Thanks for printing! Don't forget to come back to Herman Cain for fresh articles!
Tim Kaine's butchering of Genesis to justify the LGBT agenda is . . . quite something
I don't want to make this a partisan thing because it's not only Democrats who butcher Scripture in support of political agendas. A lot of Republicans who want to embrace the Bible-believer mantle will trumpet a verse here or a passage there to help them make their political points, but they don't really dive into the Word of God with true devotion to Christ as the driving force.
That said, it's Democrats who have a habit of twisting God's Word to try to justify absolutely horrendous things so they can pretend their embrace of the immoral is somehow not an affront to the Living God.
That brings us to Tim Kaine, who claims to be a devout Catholic, and offers a novel take on Genesis in order to justify his support of gay marriage, transgenderism and all kinds of other things clearly not supported in the Bible. I'm going to share this from the perspective of the wonderful Dr. Michael Brown. The actual quote from Kaine is in bold in the excerpt:
In support of his viewpoint, he cited Pope Francis’s oft-quoted comment about gay Catholics (“Who am I to judge?”), failing to realize that the Pope was not sanctioning homosexual acts and relationships but rather saying, “If someone is same-sex attracted and wants to be part of the Church, who am I to judge?”
This is very different from saying, “If two men are in love and want to have a romantic and sexual relationship, who am I to judge?”
But I am not a Catholic, nor can I predict where the Roman Catholic Church will be in 5 or 50 years. What I can say with certainty is that Sen. Kaine’s use of Genesis 1 to buttress his support of LGBT activism amounts to scriptural malpractrice.
He said, “I think it’s going to change because my church also teaches me about a creator who, in the first chapter of Genesis, surveyed the entire world, including mankind, and said, ‘It is very good.’”
And, he added, “Who am I to challenge God for the beautiful diversity of the human family? I think we’re supposed to celebrate it, not challenge it.”
Seriously? Kaine is going to Genesis 1 to argue for same-sex “marriage,” along with the larger LGBT agenda?
Allow me to give a helpful hint to the senator: Sir, although you will find no support for your position anywhere in the Bible, the worst place you can go to argue your case is Genesis.
It is in Genesis 1 that we see the importance of gender distinctions, as God creates humankind as male and female — not as male, female, and an infinite number of variations, including agender, bigender, and third gender, along with multi-gender options like ambigender, bigender, blurgender, collgender, conflictgender, cosmicgender, crystagender, deliciagender, duragender, demiflux, domgender, fissgender, gemelgender, gendercluster, genderfluid, gendersea, genderfuzz, genderfractal, genderspiral, genderswirl, gendervex, gyaragender, libragender, ogligender, pangender, polygender and trigender.
Is this what Kaine was referring when he spoke of “the beautiful diversity of the human family” that we should celebrate? Genesis 1 states the exact opposite.
The entire Bible states exactly the opposite, and let me expand a bit on Dr. Brown's point. Kaine is actually paraphrasing Genesis 1:31, which says, "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day." (So Democrats are now creationists? There's news.) God is surveying the state of His creation before the fall, when sin had not yet entered mankind, and yes, at this point it was very good.
That changes drastically after the events of Genesis 3, and eventually God became so disgusted with the iniquity of mankind that He destroyed the entire world - save for eight people - with a flood. (I know some of you don't believe any of this. Tell it to Tim Kaine, who quoted from it as if he considered it an authoritative text. If he really does, then he should know what it really says - which is not what he's trying to claim it says. If he doesn't think it's authoritative then he should admit that and stop quoting from it as if he believed it.)
Also, if you're going to look for guidance from the Bible concerning homosexuality, then you should look to 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and various other passages, which leave no doubt as to God's position - no matter what Matthew Vines tries to tell you.
But the key to Kaine's problem here is that he's using the term "diversity" to erase the distinction between who people are and what people do. Of course God loves everyone regardless of their color, their background, their sex or whatever else. These are things He designed into them.
How people respond to their fleshly urges is another matter entirely. God certainly loves the person, but if the person is choosing to be governed by fleshly urges that are contrary to God's will for their life, then God will neither accept nor bless that person's behavior.
If you have a desire and you want to know if it's OK with God for you to act on that desire, go to God's Word and see if your desire lines up with what the Word says. If it doesn't, then He doesn't want you to do it. What Democrats and the "LGBTQ community" want to do is twist passages of God's Word to mean things they don't mean, while ignoring or explaining away other parts that clearly and obviously mean things they don't like. That's what Tim Kaine is doing here. It's a deception so shameless, you can't help but suspect he's been hanging around with the Clintons.