
Is somebody out there blogging under my name?
Posted by
I received this comment via my extensive online social network (i.e., the Gnome), apparently responding to my piece of yesterday:
"With what does the Christ of Ms Miller reach out? A piece of paper and the promise of a few years of companionship, perhaps some great sex, and then what?"
Herein lies the problem with Trueman's piece. He doesn't seem to understand that there is a difference between civil marriage and marriage in the church. I would never compel a religious group to perform gay marriages in their church. It would be a flagrant violation of the First Amendment and honestly, an abridgment of their freedom to associate with whom they please.
Likewise, I see no reason for a religious group to compel a state government to deny civil marriages based upon their interpretation of the Bible.
Disagreements over the words of the Bible have led to over 30k Christian denominations, many of whom disagree over very fundamental issues. From that perspective, does Trueman have a response like this for the 29,999 denominations he doesn't belong to, particularly the ones that accept gays with open arms?
To quote the concerned writer, herein lies the problem.... I didn't actually address any of these issues in my piece. Let me assure concerned readers that (a) I was not addressing the issue of the difference between civil union and church marriage. (b) I did not make the case for a civil government to ban civil marriages of gays. (c) I did address the issue of how the Bible is being used by some pro-gay union advocates, and what I thought some of the problems in their approach to the Bible might be. I can only assume that Outraged of Tunbridge Wells (for it is surely he) has come across another blog, written by somebody posing as me who did write about these things and plagiarised the last line of my original post.
As to the last question, yes, I do have a response: to all those of you out there who aren't in my denomination, REPENT, REPENT, REPENT of your sin against the light, admit that, yes, I really have got everything sorted out and that those who disagree do so purely out of envy and spite, and humbly, humbly, humbly beg my church to take you in before it is too late.
"With what does the Christ of Ms Miller reach out? A piece of paper and the promise of a few years of companionship, perhaps some great sex, and then what?"
Herein lies the problem with Trueman's piece. He doesn't seem to understand that there is a difference between civil marriage and marriage in the church. I would never compel a religious group to perform gay marriages in their church. It would be a flagrant violation of the First Amendment and honestly, an abridgment of their freedom to associate with whom they please.
Likewise, I see no reason for a religious group to compel a state government to deny civil marriages based upon their interpretation of the Bible.
Disagreements over the words of the Bible have led to over 30k Christian denominations, many of whom disagree over very fundamental issues. From that perspective, does Trueman have a response like this for the 29,999 denominations he doesn't belong to, particularly the ones that accept gays with open arms?
To quote the concerned writer, herein lies the problem.... I didn't actually address any of these issues in my piece. Let me assure concerned readers that (a) I was not addressing the issue of the difference between civil union and church marriage. (b) I did not make the case for a civil government to ban civil marriages of gays. (c) I did address the issue of how the Bible is being used by some pro-gay union advocates, and what I thought some of the problems in their approach to the Bible might be. I can only assume that Outraged of Tunbridge Wells (for it is surely he) has come across another blog, written by somebody posing as me who did write about these things and plagiarised the last line of my original post.
As to the last question, yes, I do have a response: to all those of you out there who aren't in my denomination, REPENT, REPENT, REPENT of your sin against the light, admit that, yes, I really have got everything sorted out and that those who disagree do so purely out of envy and spite, and humbly, humbly, humbly beg my church to take you in before it is too late.
TOPICS:




- Administrator
- Carl Trueman
- Carlton Wynne
- Dai Corleone
- Del Boy
- Derek Thomas
- Elliott Greene
- Gabriel Fluhrer
- Gareth Baudrillard-Jones
- Iain D Campbell
- Jeremy Plectrum-Smith
- Jeremy Smith
- Justin Taylor
- Liam Goligher
- Ligon Duncan
- Paul Levy
- Phil Ryken
- Rev Boadicea von Ribbentrop
- Rick Phillips
- Robert Brady
- Rodney Trotter
- Sean Lucas
- Stephen Nichols
- Thabiti Anyabwile
- Theotis Solpatch












