The Bible is full of conflict. The serpent in the garden kicked it all off with, "Hath God said?"
The rest of the Bible tells the grand story of conflict. Each individual is part of the conflict like a thread is part of a grand tapestry. The thread is not the tapestry, and the thread is not able to take in the whole. The thread is bent, shoved and crammed in next to other threads.
Christianity teaches we don't get to see the tapestry until after we die and go to heaven. We Christians who have the honor of living at the end of 4000 years of recorded history can, however, view the entire tapestry of the Bible and recorded human history.
Even still, here in the world, we are just a thread.
Some Christians believe that Biblical calls for unity mean that criticism of other Christians is wrong. Is this true? Is it even Biblical?
Who did Jesus criticize? The religious leaders.
How about Paul. Did he only disagree with non-Christians? No. Paul names names to teach the truth in his epistles.
The Bible does call on Christians to resolve their disputes without inviting the world to become the judge. But even this teaching on conflict resolution doesn't provide a clear directive for Christian leaders to always agree in public. In matters of civil contracts, like employment for incorporated entities (like churches and para-church groups) the civil courts are the only place parties to a dispute can turn for justice and judgment.
Christianity, in my view, provides the best cultural, social and lawful mechanism for conflict resolution. Maine, America and the church have, however, mostly abandoned the teachings of Christianity in considerations cultural and political. A chasm is quickly opening between our civil "laws" and God's law.
It is God's law that matters.
Christian leaders who knowingly raise funds from Christians for the purpose of promoting political correctness are wrong. Christian leaders who demand -- for reasons having to do with polling and pragmatism -- that men like Peter LaBarbera and Brian Camenker have only dangerous things to say, are not leading in a Christ-like manner.
Christian leaders who refuse to call abortion murder reasoning that this will persuade the undecided are misguided themselves.
Am I being harsh?
No, I'm being practical. Honesty demands that we call things by their real name.
Sodomy is an extremely wicked idea. And our Christian leaders here in Maine are demanding that we hide that fact so we can win a campaign?
A leader here in Maine recently said on a forum that November's vote is not about homosexuality because the ballot question doesn't use the word. So, we Christians are supposed to only use the words that the propagandists for sodomy based relationships allow?
I don't think so.
I haven't named the leader in this column. That may make some Christian readers feel better. I can't, however, help but think that Paul the Apostle, given the danger posed to innocent children by this wicked ideology, would be naming names.