Can Hitler Speak Too?

(Preface: I actually wrote this article over a year ago. I had spoken to the person behind it back then, and in an effort to show a bit of grace and respect, I did not print this. But this person has now left, and it seems that the school in question is still rather problematic in this and other respects. So for those reasons I now post this piece, finally. If we wonder why we are losing the culture wars, we simply have to look at our own camp first it seems.)

I was quite taken back when I was told recently that a homosexual activist would be speaking at a Bible college course on “Spirituality & Sexuality”. I kid you not. This activist, who dumped his biblical faith, dumped his wife, and dumped his kids, to pursue his homosexual lifestyle, has evidently been welcomed with open arms at this Bible college.

A quick search of the Web verified this alright. The school’s newsletter announced the course and the line-up of speakers. And sure enough – there he was. Given that there are eight speakers for the 40 hour course, there is the possibility that this activist could get up to five full hours to indoctrinate the students.

He can spend all this time telling them that homosexuality is a gift of God, it is not at all sinful, it should be welcomed and affirmed in the churches, and any believer who finds the lifestyle to be unbiblical and wrong is a homophobic intolerant twit, who is obviously not a real Christian.

Just what in the world this Bible college is doing is beyond me. Of interest is this little rider that appears in small print at the bottom of the page announcing the class: Our college “promotes and defends the opportunity for all people to engage in informed open debate. The information and opinion presented in this unit do not necessarily represent the views of [this school] and/or its partners.”

Does it really promote complete openness of views? Does it invite in those of a more conservative stripe on a wide range of issues? Indeed, when has it in the last five years brought in a Fred Nile, or a Jack Sonnemann, or a Jonathan Sarfati, or any other noted conservative Christian to speak?

Given that this is a course on sexuality, I suppose all sorts of topics might be covered. And given how open this school seems to be to all sorts of viewpoints, it seems the sky is the limit here. Will a pedophile, polygamist and necrophiliac also be allowed to share their views? If not, why not? These too are part of modern sexuality, are they not?

Indeed, given this is about spirituality as well, how about some religious cult prostitutes to share their story? Maybe some religious pole dancers can come in and tell all these Bible college students why they should be more accepting of their lifestyle.

In fact, why be so old-fashioned and desk-bound? Why not a field trip to a local brothel, all in the name of fostering debate? What about a trip to a homosexual bathhouse? We cannot really talk about these issues if we do not see how the other half actually lives.

After all, we want to be seen as a tolerant, welcoming, and above all, a compassionate Bible college. And we do so much strive to “promote and defend the opportunity for all people to engage in informed open debate”. That is what a good Bible college is all about isn’t it?

Indeed, while we are at it, let’s loosen up the theology department a bit more. Let’s bring in John Shelby Spong and have him lecture us on why the resurrection did not occur. Let’s bring in even more Muslims to tell us why Jesus is not God and Muhammad is Allah’s only ultimate and final prophet.

One might as well say we are having a week long class on recent German history and we will be having a Nazi come and share his point of view with us. Or we are having a week long intensive on criminology ethics, and we would like to hear what serial killer Martin Bryant has to say on this.

Or we are having a class on race relations, and we have invited a member of the KKK to share his point of view. Or we will be having a discussion on multiculturalism and we have invited Pauline Hanson to come and share with us. It is so good to know that there is a Bible college which is open to all points of view, all in the interests of fair debate.

But did it also invite former homosexuals in to tell the students what a dead end and deceptive lifestyle this is? Or is that being too intolerant and exclusive? Of course the way things are going, soon all Bible colleges will be forced to hire homosexuals to teach in their ethics and theology departments – if they are not there already.

If we wonder why all over the Western world we are losing the culture wars to the radicals, the secular left, and the activist minority groups, a good part of the reason is because they are winning the battles in our churches and Bible colleges.

This particular example is simply the latest in a long line of sell-outs to the very forces that are seeking to destroy the Christian church and silence those who still affirm the biblical stance on such matters. It is one thing to acknowledge such hostile forces exist. But it is quite another to invite them in and hand them a silver platter to undermine the very biblical truths we are meant to be defending and promoting.

Of course any decent Bible college will expose students to competing points of view, so that they can better critique them and defend the biblical worldview. Thus an Old Testament student will be exposed to, say, the JEPD thesis, but then be shown its many weaknesses.

Or a theology class may study the cults, so that students may be able to properly defend their faith better, but I know of no decent Bible college that will deliberately bring a cultist into the classroom to push his poisonous claims onto the students.

And in an ethics course one will describe the arguments put forward, say, by the pro-abortionists or the pro-pornography crowd, with a view to better being able to interact with their positions. But I am not aware of any Bible college still interested in defending biblical Christianity bringing in someone from the sex industry to let students hear their side of the story.

In the same way, the arguments of the pro-homosexual lobby can be explored, but hopefully only in order to refute them and affirm the biblical position. I can see no reason whatsoever to allow an activist in to push his deceptive and diabolical agenda.

If the churches are losing ground in so many key areas, it seems some of our Bible colleges must share some of the blame. In their zeal to be ‘fair’ and ‘open’, they are simply letting themselves open to destructive doctrines of demons, the very thing that Paul and other New Testament writers warned against.

Indeed, I am not aware of Paul inviting the Judaisers in to give their point of view. Elijah did not ask the Baalists to come and teach the Israelites their version of events. So why in heaven’s name does this Bible college feel so compelled to do this very sort of thing?

(Note: I did send two emails to the school principal earlier, asking for his take on all this. So far there has been no response.)

[1291 words]

8 Replies to “Can Hitler Speak Too?”

  1. I agree with you Bill that it is a really sad stand that the fore mentioned Bible College has taken and I believe that it a result of the pendulum swinging against moralistic legalism towards liberal existentialism, both of which have a lot to answer for.

    Not knowing the Bible College in question, my assumption is that they are trying to combat the bigoted and judgmental views of those have been conditioned to believe that homosexuals should be scorned and hated for their lifestyle and treated as outcasts because they are not like us ‘moral’ people who are pleasing God in our ‘righteousness’ (sarcastic emphasis).
    Thus the Bible College is possibly aiming to challenge its students to see that people who are involved in homosexuality are fundamentally PEOPLE. People loved by God. People created in God’s image. People who Christ died for. People who are in need of God’s restoration and hope and freedom from condemnation and sin as much as the rest of us. There is no ‘us’ and ‘them’, we are all PEOPLE.

    This is a message that is possibly lacking in many of the more ‘moralistic’ Churches.

    However, I agree with you, that the approach that the fore mentioned college has taken has seemingly swung to the defense and even the support of homosexuality – as if it is somehow a God given alternative sexuality that should be embraced, rather than a symptom of a very broken and desperate world that is so distanced in its understanding of God’s goodness and love.

    Rather than presenting the radical shift of focus that Jesus presented, which moves us from a paradigm of religiosity and rules into a paradigm of God’s amazing grace and love, – which celebrates our humanity and beauty as people equally loved by a loving Father in spite of our sin and in fact frees from our sin and transforms us into more loving and subsequently more moral beings, this College seems to have simply shifted their religious mindset to now offer room for homosexuality to be moved from the ‘do not’ column in to the ‘do’ column.
    Thus they are still operating out of the same flawed paradigm which rewards or condemns people based on their own behaviors. The result is that everybody remains as much enslaved to sin as they were before – but possibly feeling a little more self-righteous about it.

    Damien Johnson

  2. I have a question for the Bible College concerned, but first I would ask them to watch this clip. (warning, it’s not pleasant viewing, but it is less than 30 secs)

    The question is this: If it was someone you loved potentially at risk – who do you think would be more likely to be loving to them, someone who endorses behaviour that dramatically raises the risk of ending up looking like that, or someone who understands that the Bible unequivocally condemns it as wrong and wishes to spare your loved one that kind of outcome?

    How can it possibly be considered ‘hateful’ or ‘phobic’ to want to warn people away from that? Jesus did not go the cross to enable behaviour that so often ends in sickness and early death – he only ever upheld the paradigm of male and female, and he strongly condemned sexual immorality in Rev 2. The fact that we even need to debate this issue for 5 seconds in the world is testimony to its corruption. The fact this corruption – even when it so clearly costs lives – is entering the church so overtly is extremely disturbing. Paul clearly taught that people who claim to be brothers but consistently teach clear falsehoods with no heart for repentance are actually to be given no quarter. (1 Cor 5)

    I maintain that God knew what He was doing when He created male and female. The evidence for God’s design lives in every person. The evidence could not be more obvious, for we all have a mother and father, and most of us can be one of those ourselves, regardless of the strength of our sexual feelings. The human body itself testifies to the need for the male-female union. Any other claim is a lie. The great hope is that God can work miracles and does not leave us alone in despair if our feelings have trouble syncing with this fact. I wish people would wake up and see!

    Mark Rabich

  3. What a disgrace this Bible college is.
    On a similar note, while I appreciate and support the work of ACL, I am very concerned about their idea of presenting opposing views in their Viewpoint magazine.
    In a recent issue where same sex marriage was discussed, they gave the supporters of same sex marriage, four pages in which to spew their lies, deception and half truths about the justification of such unions.
    For some Christians, their arguments will be convincing and will win them over.
    Why on earth would the ACL continue on this path?
    I believe the latest issue did the same thing for pornography but I was so appalled the last time I didn’t even bother to read this one, it makes me too angry.
    Needless to say, I will not be renewing my subscription.
    Annette Williams

  4. Bill, I am very aware that few people are aware of the depth of this crisis; moreover, most of those who are, are not reacting. It is obvious that your readers are nourished by this site. I do hope that they pray regularly for you.
    Stan Fishley

  5. Thanks Annette

    Yes I am with you. They seem to want to be all things to all people. There is a place for such debate formats, but not here I would have thought. The truth is, on controversial hot potato issues like this, our side of the story is lucky to get 1% of media space. The other point of view predominates in the mainstream media. Why then ask for 50-50 here, when it is so hard and so rare to get our point of view across? The other side can be heard or read anywhere, any time, so the precious little media space we have should be devoted to getting our message out, not just presenting both sides as if they are both equally true, with no one side being better than another. If you are going to call yourself a Christian organisation, then the Christian message should be unashamedly proclaimed. Elijah did not have polite debates and chit-chats over a cup of tea with the Baalists, but challenged them big time. It seems we should as well.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  6. I certainly believe that Hitler should have had the opportunity to speak – but in the Nuremberg courts. Last week Richard Dawkins was invited to make debate with Bill Craig, Christian theologian at Oxford, but he failed to turn up. By all means invite Peter Tatchell and his ilk to come and talk, but only in the context of court and serious debate where their false arguments can be exposed. Are we so lacking in confidence in our beliefs that we are not prepared to defend them? Surely the opportunities for freedom of thought, discussion and speech are rapidly disappearing. We need to grasp the opportunities when they come and not shy away from them.

    http://www.bethinking.org/what-is-apologetics/dawkins-refuses-god-debate-with-william-lane-craig.htm

    David Skinner, UK

  7. Thanks David

    Yes, as I said, there certainly is a place for proper debates in the public arena. And on smaller, in-house matters of theology, such debates can and should take place in a Bible college. Varieties of baptism, or differing eschatological schemes can be debated with profit for example. But bringing in enemies of the gospel and giving them equal time to spread their poison is just not on for churches or Christian schools. There truth should be taught and proclaimed. There the gospel should not be seen as simply one of a number of options which people can merely vote on.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  8. Yes Bill, one can only put it down to supernatural power that stops Bible colleges, churches and schools from self-censoring debating such sensitive issues as homosexuality but then invite the enemy to take the platform unopposed. We need to educate, equip and train our students and children to defeat the false arguments of our enemies before the opportunities arise.

    David Skinner, UK

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: