Does God Hate Homosexuals?

Good afternoon. In my comments, I will read a paper I have written for the occasion, an exception for me, but there is much to cover in little time.

The definitive question is this: Does love define hate, or does hate define love? To define something means that the one giving definition is greater and prior to what is defined. It means that what is defined cannot exist otherwise.

Jesus sums up the greatest commandments as loving God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength, and thus, to love our neighbors as ourselves.

John says that by definition, God is love. And Jesus says that our neighbors include our enemies. Is there any definitive statement in the Bible that says God is hate? No. Therefore, it is God's nature as love that defines any language of hate.

www.godhatesfags.com starts with hate, not love. Therefore hate is its defining identity, implying that this is where God's identity begins - contrary to Scripture.

The Bible is the story of creation, sin and redemption, as defined in Genesis 1-3. The order of creation is good, sin reverses and breaks that order, and redemption reverses the reversal and restores the goodness. The word Gospel means to "announce good news," and is rooted in Genesis 1-2. The God of creation is greater than space, time and number, and he is entirely good. Pagan religions all start with an assumption of destruction at the outset. But how can something be destroyed unless it has first been created? This leads to a second question: Does creation define destruction, or does destruction define creation?

C.S. Lewis speaks of "the good infection" of the Gospel, rooted in the parable of Matthew 13:33. What infects what? Does love infect and poison the power of hate? Or vice versa? Do we, in the ministry of the Gospel, infect the world with the Good News, or do we infect it with the bad news of hate versus hate? In Romans 12, Paul shows how it is that love defines hate. He says:

"Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge: I will repay," says the Lord. On the contrary: 'If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.' Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good" (vv. 17-21).

How is it possible for www.godhatesfags.com to obey this Scripture, to do what is right in the eyes of everybody, to live at peace with everyone, or to show love to its enemies? Is it not defeated already, being overcome by evil?

Where does biblical preaching start? Is it with creation, sin or redemption? If we start with redemption, and do not define the depths and consequences of sin, we give false comfort. If we start with sin, and seek to scare the hell out of people, then we give false warning, for no prior goodness has been defined. We must start with the order of creation, so that as the height of its goodness is grasped, the depth of the fall can be understood, and the hope of redemption's height can be embraced. When Paul addressed the pagan philosophers of Athens in Acts 17, he started with the order of creation, not with its reversal. Thus a third question: Does hope define fear, or does fear define hope?

www.godhatesfags.com starts with the preaching of sin, not with the order of creation; with fear, not hope.

The goodness of the Gospel can be summed up in six ethical components. The word "ethics" refers to how we relate to each other. This is the love of God and one another.

Yahweh Elohim, the sovereign and good God of creation, gives man and woman stewardship over his good creation. The power to give is the definition of goodness and love. Love is goodness given, even if rejected. Forced love is rape, and therefore not love.

There are only two choices in life: Give and it shall be given, or take before you are taken. To take from others is to rob their humanity, an act of destruction. One of Satan's names is the "destroyer." Therefore, we can pose a fourth question: Does God define Satan, or does Satan define God? The corollary, and therefore fifth question, is: Does giving define taking, or does taking define giving? If Satan defines the terms, then the universe implodes automatically, and could never have existed to begin with.

www.godhatesfags.com allows Satan to define the terms; it starts with the power to take and destroy the humanity in hurting or even rebellious people, and not with the power to give.

In the order of creation, Yahweh Elohim initiates the power to give, and teaches Adam and Eve to receive and give to each other this goodness, then to give back to God in worship. This power to give and receive equals the basis for trust, for God is trustworthy in his goodness. The man and woman in covenantal marriage are thus free forever to trust each other, the basis for a healthy society. Man and woman are equals and complements, giving to and receiving from one another spiritually, physically, sexually and emotionally. Sexual promiscuity and homosexuality are based on taking from someone you cannot trust fully, and this short circuits the human soul. And homosexuality is without complementarity. Thus we can pose a sixth question: Does trust define distrust, or does distrust define trust?

www.godhatesfags.com starts with a war of distrust, being without the courage or power to invest trust in broken people's lives, as Jesus did in John 4 with the woman at the well.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it" (vv. 1-5).

The power to live in the light means the freedom to have nothing to hide from, and with full accountability to God and one another. Thus, a seventh question: Does light define darkness, or does darkness define light? By definition, in physics, ethics and spiritual domains, darkness flees the presence of light. In John 3:19, Jesus says that men loved darkness instead of light, because they knew their deeds were evil. Darkness cannot understand or overcome the light. Jesus is the Light of the world, and Satan is the prince of darkness. To hate hatred with hate is to put no trust in the Light, and it is to be swallowed up by the darkness. To hate hatred with love allows the light of God's presence to drive the darkness away.

