I have been having a fascinating conversation on Facebook about global warming. I hope to post it here sometime in the near future.
As most are aware by now, the ruling against Stephen Boissoin was over-turned a short time ago. Although this is something of a victory for free speech, I wasn't going to post about it due to time constraints.
We all know it was over-turned.
Life goes on.
And then I received the following letter in my email this morning.
Stephen Boissoin challenges Michael Coren to public debate
The text of the letter follows:
Michael Coren has crossed the line and I challenge him to a public debate on the many ways that Christians can and should interact with their post-modern post-church culture (both believer and non) without compromising the ethic as outlined within scripture.
Over the last year I have listened to Michael Coren subtly and now forthrightly discredit me on the air. His recent comments were over the top and outright disrespectful for one Christian to say about another, especially during such a sensitive time for practising Christians within our culture.
Throughout the last seven-plus years I have had amazing opportunities in both Canada and the United States to explain the context of my letter and God’s love for all, including homosexuals. Coren’s comments were attacking and outright arrogant and are a clear abuse of the fact that he has his own show.
I respectfully request an opportunity to defend myself and my opinion in front of Michael Coren perhaps on a show that discusses ways that a Christian can/should interact/communicate with our post-modern/post-church culture. I would love to do so with a respectful host such as Richard Landau. That is unless Coren is too cowardly to do so with the likes of us, and instead chooses to continue his cowardly shots a me while hiding behind his personal pulpit. If you are going to attack a person or their position, then have the integrity to do it face to face.
Listen to his recent comments and ask yourself how you would feel.
I am available for Calgary or Ontario (I am in Ontario from Dec 26 to Jan 4).
My email to Michael reads as follows:
I too have analyzed many of the comments that you have made over the last year in regards to my case and, in general, on your opinion about how a Christian should communicate. Personally, I believe that you come across as an arrogant a** who has very little understanding of what does and does not damage Christianity. Your OVER (key word) intellectualization about how one is to communicate certain biblical truths is inconsistent with biblical teaching, the context of my letter and me as a Christian. I have bit my tongue until now because I had thought we were on the same team but I see now that your version of Christianity is border-lining on being so seeker-sensitive that is does a disservice to Christendom.
It is truly people like you within Christendom who assume they accomplish much for the Lord - strike that - for Christians, but actually contribute to keeping the masses stagnant. Like it or not, you do more to encourage secular humanism than the true faith and life we are called to, brother. Although causing offense is not our mandate, Jesus Himself said many would hate us because of Him (He and what he stood for - all inclusively.) Offense is at times what drives many to consider and investigate "The Why," even while in a state of rebellion. Offense is often the instigator that begins the process that leads to change and repentance. I have seen this over and over while evangelizing to thousands of youth and young adults.
Keeping my letter in context…it was partly in response to a teacher (the actual complainant) bringing a gay minister into my son’s school to teach the pro-homosexual interpretation of the Bible without inviting any other viewpoint for balance. Plus, the Alberta Human Rights Commission was funding an Alberta gay organization that had a youth-focused initiative that had the following as a foundational statement, "Homosexuality is normal, necessary, acceptable and productive and has been for thousands of years."
I have received thousands of emails from Christians (in tune with scripture and the Spirit) who understood the context of my letter and have shared how this situation has educated them and encouraged their faith. I have also had a chance to speak to hundreds of homosexuals who email or call me to discuss the letter. We have even met in person on more occassions than I can recall. In each instance, I have shared the immense love of God for them and His salvation wrought on their behalf. In every situation they have left considering me a new friend.
When one weighs the damage that the gay agenda has contributed to the demise of youth culture against the wording in my letter, only then can the true intent and perspective of my opinion be understood. When were you last involved with youth/young adult ministry in a hyper pro-gay culture Michael or have seen first-hand the damage it causes?
I request that you and I meet in person on a taped show where we can have a real (respectful) debate on this very issue. I think that you will discover that I am a little more in tune with what is going on than the average youth pastor (which I was not) and yourself. Not to do so proves one thing, that you choose to remain a coward behind your personal pulpit while taking shots at a brother in Christ who cannot defend himself.
Interesting that he calls his request "respectful" while also calling Coren a coward.
I hope there is a debate.
Let me remind you of Boissoin's position on the use of Scripture:
My open letter and comments
The answer Ruth is that not in all cases does a Christian have to, or benefit from, quoting scripture. Though scripture is the basis of our lives as Christians, it is not in every case some magic ingredient that alone convicts or instructs the target audience when spoken or read. ... That letter intentionally did not include scripture.
In his own words.
So, for all those who bend over backwards to argue that Boissoin faced some sort of horrible persecution on account of his beliefs as a Christian, I have a question.
How can that possibly be true if he DELIBERATELY excluded the very source and authority for our beliefs?