Steve Oh Refutes Ouyang Wen Feng

Gays imposing their lifestyle on us

Steve Oh
Sep 7, 10
2:41pm

I refer to the Malaysiakini report It's not a gay church, explains pastor. The idea is preposterous no matter how hard Ouyang Wen Feng tries to convince us. But there will always be people who will follow anything because it suits them.

They will explain away the traditional and correct interpretations of certain scriptures that condemn homo-sodomizers and the sad bit is they can be convincing to the unwary who do not study the entire teachings of the Christian faith or receive the proper guidance from sound teachers of the faith.

But religion is not about twisting a teaching to suit ourselves. There is a word for this sort of thing. It is called heresy and every religion suffers from it. You either accept a religion's teachings or you don't. This is what we expect of an honest believer.

If you want to change part of a religion's cardinal teachings, the honest thing to do is to invent your own as many people have done over the ages. Expecting Christians to accept something as seriously heretical as the gay agenda is like saying a Hindu should eat beef, a Muslim not fast and pray and a Buddhist believe in God.

Christianity has been assaulted by all kinds of heresies since its inception. Some are not even Christian and call themselves churches. Some even hide their real teachings behind traditional Christianity to gain respectability.

That is why all the epistles were written to help the early believers understand the doctrines of their faith and protect the churches from heresies, and heretics, and there were some strong words reserved for them. You can't claim misinterpretation when the entire Bible clarifies its stand against homosexuality in different places, not just one passage of the Bible.

No doubt the gays will give their interpretation but other parts of the Bible will expose the fallacy of their arguments. There are too many instances where homosexuality is condemned.

Christians are 'sinners' from all walks of life and backgrounds who approach God in humility and feel remorse for their sins and repent from sinful lifestyles. They believe the Gospel that Jesus Christ died for all their sins at Calvary and that they can be 'born again' by accepting and receiving Jesus into their hearts and then living their lives in obedience to his teachings which are recorded in the Gospels and the teachings of the epistles and doing good works.

That is why included in the list I referenced above are homosexual offenders, together with adulterers, thieves, robbers, murderers, fornicators etc. Many homosexual offenders, not just the temple prostitutes, were delivered from their besetting sin.

In Rome as in Sodom, gay orgies were a common feature of the social life of the decadent Romans, and that is why for 300 years Christianity was persecuted, because it offended the Emperor-worshipping and orgy-loving Romans.

There were people who thought they could have a bit of Jesus and then add or subtract and turn Christianity into a 'do-it-yourself' faith. It resulted in heresy and often sin. If religion is something that I can pick and choose like my favourite food at a buffet meal then it is meaningless. I might as well make my own. Ouyang's group will achieve credibility if they desist from claiming to be Christians because the Bible exhorts Christians from fellow-shipping with those who claim to be Christians but among other things 'sexually immoral.'

As much as Ouyang's arguments may reflect his good intentions, I find many of his reported comments too outlandish and self-contradictory, to ignore. In particular I quote, 'The reverend notes that apart from citing religious beliefs, no one can articulate 'what is wrong with homosexuality, or what harm it does to individuals or the society.' Perhaps Ouyang should start listening for a change.

The body of evidence worldwide provides proof the militant gay agenda has split communities and societies more than any other civic group in recent times. If dividing society is not harmful then I have nothing to say. And if being the conduit of the initial Aids scourge is not harmful, then what is?

In the West they call it 'gay-bashing'. Many males resort to violence against gays because they feel that gays demean and have a negative impact on their manhood. I don't condone this criminal act, but it reflects the harm many males experience and react negatively.

Gay couples also confuse gender roles. There may be feminists and gays but there are also many more who think that traditional gender roles are being harmed by the gay agenda, as some women think feminists do more harm to women than good. Why should the liberal values of the fringe groups that encroach on mainstream society be accepted as the norm just because they have a louder voice in the popular media?

It is something I hope gays understand. Male relationships have been negatively affected by the gay culture and it is not nice to be thought of as gay because men get along well with other men.

Gays only talk of gay rights but what about non-gay rights to not accept gay agendas? After all, it is gays who are imposing their lifestyle on others because no one cares what couples do in their bedrooms but they have to bring it up in the public and demand acceptance.

Why should gays broadcast their sexual preference? If they are worried about their property and other rights why don't they make private contracts between themselves instead of changing societies traditional laws and values to accommodate them?

The mere act of accepting gay rights is a defacto denial of our traditional rights. And that is why gays and Christianity are incompatible in the sense of an active gay sexual lifestyle. Religion aside, though it provides the strongest defence against all forms of moral decay in society, what will happen to the human race when everyone is gay or lesbian? Where will children come from?

If homosexuality is harmless why are the major religions like Christianity and Islam against it? Why did God destroy Sodom? Or have the gays seriously considered that God is deadly serious against this sin? And they may be deluded since this is a common warning in the Bible?

Every great civilization nearing its decline sees the rise of social and moral decay and we catch glimpses of that in the West today. Not only have they lost touch with the family they have ditched traditional family values. Western children call their fathers by name and show utter disrespect for their parents and the elderly. They have forgotten the meaning of roles. And liberal governments encourage the young to split the family. It wasn't always like that.

Many traditional values are under siege in the West and many Westerners themselves are extremely concerned and upset. And today the agenda is same sex marriage. And next? I dread to think. Do Malaysians want to ape the West in their decadent ways? The gay church is not only a religious perversion of Christianity but a serious threat to moral society and the survival of modern civilisation.

That so many famous or infamous people are gays is beside the point. Once all of Germany's and Japan's 'who is who' were for a hideous agenda of world domination. Did that make it right?

If gays are serious about justice they should stop and consider if they themselves have been just to their societies that they are trying to re-invent. Have they considered that some males do not like being treated as sex objects by other males? Do they consider that their militant ways are dividing their communities?

And using the 'you are homophobic' if you dislike gays is a cop out. It is a blanket slander of genuine dislike of the gay lifestyle which many males find simply repugnant. Or do they not have the right to dislike something that they find abhorrent like someone having sex with an animal?

No one is going to convince me that homo-sodomy is okay when science tells you the anus is not meant for sex. There are humans who find pleasure in having sex with animals and objects and young children so should we also accommodate them?

Who we have sex with is a choice. Because we have an urge does not mean we need to satisfy it. Otherwise we would be having sex like animals. And don't tell me some animals have same-sex sex because who wants to imitate animals? The truth is animals know better what homosexuals don't. Some homosexuals proselytize and initiate confused youths into a lifestyle that has seen young gays having a high incidence of suicides which they again falsely blame on society. Society hates thieves and robbers and toll collectors but do they have a high suicide rate?

Religion has served societies well with upright laws and values. And throughout history there will be people to test their limits, and when they succeed often follows the slide down the slippery slope, unless it is something that benefits all of society. Not all who are against the homosexual lobby are religious people as I have illustrated with the gay-bashers.

In the 70's there was a group called the Children of God who used their female members to become 'holy hookers' for God. These females believed that love is sharing and that includes their bodies. It was the result of false teaching but try to convince them.

Often those who are unwary are the unwitting victims and I have no doubt there are genuine gays who seek spiritual comfort but being told you can be gay and Christian is like telling an alcoholic you can be a member of Alcoholics Anonymous and still keep drinking your favourite alcoholic beverage. Sadly you can't be that insanely contradictory.

In case people who don't know me start labelling me let me clarify that I have studied the gay issue and spoken to gays long before the advent of the militant gay agenda. It would be simplistic to draw a one size fits all conclusion or solution to a complex problem and it would be equally simplistic to think that once gay always gay or that one is born that way.

Ironically gays like Ouyang have found the Holy Grail in Christianity but sadly have used it to draw the life-giving liquid not from the true 'spring of living water' but a poisoned well and as Islamic cleric, Harusanni Zakaria rightly said, 'will destroy the world' and sadly, themselves in the process. As the Bible says 'there is a way that seems right but leads only in death.'

RespectDiversity Everyone deserve the right to interpret their religion in their personal capacity. No one should impose their personal analysis of Christian scriptures to the dismay of others. Whether a selected view is mainstream or not, no one can dictate that their interpretation of god is the right one and lambaste others as heretics. All in all, there must be a live and let live policy as humans. This is explained in the variety of Christian sects around the world.

Steve Oh Dr Suresh Kumar, so what is your point? Who is denying gays their fundamental rights? Surely an intelligent doctor like you if you are one can differentiate between right and wrong. When gays distort Christianity, Christians have the right to rebut them. If you read my letter properly I said the gay problem is complex. There are different types of gays. Hormonal imbalance occurs also in heterosexuals. The problem is not about whether gays have the right to exist - it is they have distorted Christianity and don't expect Christians to sit down and embrace them for destroying the truth in a false concept of compassion and love. That is the issue at hand. Would you be upset if I suggest bomohs should be accepted as equals in the medical profession?

Steve Oh Aiyah Jerusalem Cross..homo topic not joking matter what..so why you like dat? You can cry mother cry father all you like but what I say is what Bible teaches so no need to attack me lah. Go and study the Bible properly then you will understand what real compassion is...and why i am real Christian and not bluff bluff one. If people call your mother a prostitute you will keep quiet meh? People want to corrupt God's teaching so real Christians got to tell them they are wrong ..that also cannot ah?Real love is telling people the truth like telling govt the truth... I love gays and got nothing against them and can make friends with them what but not as Christian brothers...if my son is gay I will tell him same thing lah...truth is truth what...BTW I can tell you more stories how I help gays and they can contact me anytime for help...if I don't care for gays you think I want to waste time writing and kena attack by people like you? Don't joke lah! Ask your gay friends to talk to me anytime.

Dr. Suresh Kumar To say the gays are trying to impose their belief on others is preposterous to say the least. God has given us brains to think and analyse our thoughts before we translate it into action. Secondly the male/female hormonal imbalance or defect in a person is also responsible for the behaviour. Without elaborating much, I just wish to say that, as human beings, the gays too have a rightful place under the sun. We may despise them and their actions, but we have no right to discriminate or punish them for what they are, only their maker has the final say.

Patriot I do not think there is any imposition of one's way of life or sexual inclinations on anyone. The choice is left us to follow or not, accept or do not accept. It is unfortunate they have been created this way and out of the norm. The stigma is itself bad enough. Do not make it even worse by ridiculing and condemning them for something which is no fault of theirs unless you are willing to help to alter their chromosomes to set it right and proper. It is always easy to use religion to justify one's acceptance or rejection and in the process, refuse to see real person who leads an isolated life. I am no gay or easily influenced by anyone.

Jerusalem Cross Steve Oh lets hope one of your kids turns out to be gay. Then maybe you will learn compassion. Call yourself a Christian? Don't joke-lah.

Steve Oh Ida, God sets the conditions who is a Christian. The acid test is obedience. Jesus asked, "Why do you call me Lord, Lord but do not do what I say?" In the Bible (John 6) you see him lay down his terms and it was recorded many no longer walked with him. Many people have a false idea of what a Christian is. How do gays glorify God when what they do is an abomination to God? If everyone comes to God on his or her terms there is no Christianity. The vital point is when people turn to God they must turn from sin and that is something some find hard to do like the rich young man (love of money) in the parable. When gays come to God like every sinner God accepts them but they have to give up what God considers sin. In fact it is very Christian to reject those who corrupt Christianity. The Bible commands Christians to not accept those who are slanderous, drunkards, swindlers and sexually immoral, among other things. It is what the Bible teaches, I am just pointing out what it says.

ida bakar Dear Steve Oh, Gay or not Christians have this need for God. If mainstream churches cannot and would not accommodate them, why not let them have a church of their own. No doubt you see them as corrupter of mainstream Christianity but to deny them space to glorify God is not very 'Christian', surely?

SusahKes Steve, I like the way you articulate the issue. No doubt there will be a mass of opposing views that bombard....I agree with you that these days, it appears that the homosexual movement is the one that is bent on imposing their values on the rest. How easily we are labelled homophobic, simply because we wish to adhere to what God has already wanted us to do. Then again, Jesus did foretell, "as it was in the days of Noah...." In the past, one of the arguments was that gays were born that way. But the latest finding by the American Psychological Association, is that there is no gay gene. By the same token, if I had a friend who was alcoholic - and some say that alcoholism is hereditary - does that mean I should not tell my friend to change his lifestyle, simply because he was "born that way"? I too can't imagine a God who created male & female, & commanded them to procreate/multiply, would then leave out gay relationships from his plan if He was ok with it. Unless of course, He is not ok.

Jefferson76 Thank you for speaking up for those of us who don't agree with how Mr. Ouyang interprets the Bible.

Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/142156

Ouyang Wen Feng Justifies His Act

Bible used to justify discrimination

Rev O Young
Sep 7, 10
2:39pm

I refer to It's not a gay church, explains pastor and would like to clarify that I have inadvertently been misquoted and thus my idea distorted inevitably. However, perhaps as a writer, I should have been more articulate. Thus, I would like to apologize to my readers, my opponents as well, for not being clear enough.

Since homosexuality is a highly sensitive topic and homosexuals perhaps are the least understood minority in our country, I deem it is important for me to clarify this. In my original press statement 'It is not a gay church,' I wrote:

'Many contemporary Biblical scholars now realize that the word 'homosexual' in the Bible were mistranslated from the original Hebrew or Greek. In those instances, the original words actually meant 'male temple prostitutes', 'male pimps', 'molesters' or 'morally weak men' – the prohibition was against pagan rituals, sex without consent and weak moral will. The tale of Sodom and Gomorrah, traditionally taken to mean God's wrath against same-sex behavior, is also now regarded as suggesting instead God's wrath toward the sin of inhospitality, arrogance, xenophobia and selfishness. But early Biblical translators did not have such historical insights and thus easily mistranslated the words and stories, inadvertently resulting in centuries of persecution against homosexuals.'

However, the report paraphrased it to: 'He also argues that the traditionally accepted Biblical condemnation of same sex behavior was a result of mistranslation of the Sodom and Gomorrah episode from its original meaning, which he says referred to 'male temple prostitutes, male pimps, molesters or morally weak men' and was a condemnation of 'inhospitality, arrogance, xenophobia and selfishness.'

What I was trying to say in my original statement is that, if we examine and scrutinize the biblical texts (Romans 1:26-27, i Corinthians 6:9, and 1 Timothy 1:10) in the literary and historical/cultural context of the texts, the word 'homosexual' in most English translations of the Bible actually meant 'male temple prostitutes' or 'male pimps' or people who engaged in exploitative same-sex behaviors.

And, regarding the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, it is not about the condemnation of homosexuality, but rather inhospitality, arrogance, xenophobia and selfishness. Thus, these are two arguments. I did not mean the Sodom and Gomorrah episode was about male temple prostitutes nor male pimps.

Regarding the interpretation of the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, it is not only my personal interpretation or the interpretations of most biblical scholars but also the interpretations and understanding of the biblical writers such as prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel (Isaiah 1:9-10, Ezekiel 16:49-50); even when Jesus mentions the city Sodom, he has in mind not the sexual sins, let alone homosexuality, but the inhospitality of its people (Matthew 10:14-15; 11:20-24; Luke 10:10-12).

Harvard biblical scholar Mark Jordan has also brilliantly argued and demonstrated in his highly scholarly book The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology that the term sodomy was coined by eleventh-century theologian Peter Damian and has been used to condemn homosexuals in our modern context which initially has nothing to do with homosexuality. What happened in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah is same -sex rape.

To condemn same-sex rape should not be understood as condemning homosexuality, just like no sensible heterosexual person would characterize opposite-sex rape as heterosexual. Thus, to equate the sin of Sodom to homosexuality by a lot of Christians is to read our prejudice and bias into the Bible.

For so long, the Bible has been used to justify discrimination and to perpetuate prejudice. Many people have mistaken my position as attacking the Bible. I am not attacking the Bible, I am merely challenging the interpretations of many people of the Bible. The Church in the past had used the Bible to persecute and burn scientists alive, to oppose the abolishing of slavery and to justify slavery by teaching the slaves to willingly accept punishment and not to challenge their masters (1 Peter 2:21).

Many have used the Bible (1 Peter 13-14) to criticize Rev Dr. Martin Luther King when he challenged the racist and evil laws in the US in the civil rights movement. We need to learn from the history. But unfortunately, many are repeating the same blunder when they use the Bible to go against our lesbian, gay and transgender brothers and sisters.

In addition to this, please allow me to remind my fellow Malaysians and politicians that Malaysia is a secular state, neither Christian laws nor Islamic laws should be imposed onto its citizens, especially onto non-Christians or non-Muslims.

Last but not least, as a Christian theologian by training and an ordained Christian pastor, I would like to emphasize that we must allow the research and new discoveries of the natural science and social sciences to inform our interpretations of our religious scared text. And it is not a blasphemy to do so as we have allowed Galileo to change our view of the universe and how certain passages of the Bible should be read and interpreted. If we were to believe our God is God of mercy, love and justice, then our interpretations of the Bible should reflect the natures of God by promoting love and justice.

To condemn or to criminalize homosexuals and our transgender brothers and sisters simply because of who they are, and without being able to articulate what harm they do to themselves and to the society at large with sound and valid arguments that are bolstered by unequivocal facts without compromising logical consistency, but simply appealing to the religious text, is appallingly wrong and it is a form of discrimination that does no justice to God's creations. And if anything is blasphemy, this is blasphemy.

Comments 1 to 8 of 8

Rentap That's the problem when we read the Bible like other books. We just quote by the context without established intimate relationship with Christ. The WORD of GOD is alive if we allows GOD to open our heart and eyes so that we can discerning what GOD gave us through HIS Holy Spirit. As we remind ourselves by the following verse. "And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. If we live by the Spirit, let us be guided by the Spirit "Galatians 5:24-25

Timothytong If you BELIEVED gay activity, murder, cursing, adultery..... is allowed, then you will read the Bible in a way to JUSTIFY what you believe. Similarly, Cult leaders, he too can and has justified through the Bible that his members surrenders all their properties to the church under his name and even to mass suicide! This the the power of conceiving a "thought seed" in our mind. Do we believers dare says, what does the Bible has to says about it without any preconceive ideas.

Jefferson76 Blasphemy is a pretty strong word! I think what we are talking about is heresy. Heresy has to do with what is in the scriptures and what they teach. Scientific data are not used to dictate what the scriptures teach. As a pastor you should know the difference.

SusahKes Steve Oh, like what you have written in your article, "Gays imposing their lifestyle on us". You must have given a lot of thought in articulating your points.

Steve Oh The Bible is the most positively discriminating book I know...it discriminates against sin..sexual impurity, lusts, evil desires, greed, thieving, murder, slander etc and of course, homosexuality and protects society from moral destruction. It is authoritative that is why even the heretics appeal to it to justify their heresies. The suggestion that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of inhospitality etc and not homosexuality is the sort of misleading teaching typical of the heretics which Ouyang depends on for support of his ideas. Lot was so desperate that he even offered his daughters to the sodomizers who wanted to sodomise the angels...anyone twisting the truth to justify an unjustifiable act God condemns has a quarrel with God not those who merely state the truth. There is hope for gays and lesbians but not in Ouyang's heresy...open rebuke is better than love concealed as the Bible says and he should not rely on heretical scholars who also deny many cardinal teachings.

GP123 Rev, I think you read most of us wrong. We condemn the act. Not the person. Don't jump to conclusions.

Croniq Its easy for homophobias to use the Bible as their instrument of oppression against homosexuality. They are no better than UMNO who brandish 'Ketuanan Melayu' to oppress non-Malays.

Joker LEV 18:22 "'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable. 29 "'Everyone who does any of these detestable things--such persons must be cut off from their people. LEV 20:13 "'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. How much clearer does God need to state His anger against homosexuality? ROM 1:26-27 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/142155

So what if China rules the world?

If Malaysia were to continue limiting the growth of Chinese education as well as not valuing our Chinese brains, we will very soon lag behind even the backward countries like Vietnam and Cambodia.
-------------------------------------------
By BA Hamzah

THE days of Pax Americana are over. So what if Pax Sinica were to rule the world? At its optimum size, during the Cold War period the US military was designed to fight two and a half conventional wars. Theoretically, it could fight a conventional war in Europe, another one in Asia and half a war in the Middle East and still survive. The US strategy was not put to test, courtesy of the Soviet Union’s break-up.

Today, the US is back in Southeast Asia adding a new operational theatre to Iraq and Afghanistan. The fiasco in Iraq is being repeated in Afghanistan as the US searches for a right balance between counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism strategy.

The cost of waging more than two wars could result in double-dip recession in the US. The WikiLeaks are difficult to plug. Like the Pentagon Papers, the exposure will shift public opinion and could result in President Barack Obama missing a second term.

According to the Economist US military activities in the South China Sea, Yellow Sea and East China Sea are intimidating and more than a show of force and a direct challenge to China.

Suddenly, the South China Sea has become US national interest after close to four decades of absence. It has conducted naval exercises with Vietnam the enemy state it failed to destroy. Recall those days when South Vietnam was of vital interest to America and an unfounded fear of the dominoes falling to communist rule. America’s hasty retreat in April 1975 from the roof-top of its embassy in Saigon did not herald the fall of Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore to the communists.

Communist Vietnam has embraced capitalism and looks like becoming an ally of the US planning to contain China’s military rise. The US is back with a new mantra that China is a threat to the region. Of course, it does not help China’s cause that it has militarised the South China Sea; Beijing has also warned American oil companies from drilling for oil in the disputed area.

Vietnam should carefully note that when elephants make love, the grass will be trampled. History, geography and economics tend to favour China.

The US should heed the advice from Alberto Romulo, the Philippines foreign secretary, who said Asean countries did not need the US to solve their territorial disputes with China which is fuelling the economy of the region. Romulo is right: why should Asean get embroiled in a US-Sino conflict that has been running since the Second World War? Besides, why should Asean countries team up with a distant foreign military power that is fast becoming an economic and political dinosaur? It is unethical for Asian states to gang up against China, the only Asian power that can match the US economic fight. True, it will be a while before it can catch up with the US military prowess. But it won’t be long before China closes the asymmetry gap. And, China is in no hurry to cross swords with the US.

Anti-US policy in Japan, South Korea and the China-Taiwan free trade agreement has forced the US to be on the offensive. But to win wars a democracy like the US needs a strong economy. The US Commerce Department revealed that the trade deficit for June 2010 was US$42.7 billion (RM134.4 billion), 19% more than in May, and to add insult to injury it said the US trade gap with China has ballooned to US$26.2 billion (RM82.5 billion) since October 2008.

As China becomes the world’s largest economy the deficit with the US is likely to expand.

The US is right to be concerned with the freedom of navigation in the seas near China. But the issue is China has never prevented states from exercising this freedom. Of course, China has contested military activities especially espionage in its exclusive economic zone. Brazil, India, Ecuador, Bangladesh, Egypt and Malaysia are among the states that do not allow foreign countries to conduct military manoeuvres in their exclusive economic zones.

A new battlefront in the Asia-Pacific region may drain more resources that US needs to win wars at home which it must not lose. It was Thucydides, author of the Peloponnesian War, who wrote that it was the blind and immoderate behaviour of the Athenians which ultimately led to their downfall. A lesson in history, perhaps for the US to savour.

BA Hamzah is a student of politics, international law and education. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Source: http://www.thesundaily.com/article.cfm?id=51106