The Ranting Wren The Wren Forum Banner
The Glorious Wren The Movie Wren The Photo Wren Old Man Wren

The final letter from Ms. Harvey:

John:

I will not take up a lot of your time, but I want to make a couple of key points that I hope you will seriously consider.

Everything you say is in the definitions.You’ve said you know you were born gay, so to you that’s who you are. You believe God loves you the way you are, and that you learn about Jesus and his love of tolerance, temperance, etc.

This is crucial–are you sure you are learning about the real Jesus? One of us is right and one is wrong. In my study of neopaganism, I’ve learned some very troubling things being taught in self-labeled Christian churches. The Bible is pretty much dismissed. Other paths to God are accepted. The problem with all this is that, it leads in circles of confusion, theologically.Among the many, many self-contradictory issues that this raises are, Ii we don’t turn to the Bible, how is sin defined? Your definition and mine may be totally different–even in conflict. Who then is right, if we believe in “equality”?( This is, by contrast, easily resolved if we both report to the same boss, and we turn to Scripture as our guide).

Why did the Jews so carefully preserve the Scriptures for all that time, if they aren’t worth anything, or if we can pick and choose what out of them we want to believe? And, the message in the Old and New Testaments is from the same God–His goodness and truth are in both, with a lot of consistency. They weave a pretty consistent picture taken together.

There are counterfeit spirits that masquerade as the Holy Spirit, and Scripture tells us that only God’s Word (i.e., Scripture) will keep us on track. Satan and demonic spirits can appear as “angels of light.” ( 2 Corinthians) This is what is happening in many Christian churches. Acceptance of sexual sin clearly prohibited in Scripture is a signal that an authentic gospel is probably not being taught.

I don’t know what else to say to you. But deception can seem very appealing in the short run.

Please consider this and read your Bible! It’s the only sure way to know the Lord. Your reading of Scripture will reveal to you if something is off track.

God bless you.

Linda

3 Comments

Steve Expounded Thusly:

Her belief lies in definitions as well. The sneaky harlot! Her versions of “truth” and “morality” and “sin” are all definitions. Whose? God’s, or hers, or the long string of like-minded Christians who came before her. Simply definitions. She has chosen to embrace these definitions, yet John is not allowed to embrace his.

I believe Linda’s version of Christianity could also be described by others as “neopaganism.” She brandishes the word pagan about in connection with other forms of Christianity which she does not like, so why not to her form, too? Christians battling Christians. Yes, that’s the spirit of Christ, Linda!

Even by turning to the same “boss” and the same “scripture,” it’s “still” possible to “disagree,” as we can “see.”

The Jews preserved the scriptures. I keep that little “No Peeking” pillow my mom gave me. One man’s stocking stuffer is another man’s made-up laws. (This last point is not a true debate, I just wanted to poke some fun!)

Okay, so if you believe scripture–excuse me, Scripture–is indeed God’s word and not just stuff some guys wrote down thinking it was God’s word, fine. But again, it’s “definitions,” baby! Don’t argue to others about their definitions when you’re mired in your own.

Why does Linda think her spirit, whom she calls “God,” is not a counterfeit? Definitions? Belief? Truth? Other Christians–even other NON-Christians–use definitions and belief and truth to determine their god is the one (or many) true god (or gods). Where does Linda come off with such sactimonious assurance that everyone but her is wrong? And in matters unrelated to her God?

Linda has shown that blind devotion (and she really is blind in her devotion) can be dangerous. She feels her belief in God is correct, and somehow that belief is better than John’s belief that he’s gay. As she said in her last letter, “You somewhere began to form those feelings, and they became more important to you than anything else.” Ditto to you, my dear Linda. You began somewhere to feel those feelings of God’s love, and they became more important to you than anything else. Dare I argue that your Christian feelings are based solely on feelings, while John’s gay “feelings” are in fact psychological, physiological, and scientifically based? Dare I?

Really, every argument she’s been using can be used against her and, were I to get harsh with it all, her faith.

Wednesday, November 17th, 2004 • 1:26pm • Permalink

John Expounded Thusly:

But you’re not going to get harsh now, are you Steve?

Wednesday, November 17th, 2004 • 2:05pm • Permalink

Steve Expounded Thusly:

Oh, no! I am not harsh. Simply “spirited.” Tee hee hee.

Wednesday, November 17th, 2004 • 6:16pm • Permalink

 

Sorry, I ain't takin' no comments on this page. Deal, y'hear?