three (anonymous) says…
So you interpret the Bible one way, and another clery member interprets it another.
It's happened before. The Bible was used as a reason for Southerners to keep slaves, as they used passages to justify it. Seems we can use the Bible to justify whatever hate we wish to have.
gr (anonymous) says…
"What the writer quoted could be true of any sin. So why use it only to prosecute homosexuality?"
Do you think it could be that homosexuals are the ones who are trying to promote their sin as an act that should be accepted, celebrated, and condoned, whereas the other sinners are happy to do their sin in the privacy of their own homes and leave it between God and themselves rather than trying to get publicity for it?
"So if "all men are created equal," why aren't all men given equal rights?"
Welcome to life.
Can you give an example of people being treated equally and fairly in anything?
gr (anonymous) says…
"The Bible commands the death sacrifice of the First Born:
" You shall not delay the offering of your harvest and your press. You shall give me the first born of your sons. You must do the same for your oxen and your sheep." (Exodus 22:28-29 NAB)"
Now if THAT'S not misconstruing things, I don't know what is!
But, misconstruing was your point, wasn't it?
(1 Samuel 1:11 comes to mind)
KayCee (anonymous) says…
queequeg says:
"quite pathetic"
Perhaps you need to study what the word 'pathetic' really means, Carl got to the gist of what took place.
And right here gr nailed it.
"Do you think it could be that homosexuals are the ones who are trying to promote their sin as an act that should be accepted, celebrated, and condoned,"
Curtiss (anonymous) says…
KayCee thought gr was quite clever when he/she/it wrote:
"Do you think it could be that homosexuals are the ones who are trying to promote their sin as an act that should be accepted, celebrated, and condoned,"
Well, since the pay of CEOs and sports stars had gone up a thousand percent in the last few decades, while the income of the people at the low end has gone down, I'd say those people qualify in the 1 Corinthians list, of people who'll never get to heaven.
And I think it's obvious that 150 million dollar CEOs, as well as the PNAC warmongers that want the US in a permanent state of war so that war corporations will thrive (and we'll control all the oil) also are promoting their sin "as an act that should be accepted, celebrated and condoned."
So I'll repeat the question someone else asked: What is it that makes gay people so much bigger threat to us all than warmongers, robber barons, slanderers and adulterers? (Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan, Ken Lay, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz and Rudy Giuliani come to mind right away, as people on that list, who personally have posed a bigger threat to me and my family than any gay people I can think of. Extra points for the fact that they're pretty much all draft dodgers, too.)
gr (anonymous) says…
Curtiss suggests that one person's sin equalizes anothers'.
And he also suggests that no one is speaking out against CEO salaries and the war industry.
Jamesaust (anonymous) says…
"Jesus said it best..."
Indeed.
What happens when a lawyer asks Jesus what's the standard for gaining eternal life? Jesus turns the question back and asks what the Old Testament ("the law") says, knowing full well what it says. Replies the lawyer: the law is love God fully and love thy neighbor as thyself. But who is "thy neighbor"?
Rather than provide a rule, which is what the lawyer wants to hear, Jesus replies with his "Good Samaritan" parable - a story so familiar to our ears that people, like this letter's author, act as if they'd never heard of it.
A man lies robbed and injured on the roadside while the holier-than-thou-or-anyone-else types avoid him. A Samaritan, a despised people who, in the eyes of the Jewish religious establishment, didn't follows "the law" of Judiasm adequately, is the only one to stop for the man, comforts him, takes him to an inn, and pays out of his own pocket for his care.
Who of these passer-bys was the neighbor? Jesus asks. When the lawyer doesn't answer, Jesus does - the Samaritan. "Go and do the same."
So there you have it -- ALL of the rules necessary for God's grace and eternal life. To recap: (1) love God, (2) love thy neighbor as thyself. And apparently to be gained by the most sinful and despised who actually live the love of God while the not-so-wholly-holies, bound up in rules and recipies and magic incantations for salvation, fall short!
Would that this letter's author had spent more effort on loving others and less on judging them! Woe unto those who fail these two simple - yet for some, impossible - requirements for eternal life: the fiery pit is prepared for thee. (I only add the later because the only thing that seems to get some people's attention are fiery pits.)
shockchalk (anonymous) says…
Great letter Carl! Keep spreading the truth in the midst of moral relativism.
Curtiss---Are you reallly ignorant enough to believe that only the current WH administration and the Republicans in congress are the only ones who would be affected by 1 Corinthians 6? If so, you may have to throw yourself into the pile under the heading of "slanderer".
mom_of_three (anonymous) says…
jamesaust - good story about the samaritains. Exactly what I would say, if I would have remembered the story as well as you have.
And no, gays are not trying to have their "sin" celebrated. They only want equal rights, to have their partners receive benefits given to other married couples for years. They want the right not to be discriminated against in the workplace by those who hate someone different than themselves.
And as far as equal rights go, it's in the founding documents of our country. People use other passages of these documents as a reason to carry guns, to say what they want, and to worship whom they please. So are we just picking and choosing which rights to give certain citizens of our country. I thought we were better than that.....
craigers (anonymous) says…
Good letter.
deec (anonymous) says…
To the State, marriage is a civil contract. One's religious opinion of the "sinfulness" of homosexuality is irrelevant.
Kodiac (anonymous) says…
Good to see that we still have our modern-day "Pharisees" to show us great examples of how not to live our lives or to treat others...
gr (anonymous) says…
"To the State, marriage is a civil contract. One's religious opinion of the "sinfulness" of homosexuality is irrelevant."
deec, do you wish to go down the road of allowing all marriages if they can be based upon "civil contracts"?
Otherwise, did you mean anything by that statement?
mom_of_three (anonymous) says…
So because homosexuality is a sin, then that person should not have certain protections or rights under the law. Do you think it is right for the person to lose his job because someone doesn't agree with his lifestyle? That no one should stand up for them, let alone a clergy man because you deem the gay lifestyle a sin? Pretty judgemental, isn't it?
mom_of_three (anonymous) says…
Do you treat all sins the same, or just the ones you don't agree with??
jonas (anonymous) says…
"gr (Anonymous) says:
deec, do you wish to go down the road of allowing all marriages if they can be based upon "civil contracts"?"
There are certainly controls available and generally agreed upon within society by virtually all parties on who and what could enter into a civil-contract, based upon ability to consent. Do we have to go over this ground again?
spacystaci8 (anonymous) says…
Dang it where is scenebooster? He should have had at least 2 hateful comments by now. I wanted him to come out and play! Marion I have had way more prayers answered, a son after 3 years of infertility, a house, a car, the jobs I have wanted. Coincidence? I think not, but it is AMerica and believe what you want. The bottom line is we all sin. All sins are equal to God, even if you murder someone. God is looking for the repentant heart, he will then forgive anyone. Most homosexuals don't repent from their sexuality because they think they are not sinning.
drewdun (anonymous) says…
""Do you think it could be that homosexuals are the ones who are trying to promote their sin as an act that should be accepted, celebrated, and condoned,"
Hey, here's a fun fact I will impart to you for free: not everyone believes like you believe. just because you think something is a *sin* does not mean everyone else believes that. you can think and hope and pray that homos go to *hell* or *the lake of fire* or whatever other bizarre land of punishment that exists in your mind for people who don't conform to your exact beliefs, but when you try to use the state as an instrument of your beliefs you've crossed the line.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
Hey gr, had any good "deer meat" lately?
--Ag
shockchalk (anonymous) says…
Drewdun,
It isn't that WE think it's a sin. It is that the bible says it is a sin. And God desires that no one would go to hell or the "lake of fire" as you put it but that all would come to know Him. People don't go to hell because of their sexual prefererance, they go because they don't ask for forgiveness of their sins. It's the person God is concerned with, not the behavior.
mom_of_three (anonymous) says…
So there is a clergy member who is trying to live in the 21st century, by accepting all those who are different? Still don't see the big deal....
Pywacket (anonymous) says…
You fundies are nuts and dangerous. Fortunately, we have civil protection against your would-be oppressive rule. If the mythological place "hell" DID exist, it would be intolerant scum who would fill it up.
And speaking of "hell," it's pathetic that you might not do the right thing in any given circumstance if you didn't have fire & brimstone hanging over your head to keep you in line. Those of us who don't believe in such mythology as gods, devils, elves, and leprechauns try to do the right thing and become better all our lives simply because we wish to be moral and decent human beings--even though we know that once we're gone, we're gone.
ksmoderate (anonymous) says…
"The bottom line is we all sin."
Um, nope. The bottom line is that in America, citizens are free to not believe in sin. You are free to believe in it, if you wish; that is your right. On the other hand, many Americans don't believe in the biblical notion of sin, or even in the basic concept of sin, period. To force others to bend to your beliefs is about as unAmerican as you can get.
Carry on.
jjjjohnsonlawrence (anonymous) says…
Go to mustardseedchurch.com in the menu click on church ministries, lineline groups, scroll down to Men's Lifeline groups, Promise Keepers....
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
And what does a has-been evangelical movement from the late '90s have to do with any of this,
jjjjohnsonlawrence?
"Promise Keepers"... "Promise Keepers".... hhhhmmmmmm....
Oh yeah, now I remember.
Kinda started up just as the "New Christian Rock" movement petered out... and PK themselves got pushed out of the spotlight right before the WWJD bracelets became all the rage.
Anybody else remember anything 'bout that?
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
http://www.uscentrist.org
jjjjohnsonlawrence (anonymous) says…
I googled the author & address
Jamesaust (anonymous) says…
Marion: "You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself a Christian."
Given recent comments, I'd say this is about as correct as anything said by Marion. We've seen some fairly damning evidence on ljworld lately.
I'm amazed that people who say that they "follow the Bible" seem to think - like this letter's author - that means quoting translated snippets out-of-context and ignoring whole portions when, obsequious to their self-interest, they find it more convenient to release themselves from the clear-cut if sometimes bizarre obligations of God's commands.
Apparently, the only difference between Christian fundamentalists and Muslim fundamentalists lies in whether one considers despoiling virgins (always female virgins, of course) to be a punishment or a reward. Other than that both seem to be a direct threat to public safety and the peoples' liberty. Thank God (literally) our founding fathers weren't fundamentalists!
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
Said it before, and I'll say it again...
It's "Bible Buffet" time!
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
http://www.uscentrist.org
shockchalk (anonymous) says…
scene...........your latest post surprises me. Although, I didn't elaborate on my reasons, I never said............that's just the way I feel. It's not the way I feel, it's my personal beliefs that I based my opinion on. What's the point of questioning whether or not I capitalized the word "Bible"? This isn't the normal exchange that we usually enjoy. Nevertheless, I hope that you have a good Tuesday.
shock
gr (anonymous) says…
drewdun : "Hey, here's a fun fact I will impart to you for free: not everyone believes like you believe. "
But mom_of_three believed homosexuals to be sinning. And that's what I was replying to.
drewdun, instead of replying to me, maybe you should talk to her about your beliefs.
Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…
Lest we all forget, the (Christian) Bible also says shellfish is a sin to eat, Christians may not be lenders and adultery=a death sentence. I am sure there are plenty of you Bible thumpers (and yes, I was raised in a church) out there who eat lobster, crab and shrimp, have cheated on a spouse or know some Christian who has, and have lent money to a friend, or *gasp* even been a banker. Why is it OK to pick and choose what parts of the Bible really "matter" to you, and disregard those that are inconvenient?
deec (anonymous) says…
Marriage, as a civil contract, requires consent of the parties involved. Neither minors, whom we presume by law to be incapable of making a valid contract, nor animals, who cannot comprehend or sign a contract, can enter into contracts. Two consenting adults, however, can enter into a contract. While society as a whole may have an interest in restricting marriage of blood relatives in order to prevent wholesale recessive-gene reinforcement a la the royal families of Europe, there is no similar interest in preventing two same-sexed people from enjoying the legal benefits and obligations of a civil marriage.
smitty (anonymous) says…
Why?
"For the worse possible reason, because I can." Bill Clinton
irishdevil99 (anonymous) says…
If your religion does not allow homosexuality, by all means, your clergy shouldn't allow homosexuals to get married in your church. But what does that have to do with legal marriage?
spacystaci8 (anonymous) says…
God says homosexuality is a sin, not me I didn't create that rule. Personally I don't care if someone wants to be gay or not. I think its gross but really it doesn't affect me. The Bible just states not to exercise homosexuality. Why did God make reproductive organs to fit the way they do? Boys don't fit together and neither do girls. If God wanted us to be gay he would have designed us that way.
Lev: 18: 22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, that is detestable"
stuckinthemiddle (anonymous) says…
Just wanting to share a bit more of Leviticus.
Chapter One
1: The LORD called Moses, and spoke to him from the tent of meeting, saying,
2: "Speak to the people of Israel, and say to them, When any man of you brings an offering to the LORD, you shall bring your offering of cattle from the herd or from the flock.
3: "If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he shall offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it at the door of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before the LORD;
4: he shall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt offering, and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.
5: Then he shall kill the bull before the LORD; and Aaron's sons the priests shall present the blood, and throw the blood round about against the altar that is at the door of the tent of meeting.
6: And he shall flay the burnt offering and cut it into pieces;
7: and the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire on the altar, and lay wood in order upon the fire;
8: and Aaron's sons the priests shall lay the pieces, the head, and the fat, in order upon the wood that is on the fire upon the altar;
9: but its entrails and its legs he shall wash with water. And the priest shall burn the whole on the altar, as a burnt offering, an offering by fire, a pleasing odor to the LORD.
10: "If his gift for a burnt offering is from the flock, from the sheep or goats, he shall offer a male without blemish;
11: and he shall kill it on the north side of the altar before the LORD, and Aaron's sons the priests shall throw its blood against the altar round about.
12: And he shall cut it into pieces, with its head and its fat, and the priest shall lay them in order upon the wood that is on the fire upon the altar;
13: but the entrails and the legs he shall wash with water. And the priest shall offer the whole, and burn it on the altar; it is a burnt offering, an offering by fire, a pleasing odor to the LORD.
14: "If his offering to the LORD is a burnt offering of birds, then he shall bring his offering of turtledoves or of young pigeons.
15: And the priest shall bring it to the altar and wring off its head, and burn it on the altar; and its blood shall be drained out on the side of the altar;
16: and he shall take away its crop with the feathers, and cast it beside the altar on the east side, in the place for ashes;
17: he shall tear it by its wings, but shall not divide it asunder. And the priest shall burn it on the altar, upon the wood that is on the fire; it is a burnt offering, an offering by fire, a pleasing odor to the LORD.
--------
Is this what all Christians are suppose to be doing? I don't know anyone who does this.
irishdevil99 (anonymous) says…
Actually, Staci, you claim that "God says homosexuality is a sin, not me." Not quite... the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin, not God. Unless you have evidence of God himself saying these things, you're the one making the claims.
But let's say, for the sake of argument, that there is a god. Let's take it a step further and propose that there's only one god, and that that god is the God of the Christian Bible, as opposed to Allah or Zeus or Vishnu or the Reverend Moon or any other religion's god. And let's take it even farther than that, and suppose that this God has opinions on how we should live our lives, and that His opinions are accurately represented by the Bible.
So what? It's still an argument based solely on religion. Even if God exists and exists in the manner in which you imagine him, he doesn't legislate this country.
Written into the Constitution is a clause allowing freedom of religion. This allows you to continue to be a Christian, no matter what anyone else thinks. If, someday in the future, the country becomes primarily Islamist, or Jewish, or Hindu, or Buddhist, or even atheistic, you'll still be able to be a Christian. Isn't that great? Just as importantly, it is a freedom FROM religion... which means that while you may allow your religious beliefs to govern how you choose to live your life, other people are free to live in ways that they choose, and YOUR religion shouldn't have any bearing on this.
p95151 (anonymous) says…
Well said, irishdevil99!
spacystaci8 (anonymous) says…
Coming from you scene being called a hypocrite is an honor. We are all hypocrites none of us are perfect except God. I guess someday we will all know if God is real or not. Glad I believe in Him. By the way I believe I stated earlier it is America, believe what you want, I am just stating my opinion. Funny you can express yours scene but when I express mine you attack me.
Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…
Staci, I don't know that anyone has an issue with you expressing your opinion. I know, I, for one, was mainly concerned because you sound judgemental....like you religious-based opinion of the world is the "right" one.
Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…
jjjjohnsonlawrence (Anonymous) says:
Go to mustardseedchurch.com in the menu click on church ministries, lineline groups, scroll down to Men's Lifeline groups, Promise Keepers:.
The Promise Keepers?
Ohhhh, Jesus. Pun intended.
promitida (anonymous) says…
This made me laugh. Thanks Carl.
Tychoman (anonymous) says…
Why does the LJW continue to print the BS spouted by Burkhead?
People like gr, staci and other fundies are from the cradle of idiocy if you honestly believe the crap you say you do.
spacystaci8 (anonymous) says…
So tell me Tycho, what is it you believe in? What makes it better than Christianity?
Crispian, I didn't mean to make you feel like my opinion is the "right" one. I honestly believe there are a lot of people out there going to Heaven. There are a lot of good people out there. I have nothing against gays. My favorite teacher in cosmetology school was gay and I considered him a friend. The Bible just says its wrong, as well as many other things. God intended for marriage to be for a man and woman.
jonas (anonymous) says…
"I didn't mean to make you feel like my opinion is the "right" one"
Yes you did. That's the central tenet of ANY argument from a religious or faith-based viewpoint, at least as far as it concerns this context. It's almost an identity statement. A faith-based (rather than proof-based) argument immediately invalidates itself if it is no longer the "right" one.
deec (anonymous) says…
Any poster's religious convictions regarding homosexuality are irrelevant to the civil contract of marriage. Marriage is regulated by the State in regards to property and debts, custody and support of children (if any; children are NOT a requirement of marriage), medical and end-of-life decisions, and inheritance. God (anybody's god) ain't got nothin' to do with it.
gr (anonymous) says…
"Marriage is regulated by the State"
And the state says one man with one woman.
Do you disagree with how the state regulates it?
deec (anonymous) says…
Interesting how you picked out one phrase from my post, and did not address any of the substance of the post. Yes I disagree with the State regulating civil marriage between Two Consenting Adults, and have said so repeatedly. What is your rationale for opposing civil marriage between two consenting adults? Religious arguments don't count.
gr (anonymous) says…
deec, had to take care of first things first.
You disagree with how the state regulates marriage. Therefore, any comment concerning the state is meaningless in your context. Which futher invalidates comparison of anything else with what you disagree with to start with. Don't you see that you just said the state is irrelevant to the civil contract of marriage? If you start making up new things, then where and how does one start and stop coming up with rationale for agreeing or disagreeing with anything?
I don't mean to be snide here - just trying to point out a fallacy here. No different than someone saying they don't believe in the Bible, but they sure as will tell everyone what it means.
Tychoman (anonymous) says…
Stacy, I believe in logic and proof and rationality. I suggest you look into those sometime.