Interesting talk btw Athiest Prof & Christian Student

last SG · 2005-08-06T20:53:45+00:00

Originally posted by Honeybunz: [b]An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, The Almighty. He asks one of...

Icemoon SG

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? Very Happy

Edit: wah .. so Macross just said "prove it" above - posted before my original reply Mr. Green

[email protected] SG

i'll pass this on to him and i'll tell u what he says.

here, this is what he says:

it is meant to be.. the Jeruselem temple was destroyed when Jesus died. the destruction of temple, something abt the altar of God now resides in our heart and we are our own priests now

btw i think pp talk legal and spiritual authority as if they are the same thing

earthlings73 SG

another article written by gay christian, who had undergone change therapy..

part 1

August 11, 2005
inside reparative therapy
By Gayhealth.com

With reparative therapy now in the media spotlight, here's an inside look at one gay man's first-hand experience with an ex-gay program.

The mainstream media including CNN's Paula Zahn and ABC's Diane Sawyer are paying close attention to ex-gay programs like "Love in Action" due to the imminent release of teen Zach Stark from a facility in Tennessee. With reparative therapy which both the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association say does not work now in the media spotlight, here's an inside look at one gay man's first-hand experience with an ex-gay program (to protect the identity of individuals connected to the story, he's asked to remain anonymous).

I came out at an ex-gay ministry meeting.

Featured on the cover of Newsweek in August 1998, John Paulk was board chair of the umbrella ex-gay Christian group Exodus International when he was ejected from the board in Oct 2000 - several weeks after he was photographed in a popular gay bar in Washington D.C. His defence was that his only intention was to use the bathroom.
You know, one of those groups (very similar to "Love in Action") that promise to help gays "recover" from their homosexuality and become "normal" again.

Of course, I've always felt normal. So what if I loved MGM musicals and knew every line in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, right? To me, that was normal. But I equated approval with oxygen, so I kept such things to myself for years. I played the nice guy the funny, gregarious and likeable guy. But no one knew the real me. To survive, I censored my authentic self.

Now, of course, surrounded by my wonderful friends and the freedom of New York City, being out is no big deal. Today, I'm just another person, not a label or stereotype something I only could fantasise about before. But I'd never actually shared my unusual coming out story with my friends until recently, and was unprepared for the tremors it caused. "You did what?" said my friend Sally, as wide-eyed and stunned as the rest when told the unsettling news. "No you di'int!"

But I did, Sally, I did. Telling my friends and seeing the look of shock on their faces brought the experience back into sharp focus. Now, inspired with the hope that my story might actually help others, and in response to the ridiculous media reports that programs like "Love in Action" can make you straight, I've decided to share it.

The year was 1992 obviously pre-Will & Grace, Queer Eye and let's not forget Ellen. I was a 20-something self-styled hipster (or at least I like to think so) with a cool media job in a conservative city in Florida. I lived in a spacious house near the beach, traveled widely and had money in the bank. On paper, it was my dream, one I'd worked hard for.

I always knew I was gay, and as I got older it became more difficult to stay in the closet, without the love and support of people who really knew me. Each day brought a feeling of isolation, and I grew more unequivocally desperate. I was having anxiety attacks when I wasn't darkly depressed, my only salve being my fantasies and Joni Mitchell. I was dying of loneliness. No wonder lesbian and gay folks are at a greater risk for depression and anxiety according to numerous studies not to mention suicide.

So why didn't I just move to New York City or San Francisco and come out, you ask? Even though I was suffering, I wasn't yet ready to give up the life I'd worked so hard to build. And why should I have to? But with no gay role model someone who was out and maybe even proud (is that too much to ask?) I was lost, and didn't realise how much harm I was doing to myself by hiding. Times were very different: George Michael was still pretending to be straight and Bush Sr. was still president. There were no circuit parties, gay gyms or hip vodka ads trumpeting a suitable gay existence.

So what better time to try an Episcopal church-sponsored ex-gay ministry, right? I really thought that the solution to my problem wasn't coming out, or moving, or finding new friends. I thought being straight would solve all of my problems. My therapist (a nice, albeit clueless woman who I chose from the yellow pages because she took my insurance) had actually suggested it.

Not only was there potential to get "fixed," but I was also drawn to the idea because an ex-gay group would be filled with, well, gay men, and at least I could talk honestly even shed a tear with people who would understand what I was going through. What sweet relief! But it would come at a major price.

earthlings73 SG

Part 2, including my favourite part of the article.. =p

For starters, I hated the idea of "recovering" from who I was, like getting over an illness or disease. I wanted the support of a group of people who were like me, and I wanted to recover from the pain and isolation of hatred and homophobia, and a tiny part of me thought it would actually work.

