This just in: Homosexuals are no longer Americans! And they certainly don’t have a right to be at the presidential inauguration. And their presence will certain begin the dismantling of the Kingdom of God America. I guess God is not so Sovereign after all if He is threatened by a gay marching band at the inauguration of a slightly less than powerful American president.
Seriously, with all due respect (and I mean this as a genuine point of disagreement): What does the author of Slice care who is invited to a presidential inauguration?
It’s the end of the world as we know it! And Rick Warren will be there too! Isn’t there something better the author of Slice could do with their time than complain about the marching band at the inauguration of the president-elect? And isn’t there some better use of time than to complain about who is delivering the inaugural prayer? Prediction: Rick Warren will not pray ‘in Jesus’ Name’ at the inauguration and this will begin the downfall of his empire and spark literally tens of ADM blog posts.
94 Comments(+Add)
First: This is significant (and not in a good way in my world view) and is certainly a harbinger of only worse things to come. Oh horrors! A gay marching band. The sky is falling. **There. Beat you to the punch**. But unfortunately there is much, much that has had to change for this to even be possible.
Second: I find it very disheartening, petty and distasteful that Ms. Schluester has to resort to personal attacks like this. It’s just really sad to what SOL has degenerated into. Why can’t she just keep to the facts and dispute the theology and contra world views being presented?
On a side note several prominent gay organization are upset that Mr. Obama has chosen Mr. Warren to give the inagural prayer (his first big mistake they say) and yet a gay band has been invited. Oh snap!
I heard Rick Warren plays a mean tuba!
“no word on in RW will be joining them”?
“joining them”?
really?
really?!?!
ugh.
that.
woman.
joining them…
seriously, what happened to her? I mean, what happened to get her to this point? Really?
I mean, how does a “gay” marching band hurt her?
Can someone please explain this to me?
Who told her that someone else being gay and not anywhere part of her life is such a threat to her?
and if it is, how is it a threat?
I guess, technically, in a marching band it would be the sousaphone, not the tuba…
This just in:
A horde of whores, tax collecters and sinners will be marching the streets of Jerusalem today, protesting their barring from the pork bbq to be held this Saturday.
No word yet if the obscure Jewish prophet, Jesus, who has been garnering plenty of headlines as of late, will be joining them or not. If he does….we got ‘em
“Thank you, God, that I’m not like those deviants in that gay and lesbian marching band!”
The League of Adulterous Gentlemen will be marching in Obama’s Inagural Parade followed by The Society for Incest Marching Band and the Beastiality is Beautiful Brass Ensemble. The National Organization for Onanism Only was invited, but was otherwise engaged.
It’s more than an innocuous marching band. It’s a mirror on what has become acceptable in a society and that reflection is not looking good from a historical Christian world view.
This is the beginning of the downfall of America. Not far behind will be legalized abortion, massive violence, child molestation, internet porhography, drug use, alcohol abuse, materialism, and a host of other things we have so far been successful in avoiding.
As Calvinists, we can only hope that God will grant these gays repentance unto eternal life, but until He does, we must asssume He desires them to continue as they are and provide us with such great post fodder. If Ben Franklin could have pulled himself away from the ladies, he would be ashamed of America today.
I find it curious that many withdraw from a denomination that compromises, but retain their patriotic ferver even when America continues to reveal ample evidence for withdrawal. I am waiting for them to renounce their citizenship or else they are PARTAKER of their evil deeds.
I love this game!
Has society at large ever looked good from a “historical Christian world view”? Maybe we should ask Michael Servetus how things went for him in the “Christian” city of Geneva…
The ironic thing about this is the gay and lesbian community is very upset that Obama asked Rick Warren to be at the inauguration as well.
How does a marching band become gay?
I mean, are they playing showtunes, or Cher’s or Barbara Streisand music?
Are they born that way, or do they practice a certain way?
I am going to demand to be a part of this band; I believe, as a heterosexual, that the membership requirements are too exclusive.
Sheesh.
Ruach
I am inventing a new evangelical game. It is a dart board that depicts two men holding hands, and each dart has a Scripture verse written upon it. To win you must hit either man in the head and kill him. Any dart that falls outside the target area is considered redemptive and disqualifies the player.
There once was a post, written to these gays as well as others, that said “Come unto Me all ye that labour and are heavy laden and I will give you rest”.
The writer of that post seems so emergent and treats these gays with such kid gloves.
Rick,
To liven up your dart game, could we light them on fire and thus fulfill Ephesians 6:16?
That would put us in the role of…wait, I just read a post about him here.
It’s one thing to love the gay. It’s another thing to celebrate his gayness.
The only difference is that the church isn’t endorsing this sin. Do you really want to go down the list? Sexism, racism, segregation, Jim Crow etc.
Meanwhile at least two of the ADMs are divorced. Didn’t I read somewhere that God hates divorce? Ironically the ADM choice for President this time around was divorced.
When those against the state endorsement of gay marriage also advocate equally as strongly against marriage to anyone who has been divorced, then I’ll consider that their opinion is formed by scripture rather than by their culture and self-righteousness.
Where’s Evan when you need him? Who’s turn is it to mann the gaydar this week?
It’s one thing to hate the gay. It’s another thing to deny his humanity for being gay.
John – very few are celebrating homosexual behavior, but very few show compassion for the struggle many have with genuine same sex attractions. However, the cross of Jesus Christ is the message for all of us, and the Inauguration of an American president is a nice pageantry but of no significance spiritually.
Gay bands – who cares? How about gay sinners – who cares? We should care about them, not care that they are playing in a band in January. The Christian Church has received the GRACE of God and now casts moral projectiles against an array of sinners from which they have been rescued. Could there be anything so paradoxical than judgmental gracians?
Snap!
I agree that this is a mirror on what has becomes acceptable in society.
What, pray tell, does this have to do with the contemporary church, the luke-warmness of Laodicea, or Rick Warren?
If Rick turned down the offer to pray he would have been attacked for missing an opportunity to evangelise.
It must be a slow day in Ingridville.
Neil
If you do not believe God will hear Warren’s prayer, don’t listen and go to your own closet where Jesus IS listening.
Rick Frueh’s Inaugeral Prayer:
Dear God, Help us.
In Jesus Name, Amen.
Bo, another difference is there is not a Dads for Divorce marching band on the invite list. I’m sure the ODMs **would** object to that. I am sure there are some gay people in the high school marching bands, but these bands are not making an overt political / socio statement. There is a difference here and that difference is relevant to the situation.
Let there be no doubt an overt, premeditated, fully understood and acknowledged statement is being made here.
Rick: tho Jesus would have undoubtedly ate, drank and associated with the gays in this parade I seriously doubt He would have marched beneath their banner with them. A big, but significant difference.
Agreed.
John,
Who is marching beneath their banner with them?
Rick, I agree. The Church is not handling all this well.
Neil, I have already said I think Ingrid was very wrong to include RW in this.
John – who is marching with them? And when you accept an invitation to dine at their party, isn’t that the same as marching with them? Is the band marching for the president or for gay rights?
It’s much about nothing. I would eat in their house and have them in mine, I would not march for any rights however I believe they should have full citizenship rights. My calling is the everlasting love of God through the gospel, I am not called to condemn as was not my Master either.
Obama, obviously, for one by his tacit approval.
The reason that statement is being made is because ADMs haven’t made a big deal about divorce. They just don’t care at all. Ingrid is divorces and Steve Camp is divorced. They encouraged everyone to vote against Obama which means their endorsement was for a divorced candidate. Do you think they would have done the same for a gay candidate? Do you think a gay ADM would have the same support base as Ingrid and Steve Camp? Doubtful.
The only reason there isn’t a Divorced Dads marching band is because the divorced crowd hasn’t been attacked and de-humanized in the same way as the gay community. In fact that’s the same reason there’s a gay community instead of gays in a community. The gay marching band is a product of ADMs.
I’m still surprised when people act surprised when sinful society acts, well, sinful. It’s like acting surprised that a stove is hot.
If you really want to read about some corrupt and immoral politicians, go read the history of the Roman emperors during the first century. For the most part, Christians didn’t spend a lot of time speaking out against them, at least not in a directly confrontational way. On the other hand, because the Jews of the day tried to take back the Holy Land for Judaism, it ultimately led to the destruction of Jerusalem.
John – who cares what Obama approves? Leave the politics to Satan, let us preach the love of God through Jesus Christ!
John, I was just using your quote as a way of agreeing…
“I’m still surprised when people act surprised when sinful society acts, well, sinful. It’s like acting surprised that a stove is hot.”
Amen. I find the attacks on sinners outside the community of faith as repulsive and anti-christian. The depth of such hypocrisy remains unplummed and beyond our ability to explain outside the context of colossal hubris.
Phil – I agree with #30.
When we expect the society around to act morally when they have no firm basis for morality beyond their conscience, then we set ourselves up for disappointment.
That being said, there are moral laws, just as there are physical laws. Gravity is no respecter of persons as we all know.
In the same way, unbelievers who have inculcated biblical principles have prospered simply because they applied these principles.
When a society runs headlong on a collision course against moral laws (even outside conversion and relationship with Christ) it will be judged and destroyed over the course of time. History teaches us this clearly.
Paul – all society is fallen and cannot obey God’s moral laws. When Paul is brought before the king he doesn’t attempt to legislate morality, he gives his testimony about Christ.
Paul read my book.
Jeesh…that video that Ingrid linked to is laid out in such a way to suggest that Barack tracked this group down and made the offer personally. When in fact you first have to apply to the military…ah read it for yourself.
Every group that was selected by the inaugural committee (not Barack or Joe) were then sent a form letter stating the exact same sentiment.
For a list of all participating in the inauguration and parade visit the senate page for all thing inauguration.
Again we’ll do the research, Ingrid you do the knee jerking.
NOT AT ALL. Totally apples and oranges.
Rick, Jesus inviation to the party of “sinners” was an invitation to get to see and know Him. The hosts (Levi in one instance and a pharisee in another) both had a purpose and it was not to just inviate another guest to party as usual. The gathering was for Him, to meet Him to hear what He had to say. Jesus was not just accepting an inviation to the next Friday Night bash. Jesus had an agenda and it was to advance the Kingdom of God. And to extrapolate that Jesus saw no problem with the behavior and He just attended to hang out is to do great damage to the exegesis of the text. He wasn’t just hanging out. He had an agenda.
The context is seek and you shall find — I will not put out a flickering wick — come all who are heavy laden — repent and find forgiveness — not I’m OK you’re OK. His associations were always redemptive, they alwasy had a purpose.
You do not find Jesus marching with the Zealots or prostitues or tax collectors. To march with is to condone. It is different from attending a supper. It is.
Who knew?
This is not exactly true. God sent Jonah to Nineveh not to make them Jews, but to rebuke them from their moral degradation.
In addition, God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah from their gross departure “turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly.”
As I said – I agreed with Phil. I am not advocating that we legislate morality, but stating a fact that a society (though ungodly) can depart from the principles God has implanted in the consciences of all, and as they depart further and further from these moral laws, they are inviting God’s judgment.
There are lots of examples of this.
I vote for Rick!
Rick. I always try to look for the balance between love and justice, love and acceptance, love and the sinner. I can’t condone a gay parade or pretend it just doesn’t matter in such a charged political atmosphere. Again, there is a balance in there somewhere.
Amen – well stated comment (#37).
Jesus having a meal with people that don’t know God was to actually introduce them to the light, not just to make them feel comfortable in their rebellion (ie: like marching with them below the banner – for goodness sake!).
There is a difference between advocating a particularly destructive lifestyle and pulling someone from the wreckage of it.
Warren isn’t marching in the parade. So this is a moot point.
Not sure how you know this. I mean I agree with the premise but I think its a conclusion based on assumption.
I am still wondering what makes a band gay, or a gay band.
What percent of the band must be gay to make band gay?
Does it play only Barbara Streisand, Show Tunes, Barry Manilow?
Is it populated with Hair Stylists, Stewards, and actors?
I find it interesting in Ingrid’s “dehumanizing” of gays and PB’s declaration that the homosexual was “a representative” Satan and our enemy…
Again, PB did back peddle, but as I stated I understand the possible motivation of hate as if some are no longer human, they are not “flesh and blood” at least like us anymore so you can hate them and make them your enemies… and make them equal with Satan or at least… Satanic. It is like a thinly veiled Pharisee loophole.
iggy
In case Iggy and others need a class in reading context, Let me remove out of your contemplative Lectio positions, and invite you to read the entire comment IN CONTEXT:
The people being referred to in the context are NOT the homosexuals. They are the modern neo-orthodox postmodern emergent leaders (Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, Tony Campolo, Phyllis Tickle) who have proclaimed that the Bible does not have the authority to say being Homosexual is wrong. The activity which removes Authority from God’s Word the Bible is the Satanic activity. It is Satan’s original method; to call into question God’s Word.
Satan is still the Enemy.
At no point did I call the homosexual population less than human. At no point did I label the homosexuals the enemy. It was an example of one of the things that emergents are changing from God’s Word.
Yes I totally agree with PB in that we should look at what he stated in context… not just what he conveniently left out but the whole statement.
It was in “Quote of the day” thread comment #35
So again, he not only rewrite history to his own reality, but then denies that he used the homosexual as a representative and enemy of Satan.
Nothing more needs to be said as I guess PB has a very selective memory on reality.
Even an half truth is still a lie.
And I did mention that PB back-peddled from this comment so what I stated above was not an attack on PB.
iggy
Are we against unregenerate sinners in marching bands at all, or just CERTAIN sinners?
BTW… notice that last sentence?
PB twisted Paul’s “not against flesh and blood” to justify battling against “Flesh and blood”.
And then he denies he stated such a thing… and this is all in “context”.
iggy
Rick
We are only agaisnt the representatives of satan who are his agents and thus no longer flesh and blood. For example: the Homosexual
That is the logic I get from yesterday and today.
iggy
Reference: Comment #48
The sickest thing is that people like “Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, Tony Campolo, Phyllis Tickle” are now “worse that homosexuals” and are the real agents of Satan… so… according to PB, “Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, Tony Campolo, Phyllis Tickle” are not “flesh and blood” and are now “enemies”.
Sick…
iggy
One could just as easily ask: Why do you care what she cares about? I guess she has her reasons and you have yours, and both feel justified in their reasons.
While I am far from an SOL endorser, I fail to see how the post in question “dehumanizes” gays or questions their right to be Americans. Rather, I view it to be a commentary on society that the author is mostly letting speak for itself. Interestingly, the subheading at SOL is “news and commentary on the contemporary church”, but many (including the post in questions) seem to focus on societal commentary, not church commentary. Although in this case, the author does make a poor attempt at tieing the post in with the contemporary church with the unnecessary Warren reference. Sound Biblical criticisms of Warren and his lack of clear gospel presentation during numerous opportunities I can accept (and often agree with), but bending over backward to reference Warren derogatorily in any and all contexts is way overboard, uncharitable, and not conducive to productive witness.
I do find that some level of societal commentary is appropriate and can be helpful in the life of a Christian and the church, as it helps to draw contrasts and point out pitfalls. In fact, if we are honest, we all do it (including this site) to one degree or another. If SOL made it more clear that societal commentary was part of their mission, it would be more understandable, especially if they were to refrain from personalizing the commentary and drawing unnecessary correlations or infering associations (probably not likely to happen, given the developed pattern).
Let me say publicly and unquivicably, I am vehemently against, and stand in unashamed oppposition, to my own sin. It is disgusting, repulsive, and represents a level of ignorance far above those who have never been partakers of Christ. The only reason I could ever be a part of any celebration of anything isn’t because I am not gay, it’s because of God’s grace.
I can only spread that message of grace, I cannot in any sense remove myself from that grace and then call others to judgment against those in need of the grace I was so freely given. I will always find the public judgment of sinners outside the scope of Christ and in fact anti-christ on a redemptive level. The spirit of anti-christ is not limited to denying Jesus is THE Savior, it is also misrepresenting His Saviorhood to the very ones to whom He came. The results seem to be the same.
The sheer ferocity of the irony in those small four words is amazing.
#54
I sign on to that statement.
BO – I said I do not vote, I never said I would refuse votes!
However I am impressed by your literary prowess:
The sheer ferocity of the irony.
Brilliant!!
Stunningly, no one cares that there will undoubtedly be divorced people among the marchers, just as no one cares that the divorced are leading the ADM charge.
Hooray for the hypocrisy!
I’d also like to hear an argument for why the government should be enforcing special standard on homosexuals. Why should the government care that homosexuals are marching? Should the government be enforcing this ban on all types of sinners?
Oh, and I’m still waiting for a scriptural argument for why the government should or shouldn’t endorse gay marriage.
“Why should the government care that homosexuals are marching?”
Because our founding fathers were flaming evangelicals. Having slaves for concubines is one thing, but marching gay bands?? God forbid!!
I think Rick has just warmed up the gigantic BBQ pit and its all ready for some sacred cows.
Sorta like the post about “christian” as an adjective…
When I read Ingrid’s post it seems she is more attack Rick Warren and President Obama. I also see that she is insinuating that Gays do not have the rights as others to be allowed to perform in a marching band for the president. I am also appalled that she seems to be insinuating that Rick Warren approves of the gay lifestyle for having the honor to pray for our president. With her statement it seems that we need to blame God for placing Who He picked as our president. For God holds the leaders and nations in His hands…
It also seems once again ADM/ODM cut across the teachings of scripture as she implies any one that prays for Obama endorses homosexuality… Scripture is clear we are to pray for our rulers and leaders. It seems instead Ingrid is calling for people to be in rebellion against who God established as our President.
May God’s word be her rebuke…
iggy
The expertise of the flautists.
What’s really interesting is that according to Yahoo, the GLBT community is angry with Obama for choosing Warren.
And here is the present post from the gracious pen of Ingrid as she mocks and condescends to sinners unworthy of a genuine expression of redemptive love and grace. Hubris can become so blatant and flippant that it becomes humorous.
“Go back to your bathhouses” is such a careless and mocking comment, even when their will be some homosexuals who committ suicide this very Christmas season because of rejection and profound depression.
Here is a quote that Ingrid could possibly use:
“Well, if they are a mind to die, let them do it and decrease the surplus population”.
Merry Christmas and may God bless us, everyone. (That compromiser Tiny Tim)
Again, it seems that regardless to “gays” being present (which I am sure they would be anyway regardless to being in a marching band or not) Rick Warren is the devil in “flesh and blood” to Ingrid.
It gets sicker and sicker.
iggy
How about just the blatant statement this segregated marching band is promoting. Nothing against the individuals in the band.
#66 – I agree Rick.
John H,
That gays like to march in a band and play music and want to play for the President?
iggy
John Hughes, Pastorboy, etc,
I’m still waiting to hear some scripture that explains why the government should or shouldn’t endorse gay marriage.
The statement is being made because of the derision and alienation that has been heaped on gays by society at large and specifically comes from a religious motivation. Gays are forming segregated groups and marching together precisely because of the attitude on display by Ingrid that says “go back to the bath houses”.
FYI: A RW interview being passed around by homosexual groups upset with Warren’s invitation (for comparing homosexual marriage to incest, pedophilia and polygamy).
Pay close attention the first question asked, and the answer given…
Bo,
As far as I am concerned, the government can promote civil unions. My problem is when I as a pastor would be required to perform a marriage and if I didn’t there could be civil penalties.
Just so you know, there have been cases in America against private businesses who, according to their moral standards, would not do printing (for example) of posters they disagreed with. In the same way, I am against gay marriage because the scripture is against it.
Very distasteful and wrong.
Bo – one thing must be clear. One of the cleverest things the gay rights movement has done is morphed their “struggle” into a replay of the civil rights movement. This ingenious move has allowed them to come under the same banner as racism and bigotry, when really, it is not the same at all.
Being black (or a minority) should never be equated with your sexual preference.
In regards to government, I’m not sure we should expect anything much as government tends to reflect society at large. So, I’m not disappointed when they legislate abominable things like gay marriage – it’s simply a reflection of society going further along the wrong track.
Slowly, you will see legislation that churches have no right to refuse to perform gay marriages on the basis of discrimination…
Our position should be to live for Christ in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom we shine as lights – holding forth the word of truth.
The easiest job in the world is to point out the sins and errors of others. What is difficult is swimming against the current – not just of society – but of our own sinful desire to lambaste, be proud, and mote-hunt. This is very dangerous ground that only God can save us from.
Wrong, PB. As a pastor you are not obligated to marry anyone – regardless of reason. You are not “required” to marry anyone that asks you to marry them. For instance, you can refuse to marry a couple that you feel are not ready to be married or who are living together or whatever.
