NALT Christians (The Bible and Homosexuality)

It doesn’t really surprise me that there would arise a movement in the professing Christian community who would side with anti-God, anti-Christian, anti-Bible activists.  How should we interpret a professing Christian organization who would align themselves with someone like LGBT activist Dan Savage, a man barely distinguished from the flip-side of the Westboro Baptists?

(Notalllikethat.org) — The purpose of the NALT Christians Project is to give LGBT-affirming Christians a means of proclaiming to the world—and especially to young gay people—their belief and conviction that there is nothing anti-biblical or at all inherently sinful about being gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender.

I realize there’s a desire to not offend or hurt anyone’s feelings or tell anyone they’re sinners, but despite the linguistic gymnastics, the Bible is pretty clear on what God believes about homosexual sexual relationships.  Some people don’t want to pass judgment and others don’t want to appear mean or hateful.  I sympathize, but all that is irrelevant to what the Bible has to say about homosexual sexual relationships.

Stand to Reason on Romans 1:18-32

Let me start by making two observations. First, this is about God being mad: “For the wrath of God [orge] is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men….”

Second, there is a specific progression that leads to this “orgy” of anger. Men “suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (v. 18). They exchanged “the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (v. 25). Next, “God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity…” (v. 24). They “exchanged the natural [sexual] function for that which is unnatural (v. 26). Therefore, the wrath of God rightly falls on them (v. 18); they are without excuse (v. 20).

This text is a crystal clear condemnation of homosexuality by the Apostle Paul in the middle of his most brilliant discourse on general revelation. Paul is not speaking to a localized aberration of pedophilia or temple prostitution that’s part of life in the capital of Graeco-Roman culture. He is talking about a universal condition of man.

Regarding the same-sex behavior itself, here are the specific words Paul uses: a lust of the heart, an impurity and dishonoring to the body (v. 24); a degrading passion that’s unnatural (v. 29); an indecent act and an error (v. 27); not proper and the product of a depraved mind (v. 28).

There’s only one way the clear sense of this passage can be missed: if someone is in total revolt against God. According to Paul, homosexual behavior is evidence of active, persistent rebellion against one’s Creator. Verse 32 shows it’s rooted in direct, willful, aggressive sedition against God–true of all so-called Christians who are defending their own homosexuality. God’s response is explicit: “They are without excuse” (v. 20).

[…]

Paul was not unclear about what he meant by “natural.” Homosexuals do not abandon natural desires; they abandon natural functions: “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another…” (1:26-27)

[…]

Paul is not talking about natural desires here, but natural functions. He is not talking about what one wants sexually, but how one is built to operate sexually. The body is built to function in a specific way. Men were not built to function sexually with men, but with women.

Stand to Reason on Genesis 19:4-13

Why did God destroy Sodom and Gomorrah? We can find clues not just from the Genesis account, but also from the Prophets and the New Testament books 2 Peter and Jude. These give a sense of how ancient Jewish thinkers steeped in Jewish culture understood these texts.

First, Sodom and Gomorrah were judged because of grave sin. Genesis 18:20 says, “And the Lord said, ‘The outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah is indeed great, and their sin is exceedingly grave.'” Indeed, not even ten righteous people could be found in the city.

Second, it seems the judgment of these cities was to serve as a lesson to Abraham and to others that wickedness would be punished. In 2 Peter 2:6 we learn that God condemned and destroyed the cities as “an example to those who would live ungodly thereafter.”

Third, peculiar qualities of the sin are described by Jude and Peter. Jude 7 depicts the activity as “gross immorality” and going after “strange flesh.” Peter wrote that Lot was “oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men,” and “by what he saw and heard…felt his righteous soul tormented day after day with their lawless deeds.” These people were “those who indulged the flesh in its corrupt desires and despised authority” (2 Peter 2:7-10).

Fourth, there are 27 references outside of Genesis where Sodom is mentioned. It is emblematic of gross immorality, deepest depravity, and ultimate judgment.

Piecing together the biblical evidence gives us a picture of Sodom’s offense. The sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was some kind of activity—a grave, ongoing, lawless, sensuous activity—that Lot saw and heard and that tormented him as he witnessed it day after day. It was an activity in which the inhabitants indulged the flesh in corrupt desires by going after strange flesh, ultimately bringing upon them the most extensive judgment anywhere in the Bible outside of the book of Revelation.

[…]

Was the city destroyed because the men of Sodom tried to rape the angels (option (2) above)? The answer is obviously no. God’s judgment could not have been for the rapacious attempt itself because His decision to destroy the cities was made days before the encounter (see Genesis 18:20). Further, Peter makes it clear that the wicked activity was ongoing (“day after day”), not a one-time incident. The outcry had already been going up to God for some time.

Was this a mere interrogation? Though the Hebrew word yada (“to know”) has a variety of nuances, it is properly translated in the NASB as “have [sexual] relations with.” Though the word does not always have sexual connotations, it frequently does, and this translation is most consistent with the context of Genesis 9:5. There is no evidence that what the townsmen had in mind was a harmless interview. Lot’s response—“Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly”—makes it clear they had other intentions.

In addition, the same verb is used in the immediate context to describe the daughters who had not “known” a man and who were offered to the mob instead. Are we to understand Lot to be saying, “Please don’t question my guests. Here, talk to my daughters, instead. They’ve never been interviewed”?

Did God judge Sodom and Gomorrah for inhospitality? Is it true that God’s judgment was not for homosexuality per se, but because the people of the town were discourteous to the visitors, violating sacred sanctuary customs by attempting to rape them? A couple of observations raise serious doubt.

First, the suggestion itself is an odd one. To say that the men of Sodom were inhospitable because of the attempted rape is much like saying a husband who’s just beaten his wife is an insensitive spouse. It may be true, but it’s hardly a meaningful observation given the greater crime.

Second—and more to the textual evidence—it doesn’t fit the collective biblical description of the conduct that earned God’s wrath: a corrupt, lawless, sensuous activity that Lot saw and heard day after day, in which the men went after strange flesh.

Third, are we to believe that God annihilated two whole cities because they had bad manners, even granting that such manners were much more important then than now? There’s no textual evidence that inhospitality was a capital crime. However, homosexuality was punishable by death in Israel (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13). Does God ignore the capital crime, yet level two entire cities for a wrong that is not listed anywhere as a serious offense?

Stand to Reason on Leviticus 18 and Leviticus 20

 The argument:

  1. Leviticus is not where we go for our moral instruction. It is a central thesis of Paul that Jesus has freed us from the Law.
  2. Leviticus is that book of the Law which has specifically to do with cult–sacrifice, priesthood, ritual purity. It is in this regard that it touches on homosexuality.
  3. The Hebrew word “toevah” (translated “abomination” and “detestable act”) is a cultic, not a moral, term. The English “abomination” means abhorrent, loathsome, unspeakably bad. Toevah means ritually unclean. Eating pork is toevah; having sex with a menstruating woman is toevah. You cannot come to worship after doing these things until you have been purified.
  4. Nor does the naming of the death penalty mark homosexuality as particularly heinous. Also punishable by death in the Law is disobedience to parents (no age specified), picking up sticks on the Sabbath, adultery, and many other actions.”[1]

C. Ralph Blair argues:

  1. That this was for ritual purity of the priests and not for moral purity.
  2. The Law no longer applies to the New Testament Christian.

D. Analysis: It’s true, much of the Law deals with religious activity rather than universal morality, however…

  1. Ritual purity and moral purity are not always distinct.
  2. This section was not addressed to the priests, but to all the “sons of Israel” (v. 2).
  3. This isn’t merely ritual purity.
    1. Context determines the meaning here.
    2. The “toevah” (abomination) of homosexuality here is sandwiched between adultery (18:20), child sacrifice (18:21) and bestiality (18:23). Was Moses saying merely that if you committed adultery, bestiality, or child sacrifice you had to be careful to wash up before you came to church?
  4. Moral aspects of the Law do still apply, as NT citations demonstrate.
  5. It’s curious that some claim homosexual practice was minor because it was no more offensive to God than picking up sticks on the Sabbath. Why don’t they conclude that both homosexuality and Sabbath breaking etc. were so offensive to God and such a threat to Judaism that they were capital offenses? If you want to know how God really felt, look at the punishment.

E. No, Moses spoke clearly here:

  1. The fact that the Law has just two references to it and none of the prophets directly address it is inconsequential.
  2. The paucity of reference is do to one simple fact.
    1. It’s not because it was unimportant; it was a capital crime.
    2. It’s because it wasn’t prevalent, like idolatry; homosexuals were executed.

As Neil Simpson notes:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

Comments

  1. NALT Christians = Not Christians.

    Thanks for the softball!

  2. John (not McCain) says:

    Thanks for reminding me why I’d rather spent eternity in hell than five minutes around ignorant bigot trash like you! Be sure to tell Jesus to lick my sweaty taint when you get to “heaven”.

    • How tolerant and not hateful that response is, John.

      But to the post, What hate? I merely show there is no positive argument to support homosexual sexual relationships in the bible.

  3. If anyone calls you a bigot, just ask them for the definition and then ask if they are tolerant of different opinions.

    big·ot – noun – a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

    Oddly enough, those using the word fit the description much better than those they attempt to malign with it.

  4. I believe homosexual predilections are the result of an imbalance of some sort. Every homosexual I have ever known – and this is not hyperbole – has noticeable psychological problems of some sort.

    After investigating, I found that mental health problems are infinitely more common in homosexuals than heterosexuals and that this cannot be explained by any sort of stigma, as the results are the same in nations where homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable alternative lifestyle.

    Homosexuality requires treatment, not encouragement. But this will never happen, as society has been locked into a cask of utter stupidity by the anointed intelligentsia.

  5. I bailed at the description of “the wrath of God” as being an “”orgy'” of anger.” This is a flat-out wrong reading of the text and an exegetical fallacy of the most basic kind. If the rest of the analysis is this sloppy, it’s simply not worth my time.

  6. Terrance,
    You have bought into the psyche industry’s lies.

    They have the “mental” problems BECAUSE they practice homosexual behavior and know intrinsically that it isn’t right. I have a friend who spent a couple decades in that lifestyle before coming to Christ, and he can tell you a lot about what goes on in the thoughts of these people.

    A very interesting study has shown that the vast majority of homosexually-inclined people were sexually abused as children (as happened with my friend). That in and of itself sets off a lot of emotional and psychological problems!

    There is no such thing as “imbalance” by the way; they have tried to pass “chemical imbalance” as a reason for depression, but no evidence has ever been found. Just as there has never been found a genetic reason for homosexual desires. It is learned in some way or another.

    I have a large shelf full of books I’ve read, all on psychology, psychiatry, and counseling. I’ve also taken many counseling courses during which I had to learn all the psychobabble.

    Homosexual desires are nothing but the result of sin.

  7. I didn’t bail when I disagreed, I bailed when I encountered shoddy exegesis that was objectively wrong. If you think that “the wrath of God” = “orge” = “an ‘orgy’ of anger” than you need to take or re-take Greek 101. And if the error in question isn’t immediately obvious to you, you probably shouldn’t be dogmatically defending a text that you clearly don’t fully understand.

  8. If you notice Koukl notes a progression. It is the indignation (orge) of God toward the people described thereafter. Why is this a wrong interpretation so fallacious that you felt it was OK to ignore the entire thing?

  9. There’s no orgy of anger. Period, end of story.

    • How would you describe the nature of God’s wrath toward those Paul describes in Romans 1? A tiff? You’re so hung up on this one insignificant disagreement that you believe you’re justified in ignoring the entire argument? Not surprised you disagree.

  10. second, “orgy of anger” isnt given as an interpretation, it’s given as commentary.

  11. It’s not insignificant when it reveals you don’t even understand the most basic aspects of the text you’re trying to explain. I’ll try again, though this is getting tedious. Koukl says that “the wrath of God” is “orge” — this is false. Then, in the very next sentence, Koukl references “this ‘orgy’ of anger.” Why is orgy in quotes? What orgy of anger? Why is he even talking about an orgy? He’s clearly referencing “orge” as being an “orgy.” This is also false. If he can’t even get this stuff right, it’s not surprising that he seems naively unaware of the nuances of this passage, such as Paul’s use of prosopopoeia and the vocative in Romans 2.

    Let me cut to the chase and try and help you out: There is plenty of conservative scholarship regarding Romans 1 that responsibly deals with the text — but Koukl clearly doesn’t fall into this category. He’s a popular apologist, not a Biblical scholar. You’re not doing yourself or your position any favors when defer to the conclusions of less-than-accurate exegesis.

  12. Glenn,

    The self-appointed leaders of modern psychology have done everything in their power to normalize pathetic behavior, so I understand your reluctance to accept anything they say regarding homosexuality. However, it cannot be denied that homosexuals exhibit more behavioral problems than hetrosexuals. Could this simply be the result of guilt?

    Maybe. Even so, psychological counseling has its benefits. You may not realize it, but a sinner depressed over his guilt sometimes requires counseling to move past it and accept that Christ has forgiven him. Pastors and Christian Counselors do this all the time. Aren’t you a Christian Counselor?

    • Terrance,
      But psychological methods have proven to cause more harm than good, and it is a very, very rare case when it helps anyone.

      Christian counseling very often just dresses up the secular psychological theories with “Christianeze” – promoted by the likes of James Dobson and his ilk.

      The true Christian Counseling uses NONE of the psych methods and sticks only with the Bible as their guide. Nouthetic Counseling was founded by Jay Adams, and except for his 5-point Calvinist nonsense, his teachings are excellent. There are a whole lot of teachers/counselors in that movement.

      I do not have a certificate, but I am a Christian counselor. I have studied the secular psychology methods to know what they are about, and many years did a short research paper together with a friend while he was in seminary. The majority of which I’ve posted on my blog in a series of articles explaining the unscientific nature of it. I have also studied Christian biblical counseling/Nouthetic counseling for almost 15 years, and have attended three conferences. My intent was to attend a school to get certificated, but that was before I had medical issues a couple years ago which drained my bank account. I have read all their required texts though!

      My wife and I have indeed done family counseling, pre-marital and marital counseling, counseling with a woman caught in adultery, counseling a young man caught up in porn, counseling where abuse was involved, counseling teens, and counseling in divorce situations.

      I think the majority of the emotional problems with homosexuals are indeed because of guilt, but also because of the abuse they suffered.

      • Glenn, am I mistaken that you believe that there are no psychological disorders? I have it in my memory for some reason that you believe that people don’t have them. Am I wrong?

        • John,
          There is no such thing as a “mental illness.” The mind is intangible and therefore cannot be ill.

          The brain can have a malfunction due to genetic defect or injury, on drugs, etc, which then can skew mental processes. THAT is a bonafide medical problem. Otherwise you have emotional problems based on sin issues.

          The psyche industry is there to make sure that you are not responsible for your actions. It’s either because of the way you were raised, the environment, etc, but certainly never your fault when things go wrong or you make poor decisions.

          • There is a chemical component to the brain which does effect the mind. I do distinguish between the brain and mind, but they do coincide.

            • John,

              As noted in my comment, a “chemical” component (no one has yet found any “chemical imbalance which causes defective thinking, by the way) would be a bonafide medical issue and treated medically and not psychologically.

  13. John,

    I love this bit:

    … LGBT activist Dan Savage, a man barely distinguished from the flip-side of the Westboro Baptists…

    I’ve “plagiarized” it already. It’s a great way to describe the scumbag, that he is just like the very person he accuses all homosexual opponents of being. Perfect!

  14. The whole point of the NALT movement is to try and slow the exodus from Christianity. The way conservative fundamentalists have treated LGBT people has driven many away from Christianity, including many straight people who have empathy. If you want to carry on driving LGBT people away, please, feel free. You’ll just hasten American Christianity’s demise and hopefully America will become truly secular, like Europe, where LGBT people are actually treated like real humans.

    • It sounds to me like not making people feel bad about their sin is more important than teaching the truth. How do you view adultery? Do you think its hateful to call adultering spouses theyre sinning?

  15. Avengah,
    How is it exactly that Christians mistreat “LGBT” people?

    By the way, identifying people by their sexual proclivities is just plain wrong. People are people. Those who indulge in perverse sexual behavior are just people indulging in perverse sexual behavior. The problem is that too many want to be defined by their sexual behavior and then want others to define them by that behavior as well.

    If people are “driven away” from REAL Christianity because REAL Christianity makes them realize that their sinful actions are indeed sinful, then that is NOT the fault of the Christian faith.

  16. Glenn,

    I guess I don’t know what type of counseling you’re referring to when you say it does more harm than good. There are several different methods of psychological treatment. Are you talking about psychological treatment that absolves one from guilt? If so, I agree.

    However, I used to see a psychologist that was very conservative. He was an evangelical Christian that didn’t mind talking about his faith. I could have turned him in, but I never did. He was a nice guy. And he wasn’t one of those psychologists that tried to vindicate his patients. He always said that guilt is a good thing – if you’re guilty. He believed that people were responsible for their own actions, absent some severe brain trauma.

    So while I agree that organizations like the APA are liberal and advise treatment that does more harm than good, not all psychologists follow their lead. Sometimes, psychological treatment has its benefits, depending on the type of treatment. Gestalt therapy, for example, I think is very useful.

    I think emotional and mental problems are pretty much the same thing. All we’re talking about is the intangible aspect of a human being that directly affects one’s behavior.

  17. Glenn,

    You counsel people in religious matters. People with a particular problem, an emotional problem, and I would assume that you teach coping methods based on Biblical wisdom. You help people talk about their problem, accept that they have a problem, and teach them coping methods. This is a form of psychological or emotional counseling.

    So while I agree that mainstream psychology is grounded in secular humanism and evolution, the idea of emotional counseling doesn’t have to be. That’s my point. And I think we agree on that, do we not?

    • No,
      I do NOT counsel people in religious matters. I counsel them based on what the Bible says about the issues in which they are involved/having troubles with, etc. Biblical counselors address the exact same issues as to secular psycho-therapists and psychologists. We point them to what God says about their problem. And the success with such counseling is far and above that of secular counseling (which rarely has any real success – which is why you usually have to continue to see them for years).

      I suggest you familiarize yourself with Nouthetic counseling before you comment about it.

  18. Glenn,

    I apologize for phrasing it wrong, but let’s not allow semantics to distract from the point.

    You are describing not the antithesis of psychology, but a totally different school of psychology. Some subscribe to behaviorism, humanism, psychoanalysis, so on and so forth. You believe that guilt is one of the main causes of behavioral problems and prescribe Bible-based treatment to overcome this guilt. This is a form of psychology. Freud believes the unconscious mind is responsible for most of our problems. This is a form of psychology. You get the point.

    You should become a psychologist. Suffer through all the secular B.S., get your degree, and write a book. Why not?

    • Terrance,
      No, I am indeed describing the antitheses of psychology, because secular psychology has no factual, scientific, or medicals evidence behind it. Psychology is anti-Christian, and doesn’t work.

      Psychology means study of the soul. So in reality, there should be no such thing as secular psychology.

      I would never waste my time doing what is necessary to become a psychologist – one would have to sit through years of unbiblical, unscientific, humanistic, evolutionist, atheistic nonsense. It would be a waste not only of time and brain, but also of money.

