US District Court: Bans Alabama 10 Commandments Monument

Hmm... I've met Barry Lynn and heard him speak about religious liberty in Dallas. He appears to be a person of Christian faith. Why do you think he is an infidel?

 

If this judge gets away with this act, then the Mormon judges will start with the Joseph Smith statues, the Muslim judges will erect Mohammad with his Jihad instructions, the Buddhists in Calif... a Fat Buda, and the Catholic judge will section off the side of the building that has mold growing in the shape of the Virgin Mary.

(edited)

The upside I see to the various god shrines and drive-through temples will be that it will show more than just Christians founded and served to make this country great. That each one can have and worship the way he wants. That each one of us can respect other American's religious belief because no "one" god is being subjected to a place of establishment by any one government official.

[ November 20, 2002, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: post-it ]

 

Certainly he is probably more liberal than most of us, but that doesn't necessarily make him an infidel.

[example of Mr. Lynn taking a position affirming homosexuality as a legitimate form of sexual expression snipped]

Certainly there are believers who do not oppose homosexual expression that are truly part of the Kingdom of God... There are several on this board.

Has Mr. Lynn denied the deity of Christ or the incarnation?

Does he affirm Jesus as Lord?

Does he recognize the scriptures as authoritative (even if he interprets them differently than you or me)?

These are the questions that you need to ask if you are going to slander someone as being an infidel.

 

</font>[/QUOTE]I'm glad you've had a chuckle... But why do you think this is funny?

Do you have any real evidence that he is not a person of faith?

 

You are correct in that I feel I know where you stand but since you mentioned there were others I thought you might have a list.

Murph

 

Nope. Of course Joshua and Post-it have made no secret of their position, but I've noticed a few others with similar positions. If they want to identify themselves, that's their business.

And if anyone else doesn't know me and is wondering my position, I believe that homosexual acts are wrong, although the feelings or attraction to the same sex are part of the fallenness of humankind. Just as it is immoral for a heterosexually-oriented person to engage in sexual acts with another unless they are married, a homosexually-oriented person is immoral to engage in sexual acts outside of marriage. I believe that if someone has homosexual urges, they should refrain from marriage and practice celibacy.

I don't care to argue the subject today... I don't wish to start another thread on homosexuality.

[ November 20, 2002, 09:47 PM: Message edited by: Baptist Believer ]

 

What would be an example of one of his alleged disingenuous claims?

[ November 21, 2002, 12:13 AM: Message edited by: Baptist Believer ]

 

I didn't see him... I don't usually watch Donahue. I get very tired of his self-righteous liberal tirades.

That's not very strange. The internet does not have *everything* on it. Given the amount of hostility Lynn gets, I would probably maintain a low person profile too. Some nut may think killing him is doing God a favor.

How do you know this if you can't find any information on him?

As a staff member or has he just merely worked alongside them on religious liberty cases?

Actually, every time I've heard him he is standing for religious liberty -- a traditional Baptist Christian value.

1.) James Dobson throws around a lot of ugly words about people he does not agree with.
2.) Dobsons may know some things about the family, but he is woefully ignorant about Constitutional law, the Christian doctrine of religious liberty, and the history of the First Amendment.
3.) Dobson's "traditional values" are more "conservative" values than Christian values.

That's probably an overstatement, but I myself often find that Falwell is often wrong about religious liberty issues.

Religious liberty is a place where Baptists and atheists have traditionally found common ground. There is a very long history of Baptists and atheists working together for common cause in the religious liberty arena. This is nothing new to people who understand the history of the First Amendment.

This seems to be the real issue... You don't agree with him so he must not be a child of God.

We also know who is truly of the faith because they love their brother. Calling someone who claims to be a Christian an "infidel" (without any real evidence) is a violation of our call to love the brother "we can see" (1 John).

I suspect that it was the right-wing "Christian" agenda that was torn apart... not the New Testament message.

Yes... And don't be surprised if Barry Lynn is with you in Heaven.

[ November 21, 2002, 02:12 PM: Message edited by: Baptist Believer ]

 

The only reason I dared to comment was that I pretty much know what Barry Lynn represents as the public voice of Americans United. His stance on religious liberty mirrors the stance held by Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs (a multi-denominational Baptist lobbying and education organization for Baptists) and the stance of early Baptists.

I have heard Mr. Lynn speak in public and I have spoken to him briefly about his work. I suspect your opposition to him has more to do with his position on separation of church and state than anything else.

I'm certain Mr. Lynn is theologically incorrect in some of his positions (homosexuality, etc.), but if you are condemning him for his separation of church and state views, I believe you are mistaken.

Good. I didn't think you really meant him any harm, I was just pointing out that we may be in some interesting company at the end of the age.

I can't say I'm well-versed on Fosdick... I don't have any confidence either way to know if he was a true believer. He seemed to follow God, but his ministry seemed to be all about toleration and ecumenical work. While I don't have anything against believers being tolerant of differences ("unity and diversity"), I do think it is completely naive to think that we should not sometimes divide ourselves according to important doctrinal differences. But there is no excuse for dishonesty and slander when believers feel the need to divide.

I have read and appreciated much of his most famous sermon, "Shall the Fundamentalists Win?", but certainly don't go along with all the ideas contained in the work. (If I remember correctly, Fosdick did not actually take a position in this sermon, other than a plea for tolerance.)

In my view, there are certainly many things to criticize about Fosdick's life work, but there are also some things to appreciate.