-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Gay Student Loses Baylor Scholarship
- Thread starter Dr. Bob
- Start date
Does his lifestyle conflict or not with the Bible. If it does, then Baylor is right. If it doesn't then Baylor is wrong.
Ben Mills SsBG
New Member
That logic is only good if Baylor kicks all sinner out. What is sad to me is that this sinner who is just like you and me has lost an opportunity to hear about the love and compassion of Jesus. We as Christians have just told him to hit the road because he is a sinner. I wonder what he thinks about the gospel message now? I wonder if he will ever flee from his sin after what the church has done to him? This should break the heart of ever Christian.
Mark Osgatharp
New Member
Ben,
No, he was not kicked out because he is a sinner. He was kicked out because he is a sinner who, in the words of Isaiah, "declared his sin like Sodom" and who calls "evil good and good evil." Christianity is for penitent sinners not sin justifying sinners.
Mark Osgatharp
Ben Mills SsBG
New Member
Does not Jesus say that we are like a hospital, here for the sick? I do not care if he was wearing a dress to class. We as Christians have an obligation to love him through his sin into the Kingdome of Hashem. Jesus spent most of his time with the scum of the earth living a good life and teaching them what it is all about. We as Christians MUST do the same.
I agree with you 100%. The Bible is specific to the acts. The student in question was not accused ot partaking in any acts.
No question about it. The student in question was not accused of any such act. His scholarship was removed because he was questioned about a rumor that he "was gay". He had not been accused by the school of having committed any homosexual acts. If there was an accusation that could be proven, then I would agree with the decision, because that violated the school's policy. However, there was no violation of policy, and thus he should have been allowed to keep his scholarship.
Indeed, but the school does not have a policy against having lustful thoughts. If they did, they'd probably have to expel most of the heterosexual kids as well.
Again, no disagreement there. Likewise, a boy having evil thoughts about sex with a cheerleader should keep it to himself, never make an issue of it, and not run around calling himself a heterosexual. But for some reason, lustful thoughts towards opposite genders doesn't get your scholarship revoked. The policy in question is those of acts. There was no homosexual act committed here. Hence, his scholarship should have remained.
The problem is that the school doesn't have a policy on voicing personal opinion, just on committing sexual acts. There's been no violation of that policy. If they wanted to amend their policy to include what you're saying, then I'd agree with their decision. But that was not the case.
First, he was not kicked out. His scholarship was revoked. He was allowed to stay, but had to eventually leave on his own due to the financial burden.
Second, the only sin one might be able to pin on him is having lustful thoughts. There is no school policy against lustful thoughts. Even accusing him of lustful thoughts is shakey. I'm heterosexual, and generally don't have lustful thoughts towards women. Why would one assume that a gay person is automatically having lustful thoughts towards someone else, but not think the same of a straight person?
Ben Mills SsBG
New Member
The removal of the scholarship was is all actuality kicking him out. The school knew that he would not be able to stay with out the money. They did that because it is political better for them to remove his money to go to school, rather then kick him out.
I see it here at California Baptist University. If there is someone who is too vocal about thinks here the school takes all the institutional aid from them so they have to leave school. It is a simple way to remove people who offend your sense of what a good little white Baptist school should be.
I see it here at California Baptist University. If there is someone who is too vocal about thinks here the school takes all the institutional aid from them so they have to leave school. It is a simple way to remove people who offend your sense of what a good little white Baptist school should be.
Mark Osgatharp
New Member
I stand corrected. But you also said,
JohnV,
You are wrong. According to the article he voiced approval for the sodomite lifestyle and sodomite marriages. Even if he did not consider himself a "homosexual" this fact within itself would warrant, not only his loss of scholarship but his expulsion from the school.
Furthermore, "having lustful thoughts" was not the issue. Declaring himself "gay" was the issue. If the man had penitently admitted having same sex lustful thoughts, I don't think he would have lost his scholarship. But penitently admitting a sinful thought is a monumentally different thing from declaring yourself "gay" while voicing approval for that abomination.
The man got exactly what he deserved.
