Recording of Gay Christianity Debate with Rick Schaeffer and Initial Review of Barry

This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded all Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us. Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Your host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church.

This is a live program and we invite your participation and now with today's topic. Here is James white and good afternoon. Ladies and gentlemen. My name is Rich Pierce. I'm sitting in once again for dr White and I want to welcome you to the dividing line.

Well today I have a special treat for you as many of you know. Just the night before last James white debated. Mr. Reverend Barry Lynn on the subject of homosexuality and whether it is consistent with Christianity.

Well, I unfortunately can't exactly Give you that particular Debate at this moment, but about two weeks ago. Dr. White did debate on WMC a radio live a gentleman from the United Reverend from the United Methodist Church, who is Pro, I guess the pro homosexuality.

I don't believe the man himself is a homosexual a homosexual. I'm not real sure about his persuasion, but he seems to feel that that is something that That is consistent with Christianity so what we're gonna do today is we are going to play you a CD of that tape from that event and That's gonna leave us about 15 minutes left in the program.

And once that is over with then We once that's over with Warren Smith who was in fact at the debate the other night. We'll be able to or be he will be giving us an update on what will be going on. Or what happened on seeing you're watching the chat room.

It is extremely distracting how James does it? I have no idea. Anyway, Warren will be giving us an update on what happened at the debate the other night. And so without further ado, I'm going to go ahead and start that debate right now.

The Biblical Basis for Marriage and Sexual Ethics

For joining us. It's great to be with you again, Andy. Yes, indeed and Reverend Schaefer. Thank you for being with. Why. Hello, sir. Well Reverend Schaefer you are you have opted to go first so you can start your eight minutes Whenever you're ready.

Yes, well, thank you very much Andy and it is a pleasure to have an opportunity to address this very very important subject.

In the Gospel of Matthew the Lord Jesus addressed the issue of the relationship between man and woman. In Matthew chapter 19 verse 4 he said and he answered and said have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two Shall become one flesh so they are no longer two but one flesh.

What therefore God has joined together. Let no man separate. I Believe that an honest reading of the text of Scripture in its original languages in its original context Taking into consideration. It's a consistency as a revelation from God Leads any unbiased person to the recognition that God is our creator and as our creator He has the right to determine The bounds of human behavior.

He is the one who so to speak wrote the the manual for our behavior. He as our creator knows what is best for us and how he made us to function. And the Lord Jesus said that God created us male and female and he said that it is the foundation of That relationship that a man and a woman come together in marriage.

Now the idea that we're addressing today that homosexuality is a Orientation that is not even addressed in Scripture. In fact, it was just said that there is no modern concept of homosexuality in ancient times.

And therefore the Bible is silent on homosexuality. This perspective is is certainly very very new and in point of fact the large amount of Literature that has been developed over the past about 50 years or so Boswell and Bailey and Scroggs and all the rest of them.

This body of literature seeks to to in essence establish the idea that the scriptures do not address the subject of the modern view of homosexuality now interestingly enough when they address the many passages that Most people down through the course of history have believed address homosexuality Genesis 19 Leviticus 18 Leviticus 20 Romans 1 26 and following 1st Corinthians 6 9 through 11 1st Timothy 1 10.

When they address these interestingly enough if you gather all of these books together, they all contradict one another. If what is said by one is right than what is said by another is wrong some actually just try to Pile up all the excuses together in essence and but all of them share in essence one overarching purpose and that is to say that the scriptures are insufficient to give us any guidance in regards to homosexuality and to the practice of homosexuality today and Yet when we go into those passages and do Exactly what we have been exhorted already to do and that is take nothing out of its context recognize what the contexts were when we allow those passages to speak for themselves they speak very very plainly and So those who attempt to get around the teaching of these passages in essence are forced to redefine various of the Hebrew or Greek terms.

Or engage in in some sort of misdirection to say no no no we just simply need to be accepting. These things don't fit into the worldview that the modern world really wants to hear and so I think During the course of this conversation people need to listen very very closely.

I hope that people will take their Bibles and they will look at the context of the passages as they come up as we make reference to them and Really, they have to sort of decide for themselves as to as to what these things say now the Lord Jesus said that he did not come to undo or to destroy the law and it is a fundamental truth of New Testament teaching that the Lord Jesus as Indeed the one who is the incarnate God is the one who gave his moral law to his people and therefore when that moral law speaks with the clarity of Leviticus 18 22 that says you shall not lie with a male as one lies the female it is an abomination and that that very Same section of verses also is that which gives to us?

The laws. References to for example the prohibition of of incest for example is found in that very same section adultery with a neighbor's wife Sacrificing children to idols all of these come from the very same section and so when it is argued that well That's just the Old Testament law.

That's just a purity code. Is there a consistency in carrying that through to likewise these other things in the very same context are? Also, just relevant to a purity code or. Have Christians always been right in recognizing that in point of fact the Lord Jesus by his teaching on the law Established those things as being normative for all people and that the moral element of the law is just as much for our guidance.

Today as it ever was it seems that that is most definitely the perspective of the New Testament writers. For the Apostle Paul when he addressed the church at Corinth said or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom?

Of God do not be deceived neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor effeminate nor Homosexuals nor thieves nor the covetous nor drunkards nor revilers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God and then he says Such were some of you, but you were washed, but you were sanctified.

But you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in the spirit of our God. Now we'll have a chance to look at Romans 1 and 1st Timothy chapter 1 as we move on during this period of time. But I think that we need to recognize that this passage is really focal.

Because the fact that Paul says the Corinthians such were some of you. But you were washed that is you these individuals in Corinth Recognized that those lifestyles and it's the whole list including homosexuality that those lifestyles were wrong.

He was not writing to people who refused to recognize that those are not Lifestyles that are a part of the Christian faith. I'm sorry. Yes, I remember I'm watching it real close. So we need to keep that in mind and hence there is a message of hope.

Such were some of you, but you were washed, but you were sanctified. Now we read on the the web page of the organization The no longer silent web page that we believe that God is is unconditional in his love.

Well, we need to recognize that that love brought Jesus Christ to the cross to die for thin. We need to recognize that unconditional love Takes place within the context of the necessity of God's righteousness.

And so with that in mind I think it's vitally important that we stand firm for the truth of the gospel and the truth of the Bible's ability to Define what is and what is not sin. Thank You Andy. Okay, that was dr. James White.

What we're having is a debate here this afternoon. Is homosexuality compatible with authentic Christianity and defending homosexuality is Reverend Rick Schaeffer Church Pastor of the Church of the Good Shepherd.

Bottles here in a moment. Let me take a break with. Afternoon is is homosexuality compatible with authentic Christianity for James White is Opposing homosexuality and defending homosexuality. Is Reverend Rick Schaeffer.

He is pastor of the Church of the Good Shepherd in Kansas City, and now we'll have rebuttals of four minutes apiece and mr Schaeffer, I guess you're on tap. Take your four minutes now. We'll see how far we go.

Cut me off at my four minutes. Okay, so trying to hear the original. To take all of these texts and the same thing about homosexuality. Different issues and you put them all together and say they Could do it again from the ancient perspective.

Something to do with gang rape. Depth of homosexuality. Another woman on Sunday. She's been cited up and to agree with Paul. Original form in their original voice and something about it. Marriage a man a woman to today's modern.

Merely anachronistic. It is we are reading this from an American ancient middle of marriage was the same marriage as they addressed. Not trying to hear the text. Suicide is washed of God's clean blood does not automatic sexuality.

Join these and include my remarks at this time. All right before we go to dr. White, let me take a break here. So I get back on track and we'll be right back. We're back. We're doing a debate on homosexuality.

Is it compatible with authentic Christianity. And we just heard from Reverend Rick Schaeffer? Who is pastor of the Church of the Good Shepherd in Kansas City, Kansas defending homosexuality? His four-minute rebuttal to Dr. James White and dr. James White now will offer a rebuttal to Reverend Schaeffer.

Dr. White. Go ahead. Well, thank you very much.

I wish I had more than four minutes because there is much that was said that takes a long time to Demonstrate as an error. For example in Genesis chapter 19. It was said that the only issues their hospitality or gang rape only That is not Commensurate with the text all in its original context in its original languages.

Even Ezekiel when he talks about this particular passage speaks of abominations in regards to that Which were done there in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. We also then discovered that my opponent does watch the West Wing because he used the exact same type of Argumentation that was presented there to mock.

Dr Laura including the error that people throw around a pigskin that by the way, sir is actually made of calfskin Which is a clean animal, but so the idea was that in point of fact We need to apply all the laws of Leviticus and therefore this is irrelevant and I pointed out in my presentation That this kind of confusion concerning the prohibition on homosexuality in Leviticus Leaves us with nothing in Scripture That would condemn adultery incest child sacrifice or bestiality.

