HOME | CONTRIBUTE A STORY! | ABOUT MMI | CATEGORIES OF INTEREST | CONTACT ME

image

Today’s Buzz:  Bill O’Reilly, Gay Governor Priests, 150 Accept Christ, & A Lesson in Blog Etiquette

Orginally published on Monday, May 07, 2007 at 7:09 AM
by Todd Rhoades

Good Monday to you! There are a lot of things to report on today, including: Bill O'Reilly, (who evidently calls someone a name every 6.8 seconds according to a new study); A former gay governor now turning priest; a good lesson in blog etiquette; 150 people accept Christ yesterday at one church; and how to prove the existence of God in just thirteen minutes with your Bible tied behind your back...

Former Governer, Gay American, Episcopal Preist?
Remember former New Jersey Governer James McGreevey?  He’s the governor who resigned from office with his pretty blonde wife by his side by giving his “I am a gay American” speech?  Well, now he’s planning on attending seminary.  He resigned as governor in 2004 after saying that he had had an extramarital affair with a man, and has become an Episcopalian and wants to be ordained as a priest in that faith.  The former governor, who was raised as a Roman Catholic, was officially received into the Episcopal faith on Sunday at St. Bartholomew’s Church in Manhattan.  Bruce Parker, a spokesman for the General Theological Seminary in the Chelsea section of Manhattan, said Mr. McGreevey had been accepted as a student.  The issue of gays in the clergy has caused divisions in the worldwide Anglican Communion, which includes the Episcopal Church in the United States.  You can read the whole article here in the New York Times.  Forget about the homosexuality… wouldn’t the adultery part of his recent life disqualify him for the ministry in the Episcopal Church?  Guess not…

150 Accept Christ at NewSpring Yesterday!
More great news this morning from Perry Noble.  150 people accepted Christ yesterday at NewSpring Church in Anderson, SC.  So, what do they do with people who accept Christ at NewSpring after their saved?  You might be surprised… read Perry’s post for more info.

Bill O’Reilly Calls People Names Every 6.8 Seconds
A new study by Indiana University media researchers found that the Fox News personality O’Reilly called a person or a group a derogatory name once every 6.8 seconds, on average, or nearly nine times every minute during the editorials that open his program each night.  “It’s obvious he’s very big into calling people names, and he’s very big into glittering generalities,” said Mike Conway, assistant professor in the IU School of Journalism. “He’s not very subtle. He’s going to call people names, or he’s going to paint something in a positive way, often without any real evidence to support that viewpoint.”

What an idiotic thing to say, you nincompoop.  I’ve never heard anyone bloviate so much in my life as this kook.

Read the whole article here...

Speaking of Name Calling, Here’s a Good Lesson in Blog Etiquette
OK… one of the rules in web etiquette is that if you put some image on your website, you don’t link directly to images off other people’s servers.  In other words, all images should be placed on your server so you don’t use up other people’s bandwidth.  Well, Max Blumenthal over at the liberal Huffington Post didn’t follow those rules and hard linked to a graphic on the Family Research Council’s website. This allowed the “Christian” FRC to change the image that appeared on Blumenthal’s blog to instead show a graphic that said:  Max Blumenthal:  Image Thief, Fabulist, and Kitty Poisoner.  (the image shown was a little kitty that is ‘asleep’ in it’s food dish.) You can see all the ‘fun’ here.

Just a question… since the Family Research Council’s goal is to “defend family, faith, and freedom"… wouldn’t it be better to take the high road?  And if you want to have fun with this, why not really change the image to something funny rather than call someone a kitty poisoner?  I, for one, am a little disappointed.

“I can prove the existence of God without a Bible in thirteen minutes”
It sounds like a claim from the old “Name that Tune”, but Ray Comfort insists he can prove the existence of God, using science and no Bible in just thirteen minutes.  And he planned to do just that on Saturday in a debate with an atheist.  ABC.com plans to show the debate later this week at ABC.com.

That’s it for today… have a great week!


This post has been viewed 1939 times so far.


  There are 21 Comments:

  • Posted by

    Okay, I’m going to (as a former Episcopalian) comment on the whole gay thing. There is NO way that a practicing gay person can be ordained to the clergy (as long as they are not “blessing” same-sex unions) without being an adulterer. Common sense. But here is the issue. The idea put forth by many of these people, especially gay NH bishop Robinson, is that the Bible is no longer the authority for matters of life and faith. I quote V.Gene Robinson word for word…

    “Just simply to say that it goes against tradition and the teaching of the church and Scripture does not necessarily make it wrong. We worship a living God, and that living God leads us into truth.” So if the teaching of the church and scripture don’t necessarily make something wrong, what exactly does make it wrong?

    These individuals should be drummed out of leadership in their churches NOT because of their sexual orientation or behavior, but by publicly proclaiming that they feel the articles of religion in the Book of Common Prayer are wrong. They are, by their actions and words, demonstrating disdain for the Bible and for the teachings of the church, indirectly and (as above in the Robinson quote) directly. THAT is my issue.

    And, to further clarify. I have NO problem with someone in serious sin attending and even serving in my church. I take issue with someone TEACHING that my church’s teachings and the Bible are wrong, in a church-sanctioned manner. This is why, by the way, the church I USED to attend (an ECUSA church) is one of the ones that has “seceded”. This is why the denomination is crumbling and splitting.

  • Posted by Brian

    Did anyone see Law and Order: SVU this weekend?

    It was a “Ted Haggard” type deal, only it involved a son instead of the minister.

    One of the key components was the son’s belief that, “How can it be sin when God made me this way?”

    Sad - they see a component of the sinful nature (just as any sinful appetite and behavior) and claim it was God’s doing…

    Only bring it up because that is a key component to the Episcopal thinking on this issue.

    Brian

  • Posted by

    Peter and Brian are right. If practicing homosexuality doesn’t disqualify you, then adultery certainly shouldn’t.

  • Posted by

    Well, here’s the response I got from an Episopal priest just a few minutes ago.  She, by the way, asked that she be taken off the MMI list immediately.  smile

    “What I do know is that Holy Scripture sets apart more than 2000 references for us to do something about the POOR of this world----but so very often, we humans, we sinners spend our time and self concerns paying attention to the mere 6 lines about sex.”

    Not sure what she’s really saying (other than she then accused me of doing nothing for the poor, although she has no idea what I have or haven’t done for the poor.) Actually, I’m not sure what serving the poor has to do with the McGreevy story, other than she thinks that they are 300x more important than sexual purity. ???

    Todd

  • Posted by John Atkinson

    Unbelievable what happened at Newspring last weekend. Check out Steven Furtick’s blog about what happened at Elevation Church last weekend. They are a church plant that is less than eighteen months old and are already running around 1400 in weekly attendance. They had 126 people accept Christ as their Lord and Savior last weekend. Amazing stories like these need to be told to the world. Thanks for doing your part Todd.

  • Posted by

    150??? 500 so far this year??? That leaves me dumbfounded at the awesomeness of God and the power of His Holy Spirt. Also goes to show that “salvation message” mean different things to different people.

  • Posted by

    Hadn’t heard that on Steven’s blog yet… how awesome!

    Todd

  • Posted by

    Todd,

    I wish the mentioned episcopal priest would enter the discussion. Because I agree with her as far as the quote you said goes--STRONGLY. And I am VERY dedicated to doing something with the poor of this world. We keep a child a live in Africa (http://www.keepachildalive.org) and we sponsor a child through compassion international (http://www.compassion.com/default.htm) and I actively use the small platform God has given me to encourage others to do the same. 

    Some of us who hold a “traditional” view of marriage and the family don’t necessarily throw out the Scriptures which instruct us to care for the poor. With all due respect (if you’re reading this, and I hope you will), this is a cop-out on either side. One side (often called “liberal") which often throws out what Scripture tells us about marriage, the family, and sex, and the other side (often called “conservative") which often throws out the (more important, I agree) Scriptures which tell us to do something about the AIDS crisis in Africa, the “stupid poverty” of the world, et cetera...) Let’s have ALL of scripture, not just little pieces.

    Please reconsider “dropping out” from the discussion. You may be offended, but we often are in life, by many things. It shouldn’t keep us from engaging our culture and our peers. And some of us (like myself) do NOT hold that your disagreement with me on this issue constitutes an impossibility to fellowship. Bless you, whoever you are…

  • Posted by

    Oh, also…

    there is NO way that you can “prove” the existence of God in ANY amount of time to somebody who has already a closed mind about it and doesn’t even want to consider believeing He is… And with so many of today’s “post-moderns"… proving something doesn’t prove anything anyway…

  • Posted by

    There are poor people?  Well that really fries my bacon, I thought for sure we wiped out poverty during the Clinton years!  Another assumption shattered!!

    Al

  • Posted by

    Why does no-one ever ask the quesiton this way:

    Prove that God doesn’t exist?

  • Posted by matt

    This is kinda off-topic...but apparently Slice is back…

  • Posted by

    “This is kinda off-topic...but apparently Slice is back…”

    GREAT! I love balance… tongue wink

  • Posted by

    Oh joy.

    The story of Slice’s first demise is nothing, if not, interesting.  smile

    I’m sure Ingrid will take a more ‘balanced’ approach now that this is the official radio network blog rather than her own personal one. 

    At least I hope so.

    Thanks for the heads up.  (I guess)

    Todd

  • Posted by

    “What I do know is that Holy Scripture sets apart more than 2000 references for us to do something about the POOR of this world----but so very often, we humans, we sinners spend our time and self concerns paying attention to the mere 6 lines about sex.”

    Is it possible that if we had paid more heed to the “6 lines about sex” , we’d have less poverty? How much poverty could be eliminated by obedience to Scripture (including obedience on the part of oppressors who have caused circumstances that give rise to poverty) ?

    “The poor you will have with you always,” does not excuse us from serving them but does inform us that it’s a condtion that won’t be eliminated through human means. and yes, the bishopdave family also sponsors a child in central America, and provides monthly support for a pastor in Honduras.

  • Posted by

    DON’T BELIEVE THE HYPE!!!!!

    6 LINES, GET A CLUE… OR A BIBLE SEARCH PROGRAM

    55 verses in scripture referance the word sexual
    including a few statements by a guy named Jesus
    an entire chapter in the book of Leviticus (which last time I check is still God’s Word)
    and a very powerful scripture in Eph 5:3 that says their should not be even a hint of sexual imorality among you.  Another in Corinthians that says Sexual sins are sins agianst the body and therefore the temple of God and therefore highly offensive to God.  Other scriptures say that the man (or woman) of God should flee sexual imorality , and that a brother who refuses to turn from his sin should be treated as an unbeliever.  I could go on but I believe you get the point. 

    By the way how many times does God need to say anything in order for it to be worth living by?

  • Posted by RevJeff

    Todd,
    Does the withdrawl of a few Episcopalians mean my MMI will download faster?  If so, I repent… all these years I thought that every word of scripture was important… now I realize my error.  I guess there must be at least 1000-2000 supporting statements which make me feel better before it is God’s AUTHORITATIVE Word…

    Peter - thanks for the NO SPIN ZONE. (Sorry, I can’t think of a name to call you.)

    AL - Poverty was only half eliminated, leaving room for another Clinto to finish the job in 2008.

  • Posted by Stewart

    A couple of comments on the adulterous priest issue. Adultery wouldn’t disqualify someone from the priesthood (in my book) if he repented. Has he repented?

    On the 6 or 55 verses of Scripture related to sex in the Bible - it’s a much bigger theme than that. Sexual fidelity is a huge theme. The relationship between husband and wife is held up as symbolizing and demonstrating the relationship between God and His people (Hosea). The unfaithful wife (us) is still pursued and loved by the spurned husband (God). It is also used to describe Jesus and the church. We are the bride of Christ.

    I would say there is a lot in Scripture about sexual purity. There is also a ton about poverty. They are not in competition. I agree with the withdrawn priest that in general church discussions jump on salacious stories about sinful sex while ignoring greed. Greed is acceptable in most of evangelical Christianity, isn’t it? Shame on us.

  • Posted by

    Come on now, the 6 verses referred to by the aforementioned Episcopal Priest are the ones which refer to homosexual sex, and I think everyone realizes that.  I don’t think she was trying to minimize sexual sin in the eyes of the Episcopal Church, just homosexuality.

    One of the things I like about MMI is that people here always seem open to discussion and (somewhat) tolerant of dissenting views.  But many of the comments here today seem pretty intolerant.  I’ve participated in discussions (arguments?) at Episcopal sites like T19 and others, but those sites are all on one side of the issue or the other.  I’d like to think of MMI as more neutral ground where civil conversation could take place. 

    When I listened and followed where I believed the Holy Spirit was leading me, it led me away from the fundamentalist church I grew up in to where I am today, less judgmental, and more tolerant.  So I applaud the clergy and members of the Episcopal Church, on both sides of the issue, for following where they believe the Holy Spirit is leading them.  And while I’m not agreeing they are correct in their interpretations, I’m glad there is a place for gay and lesbian people to go and seek a relationship with Jesus Christ, that He might accept them or change their hearts as He sees fit.  I know they would not be welcome in the church I grew up in, they would have been physically barred or ejected; reminiscent of the UCC videos with “bouncers” at the doors and “ejection pews” catapulting the unworthy out of the building.

  • Posted by Brian L

    Daniel,

    I do agree somewhat.

    However, you must realize that tolerance is waaaaaay misunderstood as far as how “tolerant” Jesus was.

    He was extremely tolerant of PEOPLE - and that got Him in major trouble with the religious muckety-mucks.

    But He was extremely INtolerant of BELIEFS and IDEAS that contradicted His own.  (Sorry for the caps - not yelling, just trying to emphasize...)

    He said that it was His way or the highway, especially in terms of salvation (incredibly intolerant in our day and age, especially) and loyalty to Him.

    Acceptance of people does not mean we need to accept their behavior.  I work with lots of people who are wanting help from Christ, and I do all I can to help them.  But that does not mean I accept anti-Christian attitudes and behavior.  By accept I mean “embrace and celebrate” which is what “tolerance” has come to mean nowadays.

    Jesus accepted the woman at the well and the woman caught in adultery.  He most certainly did not view their sin as acceptable.

    Brian

  • Posted by

    Brian,

    EXCELLENT way of putting it. Interesting that tolerance in many people’s eyes has come to mean relativism. If I am “tolerant” of you, then, by definition, I disagree with you, but still somehow manage to show you respect and dignity. The woman at the well is a GREAT example. There is NO way she left that encounter without knowing two things. 1. That Jesus cared about and respected her and 2. That he did NOT think the way she was living was okay.

    I, too want anyone living any lifestyle imagineable to be accepted in my church and feel loved. It doesn’t mean I have to say that what they are doing is okay, though. There’s a balance. Few have, in my experience, found it.

  • Page 1 of 1 pages

Post Your Comments:

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Live Comment Preview:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: