Posted on 02/28/2011 9:26:48 AM PST by ironwill
Here is an interesting paragraph in her own words:
I shared with the audience at this private event that I, too, had been hurt by the leadership at my church, but I did not go into any detail other than letting them know it was made very clear to me, and believe me it was, that I was no longer wanted or needed at New Life after they found out I am gay.She went to a group. She publicly said her leadership hurt her, and that they made it "very clear to me", that she was not wanted by the church.
Then, she blames the reporter for making this public, because she thinks THAT is what makes this a story. She was apparently FINE with trashing her church and it's leadership in private, but is upset that someone took her public words at a "private" event and published them for the rest of us to see.
Now, where in HER Bible is she told that it is OK to accuse her Christian brethren of behaving badly in front of outsiders, while trying to hide the accusations from them? Rembmer, this isn't a spur of the moment thing she said, NOR is this just a thoughtless response. Her words at the event were PREPARED by her, and her words in this web site were written by her in her own time.
She seems to have a "Gaius Baltar" view of religion (from Battlestar Galactica, if you understand the reference) -- God made us, and therefore WHATEVER we feel compelled to do, it must be what God wanted, and he would NEVER reject us for just doing what he made us to do.
That of course is bunk. Her church, according to her, believes homosexuality is a sin; she doesn't, and it seems clear from what she wrote that she interprets her church's refusal to accept her sin as acceptable is what drove her away from the church.
:-D
I disagree. The columnist appears to have largely reported her words correctly. She's upset that her "private" words were made public, but it's not a reporter's job to help people keep their opinions hidden, or to clean up the mess that results when people talk trash about others behind their backs and get caught.
Second, even if we account for the certainty that Ms. Assam is putting the best possible face on her side of the story, it seems quite clear that something really did happen at New Life, related to her role at the church and her homosexuality.
I don't remember anybody EVER arguing differently here. Your statement is not equivalent to her charge that she was "clearly asked to leave" (although as she notes "not wirh words"). I think we all agree that she left the church because of her sinful actions, and I presume because her church refused to accept her sinful actions as proper. My church would accept a thief, but wouldn't allow them to think stealing money from the offering was appropriate behavior. And I guess if a thief was continually chastised for trying to walk off with the offering, they would probably feel like they weren't wanted. It's how sin separates us from God, and from our brethren.
I believe her claim that she was deeply hurt by the episode.
I agree with you; she clearly thinks her actions are OK, and is upset that people she cares about won't change their views and stop calling her actions sinful. I've known a lot of sinners who decide, rather than repentance, that what they are doing is NOT sin, and that the fault is with the church for thinking otherwise. They usually leave the church, and usually blame the church for "driving them off".
And finally, if we believe that even some of Assam's story is true, Pastor Boyd's quoted response looks less than forthright.
Again, I disagree. I believe some of her story is true; I believe most of her story is true, and even think she believes ALL of her story is true. And yet I see nothing in that story that in any way contradicts what the Pastor said. A church can welcome a sinner with open arms; but if they preach that the sinner's actions are sinful, no matter how much they show God's love, that sinner will feel driven away. It's the sin that does it, but the sinner, refusing to accept the idea of sin, blames others.
She never tells us what she wanted the church to do with her. Did she want to be allowed to teach Sunday School? I certainly wouldn't let her near children with her defiant attitude toward God and his commandments.
Here is a quote of what Boyd said:
"We welcome everyone at New Life," he told The Gazette. "We would never tell someone to leave because of their sexual orientation. Jeanne will always be a hero at New Life."Assam agrees that they never told her to leave: "Assam agreed Boyd and others never used the exact words that she was unwelcome." Instead, she insists they "made it clear". Nothing Boyd said is inconsistent with the church teaching that her ACTIONS of giving in to her lesbian feelings are sinful, and denying her certain privileges of the church because she is actively living in rebellion to God's word. (My church would deny her communion, not sure if New Life would do that or not).
So, to summarize, I don't see her words in any way backing up your assertions that the columnist is at fault, or that Boyd must be less the "forthright".
Assam says that the events happened in July 2009. Noreen didn't even bother to report that fact. Mr. Noreen is not a passive reporter in this story; he's shaping the narrative for reasons of his own. We should always take into account the reporter's slant for stories like this.
I don't remember anybody EVER arguing differently here. Your statement is not equivalent to her charge that she was "clearly asked to leave" (although as she notes "not wirh words").
Which brings us back to Mr. Noreen, who appears to be the one who introduced "asked her to leave" into the story. See what I mean? As it happens, though, there were plenty of folks who called her a liar, and one (you) who called her "evil." There's no need to quibble about the words Mr. Noreen seems to have added, when you're convinced that she's evil.
I think we all agree that she left the church because of her sinful actions, and I presume because her church refused to accept her sinful actions as proper.
Well, that's just simplistic to the point of priggishness. If people were made of Legos, I suppose you could build a nice story like that. Real life is a lot messier.
And yet I see nothing in that story that in any way contradicts what the Pastor said.
Except that he left out a few details about the events in question, didn't he? (In Mr. Noreen's telling, at any rate -- see? He's still important here.) Boyd makes it seem like Ms. Assam is lying -- her story is "absolutely untrue." No suggestion that anything actually might have caused her to leave, no indication that something went on between them.... Just the flat statement that she's not telling the truth. Which is just a little dishonest, don't you think?
I don't give Ms. Assam a free pass on this; I think she stretched the truth. But she's not the only one whose story needs to be taken with a grain of salt. New Life's pastor, Barry Noreen, and a bunch of stone-throwers on this thread need to be called out as well.
How many lives were saved by her actions at that church that day?
It seems that such things do not matter. According to many on this thread, she's an evil, lying, lesbian. And "No greater love...." apparently has no part in this conversation.
Her thinking and reasoning is completely unBiblical. Homosexuality is a sin that is called out several times as an example of sin, as are many other sins.
Unrepentant sinners shall not be part of the kingdom of Heaven. Does she have a hard row to hoe? You bet, don’t envy her a bit. She cannot however attempt to justify her sinful life by skewing God’s word to her benfit.
http://jeanneassam.wordpress.com/Her latest blog post deals with this latest news telling her version of the story in her own words.
Interesting, but really doesn't tell us much more than we already knew. She left New Life, a while ago, and moved away. She feels "hurt", but doesn't say what they did, but (she says) seems to just want to get on with her life. She's one of these that managed to tiptoe through the text, squint just right, and not see her own particular sin as a problem.
Someone (the reporter, of whoever sic-ed the reporter on her) wants to make trouble for New Life Church in particular or Christianity in general.
That has little to do with salvation. She became "born again" and later decided to embrace homosexuality. You cannot claim Christ and embrace sin. The choice is hers and not up to the church.
It doesn't. You have been told repeatedly that someone cannot claim Christ and celebrate their sin.
We are all evil. None of us can do good. In her case, she calls her evil "good":
A reporter from the Colorado Springs Gazette has outed me to the public and made it appear as if I now, all of a sudden, am wanting people to know what New Life did to me and why I left.So already she is publicly saying her separation with the church was "ugly", while arguing that she won't reveal details.
...
Yes, it was very ugly and I am still baffled at the way I was treated, but I didn’t say anything to anyone. Why would I now, in 2011 decide to reveal details? I didn’t then and I won’t now
I shared with the audience at this private event that I, too, had been hurt by the leadership at my church,So, in her talk that she insists was NOT about bringing up the past, she says she told her audience that her church hurt her, that they were the abomination, that they hurt her, that the wounded her. But she didn't want to talk about it, even while she talks about it.
...
I shared with the audience that I left New Life and eventually moved completely out of Colorado Springs to Denver.
...
I was told by my church and Christian friends that it [being gay] was an abomination.
...
I agreed [to speak publicly at the "private event"] because so many gay adults and teens actually commit suicide because their church and/or pastor tells them it is a sin to be gay. To me, telling a gay person that even though they love God with all their heart, soul, mind and strength that they are still going to hell is the abomination.
...
I don’t regret speaking to the people at that event. What I do not like is that the Gazette reporter made it look like I’m bringing up ghosts from the past when I have moved on. I don’t want to talk about what they did to me. It took long enough for scabs to cover those wounds and I’m not about to pull them off now.
I’m not out to bash that church or the pastor. I don’t operate that way. As I said before, if I really wanted the public to know what happened and why I left, I would have said something in 2009.She says they attacked her for being gay, called her an abomination, but in fact THEY are the abomination, and that they made it clear to her that she wasn't welcome. But no, she doesn't "operate that way".
Meanwhile, she tells faithful Christians that it is OK to perform gay sex acts, that they can be loved by God and honor Him while purposefully committing sinful acts, that people who try to speak the Word of God against sin are "abominations". She leads good people down the same path of sin that she walks. That is evil.
She relishes her sin, and speaks evil about her church when it attempts Godly correction of her sinful ways.
You're very free in dispensing damnation.
But that's not your job.
Hm. So you know it all, I guess. But I just can't be impressed by your righteousness. Sorry.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
I’m not talking about her. I’m talking about you. You need to get over yourself.
You don’t like being told the truth, do you. No one embracing their sin will enter God’s presence unless they repent. It’s that simple.
We can all agree that the Bible instructs the homosexual to repent and to not give any justification for homosexuality, or for the groups and political movements that openly flaunt and promote this sin as anything but an abomination.
If a person continues to ignore the Bible (after being corrected) and continues to give agreement, aid or comfort to those who openly promote the abomination of homosexuality, they should be confronted and ultimately shunned until they clearly repent.
What would Jesus have done?
Log, Eye, You.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
Luke 5:31-33
31 Jesus answered them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.