Gay Man Sues Publishers Over Bible Verses

Here's an article from USA Today that was forwarded to me. Apparently this took place back in July. I wonder what happened with the case? The text of the article is found below in bold type, with my comments in regular type:

GAY MAN SUES PUBLISHERS OVER BIBLE VERSES

CASCADE TOWNSHIP, Mich. — A gay man is suing two heavyweight Christian publishers, claiming their versions of the Bible that refer to homosexuality as a sin violate his constitutional rights and have caused him emotional pain and mental instability.

Right off the bat, the whole idea that a gay man is suing a Bible publisher is laughable. The publisher has nothing to do with the content. For example, Amazon is selling copies of "Mein Kampf." Should they be sued? Should the publisher of the book? Secondly, which of this man's "constitutional rights" have been violated? Seriously, I'd like to know.

Bradley LaShawn Fowler of Canton, Mich., is seeking $60 million from Zondervan, based in Cascade Township, and $10 million from Nashville-based Thomas Nelson Publishing.

A grand total of 70 million? Wow. That's a high price for emotional pain and mental instability. For those of you outside of the Christian publishing bubble, Zondervan and Thomas Nelson are two of the biggest Bible publishers in the country.

Fowler filed the suit in federal court against Zondervan on July 7, the same day U.S. District Judge Julian Abele Cook Jr. refused to appoint an attorney to represent him in his case against Thomas Nelson. Fowler filed a suit against Thomas Nelson in June. He is representing himself in both claims.

Good luck with that.

"The Court has some very genuine concerns about the nature and efficacy of these claims," the judge wrote.

Ya think?

Fowler, 39, alleges Zondervan's Bibles referring to homosexuality as a sin have made him an outcast from his family and contributed to physical discomfort and periods of "demoralization, chaos and bewilderment."

The question here is whether or not Zondervan's publishing of the material that condemns homosexuality, or the man's homosexual behavior itself, is what's causing the physical discomfort, demoralization, chaos, bewilderment, and has made him an outcast from his family. It's amazing (yet not amazing at the same time) that people refuse to take responsibility for their own actions.

The intent of the publisher was to design a religious, sacred document to reflect an individual opinion or a group's conclusion to cause "me or anyone who is a homosexual to endure verbal abuse, discrimination, episodes of hate, and physical violence ... including murder," Fowler wrote.

Where in the Bible does it command Christians to abuse, discriminate, hate, or murder homosexuals? And don't say Leviticus something or other. That argument is so tired and worn out, and its been explained a million times. Those commands were given to a specific people at a specific time in a specific place. They don't apply to New Covenant, 21st century Christians. So really, where does the Bible say that?

Fowler's suit claims Zondervan's text revisions from a 1980s version of the Bible included, and then deleted, a reference to homosexuality in 1 Corinthians without informing the public of the changes. The other suit, against Thomas Nelson and its New King James Bible, mirrors the allegations made against Zondervan.

I have no idea what this refers to. But even if Zondervan and Thomas Nelson included or excluded certain verses, there are plenty of other Bibles out their from plenty of other publishers that we could check with.

As I think about it, I see only two possible reasons why this man would sue these Bible publishers: 1) he doesn't want to have to take responsibility for his actions and his sin (homosexual sin or otherwise); 2) he wants to get rich quick.

I suspect it's probably both.

Irresistible Evangelism?

I receive a weekly email from Group publishing that provides tips for children's and other ministries. The quality of the "tips" are hit and miss, but I found this week's tip particularly interesting (and to be filed in the "miss" category). This week's tip was entitled "Irresistible Evangelism" and is transcribed in bold type below. I've got some issues with what Group publishing considers "irresistible evangelism," so I put my own commentary in regular type. Judge for yourself.

As evangelistic results in the United States and throughout the Western world reach all-time lows, perhaps it's time to ask whether the problem is the messsage or the messengers.

Ok, they asked, so I'll answer. In one way, the message IS the problem. The Bible says that men are haters of God, and at enmity with God, and that the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. In other words, sinners are naturally hardened to the gospel. So when they hear the message of "Repent and believe," they immediately don't like the message. This doesn't absolve them of their responsibility to respond, however. So in one sense, the message is the problem.

In another sense, the message is NOT the problem. Because if the message is true, then it doesn't matter how unattractive it is. Even if it is disagreeable, truth is truth. It is therefore the responsibility of the hearer to respond to truth.

The problem certainly can't be the messengers. The messengers have been screwing it up for the last 2000 years, and yet people have come to salvation. If the success of evangelism depended upon the messengers, we'd be in a lot of trouble. Thank God that he's the one who does the saving, election, and work. This does not, however, absolve Christians of their responsibility to be obedient to the great commission.

If the most popular books on the shelves of your local bookstores are any indication, people are very interested in spirituality. On the Internet, spiritual sites receive hits more frequently than sites with any other nonpornographic subject matter. So how can we become (and train others to become) messengers who not only get heard but see the fruit and positive results that God desires?

Most spiritual books and websites that deal with spirituality are popular because they deal with what John MacArthur calls "Christianity Lite." In other words, it's a brand of Christianity that exists to solve a person's problems, meet their emotional needs (more on that further down), assure them success, and make them feel good about themselves. None of these things are at the heart of the true gospel. So it's not accurate to say that spiritual books and websites (Christian or otherwise) are popular because people are searching for God. They're usually just seeking to gratify themselves in some way.

On the topic of conversion, there is no biblical guarantee that any evangelist will ever live to see the fruit of his labor. God does the saving, and God works in his own time. Consider Noah: that man preached for hundreds of years and didn't see one convert. Did he change his message? No.

The messages that are likely to get through to a person's heart are the messages addressed to that person's individual needs. People have four layers of needs, and we frequently need to work through those layers in turn.

When you boil it all down, people only have 1 need: salvation. Plus, where the heck are they getting these "four layers of needs" from? Is that based on science? Also, it's not accurate to think that you have to peel away the layers of people like an onion in order for them to listen to you or interact with you. Again, truth is truth, whether I know you or not. It definitely helps to have a holistic approach, but it is certainly not necessary or vital for "successful" evangelism.

1) Physical needs. We start by meeting physical needs creatively and consistently. To do so, we must learn the skill of active kindness.

See above. I'm all for meeting physical needs, but they are not an end in an of themselves. They also aren't a means to an end. People can have all of their physical needs met and still go to hell. Also, how much time should I take to meet physical needs before I introduce the gospel. However long it is, isn't it possible that this person could die while still in the "having their needs met" period? Christians are always supposed to be loving and meeting needs. Do this in tandem with sharing the gospel.

2) Emotional/Relational needs. To better meet people's emotional and relational needs, we must brush up on active listening skills.

Ok, but what does this have to do with evangelism? Plus, I fear that far too often Christians just "talk" to people without ever asserting any biblical truth. If all we do is listen to each other's feelings and emotions, no one will ever believe anything.

3) Directional needs. To help people in the big directional questions of their lives, we need the skill of active wondering. This usually takes the form of asking questions that provoke people to think deeply about things and discover new insights-often giving you clues to the best way to approach them in layer 4.

"The skill of active wondering"? Give me a break. The only question people need to think deeply about is, "what will happen to YOU when you die?"

4) Spiritual needs. Once we've worked through the first three layers, people will subconsciously grant us the right (and credibility) to practice the final skill, active sharing.

Again, I'd just like to ask: what happens if the person I am "witnessing" to dies in layer 2, before I got to layer 4? Have I taken too much time meeting their needs? This whole model smacks of relational or "friendship" evangelism, and it just doesn't work - it's not practical, it's not realistic.

Also, I disagree with the notion that I have to earn the right or possess some sort of credibility in order to be heard. Either the message is true or it's not. And when I think about it, I can't think of ANYWHERE in the Bible where Jesus or the apostles EVER used an evangelistic method like the one listed above. Certainly Jesus and the apostles met the physical needs of others, listened to their stories, and asked them the "big" questions of life. But they never did it as a means of witnessing to them.

Our lives, as ordinary and mundane as they may seem, can have a wonderful and eternal influence on the lives of others!

Indeed, however the influence will be most effective, and most "irresistible" when done biblically.

Creepy

As far as I'm concerned, this has nothing to do with politics - it's just plain creepy. The Detroit Free Press is encouraging people to download a picture of half of President Obama's face, hold that picture over their own face, take a picture, and then send it to them, and tell them "what part of Obama is in you." Seriously, check it out for yourself.

Am I weird for being creeped out by this?

Never Underestimate The Power Of AWedgie

This story made my day. This woman thwarted a car thief by giving him a good wedgie. The guy broke into a car in the parking lot where she works. When she confronted him, he took off. She gave chase. When she caught him, she grabbed a hold of his jacket, which he quickly squirmed out of. When she caught him again, she grabbed his boxers which were sticking out of the back of his pants and pulled up. When that stopped him, she proceeded to put him in a headlock and held him that way until police arrived. Read the whole story here.

Man, I love wedgies (giving them, that is, not receiving them). And now to know that wedgies are an integral part of the war against crime puts a smile on my face.

Never underestimate the power of a good wedgie.

One Trillion Dollars

I saw a movie a few years ago called Brewster's Millions. It's about a guy who stands to inherit 300 million dollars, except in order to receive the 300 mil he has to first spend 30 million dollars in 30 days. He finds it to be almost impossible, because he literally can't find enough things to buy for that amount of money.

President Obama is going to sign his stimulus package bill today which, when all is said and done, will likely total over one trillion dollars. Think about that number for a minute: one trillion. Do you realize how much that is? Brewster had a hard time spending 30 million dollars - can you imagine spending a trillion?

I came across this website that's totaling up all the money spent on the Iraq war so far. The website says that over a trillion dollars has been spent on the Iraq war in the last several years. They ask the question: "What could we do with 1 trillion dollars?" and they have a calculator there to help you find out. So then, according to this calculator, here's what I could do with a trillion dollars, I could:

Buy 100 Porsche 911 Turbos ($126,200 each)

Buy 100 Saleen S7's ($395,000 each)

Buy 100 Benley Azure Convertibles ($376,485 each)

Buy the New York Yankees ($1,200,000,000)

Buy the New York Mets ($482,000,000)

Buy every NFL franchise ($8,600,000,000)

Buy an estate on Honolulu ($7,999,000)

Buy Dracula's Castle ($140,000,000)

Buy 100 Beverly Hills Mansions ($165,000,000 each)

Buy 10 Air Force One planes ($325,595,000 each)

Buy 50 Lear Jets ($11,595,000 each)

Buy everyone on earth a 24-pack of Coke ($156,000,000,000)

Buy 100 islands in the South Pacific ($38,900,000 each)

Produce 10 Hollywood movies (150,000,000 each)

Build 10 Disney them parks ($3,500,000,000 each)

Purchase 20 McDonald's franchises ($1,000,000 each)

Buy an oil company ($16,400,000,000)

Buy 100 30 second Super Bowl ads ($2,600,000 each)

Buy 100 pairs of Harry Winston 60 carat diamond drop earrings ($8,500,00 each)

Buy 100 bottles of vintage 1787 Chateua Lefite wine ($160,000)

Feed 50,000 children from birth through age 18 ($2,160 each)

Build 25,000 homes through Habitat for Humanity ($60,000 each)

Feed 10,000 people 16 meals apiece ($1 each)

Remodel 1000 homes for disabled veterans ($10,000 each)

Adopt 2 polar bears ($100 each)

Provide cataract surgery for 1000 people in underprivleged nations ($33.00 each)

Restore coastal wetlands around New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina ($14,000,000,000)

Rebuild the levees in New Orleans to stand up to a category 5 storm ($150,000,000)

Build 3000 miles of monorails for public transportation ($150,000,000 per mile)

Build and equip 2,500 hospitals in third world countries ($41,300,000 per hospital)

Buy the Hard Rock Casino in Las Vegas ($770,000,000)

Buy 100 townhouses in Manhattan ($18,000,000 each)

Buy 50 paintings by Pablo Picasso ($113,400,000 each)

Buy 50 paintings by Jackson Pollack ($142,700,000 each)

Buy 5 airports ($4,822,000,000 each)

Buy 100 Maltese Falcons - the world's fastest and most expensive boat ($100,000,000 each)

Buy a 12 acre winery in Napa Valley ($34,000,000)

Buy the New Hampshire Motor Speedway ($340,000,000)


So there you have it. That's a trillion dollars. That's the same about your government is about to spend. Oh yeah, don't forget that the government doesn't HAVE a trillion dollars to spend. Kind of makes you wonder.