      Why should I write a book? Too many covering the subject have already been written. My “book” was my paper which I posted in sections on my blog.

  19. Avengah,
    How is it exactly that Christians mistreat “LGBT” people?

    By the way, identifying people by their sexual proclivities is just plain wrong. People are people. Those who indulge in perverse sexual behavior are just people indulging in perverse sexual behavior. The problem is that too many want to be defined by their sexual behavior and then want others to define them by that behavior as well.

    If people are “driven away” from REAL Christianity because REAL Christianity makes them realize that their sinful actions are indeed sinful, then that is NOT the fault of the Christian faith.

    I almost didn’t dignify this with a response, but suffice it to say look at what Scott Lively has done in Uganda, and look at the way gay people’s families are routinely thrown out of churches just for standing by their family members.

    There’s also a double standard here. Most gay people I know don’t go prancing round, telling everyone they’re gay. We only hear about it when it’s relevant. The double standard is this: when a straight person announces his wedding, there’s no problem but when a gay person announces his wedding, suddenly he’s accused of forcing his lifestyle on others when he’s only doing exactly what a straight person would do in the same situation.

    Also, while no-one’s forcing Christians to marry gays in their churches if they don’t want to, many Christian groups are actively lobbying against equal rights for gays in the civil arena – in civil marriage, which has nothing to do with religion.

    Which one of the 42,000+ branches of Christianity is the real branch? They can’t all be right but they can all be wrong.

    • Avengah,

      I don’t see what Lively did in Uganda which has caused harm to anyone. Could perhaps fill me in with facts?

      look at the way gay people’s families are routinely thrown out of churches just for standing by their family members.
      I’m not familiar with this ever happening. Could you provide evidence for this claim?

      when a gay person announces his wedding, suddenly he’s accused of forcing his lifestyle on others when he’s only doing exactly what a straight person would do in the same situation

      Well, this is certainly a false statement. No one cares if a person practicing homosexual behavior announces his fake wedding. What we DO care about is being forced to accept it as a marriage and give it personal sanction or else be punished.

      No one is lobbying against equal rights for “gays.” Those who practice sexual such sexual perversion have all the same rights as those who do not practice such behavior. But you have to remember that no one has the right to redefine the word “marriage” and the social institution it defines. “Marriage” has a social definition, not just a religious definition. And the definition has remained constant for thousands of years.

      You confuse “branches” of Christianity with the faith itself. Any “branch” which adheres to the non-negotiable fundamental doctrines of The Faith are true Christians. Those who do not do so are non-Christian cults claiming to be Christians.

      Try again.

  20. Information on Scott Lively and Uganda in general — http://americansfortruth.com/2013/09/05/scott-lively-fact-sheet-on-uganda-and-homosexuality/ . I highly recommend that people read it, as the Left loves to distort it.

    • Thanks Neil. That was sort of my point about wanting him to show me facts supporting his claim. He has none.

    • That site about Lively is heavily biased. While I agree that it’s hard to find a truly neutral source, the facts that I’m aware of are as follows: Lively met with several members of the Ugandan government and went round Uganda, preaching against homosexuality. He authored the “anti-gay” bill with the death penalty provision, but what that site doesn’t say is that the MINIMUM punishment was LIFE in prison. I actually read the anti-gay bill; even people who know gay people could be punished for not reporting them. It was seriously draconian; it was life in prison for homosexual sex, and death for aggravated homosexuality, which was defined as repeated offences, sex with minors or forced sex. There’s even a part near the top of the bill saying “we believe homosexuality is a choice” or something like that. What that has to do with the bill is beyond me, but it’s incorrect anyway. Even if people aren’t born gay, that doesn’t make it a choice. I’m not up to date on the science, but I don’t jump to conclusions. I never chose to become straight and I don’t fancy men, so why would a gay man choose a sexual orientation that causes so much persecution in these parts of the world?

  21. Sorry, I missed this: look at the way gay people’s families are routinely thrown out of churches just for standing by their family members.
    I’m not familiar with this ever happening. Could you provide evidence for this claim?

    Here you go: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/mom-kicked-tennessee-church-supporting-lesbian-daughter-article-1.1435249

    • Its not that they were removed from the church for supporting their daughter, it seems they were removed because they refused acknowledge homosexual sexual relationships are sinful. It’s normal for a church to take measures against members who endorse sinful actions. They likely would have been removed if the daughter was in an adulterous affair and the parents refused to acknowledge adultery was a sin.

  22. avengah,

    You made a genetic logic fallacy – assuming the data was incorrect or false because of its source. Go figure.

    Then you provide a link to Wikipedia, as if that is to be considered authoritative, considering just about anyone can write the articles.

    You’ve provided no evidence that Lively participated in writing the bill, and capital punishment was only for the offense of “aggravated homosexuality,” and I have no problem with it for that crime, just as I would have no problem with capital punishment for rape.

    I don’t see the problem with the bill personally, any more than if the bill was for pedophilia, or bestiality. Homosexual behavior corrupts society in the same way bestiality would. It is a perversion of human sexuality, causing mental as well as medical harm to all participants.

    Why would people choose homosexual behavior? For the same reason people choose every other sexual perversion – because they want to. Even if someone IS “born” that way (and there is no evidence to support such a claim), they still don’t have to act on their sexual desires.

    Let’s see, the link you provided about a church kicking a family out did not meet your charge of
    look at the way gay people’s families are routinely thrown out of churches just for standing by their family members.
    As John said, standing by a family member wasn’t the reason – denying that homosexual behavior is a sin was the reason.

  23. Glenn,

    It’s unreasonable and irresponsible to reach the conclusion that Bible-based counseling can help all people of all backgrounds with all psychological conditions. So while I support Nouthetic counseling on a limited basis for the right people, I understand that some people may receive greater benefit from secular counseling methods. Something Nouthetic Counselors like yourself are unwilling to admit.

    Moreover, Bible-based counseling can worsen the condition and create a crisis of faith that merely adds to the patient’s suffering. Of course, the circular reasoning of Nouthetic Counselors is that lack of faith and trust in God created the problem in the first place, but this is not helpful.

    Nouthetic Counselors have a tendency toward the schoolyard “my way or no way” approach to human emotion that I find distasteful. It has its benefits, but so do other counseling methods, and it’s high-time you admit it.

    • if someone doesnt grant the bible any authority they wont see any value in it’s application to their life, barring divine intervention. I think getting someone to a place of clear thinking, you can then make the case for a Christian view of longterm solutions.

      • John,
        As I noted to Terrance, I never suggested Christian counseling for unbelievers. They need the gospel first.

        But my point is that unbelievers have absolutely NO help with secular psychology or psychotherapy. They may have momentary feel-good, but they rarely, if ever, have lasting results because it is all psychobabble and nothing of truth.

    • Terrance,

      I NEVER said Bible-based counseling was for everyone. It is only for Christians. You can’t use spiritual teaching on unbelievers. Christians CANNOT receive better therapy from secular methods. Nor does it EVER create a “crisis of faith.” I don’t know where you heard that nonsense. And you statements about Nouthetic counseling sounds like you have been reading its opponents’ material, those who swear by anti-Christian secular psychological methods. Your description of Nouthetic counseling is not from personal study.

      But, unbelievers get NO real help from secular psychology. Which is why they stay in “therapy” for virtually the rest of their lives.

      It’s high time that YOU admit that secular psychology or psychotherapy is worthless and ungodly and anti-Christian, atheistic, etc.

  24. “The whole point of the NALT movement is to try and slow the exodus from Christianity. The way conservative fundamentalists have treated LGBT people has driven many away from Christianity, including many straight people who have empathy. If you want to carry on driving LGBT people away, please, feel free. You’ll just hasten American Christianity’s demise and hopefully America will become truly secular, like Europe, where LGBT people are actually treated like real humans.”

    Ma’am,
    Not all “Christians” are religious right, conservative Republican. Many of us subscribe to an INDEPENDENT or even Christian-LEFT perspective; there are probably far more of us out here than you’re aware of. We are tired of the right attempting to hijack Christianity away from the teachings of Jesus Christ and God Himself within the Holy Bible, particularly the New Testament after Jesus has died and risen again.

    Fundamentalists may also actually believe in the fundamentals of Christianity but it doesn’t make them bigoted, angry, screamers who judge the mote in their brother’s eyes, while neglecting the beam in their own. I believe in the fundamentals of Christianity but I do not agree with the conservative haters on the right who don’t know how to treat their fellow men and women who think differently than they do, especially when it comes to sin.

    Anyway, just a brief heads up so you would know that the example presented here, on this blog, is *not* the standard people should look to as a consistent definition of what a Christian is and what one looks like.

  25. Glenn,

    I read several articles on Nouthetic Counseling. I read the stuff you wrote, I visited the National Association of Nouthetic Counselors (NANC.org), and various other websites in an effort to fully familiarize myself with the practice, and my conclusions, I assure you, are my own.

    If Nouthetic Counseling doesn’t prove beneficial to a patient, then what? Is that person now questioning his faith? Questioning God’s existence? Does he think he’s unworthy of God’s love? What exactly do you counselors tell people who aren’t helped?

    • Terrance,

      I’ve never had counselees who weren’t helped, nor have I know of any Nouthetic counselor being unable to help a counselee as long as the counselee wants to be helped.
      The only time I have had counseling fail was with a couple who came for marital counsel and yet lied about what the problems were, lied about just about everything we were to counsel about while they pretended everything was fine and dandy. They would have done the same with a psychobabbler. At any rate, when she left him and divorce proceedings started, that’s when they began telling us the real problems and apologized for lying to us. By then it was too late. My wife and I think they were just going through the motions to please their families. As I said, we have counseled many people over the years, and this was the only time we were had.

      I’ve never read in any reports about people having trouble with their faith. (That is what happens with Word of Faith people!) But I am very familiar with the great success biblical counseling had for prison inmates in Illinois many years back when it was allowed, even to nonbelievers, and the return rate of prisoners was cut exponentially compared to those who didn’t get the counsel. It was a program that was working well for many years until some ACLU types decided it was a violation of the 1st Amendment.

      But I guess in your mind, if they were unable to find help with good Biblical counselors then they should go get counseling from those practicing witch-doctoring? (which is what psychobabble is).

  26. Glenn,

    I’ve never had counselees who weren’t helped, nor have I know of any Nouthetic counselor being unable to help a counselee as long as the counselee wants to be helped.

    It seems like you’re saying that if someone isn’t helped then they don’t want to be helped. Is that what you’re telling me? That Nouthetic Counseling is infallible?

    I have no doubt that you are good at what you do. You’re obviously intelligent, quite faithful, and you seem to care about people. So, I’m sure you help lots of people. But we’re not talking about you specifically. We’re talking about the practice of Nouthetic Counseling. You’ve already admitted that it doesn’t help people who lack faith. So, what helps them? Nothing? They just need to suck it up and believe in Christ?

    I’ve received counseling for some trust issues I’ve had in my relationships – and it’s helped immensely. It’s helped me for 6 years now. So, when you refer to these methods as “psychobable,” you don’t make much sense to people like me who know, firsthand, that there is a place for secular counseling methods. That these methods can and do help people.

    • Terrance,

      Good biblical counseling is infallible in and of itself because one is giving the counsel of God’s word – unless you want to say the word of God is fallible. And yes, if people aren’t helped it is because they don’t want to be helped. I have know too many people (including siblings) in this world who would not be helped by anything because they want to remain victims. And I’m talking about the whole Nouthetic counseling field. Of course you can get bad counselors in any field, and bad counselors can make bad decisions, but with the secular field even a good counselor gives bad decisions because his ideology is rotten to begin with!

      The problem with secular psychology and psycho-therapy is it is nothing but “rent a friend.” In other words, they would get the same benefit from talking to friends. That therapy you are getting could easily be gotten from a friend.

      If you want to accept ungodly, humanistic, anti-Christian counseling as useful for people, be my guest. All I can do is provide you with facts about how unscientific it is, how there is no genuine medical support for it, how much further damage it has done to people, and how it will keep you in therapy for years, and years (Biblical counseling never lasts that long because the problems are solved), then more power to you.

      I don’t see the point of continuing this dialog. You read some things about a field (and apparently mostly from its detractors) and now you are an expert on it. I’ve studied the secular industry for almost two decades and I am not an expert one it, but I am well-versed in what they teach and what their root philosophies are, as well as the normal outcomes.

  27. Glenn,

    I am not an expert in Nonathletic Counseling, but I’m guessing that my definition of it was pretty accurate. It is, in fact, Biblical counseling that seeks to renew one’s faith in God’s deliverance.

    You have said repeatedly that if Nouthetic Counseling proves ineffective then the patient didn’t want to be helped. You say mental illness is the result of sin. Okay. What about someone suffering with PTSD?

    And I do think it’s a little peculiar for you to continually chastise modern psychology for being “unscientific” when you would replace it with something that is unscientific by definition.

    • Terrance,

      I’m not sure you read correctly what you do read.

      Nothetic counseling is NOT to renew one’s faith in God’s deliverance. It is merely counseling using but Bible and its principles to get one’s thoughts re-aligned with what God says we are to do. Exchange bad ideas for the truth. Yes, they will see that God’s word is effective for everything in life. People have to want to change, which is why they usually seek counsel. However, there are people who merely go through the motions so they can stay perpetual victims, and refuse to be held accountable. No counsel of any type can help those people.

      I never said mental illness is the result of sin. I said mental illness doesn’t exist. Period. That is a construct by the psychobabble industry. The mind is not tangible and cannot be ill.

      Nor have I said all emotional/psychological (in the true sense of the word) problems are the result of sin. MOST are. Many are just from suffering with results of bad decisions, which may or may not be sinful. Sometimes its others’ sins which cause problems for the person seeking counsel.

      PTSD is a blanket term for just about any emotional baggage from any traumatic incident. And, yes, it can indeed be treated with biblical counseling much better than secular counsel.

      Nouthetic, or any biblical counsel, never claims to be scientific, nor does it claim to be part of the medical field. So you raised a straw man.

      The psych industry DOES claim to be scientific, and DOES claim to be part of the medical field, so as to give itself credibility. My point was to demonstrate what a fraudulent claim that is.

  28. Glenn,

    I’m not sure you understand that which you practice. Either that or you don’t know what the word “deliverance” means.

    The Bible mentions “deliverance” repeatedly. Put simply, it is to be “rescued from bondage or danger,” and this needn’t be a physical bondage or danger. We learn in the New Testament that God will deliver believers from the powers of darkness in a fallen world. In 2 Peter 2:9 we learn that God will deliver us from the trials of this life, whatever they may be, and to receive this we need only suit up with the armor of God so that we may defeat our enemies through faith. Nouthetic Counseling, therefore, is a method used to arm believers with the necessary tools to receive deliverance, to be rescued by God from that emotional bondage.

    Now, I should apologize for being a bit hasty in my opening sentence. There is another explanation for your obstinacy: you’re quibbling over semantics, yet again, to distract people from an unreasoned argument.

    I never said mental illness is the result of sin. I said mental illness doesn’t exist. Period. That is a construct by the psychobabble industry. The mind is not tangible and cannot be ill.

    You said that emotional/mental problems share a close relationship. You said that homosexuals suffer emotional/mental problems because of guilt from sin and abuse. You also said, in your latest response mind you, that most emotional problems are the result of sin. So, forgive me for believing your own words.

    Moreover, it is because the mind controls emotions that one cannot have emotional problems without also having psychological problems. Seriously, Glenn, these verbal gyrations are tiring.

    • Terrance,

      I am very familiar with what “deliverance” is, but counselors don’t provide the deliverance – they point you to who does. But I don’t like using that term with general audiences, because most Christians apply that to the false “deliverance” ministries.

      Oh, now I have an “unreasoned” argument?!?!? Mine IS the reasoned one, as I have pointed out that the secular industry is harmful much more than helpful. It is rent-a-friend, it is witch-doctoring. Christians should NEVER use it. Period. And even for unbelievers, I would tell them to get counsel from a good friend who is wise in things before I’d let him bed ruined even more by a psychobabbler who thinks one of the first things to do is prescribe pills.

      Mental/emotional problems are pretty much one and the same, because it is the mind that gives us our emotions. I don’t see what the problem is here with your understanding. My point is that call it mental or emotional, it is not tangible and can not be an illness.

      See, you showed my specific example of problems that ARE caused by sin. The individual participating in homosexual relations is guilty of sin. I didn’t say ALL emotional problems are a result of sin, rather I said MOST are. Even then, if you get right down to it, you could probably point to a sin behind every one of them.

      Also, I pointed out that the word “psychology” is the study of the soul, the spirit. So in a real sense Christian counselors do use “psychology,” but we can’t use that term due to its connotations. And, by the same token, yes, emotional/mental problems are psychological problems in that they are about the spirit, the soul. But, again, to the psych world, that term has a whole different connotation. Which is why we should stick with calling it emotional/mental problems – and NEVER an illness.

      You really need to quit trying to defend the godless psych industry.

      • Glenn

        I dont terrance is necessarily defending the psychiatric industry writ large. He seems to be suggesting that there are cases in which the help one gets from a secular psychiatrist does actually help. I agree that the current psychiatric industry does more harm than good overall, we cant dismiss the successes.

        So what would you say to someone who claims to have been successfully counceled to where the dont have the mental problem anymore?

        • John,

          If you look at my comments, I have stated that the psych industry has on rare occasions helped, but normally the cause more harm. It’s like playing Russian roulette with only one empty chamber.

  29. Glenn,

    I am very familiar with what “deliverance” is, but counselors don’t provide the deliverance – they point you to who does. But I don’t like using that term with general audiences, because most Christians apply that to the false “deliverance” ministries.

    Can you point me to where I stated that deliverance comes from counselors? I wouldn’t try too hard if I were you, since I never said. I stated that the job of a Nouthetic Counselor, as I understand it, is to help one put on the armor of God, so to speak, and ready themselves for God’s deliverance.

    Oh, now I have an “unreasoned” argument?!?!? Mine IS the reasoned one, as I have pointed out that the secular industry is harmful much more than helpful. It is rent-a-friend, it is witch-doctoring. Christians should NEVER use it. Period. And even for unbelievers, I would tell them to get counsel from a good friend who is wise in things before I’d let him bed ruined even more by a psychobabbler who thinks one of the first things to do is prescribe pills.

    You have an unreasoned argument because you refuse to admit that secular counseling methods do have benefit. You subscribe to a my way or no way approach to mental illness and I find that distasteful. I know secular methods work. I know it for a fact. They worked for me!

    And I don’t believe they do more harm than good and I can’t believe you and John would suggest it. It depends on the situation. If a secular counselor is telling a transexual that he or she is completely normal, that’s a problem. But most people that seek secular counseling are not homosexuals or transsexuals. Most people I’ve met while working in the mental health field have trouble coping with the stresses of daily life and talking to a nonjudgmental stranger helps.

    Mental/emotional problems are pretty much one and the same, because it is the mind that gives us our emotions. I don’t see what the problem is here with your understanding. My point is that call it mental or emotional, it is not tangible and can not be an illness.

    If you believe that emotional problems are real, and believe they are the same as mental problems, then why do you object to the idea of “mental illness.” It’s always semantics with you.

    Also, I pointed out that the word “psychology” is the study of the soul, the spirit. So in a real sense Christian counselors do use “psychology,” but we can’t use that term due to its connotations. And, by the same token, yes, emotional/mental problems are psychological problems in that they are about the spirit, the soul. But, again, to the psych world, that term has a whole different connotation. Which is why we should stick with calling it emotional/mental problems – and NEVER an illness.

    Emotional/Mental issues are demonstrable. The symptoms of what we call mental illness are measurable and real. We know they exist. You can see it for yourself. And yet you’re trying to replace that with – what? The supernatural idea of a soul? Something we can’t see, feel, hear, or measure? And psychology is pseudoscience?

    For the record, I fully accept the notion of a soul. But that’s my personal, religious belief. I can’t prove it. I can, however, prove that mental issues exist.

    Do you honestly believe, Glenn, that I, the most fanatical and angry pro-lifer on this blog, would defend an industry that says slaughtering children is totally normal? I’m not defending the organizations that represent the industry. Instead, I’m defending the sensible, secular psychologist from being lumped in with the crazies at the APA. My secular psychologist told me that abortion is unnatural, leads to depression and substance abuse, and that homosexuality is a pathology. He is a secular psychologist, Glenn. He is a Christian in his personal life, but his practice is not Christian Counselor. He’s a regular psychologist – and he doesn’t accept the nonsense pushed by the APA. I’m defending him and people like him.

    • When I say they do more harm than good I’m working from the perspective that often patients are coached to accept certain things as normal (not just sexual things) that really arent. The ‘youre the only one who matters’ approach. I get the impression theres a lot of validating things that probably shouldnt be validated.

      Maybe im just too unfamiliar with the enterprise or maybe I hastily said that. But I have a certain vision of the approach the industry takes.

    • Terrance,
      
Please read again. I never said secular counseling had NO benefits. I have stated that it is rare when they do. BIG difference. If they DO have beneficial counseling, it is no better than talking to a friend for the same counsel. They give nothing special – they are nothing but “rent a friend.”

      It isn’t “my way or no way approach to mental illness” – MENTAL ILLNESS DOESN’T EXIST!!!! THE MIND CANNOT BE ILL, IT IS INTANGIBLE. HELLO!!! That’s like saying it is either “my way or no way” to say a circle can’t be a triangle.

      Whether or not you believe secular psych methods do more harm than good is irrelevant to the facts found in numerous studies. You don’t have to believe in facts for them to be true.

      People who have emotional problems or mental problems (why we need two titles for the same thing is beyond me – again, the mind controls the emotions) do not have an “illness”. It is not semantics. It is a lie to say that a mind can be ill. By claiming illness the psych industry takes responsibility away from the person. “Oh, he’s just mentally ill and can’t help himself.” “He’s just sick in the head.” When emotions get the best of someone to the point where they quit thinking rationally, then they need to be brought back to reality and not told that they are just ill and a bunch of pills might help them out. We have “alcoholics” instead of drunks. We have “gambling addicts” or “sex addicts” instead of people who refuse to exercise self control. ADHD, ADD, OCD, etc are all bogus “illnesses” which allow psychobabblers to get funding from insurance companies, get kickback from pharmaceutical companies, etc, etc. This is FACT, not fancy.

      So you call the “mind” scientific and the soul/spirit supernatural. THEY are the SAME thing. Neither the mind nor the soul are tangible. You can’t see “mental illness” you can’t touch “mental illness” and you can’t measure “mental illness.”

      Mental ISSUES exist, mental ILLNESS doesn’t. “Issues” are the results of poor judgement, or circumstances that happen to you, etc and how you respond to them. They aren’t illnesses.

      If you psychologist is a Christian in his personal life, then he is using his Christian morality to modify his psychological training. The training they all get is the same.

      • Glenn,

        No reputable studies have shown secular counseling methods to be lacking in effectiveness. But I will give due attention to any you wish to share.

        Lastly, mental illness is absolutely measurable. You can look at the brain scans of those said to be mentally ill and compare the activity or non-activity to that of a normal scan. You can correlate low-levels of serotonin with depression. Now, you’ll say that those only prove that the brain itself is ill, et cetera… And that could be true, but in situations where there is no absolute proof, yet we see the symptoms, what is the logical conclusion? “Oh, har, har, they’re just guilty sinners!” Yep, let’s ignore human complexity in favor of religious dogma because it’s convenient to our ideology.

        • Terrance:

          No reputable studies have shown secular counseling methods to be lacking in effectiveness.

          You’ve got to be kidding me! Have you actually read any studies? I’ll tell you what, why don’t you read just ONE author: E. Fuller Torrey, M.D., who has done much study of the field. In fact, he was a clinical and research psychiatrist in Washington, DC, who specialized in “serious mental illnesses,” and who received a Special Award from the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. He was also special assistant to the Director of the National Institute of Mental Health. The man is an unbiased researcher in the field which he actually believes in, and yet he is one of their biggest critics because of the fraudulent “science” behind it, and the horrendous methods used, and the horrible damage it has done to people. My two favorite books by him are “Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists: The Common Roots of Psychotherapy and Its Future,” and “Freudian Fraud: The Malignant Effect of Freud’s Theory on American Thought and Culture.” The last I knew he had written at least ten other books about the field, and his citing of studies is well-documented.

          No, mental illness is not measurable because there is no such thing. How can you continue to say a mind can be ill when it is not a tangible part of the body!?!? It cannot catch a disease, cannot get cancer, cannot get a cold, cannot have a genetic defect, etc.

          You are talking about the brain, not the mind. It is you who have no idea what you are talking about. I stated that an issue with the brain, whether it is genetically defective, injured by accident or some other cause, can AFFECT the thinking process. THAT is a medical condition to be treated medically, not psychologically!
          
A perfect example of trying to medicalize that which is not medical, is all the false “disorders” which are nothing but lack of self control, such as ADD/ADHD, “alcoholism” (drunkenness), “sex addiction” and so forth. Anger issues, so-called compulsions, lack of self-esteem (THE BIG ONE) which leads to self-pity and then killing people because they don’t like you, etc

  30. Glenn,

    I told you I’d be willing to review any studies you offered, but you’ve not offered a single link. I’m not going on a treasure hunt; you’re the one responsible for supporting your own premise.

    So mental illness is not measurable because it doesn’t exist? Nice to see you keeping an open mind. So even though we can correlate low levels of seratonin with depressive behavior, depression doesn’t exist? And though we can see the symptoms of ADHD, it doesn’t exist, right?

    Okay. Explain this: My niece was diagnosed with ADHD a few years ago. She had all sorts of behavioral problems until they put her on medication. The behavioral problems are now gone and she gets straight A’s. I’m curious: Why did the medication help her conquer an illness that doesn’t exist? Why the change?

    Maybe you should study for another two decades, my friend.

    • Terrance,
      I gave you book titles. I don’t spend my life on the Internet – I prefer books. I can’t give you links because I don’t have them. I read books – something you should try once in a while. I’ll give you another one: “Manufacturing Victims: What the Psychology Industry is Doing to People,” by Dr. Tana Dineen. She has a website:
      http://www.tanadineen.com

      Mental illness doesn’t exist any more than a round square. It has nothing to do with open minds – it has everything to do with fact. A fact about the mind which you seem to want to remain ignorant about.

      Nor have I ever said depression doesn’t exist, but the vast majority of depression has nothing to do with medical conditions, rather it is all about self-focus.
      
Have you ever studied the issue of ADHD/ADD? There are no agreed upon symptoms. Anything and everything is claimed as a symptom, especially in children who are bored to tears with the school system and are not disciplined. Try an excellent, short examination by Drs. David M. Tyler and Kurt P. Grady titled, “ADHD: Deceptive Diagnosis.” The whole thing was essentially created for the pharmaceutical companies, and the various psychotropic drugs are downright dangerous.

      Medicating people rather than teaching them self-control and discipline is much easier. Explain why the USA has the most cases in the world? Explain why this “illness” only showed up in the past few decades after the pharmaceutical companies developed their pills and needed an “illness” to test them on.

      YOU are the one who needs to do some studying. YOU have bought into the whole psych cult’s lies.

  31. Glenn,

    I read plenty of books, my friend. That’s how I know the earth is round and more than 6,000-years-old. And I know that “books” written by professional outcasts are not the same as peer-reviewed studies. Perhaps heeding your own advice wouldn’t be out of the question?

    Dr. Russel A. Barkley says of mental illnesses,

    “We label things all the time in daily life to create concepts and categories of things in the material world, which allows us to begin to identify how some things in one category or label are different from things in another category. By labeling groups of people who share a common set of symptoms that are producing serious impairment in their major life activities, we can learn more about what may be causing that disorder, what its risk factors are, and whether it responds better to some treatments than others. These are important issues.”

    It’s funny, isn’t it, how this sinful inability to “self-focus” manifests itself almost exactly the same in people from all different backgrounds and cultures. Almost, ya know, like an illness…

    BTW, your tidbit about A.D.H.D. medication is irrelevant. Viagra, for example, was invented to lower blood-pressure, not alleviate erectile dysfunction. Welbutrin was invented to help people with depression, not smoking-cessation. So new uses for specific medications are found all the time. Ritalin has been used since 1955 to treat hyperactivity, narcolepsy, and a specific type of tachycardia. And, yes, this information is cleverly concealed in books rather than pamphlets handed out in church….

    • Terrance,

      You read the wrong books if you think the earth is more than 6000 years or so old. The Bible is the only reliable text there. But that is another topic.

      Oh, so now one of the top-notch psychobabblers, E. Fuller Torrey, is an outcast?!?!?

      Keep deceiving yourself that the mind can be ill.

      My “tidbit” about ADHD medication is not irrelevant. They had to FIND something to use it for. ADHD does not exist. Study up on it, lad. Quit being so ignorant and brainwashed.

      I don’t get my information about the psych industry from church. Never have. They don’t care. I get my stuff from those who are part of the industry, I have studied college textbooks on the subject, etc.

      You want to be deceived, so be it. The conversation is going nowhere. You are a believer and I’m an unbeliever. The proof is on my side that it isn’t scientific in any manner, and it is rooted in paganism, atheism, secularism, and evolutionism. I’ll stick to God’s word, thank you.

  32. Glenn,

    Any psychologist or psychiatrist that believes ALL mental illness is non-existent is, I’m sorry, an outcast of the field.

    But I really needn’t say anymore. You’ve not been able to counter my arguments with anything of substance, just more religico nonsense. Plus, you’ve all but admitted that you don’t take science seriously when you said the Earth is only 6,000 years old.

    • Any psychobabbler who claims there IS such thing as mental illness is propagating unscientific lies. Why is it so difficult for you to understand that something intangible cannot be ill?

      I have countered your arguments with facts, while you present pseudo-science. You apparently didn’t read my articles on my blog, where I prove the problem.

      I take science seriously, but there is NO science with proves the earth is any older than about 6000 years. All they have is evolutionist speculations, assumptions, and ideology – no science. But you’ve apparently been indoctrinated in that pseudo-science also.

      • Glenn,

        You’re a quack. You’ve presented nothing but unsubstantiated and unscientific opinion based on religious dogma.

        You’re the only regular commenter on this site – that I’m aware of – that believes the Earth is only 6,000-year-olds. John doesn’t even believe that. Young Earth is pseudo-scientific nonsense and nothing more.

        • Terrance,

          YOU are the quack. Truth isn’t dependent upon how many people believe it, by the way.

          So, it is religious dogma to demonstrate the unscientific prattle behind the psych industry?!?!? Without even mentioning religion, just the so-called “science” and that is religious dogma. You are sooo deceived. Why don’t you really take time to study the subject before blowing so much wind? Like I said, I’ve been studying the subject for 20 years.

          As for 6000 years, as above about truth. I’ll bet a dollar to a doughnut you’ve looked at very, very little actual creationist literature. And my guess is that you’ve studied little actual of the so-called science behind the evolutionist time tables. Because if you studied at all, you’d know the whole evolution and millions of years nonsense is built on a house of cards.

          But then, I believe what God says also. And this is one subject I’ve been studying for over 30 years, from all sides of the fence – evolution, theistic evolution, progressive creation, YEC, OEC, etc, etc. The only thing that fits with ALL the evidence is the Biblical time table. Ah, but why study that when you have those very trustworthy liberal “scientists” telling you what to think!

          Have a wonderful day. I’m out of this futile conversation.

  33. The cult known as NALT is founded on a LIE. Visit http://www.christiansagainstnalt.com for more info.

Trackbacks

  1. […] You can comment on Shore’s NALT project here.  Here is another good response to these frauds.   […]

  2. […] You can comment on Shore’s NALT project here.  Here is another good response to these frauds.   […]

Any Thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: