Intravarsity Christian Student Fellowship?

[bar Jonah]

Anyone here associated (past or present) with Intravarsity Christian Student Fellowship?

[malacon]

I am at Tulane University, New Orleans, LA

[bar Jonah]

I was wondering if anyone involved in ICSF elsewhere in the country might have any explanation for the recent actions of the Auraria campus chapter here in Denver, or might at least shed some light on the issue.

Last week, I was walking into the Student Union to visit the campus bookstore for a folder to hastily put my presentation in, which was due in just minutes. On the way in, I saw little fliers taped to the glass on the outer doors of the building (very common). My stopped in amazement upon seeing one of them:

Queers Talk!
Bible Thumping Christians
shut up and listen!

It explained that this event was going to happen just inside this door, on the right, in the "Multicultural Student Lounge" just minutes from then -- 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.

Well, if I didn't HAVE to be in class that day, I would have skipped and made sure that event heard the truth from this unapologetic apologist. I hastily went to the store, got my thing, and on the way out a different entrance, stopped by a student club table where sat a friend of mine named Jeff. He and I help run a Messianic Jewish evangelism student club on campus called "Menorah Ministries Student Club," associated with the Denver evangelism organization by the same name (Menorah Ministries). Jeff is just the kind of guy to give these folks a piece of his mind as well. He promised he'd check it out and report to me later, after my class.

I got out of class and swung by our club's table. Jeff said the event didn't allow ANY questions or commentary from Christians. It was strictly one-way communication, allowing homosexuals to spew their garbage without response.

But then, Jeff told me who sponsored the event. And that's what was really beyond the pale.

Intravarsity Christian Student Fellowship

One of their leaders got up at the beginning of the event and told everyone that Christians are not allowed to speak during this event, that they are here to shut up and listen to the homosexuals' testimonies and issues and beliefs. And "Jesus taught us to love, so we should love them and accept them as they are, and not judge."


So, is this kind of outrageous, disgusting behavior happening with ICSF elsewhere in the country? Frankly, I am astounded and appalled. I never would have expected such nonsense from this widely-respected Christian student organization.

[Pilgrim]

I was in the InTER Varsity Christian Fellowship. Is that what you meant?

I'm sure it was a decision of that group and not a point for the organization as a whole. But really, what's the big deal about having to shut up and listen for once?

[bar Jonah]

Today @ 11:54 AM located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=43025#post43025)
Pilgrim:

I was in the InTER Varsity Christian Fellowship. Is that what you meant?

I'm sure it was a decision of that group and not a point for the organization as a whole. But really, what's the big deal about having to shut up and listen for once?
What's the big deal about evil running unchecked, unanswered? What's the big deal about having a public event where Christians restrain other Christians from speaking the Truth, but allow sinners to have control of the floor and spew anti-Christian rhetoric?

Indeed, what is wrong with that?

(And yes, sorry, Intervarsity.)

I'll tell you what's wrong with it.

1. It hurt the Christians there by invalidating their faith, telling them that these homosexual ranters had something more important to say than those Christians' Truth. It told them their Truth wasn't even welcome by a campus Christian leader. It told them to accept homosexuality and not judge.

2. It hurt the non-Christians observers by invalidating the truth of Jesus Christ and the Bible. It told them that Christianity needs to "shut up" and listen to homosexual garbage. It told them that all views are equally valid.

3. It hurt the homosexuals by maliciously withholding the truth from them when it could have saved someone that day, could have set someone free from their bondage in sin. It validated the sick, evil abomination they call a "lifestyle" or "preference."

It hurt every person in that room. And it disrespected God by disrespecting His Truth, His Word.

That's what's wrong with it.

[PRAISE]

Today @ 06:07 PM located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=42990#post42990)
RightIdea:

I was wondering if anyone involved in ICSF elsewhere in the country might have any explanation for the recent actions of the Auraria campus chapter here in Denver, or might at least shed some light on the issue.

Last week, I was walking into the Student Union to visit the campus bookstore for a folder to hastily put my presentation in, which was due in just minutes. On the way in, I saw little fliers taped to the glass on the outer doors of the building (very common). My stopped in amazement upon seeing one of them:

Queers Talk!
Bible Thumping Christians
shut up and listen!

It explained that this event was going to happen just inside this door, on the right, in the "Multicultural Student Lounge" just minutes from then -- 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.

Well, if I didn't HAVE to be in class that day, I would have skipped and made sure that event heard the truth from this unapologetic apologist. I hastily went to the store, got my thing, and on the way out a different entrance, stopped by a student club table where sat a friend of mine named Jeff. He and I help run a Messianic Jewish evangelism student club on campus called "Menorah Ministries Student Club," associated with the Denver evangelism organization by the same name (Menorah Ministries). Jeff is just the kind of guy to give these folks a piece of his mind as well. He promised he'd check it out and report to me later, after my class.

I got out of class and swung by our club's table. Jeff said the event didn't allow ANY questions or commentary from Christians. It was strictly one-way communication, allowing homosexuals to spew their garbage without response.

But then, Jeff told me who sponsored the event. And that's what was really beyond the pale.

Intravarsity Christian Student Fellowship

One of their leaders got up at the beginning of the event and told everyone that Christians are not allowed to speak during this event, that they are here to shut up and listen to the homosexuals' testimonies and issues and beliefs. And "Jesus taught us to love, so we should love them and accept them as they are, and not judge."


So, is this kind of outrageous, disgusting behavior happening with ICSF elsewhere in the country? Frankly, I am astounded and appalled. I never would have expected such nonsense from this widely-respected Christian student organization.

I am very surprised about this! I hope that this is an isolated incident! I was a member of IVCF when I went to both University of Wisconsin Eau Claire & UW-Milwaukee, & if this is true, I am very dismayed!:eek: The IVCF that I knew was an orginization dedicated to encouraging Christian students in their Christian walk-NOT something like this! Can anyone confirn that this has happened at other campuses? E-mail me if it's true I DO WANT TO KNOW IF IT IS TRUE! Thanks!

PRAISE:thumb:

[Socrates]

RightIdea is totally correct. I can't believe Pilgrim's response to a supposedly evangelical group sponsoring anti-Christian bilge without any challenge allow. Homosexual activists certainly don't need any more platforms, since the media and educational systems already push ad nauseam that there is nothing wrong with homosexual acts, and that anyone who objects is "homophobic".

Hardly surprising though -- the IVF crowd have long compromised on Genesis. History shows that compromised on the rest of the Bible follow a generation or two later.

[bar Jonah]

Not only do I not mind open discussion of issues such as homosexuality, but I strongly encourage such events. There IS a time for Christians to "shut up and listen." Yes, within an event involving two-way discussion or debate, an event that allows both sides (or various sides) to express what they believe to be truth.

But this... this was a travesty. It turns my stomach. To deny Christians and give blatant and public support to the homosexual community as they bash Christianity... It is inexcusable.

I'm sorry I couldn't be there to tell that student club leader that I am literally ashamed of him and of what his club did that day.

[Socrates]

Yeah, that's the point. The agressive gay lobby shouts down any dissent, so that anyone who objects on biblical grounds is labelled a "homophobic bigot". And now the allegedly evangelical Christians have joined in! The agressively misochristic gay community must be chortling at these "useful idiots".

To show where this could lead in America, Canadian courts have already labelled the Bible as "hate literature".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LAW OF THE LAND
Bible verses regarded
as hate literature
Court rules Scripture exposed homosexuals to ridicule

February 18, 2003

By Art Moore

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

Certain passages of the Bible can be construed as hate literature if placed in a particular context, according to a Canadian provincial court.

The Court of Queen's Bench in Saskatchewan upheld a 2001 ruling by the province's human rights tribunal that fined a man for submitting a newspaper ad that included citations of four Bible verses that address homosexuality.

Ad placed by Christian corrections officer in Saskatoon, Canada, newspaper

A columnist noted in the Edmonton Journal last week that the Dec. 11 ruling generated virtually no news stories and "not a single editorial."

Imagine "the hand-wringing if ever a federal court labeled the Quran hate literature and forced a devout Muslim to pay a fine for printing some of his book's more astringent passages in an ad in a daily newspaper," wrote Lorne Gunter in the Edmonton, Alberta, daily.

Under Saskatchewan's Human Rights Code, Hugh Owens of Regina, Saskatchewan, was found guilty along with the newspaper, the Saskatoon StarPhoenix, of inciting hatred and was forced to pay damages of 1,500 Canadian dollars to each of the three homosexual men who filed the complaint.

The rights code allows for expression of honestly held beliefs, but the commission ruled that the code can place "reasonable restriction" on Owen's religious expression, because the ad exposed the complainants "to hatred, ridicule, and their dignity was affronted on the basis of their sexual orientation."

The ad's theme was that the Bible says no to homosexual behavior. It listed the references to four Bible passages, Romans 1, Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 on the left side. An equal sign was placed between the verse references and a drawing of two males holding hands overlaid with the universal nullification symbol - a red circle with a diagonal bar.

Owens, an evangelical Christian and corrections officer, said his ad was "a Christian response" to Homosexual Pride Week.

"I put the biblical references, but not the actual verses, so the ad would become interactive," he told the National Catholic Register after the 2001 ruling. "I figured somebody would have to look them up in the Bible first, or if they didn't have a Bible, they'd have to find one."

Leviticus 20:13, says, according to the New International Version, "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."

"Owens denies that, as a Christian, he wants homosexuals put to death, as some inferred from the biblical passages," the Catholic paper said. He believes, however, that "eternal salvation is at stake," both for those engaging in homosexual acts and for himself, if he fails to inform them about "what God says about their behavior."

Exposure to hatred

Justice J. Barclay wrote in his opinion that the human-rights panel "was correct in concluding that the advertisement can objectively be seen as exposing homosexuals to hatred or ridicule."

"When the use of the circle and slash is combined with the passages of the Bible, it exposes homosexuals to detestation, vilification and disgrace," Barclay said. "In other words, the biblical passage which suggests that if a man lies with a man they must be put to death exposes homosexuals to hatred."

In the 2001 ruling, Saskatchewan Human Rights Board of Inquiry commissioner Valerie Watson emphasized that the panel was not banning parts of the Bible. She wrote that the offense was the combination of the symbol and the biblical references. Owens, in fact, published an ad in 2001, without complaint, that quoted the full text of the passages he cited in the offending 1997 ad.

But the Canadian Civil Liberties Association sides with Christian groups that criticize the panel for stifling free speech. Opponents of the ruling say it illustrates the dangers of a bill currently in Parliament that would add "sexual orientation" as a protected category in Canada's genocide and hate crimes legislation.

That legislation would make criminals of people like Owens and others who have been charged under provincial human rights panels, they argue.

Two years ago, the Ontario Human Rights Commission penalized printer Scott Brockie $5,000 for refusing to print letterhead for a homosexual advocacy group. Brockie argued that his Christian beliefs compelled him to reject the group's request.

In 1998, an Ontario man was convicted of hate crimes for an incident in which he distributed pamphlets about Islam outside a high school. In one of the pamphlets, defendant Mark Harding listed atrocities committed in the name of Islam in foreign lands to back his assertion that Canadians should be wary of local Muslims.

Janet Epp Buckingham, legal counsel for the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, says cases like this are worrisome precedents that an expanded hate law could build upon, reported the Hamilton, Ontario, Spectator newspaper.

"Mark Harding really went overboard," Epp Buckingham said. "He said some quite nasty things about Muslims - that they are really violent overseas and that Muslims in Canada are the same and people need to be careful of them.

"But the court almost ignored the religious exemption," she said. "Harding himself said he wasn't trying to incite violence against Muslims. But the court said he did promote violence and hatred against Muslims and therefore the exemption doesn't apply, that it was not a good faith expression of religion."

She said that, at the very least, Bill C-250 could place a significant chill over the Christian community and, at worst, it could cause undue restrictions on religious expression.

[bar Jonah]

03-24-2003 @ 03:13 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=43562#post43562)
Socrates:

Yeah, that's the point. The agressive gay lobby shouts down any dissent, so that anyone who objects on biblical grounds is labelled a "homophobic bigot". And now the allegedly evangelical Christians have joined in! The agressively misochristic gay community must be chortling at these "useful idiots".

To show where this could lead in America, Canadian courts have already labelled the Bible as "hate literature".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LAW OF THE LAND
Bible verses regarded
as hate literature
Court rules Scripture exposed homosexuals to ridicule

February 18, 2003

By Art Moore

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

Ah, someone else who appreciates the outstanding WorldNetDaily.com! Hear hear, brother!

[Pilgrim]

I hear what you are saying. It only makes sense that any conversation has participation from all view points. I can totally understand why you would be upset at not having a chance to respond and really have a dialogue with those folks.

In my intial response I thought you were saying that you didn't want any open conversation with them. I misunderstood and apologise for that.

Pilgrim

[bar Jonah]

Today @ 01:26 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=51195#post51195)
Pilgrim:

I hear what you are saying. It only makes sense that any conversation has participation from all view points. I can totally understand why you would be upset at not having a chance to respond and really have a dialogue with those folks.

In my intial response I thought you were saying that you didn't want any open conversation with them. I misunderstood and apologise for that.

Pilgrim
Oh HECK no. I would LOVE an event where both sides got to say EVERYTHING they wanted to say. :tongue: