So back to the question, "What would you do if a homosexual group asked to use the aplacetotalk building?" I responded to that question by saying "First of all, let me say that I am glad that I wouldn't have to make that decision alone. I would talk to the people and they would get to decide." Then the "leadership team" of the well known denomination asked me what I would do if there wasn't an agreement and I responded "Until there was an agreement we would have to wait." Later in the conversation I did say that if I believed that homosexuality was sin, just like gluttony, lies, gossip, and murder. I also added that if I believed there was any chance of influencing this imaginary group of homosexuals for Jesus Christ I would have to strongly consider allowing them to use the building. However; we can't forget that I wouldn't make that decision alone. I have no more rights to the aplacetotalk building than any other aplacetotalk partner or participant. We haven't discussed or planned anything about membership or partnership yet either so we need to nail that down someday as well. But that is a different blog post all together.
Anyway I am writing because I got a phone call today and the message was, and I quote "Hey Josh this is _(his name)_ uh, I talked to the leadership team and they said no on signing off on you guys mostly because of the willingness to have open homosexual groups come into the church uh if you need to call me back go ahead... talk to you later, bye."
Anyway I am writing because I got a phone call today and the message was, and I quote "Hey Josh this is _(his name)_ uh, I talked to the leadership team and they said no on signing off on you guys mostly because of the willingness to have open homosexual groups come into the church uh if you need to call me back go ahead... talk to you later, bye."
Are you as surprised by this as I am? aplacetotalk was rejected by this little organization based on the possibility that some "imaginary group" may want to have an "imaginary cookout or meeting" on our property and we might have an "imaginary meeting" and discuss the possibility of allowing this "imaginary group" have an "imaginary cookout" on our property. I am so glad that I don't have to live in that "imaginary world" where human beings have imaginary authority over other human beings. I am so glad that I live in the real world where Jesus (the real King with the real authority) allows blacks, whites, racists, homosexuals, rednecks, democrats, republicans, fat people, skinny people, smart people, dumb people, alcoholics, drug abusers, rapists, rappers, bloggers, and even pastors live on His property and He doesn't toss them out just because they aren't perfect.
3 comments:
Hey, man... last time we talked, you hadn't heard anything yet, and I really don't know what to say.
Seriously, though... if that's the reason they rejected us, perhaps their umbrella isn't what we want to be under at all.
I think the best thing to do at this point is to pray for those who have let the opinions of men influence their decisions more than their walk with Christ.
"No, you can't join our Christian organization because you might let undesirables use your building." Wow...
I started to type that I'm amazed that folks have that mindset... but I'm not. I guess I have just been spoiled by spending time around folks who don't mind ministering to the outcasts that many other churches would like to pretend don't exist.
Just a side note... what exactly is the difference between a rapist and a raper?
Just remember that sex and drugs went with rock and roll long before they went with rap...
;-)
good point...
Post a Comment