The Christian Reformed Church publication, “The Banner,” continues to push the homosexual agenda with its Editor’s recent Editorial on homosexuality. The Editor professes that he is not pushing homosexuality but merely desires to see all the hurting homosexuals that attend CRC churches receive loving acceptance and pastoral care.
The Editor suggests that the way to get past the current conversational impasse on the issue in the Denomination is for everybody to put aside their certainties on the subject and “do some fresh, serious, Bible study that is also informed by the latest scientific research on the subject.” Speaking only for myself, I would prefer to see some fresh, serious, scientific research that is also informed by wisdom of the Bible.
The problem with consulting “creation revelation” independent of the presuppositions drawn from Scripture is that “creation revelation” is only as good as the presuppositions that we bring to the “creation revelation.” Good and bad, and right and wrong, can not be determined by scientific research, though scientific research can be used and has been used to justify changing good and bad, and right and wrong in order to fit our preferences.
Face it, if Adam and Eve had looked to creation revelation and scientific research in order to determine whether or not they should eat the forbidden fruit they would have concluded that since the tree was good for food, and since the tree was pleasing to the eye, and since the tree was desirable to make one wise therefore scientific research and creation revelation taught that it was good to eat the fruit.
The call for people to put aside their certainties is merely a pretext to get the opponents of homosexuality to lay aside their opposition. It is only the opponents of homosexuality who lose by laying aside their certainties that the Scriptures speak against homosexuality. I mean, nobody really believes that the latest greatest scientific research is going to return a report confirming that homosexuality is deviant and putrid behavior. So, Rev. DeMoor appeals to laying aside our certainties and appeals to “scientific research,” knowing that such a call serves his agenda.
Rev. Bob DeMoor of the Banner, by opening and pursuing this conversation, whether intentionally or unintentionally, is serving the homosexual agenda.
Shotgun,
Yes, I would think that if someone is born homosexual it would not be sin anymore then to be born left handed could be sin.
If we are genetically imprinted to act in a certain way then I don’t know how it could be sin to act that way.
Certainly all of us are imprinted with an inclination to sin due to original sin but original sin is not genetic.
DeMoor knows exactly what he’s doing.
Mark,
If you’re right then DeMoor is a liar, as well as an apologist for buggery.
But I suppose if one is sympathetic to catamites being a Liar is small stuff.
It’s the same ploy he used when he pushed for ordaining women. In response to those who said this was a settled issue, he said no, the denomination needed to continue its “strenuous reflection” on the competing viewpoints on the matter.
I reminded DeMope that the church’s 2000 year reflection on the matter made the CRC’s 20 year “study” of WICO look like a 2 second drunken stroll in the park.
Mark,
Is this the same “DeMoor?” This guy (Bob DeMoor) wasn’t Editor of the “Banner” when the women’s issue was hot and heavy.
It is the same DeMoor, but he was not, as you indicate, there in the early “hottest” stages of the women issue. Once he assumed the helm at the Banner, however, he saw there were other mop up operations to complete via his “strenous reflections”. This ultimately led to the CRC abandonment of the “local option” circa 2007. I was having my public exchanges with him between 2002 and 2007.