Therefore we are being told that in reality. Well, you know if we just listen to the text then then these things are no longer relevant or is it not the case that Scripture is very clear and that we can tell the difference between a holiness code law in regards to pigskin or the issue of homosexuality Being an abomination before God in Romans.

We were told without any substantiation being given that all Paul is talking about there is pederasty. The problem is that makes no sense. Romans 1 26 says for this reason God gave them over to degrading passions for their women Exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural Pederasty amongst basically unknown at that time so that wouldn't follow and then listen to 127.

It says in the same way also the men not the man and a boy but the men abandoned the natural function of the woman which would be natural sexual intercourse and Burned in their desire toward one another men with men Committing indecent acts and receiving in their own person's due penalty of their error.

There is no possible way whatsoever To take those clear words which talk about mutual Sexual behavior between a man and another man and say oh, this is just pederasty as was just said to you. The the text simply will not allow it.

It says men with men Committing indecent act there's a Greek word for children if we want to go that particular direction, but it isn't there. Now we've been told that none of these passages address modern homosexuality.

So does that mean there were no modern homosexuals in the ancient world that? Homosexuality is in the modern sense has developed since that time. Certainly anyone who's read Plato anyone who's read any of the extra biblical documentation Knows that there was homosexuality in that particular time.

Now I would point out that the idea of one person with one person monogamous Homosexuality is not only was not only known back then. Plato specifically refers to it long before the writing of the New Testament.

But that is the vast minority even in the practicing homosexual community today. The vast majority of homosexuals have had more than one sexual partner. All the studies demonstrate that. So to continue to limit that down to just a small subgroup of the larger issue.

Really? I think is a great error. So I think we've seen in each one of these when we do listen to it in its own context in its own language. They do directly address this specific issue of homosexuality and for the Christian they Cannot stay in that lifestyle and claim the cleansing of first Corinthians chapter 6 that we had just been talking about.

I'll read to you from the Oxford Classical Dictionary just for brevity. No, Greek or Latin word corresponds to the modern term homosexuality and ancient Mediterranean societies did not. Sexuality as a socially operative category of personal or public life.

That's my authority on that in the next segment. We'll do that. Yeah, I'll need to take a break. And then when we come back you can ask the first. So we each have four minutes for rebuttal that is I would just say Second rebuttal Andy.

Well, this is a each each. We just don't know why just did his a reverend Schaefer. You're up now.

We take the break. We'll come back with questions. Actually. He had his four minutes before we took the break. Remember? Yeah.

So you already shot my rebuttal? Oh, okay. All right. I guess I'm losing track of time here. Let me take this break and then we'll come back. Questions and Honor of the first question, okay. Thank you by that in light of the phone in chapter two, which is therefore you have no excuse excuse Whoever you are when you judge others.

For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself.

Well, actually sir, if you would read the rest that context. It says he then goes on to demonstrate that a he's talking to the Jews and B. He is then saying you who have the law do not follow the law if I was claiming to be a perfect and sinless person in fact.

If I was engaging in homosexuality myself, then obviously I would be committing the sin of hypocrisy. To say these things. However, the scripture is very very plain in that passage, sir. That the Jew agrees with Paul in regards to what he has said in Romans chapter 1 that that is what God's law is.

And then he turns around and says but you Jews break that very same law the result being in Romans 319 that every mouth is shut and every person is brought guilty before the bar of God so they can hear the message of justification by grace through faith.

Oh, okay, we're school back and forth then yeah. Oh, all right. Well, I'm sure once the callers started that will. Now sir you you have made the the statement that You talked about. I know of people who have been washed in the context of 1st Corinthians chapter 6 and yet they've been then gone Into the church and they have heard the word of condemnation and so on and so forth.

Is it not clear in 1st Corinthians chapter 6 verse 11 that there is a break between the two statements? So that Paul says such were some of you but now you have been washed. Is it your position that you can continue in those lifestyles and yet be washed?

Practical experience. Saved if you want to use that terminology. They've studied the scripture and indeed they've even been caught and they have not been called to change their sexual orientation. It's not a problem in them.

If you may I follow up on that or we just going back and forth. Well it that sounds to me like what you're saying is when you said they were not called to change orientation that scriptural interpretation is to be subjected to a Subjective feeling or experience rather than the Subjective feeling experience being subjected to the objective revelation of God in Scripture.