Jesus, as the incarnate Word, comes to sinful humanity and relates to our brokenness in terms we can understand, and reveals the truth as light by definition disperses the darkness. In philosophy there is a concept called "the metaethics of language." This means that it is not so much important that we understand what we mean to say, but that our hearers understand what we mean - especially those who oppose us.

www.godhatesfags.com lives in the darkness, is not accountable to the wider church, and fails to communicate and reveal the truth.

The first words in the Bible are words of God's sovereignty, and the first words to Adam from Yahweh are words of freedom. God's sovereignty defines and provides for human freedom. This is the power of informed choice, as Yahweh defines for Adam and Eve the terms of good and evil, and the power to choose between the two. Here is an eighth question: Does good define evil, or does evil define good?

God is free, and his freedom is the power to do the good. Adam and Eve, made in his image, were given the same freedom. God, himself not a slave, did not create man and woman as slaves. If God forced them into his will, he would not be good. Men and women would not be image-bearers of God, and would be no more than puppets, robots or animals. Thus, we have a ninth question: Does freedom define slavery, or does slavery define freedom?

This God-given freedom is polluted by sin, but Yahweh still respects the freedom of man and woman to accept or reject his grace. Sinful man has no power to save himself, or reach up to God. But God reaches down to us and provides the gift of salvation, if we will accept it. The Holy Spirit is the One who mediates this possibility. This reality of assumed freedom is seen when Yahweh first confronts Cain (Genesis 4:6-7), in the final words of Moses (cf. Deuteronomy 11-20), in the final public words of Joshua (cf. Joshua 24:14-24), in the Bible's shortest sermon, given by Elijah (cf. 1 Kings 18:21); in the invitation of Jesus (Matthew 11:28-30), in key words of Paul (cf. Galatians 5:1), and in the final invitation in the book of Revelation (cf. 22:17).

www.godhatesfags.com says that free will is a lie, that people have no ultimate choice between heaven and hell; accordingly it means that people are slaves, and thus God is a slave-master like a pagan deity, which means that God is first a slave to his own lack of freedom, and therefore not sovereign.

All through the Bible, God is hospitable to our toughest questions. Jesus asked far more questions than he gave answers, for we cannot possess an answer until first we embrace the question. Here is a tenth question: Do questions define answers, or do answers define questions?

There are many salient hard question here, such as the moral nature of hell, whether God still loves those who choose hell, predestination, and the nature of a biblical theocracy. We can thus pose an eleventh question: Does heaven define hell, or does hell define heaven?

www.godhatesfags.com defines questions by presuppositional doctrinal grids with ready-made answers, thus censoring honest questions; and spends primary energy describing hell.

Here is a twelfth question: Does friendship define enemies, or do enemies define friendship? There is a well known Arab proverb: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." But after the mutual enemy is vanquished, the new friendship resorts back to enemy status. If the sharing of a mutual enemy is the basis for friendship, hate will triumph over love.

The height of the sermon on the Mount is where Jesus says that perfection is the power to love enemies. Are we more concerned with perfect doctrine in the abstract, or in obeying Jesus in the concrete? Paul also says, in Romans 5, that Christ died for us when we were still his enemies (vv. 8-10). How can we but love those who are still his enemies? Paul says in Romans 12:

This leads to a thirteenth question: Do blessings define curses, or do curses define blessings?

www.godhatesfags.com defines enemies as its basis for whom it accepts as friends; it curses enemies and in its reaction to certain militant homosexuals, it mocks Proverbs 15.

"For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins" (Matthew 6:14-15).

The power to forgive is the power to give in the face of the violation of human sin. Those who do not desire forgiveness for others mock the forgiveness they may have received, and are happier in hell where they can stew in their bitter and self-righteous juices.

In Luke 7, Jesus says of the woman sinner, "Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven - for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little" (v. 47).

"Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, because judgment without mercy will we shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment" (vv. 12-13).

Thus, a fourteenth question: Does mercy define judgment, or does judgment define mercy?

www.godhatesfags.com allows judgment to trump mercy; in so doing, the question may be asked: Do its sponsors know the God of mercy, or do they only know a god of merciless pettiness - like a Zeus?

In 1988 at Harvard, three women classmates once approached me during lunch. They said they were lesbian, and that every lesbian they knew had been physically, sexually or emotionally abused as girls. When I heard this, I prayed in my spirit, "Dear God above, does the church know this testimony, or do we just condemn?"

Now, speaking as a man, a husband and father, I ask any father here today: How would you respond if you learned years later that your daughter had been so abused, and thus turned to lesbianism out of the fear of men? Would you look at her, and say, "God hates you, you dirty hell-bound faggot?" Or would you wrap your arms around her in protective love and seek to minister to her wounded soul? How much more does our heavenly Father love all his children, the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve.

"He will not shout or cry out, or raise his voice in the streets. A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out" (vv. 2-3).

This is the language of binding up the broken hearted, of protecting the last flicker of hope in a wounded soul from the violent winds of adversity, cupping the hands around the wick and gently breathing the smolder back into a bright flame.

"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light" (vv. 28-30).

Can we imagine how www.godhatesfags.com might counsel the father in speaking to his daughter? Would it be to call her a hell-bound faggot? Can we imagine walking in the light of Isaiah 42? Or, in its chosen language with raised voice, would it break the bruised reed, quench the smoldering wick, and in fact, would it oppose Jesus in his Messianic fulfillment of this prophecy?

In 1996 I addressed a packed forum at Yale Divinity School, where much of the audience was homosexual, and most others were thus sympathetic. Yet they all agreed that the Bible on its own terms is defined by the doctrines of creation, sin and redemption in Genesis 1-3. So I asked: Where in the order of creation is homosexuality found? No evidence could be provided. After a break for refreshments, several ex-homosexuals from New York City gave their testimonies of conversion and lasting change through Jesus.

In the ten days following, the two student evangelical leaders who organized the forum were approached by as many as 20 avowed homosexuals. These homosexuals all posed the same question, "How can I change?" Jesus came to seek and save the lost. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 testifies to the possibility for homosexuals, and all sinners, to be transformed by the grace of God.

Would any homosexual student at Yale seek out www.godhatesfags.com for a listening ear?

Therefore, love defines hate, but for www.godhatesfags.com hate defines love and accordingly reverses the biblical order of creation. The same is true as www.godhatesfags.com allows destruction to define creation, fear to define hope, Satan to define God, taking to define giving, distrust to define trust, darkness to define light, evil to define good, slavery to define freedom, answers to define questions, hell to define heaven, enemies to define friendship, curses to define blessings, and judgment to define mercy.

The "gospel" of www.godhatesfags.com is bad news, not the Good News of the Messiah. It is reactive in its insecurity, not proactive in confidence. It is indeed pagan in its ethics.

The true Gospel calls all people to repentance, based on the love of God for all sinners, homosexual or otherwise, and based on the evidence that God is good. The evil which God hates is rooted in his prior and defining love for us, that we may be set free from its tyranny.

God gives all of us the unalienable rights to life, liberty and property -- and those of us who are biblical will show that respect to all people equally, and protected by law. This is true for homosexuals as it is for anyone.

Once, a lesbian activist in California tried to incite me to anger. Instead, I told her that if ever her life were in danger, I would not hesitate to risk my life to protect hers. Why? Because that is what Jesus has done for me.

John Rankin was raised a secular humanist, an agnostic Unitarian, prior to his conversion to a biblical and evangelical faith in 1967. He holds graduate degrees in theology from Gordon-Conwell and Harvard, is author of the three-volume series, First the Gospel, Then Politics..., host of the Mars Hill Forum series on university campuses and other venues, and has successfully opposed same-sex marriage legislation in Connecticut. He and his wife Nancy have been married 25 years, and have four children. His website is: www.teihartford.com.

James: Okay, then my next question is: If Jesus says to love as he loved, in John 13:34 and 35, and his love is enough so that he dies for sinners, and that’s Romans 5:8, doesn’t that mean that God loves homosexuals, because homosexuals are sinners, and he loved them enough to die for them?

Fred: The Lord Jesus Christ didn’t die for any hogs, any dogs, any pigs. The Lord Jesus Christ died for his sheep, they’re otherwise called his children, they’re otherwise called the sons of God without rebuke in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation among whom ye shine as lights in the world, holding forth the word of life. And the Lord Jesus Christ didn’t die for any hogs, but only his sheep, for whom he says, the good shepherd layeth down his life for the sheep. I told you that metaphors are very important in the scriptures. You have assumed facts not in evidence, not in the bible, not in reality, not in eternity, that the Lord Jesus Christ died for people that end up in hell. He died effectively, his blood was efficacious. All those for whom he died will repent of their sins. They’re certainly not going to go wallowing around in their filth, rolling around on rubber sheets, men with men and women with women, and all kinds of filthy living like beasts rather than human beings, and say that the Lord Jesus Christ died for those people! He did not!

John Rankin: Sure, two points of response there. Notice how Jesus treated the woman caught in the act of adultery in John 8. This woman was set up by the Pharisees to entrap Jesus. And Jesus came and wrote in the sand, no one knew how to answer it, and then he said, he who is without sin cast the first stone. And all the self-righteous, theologically correct Pharisees left. He looked at the woman and said, where are your condemners? She said, sir, they’re not here. Go and sin no more. You see, at this point, this woman was in sin, and Jesus showed her the love that brought her out of sin. And so this is the nature of God’s love, love defines what follows. And the answer that Mr. Phelps has given is that hate defines love.

Lane: Okay. Can a person repent of their sin unless you first show them love, by showing them the answer and a way to repent?

Fred: The truth of the matter is that repentance is a gift of God. If the Lord God doesn’t give you repentance, you’re not going to have it. And not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance, but after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasures up unto thyself wrath, against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God. Those who continue soberly, righteously, and with self-denial, live out their days upon this earth, can expect to go to heaven. Those who impenitently refuse to repent, and I’m telling you that the prescribed methodology of the prophets and the apostles for bringing sinners to repentance was to hold them over the fires of hell a while. That you’re going to hell and except you repent, you will all likewise perish. And that Mars Hill sermon of Paul’s that Brother Rankin is so fond of, Paul ends up by saying, for God hath appointed a day in which he will judge, the word is "creneo" there, condemn and pour out his vengeance upon this world, by that man, because he’s appointed a day in which he will do it, by that man whom he hath ordained, the Lord Jesus Christ. And that second chapter of Romans that I was quoting from, about not knowing that the goodness of God leads to repentance, the apostle says, in the day that God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel. Paul’s gospel was, arise ye dead men and come to judgment.

John: Oh, absolutely. What is interesting about this is that the gift of God goes back to the word in the Hebrew and the Greek for grace, the power to give, that was the starting point I talked about in terms of God’s nature. Where does God’s giving begin? Does it begin before sin or after sin? The one question that Fred has not answered. So if we take the Bible on its own terms, we start where the Bible starts. We don’t know Malachi and Esau and Jacob until we know the whole history of Israel, in their faithfulness and their unfaithfulness, and why God says what he says. In the Old Testament, it almost never talks about hell the way Jesus does, it talks about judgment many times. Now let’s look at Acts 17. In Acts 17, Paul comes and says what you worship is unknown I proclaim to you as known. These people didn’t know the Bible, so Paul didn’t once quote the Bible, but he spoke Biblical truth and said that all people come from one man and from one woman, there’s one God, and now God has overlooked your ignorance in mercy, and he’s sent forth his son, who has died and risen again, and appointed him to be the judge, as Pastor Phelps just quoted. But you see, judgment comes after the gift of salvation has been preached. Mercy triumphs over judgment. So what happens is, we come back to the basic issue: Is it creation, sin and redemption? Or is it sin, sin, sin, with a little bit of redemption?

Lane: This is for Fred. If God already hates the sinner, where is the entrance to salvation, if he’s already condemned them?

Fred: Don’t you understand that they’re not going to be saved? Can I get that through your head? I’m telling you, my friend, fags cannot be saved. Deal with it. Deal with it.

John: And I will deal with First Corinthians 6:9 through 11, actually the entire chapter. And what Paul does in the first nine verses is he chastises Christians for filing lawsuits against other Christians. He says that is the worst form of iniquity. Then he goes, in verses 9 and 10 to define many other forms of iniquity; adultery, lying, slandering, and then he says, male homosexual prostitutes and homosexual offenders. And he says, these people will not inherit the kingdom of God, starting with the example of Christians filing lawsuits against Christians. He goes through this list, and then he says, and such were some of you, but you have been washed and justified by Jesus. So he says yes, you can change. The real issue between Fred and myself is God’s sovereignty and human freedom. All I’ve read from his website, about 80 e-mails I’ve had from two of his daughters in the last week arguing this stuff.

Questioner: My name is Denny and I’d like both to respond, but the question goes to Fred. You’ve made many references to Martin Luther, which I appreciate. Martin Luther had much to say about law and gospel, and my question, Fred, is where is the balance of law and gospel or grace in your ministry?

Fred: Here is what he said. I’ll tell you what he said, and this is what I believe. And I love Brother Martin Luther, and I recommend this book to you. Have you read this book? You ought to read this book. He said that is the only one of his writings that deserved to survive to posterity. You let it all go. All the rest of that stuff, you try to read that too, and I believe he was right, it wasn’t worth printing. But that is, a red-hot debate with Erasmus of Rotterdam over the issues we’re debating here today. Now here’s what I love about Brother Luther, here’s what he said. "This is the very thing that raizes the doctrine of free will from its foundations. To wit, that God’s eternal love of some men, and eternal hatred of others, is immutable and cannot be reversed." That’s what I believe. That’s what all the old-time preachers believed, and modern America, whose thoughts of God are so human that they can’t get around the notion that the main thing God is interested in is these people and how happy they can be, and therefore, let them fornicate their brains out. The Lord Jesus says, castrate yourself if you can’t behave! He says that in Matthew 19. Get over this notion that everything is for the good of the human. It’s for the good and glory of God almighty. And if he chooses to love some and hate others, that’s his prerogative. I love Brother Luther.

John: No, that’s perfectly fine. Luther has a lot to say that is good. He was a passionate man who reacted to legalism, but there was a lot that he said that was not good, as I think Mr. Phelps just indicated. But here’s my quick question here. Does the Bible define Luther, or does Luther define the Bible? Now I am strongly in the reformed tradition, and God’s sovereignty is the all-defining doctrine of the Bible. But here’s the question. Is God free, or is he a slave? Because if we’re made in God’s image, which is where the Bible starts, before sin comes in, then he has given us a gift of freedom. And if he hasn’t, then the God of the Bible becomes a Marduk, or a Thor, or a Zeus, or some other pagan deity. And so Luther was reacting to certain things that I would also react to, but differently, in terms of people such as Jacobus Arminius arguing that human power could bring redemptive salvation. Well Arminius was wrong, because total depravity is true. But total depravity isn’t the starting point of scripture. The image of God in wholeness is the starting point.

Questioner: Good afternoon. I’m Don, and my question is for Reverend Phelps, and if Brother Rankin, as he calls him, has a reply to that, that would be fine. I understand how you approach the word hate, as I’ve listened, similar to the word jealous, as God says, I’m a jealous God, jealous of my people. But I’ve also heard by your words, as you were speaking to Brother Rankin, you must be gentle. And I also heard that in 1947 you were charged by a laying on of hands, elders, I would assume, to also be a man that shall exhort, that was among many things that you said, but that was a word that I caught. So my question for you is how do you practice these two things, being gentle, and exhortation in the ministry that God’s called you to?

Fred: Well, you wouldn’t think there would be a conflict between those two concepts, would you? Can’t you gently exhort? Can’t you gently tell Brother Rankin he’s headed straight for hell? You don’t have to be ungentle or ungentlemanly to tell some hard truth. I mean, these are very serious, weighty matters. This isn’t someone trying to win debating points in a little high school contest here. We’re talking about things that are going to go down in eternity, with all the angels of God here as witnesses here. And this stuff that he’s been putting out attacking the sovereignty of God, all the while using the word sovereignty. He’s made man the sovereign. He has made man the sovereign. There can be only one free will in a moral universe. The doctrine of free moral agency is a lie out of hell. The Lord Jesus says, if you’ve got so much free will, grow a foot and a half. Which of you, by taking thought, can add a cubit to his stature? So what I’m saying is, preach the word, the truth, be instant in season, and the verse that really applies nowadays is Second Timothy 2:15. Study it, give diligence, to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing or portioning out the word of truth. That is, you size up what’s happening all around you. With every time you open a paper there’s some new fag victory, that the country is going to hell in a faggot’s hand basket, and I’m supposed to get lockjaw on that subject? I’ve got the only answer for it. I’ve got the only original source material on this subject. All these guys writing books and psychologists and psychiatrists, about homosexuality and whether you’re born with it or not born with it, so much baloney! I’ve got the original source material. I don’t care if you were born with it or learned it, you can’t practice that kind of conduct and expect to go to heaven. That’s a very good talk I just put up here.

John: Now this is interesting, because this does highlight, as we look at the issue and how Fred answered the question about gentleness and exhortation, and he talks about there being no free will. We have to ask ourselves if this is the question, what about the fact that the first words God ever said to Adam are, you are free? Why did God say to Cain, you must overcome it? Why were the final words of Moses, choose this day? The final words of Joshua, choose this day. The shortest sermon in the Bible, Elijah, how long will you waiver between two opinions and therefore make the choice. Jesus says, come unto me. Paul says for freedom Christ will set you free. And the last words of Revelation are, to him who is thirsty, let him come and drink without cost. Now all of this involves human, moral agency. So we have either one of two choices. Either God gave moral agency, freedom to begin with, sin pollutes that, and we have no longer the power in our choice to reach up to heaven. But all the way through the Bible, the very language of the Bible, is come unto me, you are free, come unto me. Now, the doctrine of predestination is a true doctrine, but if you look at the history of that doctrine, it is Yahweh Elohim, the God who is bigger than space, time, and number, who steps outside of space, time, and number, and says I fore-ordained. He doesn’t say he comes into time and manipulates our will against our will. He doesn’t force people into heaven against their will, he doesn’t force people into hell against their will. All the way through scripture, people choose what they want to. Sin affects it, and Jesus came. Now, if God had foreordained in a pagan, deity way, which is what Babylonian astrology is all about, and fatalized them to go to hell or go to heaven regardless of their will, then what a charade we are living in, and no wonder Fred says that God is hate.

Fred: I am the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is well pleasing in his sight. It is God that worketh in us both the will and to do of his good pleasure. He is an Arminian, free will, heretic, and he just don’t want to use that plain language, and he knows better. Look, there can be only one free will in a moral universe, and that free will is the boss. Is God’s will going to prevail in all matters? He says so, who doeth according to his will, in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth, and none can stay his hand nor say unto him what doeth thou? Absolute Predestination by Jerome Zanchius is back in print, you ought to read it. Can’t beat it.

John: I need to respond there, just a moment. Note how interesting this is. Fred calls me an Arminian. And I reject….

John: The simple idea at debate is, Arminius believes that the soul is benign, it’s not affected by sin. And so the way you’re born, environment will shape you to good or to evil. I reject that.

Fred: That’s not it. I’ll tell you what an Arminian is. It is antithetical to Five-point Calvinists. T.U.L.I.P. Baptists, they call them, who believe in total depravity, unconditional election, limited design in the atonement, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of the saints. The Arminian heretic, named after Jacobus Arminius, it had nothing to do with the country of Armenia, came along and said, we don’t like that, because it says God is a sovereign, so he elicited five points saying just the opposite. Man is not really totally depraved, he says, he’s got the ability to exercise his free will and go to heaven.

Fred: There’s not unconditional election, he doesn’t elect anybody, and all the terms in the Bible that say these are God’s elect, these are God’s sheep are meaningless and can be dispensed with. And no limited design and atonement, said the Lord Jesus died for the sins of every single individual of mankind, even for the sins of those multiplied billions that were in hell when he died!

Fred: I know, but he was a heretic, and furthermore, the fags say he was a fag and had sex with Henry the VIII. Most Arminians are fags and fags are Arminians.

John: And what happens is, I tell you theologically that I say no to Arminius.

John: I am saying, at this point, that I say I don’t believe in Arminius, and you say no. So what happens is, you’re going to put me into your template, no matter what happens, because I go against your template. And your template is a template that will not answer whether the Bible comes before Luther or Luther comes before the Bible.

Danielle: Okay, where in the Bible does it say that homosexuals are hogs and pigs?

Fred: Well, that’s enough, and then the next one? It says in Second Peter, for example, 2:22, and it says that, for example, in Matthew 7:6. Give not that which is holy to the dogs and neither cast ye your pearls before swine lest they trample them underfoot and turn again and rend you.
Now the connection to show that when that metaphor dogs is used, they’re obviously talking about people, no question about that, is there? Cast not your pearls before swine, the Lord Jesus isn’t talking about literal swine. It’s people. And you pick that up from such places as Deuteronomy 23:17: There should be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel, thou shall not bring the price of a whore, or the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog into the house. Sodomite, that’s what the metaphor is, it’s a metaphor, those are places in the Bible you pick them up.

Moderator: Now, since we did one question at a time, it’s your turn, John, to respond.

John: Just very simply, Two Peter 2:22 and Matthew 7:6 are not speaking about homosexuals, they’re speaking about sin at large. However, in Deuteronomy 23 and also the metaphor at the end of Revelation, when it talks about dogs, it talks about male shrine prostitutes as dogs. And the reason it does so is it says, to sell yourself as a homosexual for religious prostitution is regarding yourself like a dog that’s in heat without self control. So that metaphor is used in a couple of places, but the first two places that Fred quoted are used overall for people who resist God’s grace.

Danielle: Mr. Phelps. Where in the Bible does it exactly say that only some can be saved?

Fred: I told you John 10, you start with John 10. The Lord Jesus Christ says that the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep, and laith down his life for the sheep and he never died for a single dog. That’s an obvious metaphor. When he says the sheep, he’s not talking about literal sheep, he’s talking about human beings with the attributes of sheep, and that metaphor runs right straight through the scriptures, about sheep, and being God’s elect. And the Lord Jesus says, when talking about the unjust judge, and Luke 18, long about verse 2 or 3, hear what the unjust judge said. And shall not God avenge his own elect who cry to him day and night though he bear longer with them. Every time you see the word elect in the scriptures, you’re talking about those whom God has elected to salvation as distinct from those who are called reprobates, that are reprobated, and non-elect. And the Lord Jesus Christ died only for his elect, for no goat, for no hog, for no dog.

John: Very briefly. What we have all the way through scripture is we have God declaring he is sovereign over space, time, and number. So the great doctrine of predestination, it’s several places in the New Testament, but in particular in terms of Paul’s exposition, in Romans 8, it’s as a word of encouragement for people to endure. So that’s there, and God’s bigger than space, time, and number. But then, Paul also says, in First Timothy 2:4 that God wants all men, everywhere, to be saved. So now we have a real question. If God is sovereign, and if the inspired word says he wants all men everywhere to be saved, and if they’re not saved, is God impotent? Is God without power?
And so what happens is we’re missing the quality of freedom. I’ve argued that God is free, and he’s good. If you compare the God of the Bible with all pagan religions, all pagan religions start with finite gods and goddesses who are less than time, space and number, beating up on each other and beating up on us. The God of the bible is greater than space, time, and number. That’s the declaration of sovereignty. And then the sovereign God, in the first words in history, said you are free to eat from any tree in the garden. In the Hebrew it is akol tokal. In feasting, you shall feast, an unlimited menu of good choices, but don’t eat poison. So he set before Adam and Eve life and death, and he didn’t force them into life. He gave them liberty.
So the rest of the scripture is the face of polluted liberty. So John Calvin is right when he talks about total depravity. The totality of our nature is affected by depravity. But do you know what the one problem is I have with, not Calvin, but with Calvinists who come up with T.U.L.I.P.? (All five points are correct.) They start with sin. But sin doesn’t exist until the order of creation exists. And that’s the question that
Fred Phelps will not answer. He will not answer whether or not creation precedes sin.

John: Okay, in a nutshell, we have a biblical theocracy from the days of Moses on forward. Theocracy means God’s law. And in the Exodus, God showed how good he was in bringing the Jews from the land of slavery, slavery imposed upon them that they didn’t deserve. And so as he brings them out and shows them their goodness, in the midst of sin and rebellion, and therefore they have to be in the wilderness 40 years, we come to the end of Moses’ life. And then Joshua helps them take over the promised land, as much as they would, and then Joshua gives his final words. He goes to the goodness of God in protecting them, then he concludes, and he says, this day choose whom you will serve. Will you serve the gods across the river in Babylon, the god of the Egyptians, the god of the Amorites, in whose land you now live, but as for me and my household, we will serve Yahweh.

John: Would you please not interrupt, good friend? So what happens is that Joshua concludes, and he says, choose this day. So what he is saying is before you enter into God’s theocratic community, you have the choice to go elsewhere, so if you don’t like what’s happening. The Jewish theocracy was the only nation in all antiquity that said no to homosexuality. Therefore, if someone wanted to come into the Jewish theocracy and commit homosexuality, they were actually committing treason against God. And he said, ahead of time, that is the death penalty, because you’re trying to destroy the kingdom that leads to the Messiah who has come to bring the good news to the Gentiles.

Fred: God Almighty makes some willing and he leads others into sin, that’s Calvinism.

John: Hyper-Calvinism.

The Summer of Our Discontent: The Church Fights Back in the Culture War on Homosexuality." <> Transforming Congregations is a network of uniting ("mainline") churches in the USA and Australia whose mission is to "provide information, resources and training in understanding and involvement in transforming ministry toward homosexuals, and to encourage transforming ministry based on loving compassion, scripture, and The Discipline of the United Methodist Church." Courage is a network of Roman Catholics whose mission is to "provide spiritual support for men and women striving to live chaste lives in accordance with the Catholic Church's pastoral teaching on homosexuality." Write to Courage, c/oChurch of St John the Baptist, 210 W 31st Street, New York, NY 10001. The phone number is (212) 268-1010. There are chapters in many major cities, including New York, Philadelphia, Harrisburg, and Chicago. One By One is a fellowship of Presbyterian (USA) churches whose mission is to "educate and equip the Church to minister the transforming grace and power of the Lord Jesus Christ to those who are in conflict with their sexuality." PFOX - welcome! No one is born gay. All scientific studies, including those by gay scientists, have not found any gay gene or gay brain center.

Is Same-Sex Marriage Good for the Nation? The only source for unalienable rights in all human history is the Creator, the God of the Bible.

Judaism's Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism (and then Christianity) Rejected HomosexualityWhen Judaism demanded that all sexual activity be channeled into marriage, it changed the world. The Torah's prohibition of non-marital sex quite simply made the creation of Western civilization possible. Societies that did not place boundaries around sexuality were stymied in their development. The subsequent dominance of the Western world can largely be attributed to the sexual revolution initiated by Judaism and later carried forward by Christianity. The acceptance of homosexuality as the equal of heterosexual marital love signifies the decline of Western civilization as surely as the rejection of homosexuality and other nonmarital sex made the creation of this civilization possible.

Homosexuality: A Political Mask For Promiscuity: A Psychiatrist Reviews The Data Indeed, the Torah reserves its most intense condemnation for homosexuality: "to'eva" - abomination...

Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 US 186 (1986) The Constitution does not confer a fundamental right upon homosexuals to engage in sodomy.

BURGER, C.J., Concurring Opinion Decisions of individuals relating to homosexual conduct have been subject to state intervention throughout the history of Western civilization. Condemnation of those practices is firmly rooted in Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards. Homosexual sodomy was a capital crime under Roman law.... During the English Reformation, when powers of the ecclesiastical courts were transferred to the King's Courts, the first English statute criminalizing sodomy was passed.... Blackstone described "the infamous crime against nature" as an offense of "deeper malignity" than rape, a heinous act "the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature," and "a crime not fit to be named." W. Blackstone, Commentaries . The common law of England, including its prohibition of sodomy, became the received law of Georgia and the other Colonies. In 1816, the Georgia Legislature passed the statute at issue here, and that statute has been continuously in force in one form or another since that time. To hold that the act of homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right would be to cast aside millennia of moral teaching.

Hundreds rally for '10 Commandments judge' Moore wrote a separate concurring opinion, repudiating homosexuality on religious grounds, calling it "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature and of nature's God."

Where does biblical preaching start? Is it with creation, sin or redemption? If we start with redemption, and do not define the depths and consequences of sin, we give false comfort. If we start with sin, and seek to scare the hell out of people, then we give false warning, for no prior goodness has been defined. We must start with the order of creation, so that as the height of its goodness is grasped, the depth of the fall can be understood, and the hope of redemption's height can be embraced. When Paul addressed the pagan philosophers of Athens in Acts 17, he started with the order of creation, not with its reversal.

NET Bible

Paul at Athens

17:16 While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, his spirit was greatly upset58 because he saw59 the city was full of idols. 17:17 So he was addressing60 the Jews and the God-fearing Gentiles61 in the synagogue62 and in the marketplace every day63 those who happened to be there. 17:18 Also some of the Epicurean64 and Stoic65 philosophers were conversing66 with him, and some were asking,67 "What does this foolish babbler68 want to say?" Others said, "He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign gods."69 (They said this because he was proclaiming the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.)70 17:19 So they took Paul and71 brought him to the Areopagus,72 saying, "May we know what this new teaching is that you are proclaiming? 17:20 For you are bringing some surprising things73 to our ears, so we want to know what they74 mean." 17:21 (All the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there used to spend their time75 in nothing else than telling76 or listening to something new.)77

17:22 So Paul stood78 before the Areopagus79 and said, "Men of Athens, I see that you are very religious80 in all respects.81 17:23 For as I went around and observed closely your objects of worship,82 I even found an altar with this inscription:83 ‘To an unknown god.’ Therefore what you worship without knowing it,84 this I proclaim to you. 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it,85 who is86 Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by human hands,87 17:25 nor is he served by human hands, as if he needed anything,88 because he himself gives life and breath and everything to everyone.89 17:26 From one man90 he made every nation of the human race91 to inhabit the entire earth,92 determining their set times93 and the fixed limits of the places where they would live,94 17:27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope around95 for him and find him,96 though he is97 not far from each one of us. 17:28 For in him we live and move about98 and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we too are his offspring.’99 17:29 So since we are God’s offspring, we should not think the deity100 is like gold or silver or stone, an image101 made by human102 skill103 and imagination.104 17:30 Therefore, although God has overlooked105 such times of ignorance,106 he now commands all people everywhere to repent,107 17:31 because he has set108 a day on which he is going to judge the world109 in righteousness, by a man whom he designated,110 having provided proof to all by raising111 him from the dead."

17:32 Now when they heard about112 the resurrection from the dead, some began to scoff,113 but others said, "We will hear you again about this." 17:33 So Paul left the Areopagus.114 17:34 But some people115 joined him116 and believed. Among them117 were Dionysius, who was a member of the Areopagus,118 a woman119 named Damaris, and others with them.

The problem with declaring homosexual acts to be "legal" is that, when an action is so colored, the act in itself is declared to be legitimate and moral by public authority; to wit: the act is given due recognition by the state, and is protected under force of law. In this context a denial of those priveledges that are the natural and immediate consequence to being declared lawful is contradictory.

In plain english: you cannot declare something legal, and then place restrictions on the outcomes that are a natural consequence to the act being made legal.

If homosexual "love" is recognized to be legitimate, then homosexual marriage cannot be denied, for one follows naturally as a consequence of the other. This is the slippery slope we place ALL civilization upon once the declaration is made that homosexual behavior is normal, and thus deserving of legal status.

The best argument against such folly is this: Homosexual unions are metaphisically non-life affirming, and thus cannot sustain themselves except through seduction. A homosexual culture, isolated and left to its own means, would soon die out.

God certainly hates homosexuality.

It is important to understand that G-d hates that which destroys His people. G-d hatest greed. G-d hatest lust. G-d hates jealousy.

Homosexuality is the resultant behavior of a spirit that says, "It's all about me." This spirit is the height of sinfulness where the Serpant told Eve, "If you eat of it, you will be like G-d, knowing good and evil." It is a destructive behavior, but it is even more the result of a destructive attitude which robs us of our humanity.

To focus on homosexuality without also looking at adultery, fornication, pornography, lust, greed, glutony, sloth, etc, is to miss the point. All of these destroy our humanity and each of them was a starting point toward 'normalization' of homosexuality.

Of course G-d does not hate fags. He may not really hate anything. But He loves his children and He defends them with a passion that would appear to us as hate for anything that threatens them.

Shalom.

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.