Media Pastoral Double-Standard: Uncontroversial Controversy

surprisemanFrom OneNewsNow comes word that media analyst Colleen Raezler from the Culture and Media Institute says the “mainstream” media has a blatant double-standard on two pastors invited to speak at President-Elect Barack Obama’s inauguration–evangelical Rick Warren and open homosexual V. Gene Robinson.

I know, you’re as shocked as I am that the media would be anything less than objective, and even more so that they would exhibit a Left-wing bias, but let’s take a closer look.

Raezler says while the “mainstream” media squawked about the ”controversial” pick of Rick Warren (who espouses the Biblical position that homosexuality is a sin), the “mainstream” media has been unable to discover any signs or indications that the invitation to the openly homosexual priest V. Gene Robinson is in any way “controversial” or remarkable.  

Why would that be?  Could it be that the “mainstream” media would like us regular knuckle-dragging Americans who lack their broad-gauged understanding to believe that–even though the Bible clearly condemns homosexual behavior in both the Old and New Testaments–it is Rick Warren who is off his rocker and not the homosexual bishop who lives in contradiction to everything God teaches about homosexuality?

Could it be that our “objective” media wants to not merely report facts but change opinions?  

What an upside-down world we live in where supporting the moral, traditional, most-people-understand-this, been-that-way-for-thousands-of-years position is considered controversial.

Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.

  • Digg
  • Yahoo Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo Bookmarks
  • Delicious
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Windows Live Favorites
  • Technorati Favorites
  • NewsVine
  • Share/Bookmark
  • James Baull
    The way I see it , this just apart of what will be used to promote the change that will have many casting down thir bibles to embrace the flesh , people will infact start to use the take that the media is speading on behalf of the enimy of God ,to give up on the truth and princaples the bible teaches . and become more like the preist that has cast down his own bible , and family princaples to fulfill his fleshly desire. Now as far as ick warren goes in my book he is puting aside the princaple of being in the world not of the world to play politics with the world , we can love our brothers and even serve and minister to them , and as we do so let them know thier sin can and will not only kill them in this life but kill the oppertunity to not have to go to Hell. The right has areas in its movement that are off base and the left has areas that are devistateingly off base , it would be in everyones best interest to live and love as Christ has taught us, staying focused on the path not straying to one side or the other the path I refurr to is narrow and we should all be asking the Lord to lead us down it .
  • Eric
    Ellis, I bet you eat shell fish and don't think a thing of it - the bible says that is also a BIG no no. Also, if you married and have female children - you know you can sell the oldest. Or better yet sell her to a mormon, they like little girls
  • Eric, you're a few thousand years behind on your understanding of the Bible. You really should catch up sometime so that you don't embarrass yourself so.

    For instance, Christ did away with the ritual and dietary requirements of the Mosaic Law. Acts 10 and Romans 14:20 make it clear. And no, I don't eat shellfish, but if I did, there would be no Biblical reason not to.

    Homosexuality, however, is a blatant violation of God's design for human sexuality, as defined in Genesis 2 and Matthew 19. God also makes it clear in multiple passages in both Old and New Testaments that the moral behavior (not ritual or dietary) of homosexuality is a sin that God strongly disapproves of.

    You really should take a closer look at the Bible. You might find that it's far more reliable than you think. And that could change your life infinitely for the better, if you'd let it.
  • cinemaphile85
    To me, verses like Romans 14:20 are irrelevant. That the Bible would say anything as asinine as "eating shellfish is an abomination" doesn't lead me to believe that it's exactly busting at the seams with useful, coherent, or intelligent information.
  • So you're smarter than God? When my children were preschool-age, they were at least smart enough to realize that instructions I gave them were for their own good...and God is considerably smarter than you are, than I am above my children.

    Children who don't listen to their parents when they don't understand the reason for an instruction usually end up in the hurt locker sooner or later.
  • cinemaphile85
    How is a command like "thou shalt not eat shellfish" for someone's own good?

    And I'm sure God is smarter than me. The men who wrote the Bible, on the other hand...
  • I agree with Mr. Ellis' comments, Cinemaphile, but perhaps I can add a few specifics. Shellfish, or more precisely molluscs, are detritus feeders and accumulate toxins that are in much lower concentrations further up the food chain (the same goes for fish that do not have scales). One condition in particular is toxicity caused by algae blooms called "red tides." The algae, or phytoplancton, produce toxins that are quite harmful if eaten by humans. When present the toxins are relatively dilute in other fish, but are concentrated is detritus feeders.

    Pork was banned because of the widespread incidence of trichinosis, a debilitating chronic muscle disease. Hare was forbidden because of tularemia or "Rabbit Fever" produceded by a spirochete and causes disease and death in humans.

    I believe all of the dietary laws were enacted for the benefit of the Jews in order to keep the population strong and healthy because God had specific plans for them as a population.

    You can read more about "Red Tide" here:
    http://environment.about.com/od/redtidesfaq/f/r...
  • Thanks, Dr. Theo.

    For what it's worth, I'm allergic to shrimp. I get bad, bad, bad ill when I try to eat them...which took me a couple of times to figure out. Now I stay away from lobster, crab, and almost every kind of seafood, just to be safe. :-)
  • cinemaphile85
    Bob and Dr. Theo,

    Thank you both for attempting to explain this, but avoiding certain foods is something that even animals know how to do.

    And Bob, you've just proven my point. Shrimp makes you sick, so you stay away from it. I doubt you needed a divine commandment to figure this out; your physiological response and common sense were enough. And unlike the ancient Hebrews, you know about allergies, toxins, and bacteria, and can make an appointment with an allergist to see whether you are allergic to all types of shellfish or just shrimp.

    The Hebrews knew none of these things, so they did what superstitious people always do when they don't know the answer: they attributed it to God.
  • When dealing with a large population of people the most efficient way to get everyone educated about what and what not to eat was by decree, which is what God did. Had He left it to everyone to figure it all out, there would have been a large number of members that succumbed after their first exposure, allowing no time for learning.

    So let's sum up the debate: You say God's laws are asinine (because you are too ignorant to understand), Mr. Ellis and I attempt to educate you with some facts, but you ignore our arguments and go right to your next ignorant, sophomoric assertion. Furthermore, we have been through this before. I have to come to the same conclusion as Mr., Ellis; you don't intend to discuss anything. You just want to throw stones wildly hoping for an occasional hit. You are not even interested in sharpening your aim, choosing volume of stones over precision of throw.

    No, you have your mind made up, which is sad to see in an adolescent who apparently has had little world experience to inform his opinions. God is going to have to deal with your heart; I have done as much as I can.
  • Or maybe God wanted to spare the Israelites (who didn't have the medical facilities and modern trappings I enjoyed when I got sick) what I went through, so he told them in advance to stay away from something that could cause problems for some of them. I must not be as smart as an animal, because I didn't know it might cause a problem for me--even with our modern ability to clean and prepare shrimp after capture.

    But if you're determined to reject Gods wisdom, there's nothing I can do to convince you of anything.
  • It's been several years since I studied the dietary laws, but if I remember correctly, it had something to do with cleanliness. It may have been that they can have a tendency to carry bacteria, and if not properly prepared can make you sick or kill you. I know some foods were off limits because God was trying to illustrate a point. Some animals had unclean habits, etc., and God was trying to teach the Israelites about his holiness and cleanness, and of their need to pursue the same awareness of cleanliness.

    If you've ever been in the military and gone through basic training, you would have been exposed to some rules and exercises that seemed pretty stupid...until you understood what they were trying to teach. For instance, in the Air Force, cleanliness and organization rules for the barracks were nuts. One particular rule required us to have our underwear folded into a perfect 6-inch square and grounded to the side of the drawer.

    Stupid on the surface of it...unless you realize that they were trying to teach us focus and attention to detail. See, many jobs in the AF were highly technical; you had to pay very close attention to what you were doing and follow instructions to the letter. For instance, failure to follow specific procedures could result in classified information falling into enemy hands. Or an aircraft mechanic who didn't pay attention to detail might leave out a few screws...and have a multi-million dollar plane falling out of the sky...or a air-to-air missile not dropping off the wing when fired...or detonating before leaving the wing.

    Even some of the best Bible scholars don't understand some of the Levitical instructions. It was a different culture and a different environment, and some things that might seem totally nuts to us today in the West might have made perfect sense to the Israelites 3,500 years ago. Or maybe they had to take a few things on faith, too.

    Part of following and trusting God involves doing so even when you don't understand everything. That's not to say a Christian has to follow in blind faith because God does provide more than enough information for the reasoning person--who genuinely seeks truth--to achieve a thresh hold of belief. But if we understood it all, we'd probably be as smart as God...and that's never going to happen.

    I think a primary reason God leaves a number of things to faith, requiring us to follow without understanding everything, is a kind of "basic training" for eternity. Consider this: Adam and Eve walked with God and talked with him face to face...yet chose not to trust God at a moment of temptation. If we can learn to trust God even when we can't see him and can't understand the whole picture, maybe that helps prepare us for an eternity where there will be no more rebellion against God.

    Just a thought...
  • Robby
    Well said!
blog comments powered by Disqus