No, whether we keep her objecting. I know a number of people who have read those texts. Me therefore God I come to you. I asked for your salvation. I asked for your cleansing. Help me change my orientation so I can be in line in the scripture.

Okay, I guess it's your turn to ask a question.

We can stay on this line if you want. I don't care. Well, so so is it your your position then that if they Subjectively do not feel a deliverance that this means that they're that we're misinterpreting the text.

So what is the interpretation of the text then in regards to verse 11 when it says and such were some of you? But you were washed. How do you look at the text? First Corinthians 611 where Paul's Paul after making this entire list of various things then says Such were some of you past tense.

He uses there The the form of I need that's a past tense. But and then he goes to you were washed you were sanctified.

Well again, I'm arguing that this has to do with pederasty not with homosexual where you have a monogamous relationship Between two males and two women. I thought you said that in regards to Romans chapter 1 not regarding in regards to the whole society and those are the issues to Which Paul is addressing?

So the Romans 1 is pederasty and the use of arson a coitus in 1st Corinthians 6 is also pederasty.

The only caveat to that would be in Romans. He talks about The men who gave up our God gave him over for their natural lust. Well, if you take a homosexual towards another male I mean, they've known that from birth right men who maybe gave up their natural inclination for women in which case.

You might have something there.

So but your assertion then is that when the the term that is that is found in 1st Corinthians 6 9 arson a coy tie that that is actually Not someone who is quote-unquote naturally homosexual. Correct.

And what basis. Can you. Can you give us any substantiation for that assertion outside or is your.

Substantiation. Your experience that according to my sources the same concept. And again, okay. And to take these Greek words and try to twist them and turn them around and make them to apply today to today's contemporary.

Homosexuality, that's the abomination. Okay, so arson a coy tie, which comes from arson. Ah, which is male and coy tie is the foundation of coitus males having coitus.

Sexual relationship with males again. You're talking you're talking about straight males again. Oh, where does it say? Sure, sure, please be my be my guest. Okay. I'm wanting to know sure your sole basis of authority from God.

Yes, in fact as Paul instructed Timothy He said that the that which is the Anu staffs that which is God breathed is Sufficient for equipping the man of God for all good works. So yes I do not believe in revelation from God outside of Scripture.

I'm a Protestant. Well, then you shouldn't believe revelation outside of Scripture either. I shouldn't. Not if you're familiar with the doctrine of solo scriptura, sir. No, well again we're going back to the.

We're going back to the text and I believe I do believe in revelation outside is that revelation is One of the ways that God can speak through us, but God certainly. Well.

Are you saying that those words then would be equal with Scripture or are they subordinate Scripture? So that there is there is God breathe revelation outside of the Bible. Yes. Okay. That is not a Protestant position, sir.

I don't care. Okay, that's good. I Just want to make sure people understand that's not a Protestant position.

Do we go on this examining each other? Well I can take a break right here and We can move into some questions from our audience if you gentlemen care to do that. Sounds like a good idea I'm up for it.

All right. Let me just Debate going here Concerning homosexuality. Is it compatible with authentic Christianity? Dr. James White is opposing Homosexuality you've heard him frequently on this broadcast as well as the Bible answer man Defending homosexuality is a reverend Rick Schaefer pastor of the Church of the Good Shepherd in Kansas City, Kansas.

Let me take a break right here and we'll take some calls from the audience. But before we do that, let me just say very quickly that dr. White is coming back to the New York metropolitan area next month To preach at churches in New York and New Jersey.

First debate will be on Thursday May 24th at Central Presbyterian Church Huntington Long Island against a well-known liberal activist of Reverend Barry Lynn of Americans United for separation of church and state and the topic is Is homosexuality compatible with authentic Christianity?

We tell you about the second one in a minute. Okay, we're back. Let's go to the phones Connie and Queens. Go ahead Connie. You're on the air. Hi Andy. How are you? I'm doing well.

I just I just got in the car a few minutes ago. So I'm only hearing the tail end and just a lot of what I'm hearing is really disturbing me because I'm not sure where it is. Maybe it's a revelation. The Lord says that we're not supposed to add to or subtract an Amalek.

I know he says that he changes not the way his word isn't in the beginning is the way it is now and Sodom and Gomorrah was not I mean. It sounds like people are saying because I'm not sure who said what?

But it sounds like people are saying that I would talk about men not boys and just that Homosexuality is not right. And that's what the Bible says. All right.