Mark Osgatharp
Those of you who do not think this homosexual did anything wrong should look at Romans 1:18-32 b/c it CLEARLY bans homosexuality. God's people should not fo against that which is natural. Also some of you are saying that if you are gay you cannot be a Christian. When he/she gets saved they should surely be convicted that it is worng and change their ways. If they have been saved and then turned gay they are still a part of the Kingdom of God b/c we have eternal life. Read John 3:16.
*REMEMBER* IT'S ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE!
*REMEMBER* IT'S ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE!
Absolutely right. Being gay, in and of itself, is not, in and of itself, a sin (in the same manner that alcoholism is not a sin). The Bible referrs to the homosexual act as a sin. He had not committed any sexual act of a homosexual nature. If he did, I'd be the first to say he should leave. The school has not ban on "being gay" or "being straight". It doesn't however, have a policy against sexual promiscuity. He did not violate the policy.
I did a bit of digging, and the school apparantly does not have a policy of expelling straight students who have advocated legal gay marriage. So if they're not expelling the straight students who have a certain opinion, they shouldn't be expelling a gay student for having the same opinion.
This is a scriptural reference that is often taken without the proper context. The section is referring to those who engage in idol worship. Verses 22 andd 23 state, "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles."
Those Baptists who are legalistic in their approach to the Bible, and who insist on doctrinal conformity aren't going to be comfortable with universities that allow male and female students to share the same sidewalks and attend the same classes. They're going to criticize schools that don't require their students to wear dowdy, out of date clothing, and only allow them to date in a supervised parlor setting on campus once a month. They're going to throw out that inevitable, all powerful catch phrase, "liberal" with a sneer to show their critical spirit.
This isn't just a matter of a university student being vocal about disagreeing with the university's policy. This is a student in a theological seminary preparing for a ministry which would have been endorsed by the university with its seal on his diploma and transcript. From what I've read in the local press, the school was quite gracious to the student, in spite of the fact that the student was not gracious in his response, nor did he show a measure of personal responsibility or integrity in his statements to the media.
Baylor showed its integrity. They did not expel the student, because he had not violated the policy by committing a homosexual act. But they did acknowledge that the student's beliefs were not consistent with theirs, particularly regarding preparation for vocational ministry, by not continuing to fund his theological education. In so doing, they were within not only their rights, since the money he was using was not his, but theirs, but also the boundaries of Biblical truth.
Both Baylor and the Baptist General Convention of Texas, in spite of the rumors and gossip spread by their critics, are solidly theologically conservative. They clearly do not fall within the fundamentalist/legalist/literalist camp, but then, the majority of Baptists don't either. But to classify them as "left leaning Moderates" or even "liberal" is a characterization that can't be proven by their actions.
This isn't just a matter of a university student being vocal about disagreeing with the university's policy. This is a student in a theological seminary preparing for a ministry which would have been endorsed by the university with its seal on his diploma and transcript. From what I've read in the local press, the school was quite gracious to the student, in spite of the fact that the student was not gracious in his response, nor did he show a measure of personal responsibility or integrity in his statements to the media.
Baylor showed its integrity. They did not expel the student, because he had not violated the policy by committing a homosexual act. But they did acknowledge that the student's beliefs were not consistent with theirs, particularly regarding preparation for vocational ministry, by not continuing to fund his theological education. In so doing, they were within not only their rights, since the money he was using was not his, but theirs, but also the boundaries of Biblical truth.
Both Baylor and the Baptist General Convention of Texas, in spite of the rumors and gossip spread by their critics, are solidly theologically conservative. They clearly do not fall within the fundamentalist/legalist/literalist camp, but then, the majority of Baptists don't either. But to classify them as "left leaning Moderates" or even "liberal" is a characterization that can't be proven by their actions.
Scholarships are given by people and groups that should have a say in who gets them and who gets to keep them.
This guy should have thought about this before accepting the scholarship. He could have applied for a scholarship at a place that doesn't have a problem with his sin.
This guy should have thought about this before accepting the scholarship. He could have applied for a scholarship at a place that doesn't have a problem with his sin.
by JohnV:
I told my congregation once, any homosexual or lesbian is welcome to sit and listen to the Word of God in this Primitive Baptist church. I don't care if they are practicing homosexuals or lesbians.
But they are not welcome to join the church while they have not publicly denounced their lifestyle.
Bass here publicly, to his classmates, admitted he is a homosexual, publicly, to his classmates, admitted he is supporting gay rights and marriage, which I suppose Baylor does not.
I don't see him any different from the communist rebels in my country, the Philippines, who when caught, demand that the government they want to overthrow by force grant them the protection of its laws.
How do you know there was no activity ?
I told my congregation once, any homosexual or lesbian is welcome to sit and listen to the Word of God in this Primitive Baptist church. I don't care if they are practicing homosexuals or lesbians.
But they are not welcome to join the church while they have not publicly denounced their lifestyle.
Bass here publicly, to his classmates, admitted he is a homosexual, publicly, to his classmates, admitted he is supporting gay rights and marriage, which I suppose Baylor does not.
I don't see him any different from the communist rebels in my country, the Philippines, who when caught, demand that the government they want to overthrow by force grant them the protection of its laws.
What you are saying may seem true, but in God's eyes: Sin IS Sin.
We members of American churches are trying to accept that fact that regular sex outside of marriage is not so bad.
I agree 100% that the school is right, but I also agree they should let him go if he is practicing adultry or condones adultry. (for those of you who said he only said he was gay and wasn't caught in the act)
Yes, homosexuality seems to be the culmination of the bad sins in the Bible when civilizations were destroyed, but sin is like a chain. If one link breaks the entire chain is worthless.
If Jesus Christ had committed one single sin whether it was a lie to his mother at age eight or something far worse when he was older, he would not have been acceptable as the perfect sacrifice. Therefore, my point is, it is just as doubtful that a practicing adultrer (sp?) is just as likely "not" to be a Christian as a homosexual.
We should love all sinners, as Jesus did and try to convert them, but churches and schools still MUST draw their lines and not allow unrepentant sinners in their ranks.
JohnV
I don't know where you are coming from on this issue, but admitting to homosexuality and homosexuality marriage is not exactly Biblical and whether or not Baylor has done the right thing in the past, they have obviously done the right thing NOW. Why don't we cheer them for making a right decision for once?
Your alcoholic, homosexual argument makes as much sense as me being a "murderer" who doesn't murder.
Again, as posted by another member, it is NOT the act of doing a sin, but the fact that the boy has no problems with either the sin or with homosexual marriage.
What if I were to be a student at Baylor and start preaching that there is nothing wrong with "murder", or nothing wrong with "forceable rape of a minor", doesn't it make sense that Baylor SHOULD boot me out, not because I committed murder or forceable rape of a minor, but because I condone those acts?
By the way, I must disagree with your theory (now often held by secular psychologists) that homosexuality is as normal as alcoholism. Each is a "DESIRE" and different people may have different levels of these desires, but what we DO with our "desires" becomes the problem.
Another quick point, let's follow your theory that homosexuality is like alcoholism. If I were to go to any school that is Christian and say that I am not only a alcoholic, but I see no problems with hanging out in bars (or gays getting married), then you still don't see a problem here?
I don't know where you are coming from on this issue, but admitting to homosexuality and homosexuality marriage is not exactly Biblical and whether or not Baylor has done the right thing in the past, they have obviously done the right thing NOW. Why don't we cheer them for making a right decision for once?
Your alcoholic, homosexual argument makes as much sense as me being a "murderer" who doesn't murder.
Again, as posted by another member, it is NOT the act of doing a sin, but the fact that the boy has no problems with either the sin or with homosexual marriage.
What if I were to be a student at Baylor and start preaching that there is nothing wrong with "murder", or nothing wrong with "forceable rape of a minor", doesn't it make sense that Baylor SHOULD boot me out, not because I committed murder or forceable rape of a minor, but because I condone those acts?
By the way, I must disagree with your theory (now often held by secular psychologists) that homosexuality is as normal as alcoholism. Each is a "DESIRE" and different people may have different levels of these desires, but what we DO with our "desires" becomes the problem.
Another quick point, let's follow your theory that homosexuality is like alcoholism. If I were to go to any school that is Christian and say that I am not only a alcoholic, but I see no problems with hanging out in bars (or gays getting married), then you still don't see a problem here?