So I mustered up the courage to drive to the meeting, held in a seedy but historical section downtown, in the city's oldest church. I sat in the parking lot, unable to move. I was sweating and nauseous; I wanted to flee.

Only about five or six other guys showed up to the meeting, but to me that was monumental. The meeting room seemed dark and depressing; the tension and shame in the air were suffocating. But that night, I uttered the words "I am gay" for the first time. I also talked openly about my feelings. Going to that meeting marked my first step toward freedom, no matter how fucked up the circumstances.

My unconventional coming out party went on for almost a year days and weeks and months of 12-step meetings ("I admit that I'm powerless over my homosexuality..."), Friday night support groups (held so we wouldn't get tempted by local gay bars), and humiliating sing-a-longs ("Amazing Grace" was our anthem) surrounded by myriad married couples.

But what I'd hoped would help me connect with my true self, and with God, had the opposite affect: I had never felt lonelier, and I was darkly depressed. My soul felt dead, and so did I. My innate joy was buried in shame every day. I hated myself more than ever.

To contain my urge to be playful and camp it up, I instead wore a perpetual mask of gloom. If I was tempted to hit a bar, I called to chat with my 'sponsor' instead. We all added up the days since our last trip to a bar or hook up, and announced it at each meeting; instead of feeling proud, I felt punished, like Martha Stewart must have felt whiling away her days in Alderson.

Finally, something happened that changed everything for me. Completely by accident, our long-time group leader a minister's son no less was spotted having a gay old time with a shirtless pal in a nearby city (I'll spare you the details). In gay recovery circles, this is called a "slip" my friends, kind of like an AA member downing an entire bottle of Kettle One.
That was it. No more meetings. No more pretending. I was done.

After all, what was this accomplishing? I'd never felt less connected to God in my life. And I wasn't the only one who left the organisation for good. The word spread like wildfire. It was like we all saw the light. Ironically, the religious and spiritual experience I was searching for had finally happened. I felt the truth:

There was nothing wrong with me.

Of course, because we had all endured this painful attempt to excavate our straight selves, many of us also bonded. In fact, lots of late night coffees fuelled an intimacy that I find all too rare in today's gay community.

Sex was off-limits, so we actually got to know and accept each other as people (imagine that!). Instead of worrying about who had the lowest body fat percentages or the best jobs, we just really got to know and care for one another. In fact, I'm still friends with several of the guys from that group to this day; and yes, they're gay, and happily so. Some are even in long-term committed relationships.

My unsolicited advice, if you're struggling with merging your sexuality and spirituality? Lighten up on yourself as a first step. Self-acceptance is an incredibly powerful, and immediate, healer. Ultimately, that's all I needed to finally connect with life (and in my opinion, with God).

So don't let anyone tell you there's something wrong with you. Not ever!

Despite the crazies on the far right, much of society is evolved and accepting these days and if they're not, screw them and just let the rest happen naturally.

Trust me, I wish I'd have done exactly that right from the beginning.

Icemoon SG

I agree that Christians should use more of the brain God has given them, and not just trust their pastor whole heartedly. But they have to start somewhere - not many people can claim, like charismatic pastors love to, that God gave them a vision. Read, pray, discuss.

It is one thing to say the bible condones homo (using the ecc. verse) and another to say the bible is silent on it. I guess this is like a spectrum. Condemns - silent - Condones.

Me: ah but then they will say that if its all up to the individual, then there is no guidance

Friend: They are the conservatives. Then again, those guys dont have to deal with homosexuals - sheltered in sg

don't seems to ans your qn.

earthlings73 SG

this is an older article, but a real shocker if you ask me.. Shocked

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.

[email protected] SG

from sites on medival history:

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, 118992, 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 leadersRichard I of England, Philip II of France, and Holy Roman Emperor Frederick I.

Pope Innocent III launched the Fourth Crusade, 12021204, 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, 121721. 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?

[email protected] SG

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.

[email protected] SG

it does. they are conservative is the answer.

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?

SingaporeMacross SG

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?

Icemoon SG

To capture Jerusalem back from the Moslems?

[email protected] SG

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.

[email protected] SG

noble? can u truely say they only had noble purposes for war? now its my turn to say:

prove it.

[email protected] SG

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

SingaporeMacross SG

You haven't answered my question.

What was the objective of the Crusades?

ben1xy SG

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

M©+square SG

Ah heng: Ask your friend on 1 Cor and Romans

To satisfy everyone.

ben1xy SG

MC .. u're a Christian ah?

sorry ah .. i am kinda new here

Icemoon SG

wah leow .. u read the reply by Uncle Eng right? Why never mention the Cor. verse? Twisted Evil

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?

M©+square SG

nope. i wouldn't say i am.

Anyway, welcome. Hope you're not over zealous and pushy. Wink

« Previous Page Next Page »