Choose a loving God
I am privileged to pastor a church that believes in love and acceptance, not one that promotes hostility and intolerance. We don’t see homosexuality as a “sin.” It is a sexual orientation that has genetic roots. In other words, it is God-given.
How can those who profess to follow Jesus condemn mothers and fathers for the emotional support of homosexual children? The Aug. 28 editorial page included an attack on Matt Nevels who supported his son through an agonizing death due to AIDS. This attack has no connection to Christianity. Then this letter condemns the father’s defense of his son as “perverse.” This is not Christianity. This is hate speech.
This hateful letter is placed next to a letter that advances the prospect of a loving, non-judgmental Christianity. This deeply considered approach is in marked contrast to cruel, vindictive self-righteousness. This juxtaposition makes the choices very clear. You can follow a loving God or belong to a church that promotes hate speech.
DR. DAVID BROWN
Christians are being persecuted
First the Christmas scenes that were encouraged for 200 years have now been declared illegal. Even crosses at memorials and cemeteries on public property have been attacked.
Many believe that human life begins at conception, and that abortion is therefore murder. But new laws force them to contribute to insurance plans that finance abortions and birth control. Christian hospitals are being pressured to perform abortions.
Christ commanded Christians to go teach all nations His way of living. But a Pentagon official has equated Christian proselytizing with rape. He says in effect that a Christian knocking at your door and inviting you to his church is a bad as someone raping your wife or daughter.
Army chaplains are discouraged from using the name of Jesus
Biblical Christians still believe that homosexuality is an abomination to God. Yet American and Canadian courts have forced biblical Christians to provide printing and photographic services to gays or go out of business.
It has been said that “the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” The silent majority has been silent much too long.
DR. TOM HERZOG
What’s different this time around
Question of the decade: Who said, “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation”?
The answer: Barack Obama in 2007 when he was campaigning for the presidency of the United States.
A follow-up question, this one for right now: What has changed since 2007?
Answer: The speaker was elected, twice, to the presidency and now has a different perspective.
related articles »
I want to suggest to Tennessee's Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander: When campaigning for re-election, please be honest with the voters ...
Let’s see if I have this right. The U.S., to punish Syria for using chemical weapons to kill their people ...
Obedience to the divine will is perfect freedom, but believing all those who presume to expound it is idiocy.
I recently read in your paper that two churches in the Chattanooga area are dropping sponsorship of a Boy Scout ...