Let me get Rick Schaefer in here because he was the one that made some of those statements. Rick How do you respond to that? Yeah, I know but I have but I want to get. I want it. I want to get his side because he was the one that made those statements and before you go off and we lose what you Said it initially objects what you want me to respond to.

Well Sexuality today. You have it you have these texts, but her main concern seems to be that you're adding to Scripture which is Is unscriptural revelation here, I think I'm trying to hear the scripture not adding anything to Scripture.

Are you talking about the revelation idea? I think God can reveal. In other words God speaks that God is not limited to speaking to this wonderful person just through the Bible. God doesn't need to use the Bible to reveal self.

Okay, my my my my answer to that is any revelation that you get from God always Agrees with what he has always said in his Bible, you know, you're not gonna get a I mean I'm not gonna get my daughter's married.

She's not the Lord is not going to tell her leave your husband because that is not what he's about.

This is not scriptural. Very very quickly and he just two things very quickly. First of all these the scripture that self teaches that Jim.

Can you hold it because the computer's gonna take it away from me here? You're gonna get cut off. Let me go to this break and we'll come back on the other side at three o 'clock and we'll have more time to Develop these these things like we're having a debate this afternoon and it is is homosexuality compatible with authentic Christianity.

Opposing homosexuality is Reverend Rick Schaefer pastor of the Church of the Good Shepherd in Kansas City, Kansas and Opposing homosexuality is dr. James White frequently heard on this broadcast and the Bible answer man as well.

We're going to devote this hour to questions, which are Debaters will handle for you. And if you care to call us our number is 1 -800 -345-WMCA. Jim you were about to make a point there when I Rudely cut you off.

If you still remember what you were going to say, go ahead. I do. Clocks are absolutely unmerciful.

You know that I know that First and foremost in regards this concept of revelation that's equal to or superior to scripture The Bible says that it is the honest off that it is God breathe It's God's actual words and to put anything above that I think is to demonstrate that's a really The the authority of scripture is no longer an issue at that point.

And secondly, I just have to ask if my opponent is is seriously suggesting that there were no Homosexuals in the quote-unquote modern sense of the word in the ancient world. I mean Plato's symposium I can give the references I'd suggest anyone look at James BD young's homosexuality Contemporary claims examine why the Bible and other ancient literature and law which gives you Extensive portions of the writings of the ancients where they talked about these very things is is this a new Condition a nation that has developed since that time.

I don't see any basis that whatsoever the words in the text refer to sexual activity between two males between two men and if that is not What homosexuality is then I I think we need to Try to explain where the difference comes in.

From the Oxford it's right in front of me and it says the ancient Mediterranean societies did not Practice treat homosexuality as a socially operative category of public life now. You can talk about Plato and Socrates and all that other than the ancient Jewish Society.

Well see that but your years the years the quotation there is not saying that Homosexuality did not exist. It's saying you did not treat it in similar categories. That's not the point.

The point is is the scripture very clear in saying it is exactly the point. No, I certainly there were homosexuals. There were there always been homosexuality. I assume since the beginning of time if indeed it's a genetic thing in society up today.

It's not the same.

So when the words of the Old Testament say it is an abomination for a man to lie with a man as he lies the Woman or the word is arson a coitus which means to have coitus between men. Somehow for some Oxford dictionary reason That's not relevant to homosexuality.

You're talking you're talking. Okay, you're gonna keep pulling out this one little line from Leviticus and you're not going to talk about the rest of them.

Well, sir, actually since we haven't gotten an answer that one we can keep talking about it. But we've we've looked at Genesis. You've got Leviticus 18 20 and 20. You've got Romans chapter 1 that says this is parafusis.

It is against nature and you have not given me any sources that say that arson a coitus in First Corinthians 6 or first Timothy 1 do not mean what the word itself means. I haven't heard anything from you and I've.

I've read I've read Bailey. I've read Boswell. I've read Scroggs. More than that actually but not on this subject. I've read these books that have come from pro-homosexual advocates and their arguments to try to get around the meaning of these words fail.

So I'm just asking if you're gonna say that well, that's pederasty there. There there needs to be something more than just simply the the direct assertion. This is a very important subject.

Yeah, go ahead Connie, okay.

I think it was Reverend Shane helped someone in love. To come to whatever it is that the Lord wants them to get out of. When I came to the Lord I was doing things. I was not supposed to be doing and that did not.

I mean, I know I had to change. You know, you know. You're not supposed to be doing drugs or sleeping outside of marriage or any of the things that many people are doing today. It doesn't take a thunderbolt to figure out.

Wait a minute. I've come to the Lord. You're supposed to be a new creature supposed to change or it's not real. All right, Connie. Thanks for the call. Reverend Schaefer you want her to say something?

Yeah, I mean, what do you say this year? She just equated drugs and all those other things with modern homosexuality when you come when you come to God. What happens when somebody comes to God. They cleanse their soul with God.

They open their life up to God. God Validates their lifestyle and then they listen to this other stuff. What are they supposed to do? God doesn't validate that lifestyle, sir.

That's the whole point of a person who holds to scripture is being revelation from God is it God is consistent.

You account for the number of gay and lesbians who are in ministry today.

I would say that that is a demonstration of apostasy from the truth. Not the not God contradicting himself. Well, the Lord Jesus said the scriptures could not be broken and he's the one who died and rose again.

So yes, I I do listen. Because any revelation that comes from God will not contradict what is within the canon of scripture, sir.

And your basis for that again is scriptural, of course.

Okay, if it is God speaking that is the ultimate authority. Is it not sir? Is that was it not the ultimate authority for the Lord Jesus Christ if we follow him? Will we not follow his own view of scripture?

Pharisaic. No. Actually, he took the Pharisees on because they added their traditions to scripture and therefore undercut its ultimate authority. Which I would point out sir. They did believe in revelation outside of scripture in the form of tradition and that's exactly what you're doing.

Matthew chapter 15 verses 1 through 9.

For me like I listen to you. Well make it short. Day relation day. Even if you don't think it between Genesis were who you mentioned, mr. Shave held even more paper. You want to respond? I couldn't hear what he said, but he was saying something about Episcopal.

Well, he thought you were an Episcopal from the Episcopal Church. And he said he almost fell off his chair when he heard you were actually the Episcopal. Is our process. I didn't. I didn't understand the boy neither Torpedoing the notion of tradition earlier and that is one of the foundations upon which the.

I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I just didn't hear everything. All right. Well, let's move along. That Richard in New Jersey. Richard. Go ahead. People who believe almost dr.

Why you want to start. Well first and foremost? It is interesting to note that the debate between myself and Barry Lynn in May will be at a PC USA Church. That is still standing strong against that but certainly.

Speaking for my own denomination If we can use that term reform Baptist, I don't believe there's anyone who could possibly In good conscience stay within that to domination and believe that homosexuality is proper in God's sight.

We have very clear beliefs on the subject and and I really don't think that there is a possibility for that but what we have seen over the past number of years is a tremendous fight for the heart and soul of many denominations and in many instances as soon as Biblical authority the ultimacy of biblical authority and scripture as they are new stops Revelation from God has been abandoned then that fight was lost.

I think that's just history here in the United States.

All right, Reverend Schaefer any thoughts on that? Well, I happen to serve a emerged United Church of Christ Presbyterian USA Church. And so I can speak a little bit about that in terms of practicality.

The United Church of Christ there certainly a bit would be room under that tent for Various dissenting views because it's not a quote top-down denomination. In other words. It's a covenantal relationship one Congregation and covenant with the other the Evangelicals leave.

Because that it depends on the individual denomination. All right. Let me let me take a break right here. We'll be right back. We are back and the topic is is homosexuality compatible with authentic Christianity opposing homosexuality.

Dr. James White frequently heard on this broadcast. I'm the Bible answer man and defending homosexuality. Reverend Rick Schaefer pastor of the Church of the Good Shepherd in Kansas City, Kansas. Congregation which is a merger of United Church of Christ and the Presbyterian Church eulers online.

Let me go to Noella. Noella in the Bronx. Hello, Noella born again for for just his. I'm just in shock at what I'm hearing by past. He said he refers to the Bible. He mentioned Romans as the Romans business and you know, he was in she's not his only authority appalled at what he's saying.

God made man and woman and He says basically sex out for it between man and woman is sin. Sin is sin and what dr. Schaefer has been doing or has been saying I should say has been watering down sin. Basically his whole argument so that he is considered a minister.

I'm just very appalled. He's basically a liberal. I just feel he's leading people astray. I know many people have met many people who were homosexuals and God saved them and delivered them and When you talk to them, they're born again, they're brand-new many of them are married now with children.

God has transformed them and they'll tell you that what they lived a life of sin. Oh, and I'm just in shock this entire program as I said, I commend dr. White and I commend you. But I've just been appalled at what I'm hearing by pastor Schaefer.