No need to create an boogie man where there is no need for one.
Is there a single example of anyone who has been punished by the government for refusing to marry anyone?
These objections seem a bit far-fetched and I suspect are an excuse to take a position that isn’t Biblical in the least, but is often portrayed as one that is a lead pipe lock for orthodoxy.
I don’t see how the government could ever make a pastor marry anyone. Pastors refuse to marry people all the time for all sorts of reasons.
This is all I’m saying:
OMG so awesome.
And:
Correct as usual, King Friday. Until the anti-marriage equality advocates show me a Catholic priest who was sued because he refused to marry a divorced couple, or prove that somewhere, somehow, some insidious entity is trying to remove the religious from anti-discrimination clauses in our lawbooks, and then show me one single gay couple in all the world who has any desire to get married by an odious bigoted pastor in an odious bigoted church, then that line of thought (which Rick Warren lied about to scare his dumb sheep, naturally) will continue to be denied access to the adults’ table of ideas.
Evan, thank you for being the brave soul to acknowledge my fautist pun
For awhile it seemed like I was laughing all alone.
It flew over peoples’ heads.
Flew or fluted?
I dunno, but it definitely came from somewhere in the brass/woodwind section…
That would be the woodwind section…
Yes, I’m well aware that the flute is part of the woodwind section.
/has conducted orchestras.
Yikes!
Go back to the bathhouse….
That woman.
Perhaps Ingrid ought to get back into the kitchen, remove her shoes, and start tracking her ovulation cycle.
And Jesus, looking down from the cross and seeing the need of the entire world, was heard to say “Y’all go back to the bathhouse, you disgusting deviants”.
I am coming to the conclusion that many segments of the evangelical community have no idea what redemption and the gospel actually are. I am so “conservative” that I cannot even abide coarse language (can you imagine), but I would rather die than speak in such redemptiveless and ungracious terms about sinners who the Spirit desires to draw to Christ.
I believe the dopctrine of limited atonement is one of the major reasons people like Ingrid can spew upon sinners with such caustic hubris. If you are gay and are reading this comment please know that Jesus died for you just as he died for me. All have sinned means ALL – AND I MEAN ALL!!!
Bo – let’s leave the remarkably rude comments for “them.” – OK?
Here’s the thing, I bet you the batthhouse comment didn’t even register as rude or offensive to them. I was just contextualizing for them.
Also, has anyone rebuked divorcees Ingrid and Steve Camp? God hates divorce and they have disqualified themselves for traditional leadership roles in the church, yet they rebuke pastors and elders who have Biblically ordained roles.
It would be fair to say that they are tolerated because the tickle the ears of their audiences who will not put up with sound teaching.
I would agree, in the big picture, about the hypocrisy about divorce especially with respect to the “gay issue”.
However, I think comments about Ingrid’s divorce are out of bounds. It’s been established that there was some kind of abuse there and divorce was probably one of the better decisions for her life and health.
None of that excuses her other comments, but I think a general rule should be that her divorce is out of bounds.
Steve Camp…? I don’t know what the story is there OR CARE TO, but again, like Ingrid, I think he’s also really good at demonstrating a load of hypocrisy without touching that subject.
Although, I will say, in light of that brokenness that would touch them so deeply and personally, I would hope that they would have become the picture of graciousness and compassion.
Sadly, that’s not the case.
I will say this though, Ingrid is much sharper than Camp. She can cut through in 4 sentences what Camp takes a cut-and-paste dissertation to say. At least there’s no intellectual pretension on her part.
I won’t be surprised if my critique of Camp might garner a private rebuke email from the forward position on the Eastern Truth War Front, as it has other times before.
apparently, he’s a top-notch “general”, the criticism of whom garners a barrage/salvo/shelling from that New Hampshire lurker force who shall not be named.
oy
The Bible says that God hates divorce. All divorce, not just the divorces that are good for someone’s health. Anyone who says otherwise is departing from sola scriptura and is in all likelihood either Roman Catholic, Rick Warren, or emergent. Haha, just kidding, we know all three of those are the same.
Yeah, I bet you’re right… beyond that they probably see it a fruit of their righteousness.