Christian councillor ‘cancelled’ for tweeting ‘Pride is a sin'...
A Conservative councillor claims he has been dropped by six companies after tweeting that ‘Pride is a sin’. Christian Cllr King Lawal, who has been a councillor at Northamptonshire Unitary Council for two years, claims he was banned from holding surgeries at the local library. He was suspended for 21 days, pending an investigation.
He also claims he was forced to resign from his own company, which he had built and grown. He is preparing for legal action, with the help of the Christian Legal Centre, citing “multiple violations of his rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion.” The Christian Concern group, which is supporting him, said Mr Lawal had been “cancelled by seven organisations, including being suspended by the Conservative party pending an investigation”. It said he would “launch legal action after having his life torn apart for sharing one tweet which gave the Christian and biblical position on LGBT Pride events”. Mr Lawal’s now-deleted tweet said: “When did Pride become a thing to celebrate? Because of Pride Satan fell as an arch Angel. Pride is not a virtue but a Sin. Those who have Pride should Repent of their sins and return to Jesus Christ. He can save you. #PrideMonth #Pride23 #PrideParade.”
The post included an image with a verse from Isaiah 3 verse 9 which said: ‘Whatever God calls “Sin” is nothing to be Proud of.’ Cllr Lawal later provided further clarification in a more detailed statement: “When I referred to Pride as a sin in my previous post, it may have been misinterpreted as hateful. Let me explain why it is not. “When Christians refer to ‘sin’ or ‘sinners’ we are speaking of ourselves. “We are not singling out specific people or groups of people as sinners.
Sin, according to the Bible, includes lying, stealing, gossip and hatred – not just things like homosexuality, adultery and sex outside of marriage. “Jesus said that even to have unholy thoughts that we never act on is sinful. Therefore every single one of us is sinful by this standard, including myself.” Speaking to Premier Christian News, he said: “I would do it again. “First, I am a Christian, and a believer in Jesus Christ and a soldier of his army, so I am a councillor second. Actually, my political life works better with me being a Christian because I believe in truth, being honest and loving people. They don’t work against each other. I should be able to share my beliefs. Legally I can hold and share my religion.
Just listened to an interview with King Lawal on the Sunday programme on BBC Radio 4. Yes, this guy was well and truly cancelled. That's what happens if you put your head above the parapet in today's LGBT, Woke. Politically Correct world.
"When did Pride become a thing to celebrate?"
ReplyDeleteINDEED!
GENE
And when did this “Christian” fall so far in the sin of pride and arrogance that he thought he could judge others rather than heeding the lesson of Matthew chapter 7? What a sanctimonious prick this man is, another self righteous, bigoted bellend like Gene “Two Faced Fuckwit” Vincent. Another pig ignorant Pharisee who forgets that all humanity is made in the image of God WITH NO EXCEPTIONS. Piss off, Gene, and take your mean spirited fake religion with you. Your father would be disgusted at your betrayal of the freedoms for which he risked his life, not least the freedom of his Uncle Claude to live his homosexual lifestyle in peace. You really are a loathsome piece of work, Gene.
ReplyDelete"all humanity is made in the image of God WITH NO EXCEPTIONS"
ReplyDeleteThere you go again. Why can't you get through your thick head that Man in the image of God was before the Fall. Read and grasp what happened after the Fall.
Are you saying that unrepentant murderers, rapists, thieves, paedophiles, extorsionists, sodomites are in the image of God???
OF COURSE THEY ARE NOT.
But they were CREATED in the image of God, you simpleton. They BECAME murderers, rapists, peeping toms, groupers, liars, poseurs, hypocrites, bombastic pricks and sanctimonious bellends BY THEIR OWN WRONG CHOICES as they grew up. Superstitious twaddle about the fall of man based on Bronze Age myths and doctrines invented five centuries after the death of Christ is simply irrelevant.
DeleteAnd Detterling let me hear you explain why Saint Paul wrote that sodomites will never enter the Kingdom of God.
ReplyDeleteWell, before I do that, why not consider these wise words?
Delete"This (laws around the world criminalising LGBTI people) is not right. Persons with homosexual tendencies are children of God. God loves them. God accompanies them … condemning a person like this is a sin. Criminalising people with homosexual tendencies is an injustice."
OF COURSE LGBT PEOPLE SHOUD NEVER BE CRIMINALISED,
DeleteHowever, that will never happen in any civilised nation.
Read Pope Francis on this subject.
"And Detterling let me hear you explain why Saint Paul wrote that sodomites will never enter the Kingdom of God."
ReplyDeleteIn fact, there is considerable doubt as to what St Paul actually meant in 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11.
A REPLY: PART ONE:
A hermeneutic reading of 1 Corinthians 6: 9 -11. [Source: The Reformation Project]
In 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Paul warns that those who persist in sin will not inherit the kingdom of God. In his list of wrongdoers, he includes two Greek words that connect to some forms of same-sex behaviour. "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate (malakoi), nor abusers of themselves with mankind (arsenokoitai), nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." -1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (KJV)
1 Timothy 1:10 also uses the term arsenokoitai in a similar “vice list.” Given that many Bible translations since 1946 have rendered malakoi and arsenokoitai as “homosexuals” or “men who have sex with men,” it’s worth taking a close look at these two Greek terms. The term malakoi literally means “soft,” and it was widely used to describe a lack of self-control, weakness, cowardice, and laziness.
Given that those negative characteristics were unfortunately (and unfairly) attributed to women in the ancient world, the term was also long translated as “effeminate.” Although most uses of the term in ancient literature were not related to sexual behavior, men who took the passive role in same-sex relations were sometimes called malakoi, which is why many non-affirming Christians argue that it represents a condemnation of same-sex relationships. But even in sexual contexts, malakos was most frequently used to describe men who were seen as lacking self-control in their love for women.
It’s only in the past century that many Bible translators have connected the word specifically to same-sex relationships. More common English translations in past centuries were terms such as “weaklings,” “wantons,” and “debauchers.” However, even if malakoi doesn’t necessarily refer to same-sex behaviour, doesn’t the fact that Paul places it next to the term arsenokoitai make that meaning more likely?
[CONTINUED]
I
A REPLY: PART TWO
ReplyDeleteThe term arsenokoites (the singular form) comes from two Greek words: arsen, meaning “male,” and koites, meaning “bed.” Those words appear together in the Greek translation of Leviticus 20:13, leading some to speculate that Paul coined the term arsenokoites in order to condemn same-sex behaviour.
But as New Testament scholar Dale Martin has written, “The only reliable way to define a word is to analyze its use in as many different contexts as possible.” After Paul’s apparent coinage of the term, most subsequent uses of it in ancient literature appear only in lists of vices. As Martin has shown, those contexts indicate that the word likely relates to sexual or economic exploitation. So while that may involve same-sex behavior, it would be exploitative forms of it, not loving relationships.
But isn’t it possible that Paul used malakoi and arsenokoitai together to condemn both the active and passive partners in male same-sex relations?
There were many word pairs in common use in ancient literature to describe both the active and passive partners in male same-sex relations—words like erastes and eromenous for example. Malakoi and arsenokoitai, however, were not used as a pair by other ancient writers. Moreover, even if Paul had intended to condemn both partners in male same-sex relations, it’s critical to remember the major gap between same-sex behavior as it was practiced in ancient societies—where it was based on status, power, and lust—and committed same-sex unions today.
Some Bible translations render malakoi and arsenokoitai as “homosexuals,” but that term wasn’t even coined until 1869 in German and 1892 in English. Not only that, the concept that the term describes didn’t exist in the ancient world either."
I would be interested to read, Gene, your own scholarly refutation of the above analysis - which will no doubt be forthcoming the day that "Granny Barkes fell in Woolworths" is published.
The beauty of Saint Paul's word in 1 Corinthians is that there is no ambiguity. This is why St Paul saying that sodomites will never inherit the kingdom Of God is such a red rag to the Gay Lobby. Sodomites are those who commit the depraved sin of sodomy.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, faced with genuine scholarship in a hermeneutic analysis based on extensive theological and historical knowledge, you are completely out of your depth, and can only repeat what you have already averred. A pitifully abject performance from Gene "Bogus Bellend" Vincent, the Russell Brand of the Intelligentsia.
ReplyDelete"genuine scholarship in a hermeneutic analysis based on extensive theological and historical knowledge"
ReplyDeleteHa! Ha! Ha! Don't make me laugh. As you know I do possess some erudition in this area. Dale Martin is not a biblical scholar of any repute and this offering is superficial Readers Digest flim flam.
If you wish to acquaint yourself with a genuine scripture scholar I suggest you read Raymond E Brown.
ReplyDelete"As you know I do possess some erudition in this area."
ReplyDeleteIn which case be my guest - and refute - rather than simply gainsay - the argument set out about above. Mind you, you'd have to read it properly first - you obviously think that it was written by Dale Martin
Dale Martin joined the faculty of Yale University in 1999 and retired as the Woolsey Professor of Religious Studies in 2018. ] Before Yale, he was a faculty member at Rhodes College and Duke University. He has degrees from Abilene Christian University, Princeton Theological Seminary, and Yale. He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2009.
I suggest that this makes him a theologian more to be trusted that you, a clapped out PPE Third Class from St John's Oxford - a degree which you admitted to having obtained by cheating in your essays.
So go on, Gene, let us have your considered refutation of the article set out above. You can't, can you?
"This (laws around the world criminalising LGBTI people) is not right. Persons with homosexual tendencies are children of God. God loves them. God accompanies them … condemning a person like this is a sin. Criminalising people with homosexual tendencies is an injustice."
ReplyDeleteGene Vincent on 22 July 2023 at 02:41 wrote: "OF COURSE LGBT PEOPLE SHOUD NEVER BE CRIMINALISED. However, that will never happen in any civilised nation."
So why do you spend so much time arse-creeping "Father" Calvin Robinson, a member of GAFCON and the Global South group of African churches, one of which, in Uganda, supports the execution of homosexuals. By implication, then, both he and you do the same.
Gene Vincent also wrote: "Read Pope Francis on this subject."
I did, which is why I copied them into the post above as well as including them at the head of this post.
Interesting that you didn't recognise them as the words of Pope Francis. So much for your scholarship, theological expertise and epistemicological prowess.
Another epic fail for Gene "Blowhard Bellend" Vincent, the Jeffrey Archer of Academia.
"Interesting that you didn't recognise them as the words of Pope Francis."
ReplyDeleteOf course I recognised them you silly old tosser.
No you didn't.
ReplyDeleteIf you had, you wouldn't have written, in the same post, "Read Pope Francis on this subject",
Busted yet again, and another epic fail for Gene "Bloviating Bellend" Vincent, Uxbridge's answer to Donald "Grab them by the pussy" Trump.