A brother in the Lord recently asked me in response to my video "Selective Hypocrisy of Obama & Notre Dame: Why We Need The Real JESUS!"why I encourage public debate to the point that I would have no problem with homosexual marriage advocates from proposing their ideas in the public arena, including schools. That was a fine question that any Christian should be concerned about.

Firstly, whether we like it or not the phenomena is happening and it will continue to happen in greater ways. So the real question is how will we respond on a ground level to unreasonable ideologies of the homosexual community in light of Christian evangelism versus political maneuvering to eliminate their presence. Because if sin is the issue we should be legislating to eliminate the presence of fornication and adultery from all forms of public life too. Granted some sins are socially dangerous and should be illegal. Question: What makes a sin dangerous for society? Your answer should inform what issues are worth "fighting" for on the political front.

Secondly, if we as Christians want the freedom to share the exclusive and potent truths of the Gospel we need to allow them to share their views. The Gospel is explicitly and implicitly offensive to non-christians due to it's claims that we as humans are sinners worthy of eternal death only to be remedied by the "blood" sacrifice of Jesus Christ.  To make matters worse Christian morality is so intense that even wicked thoughts can be a abomination to God. As a non-christian I hated the narrowness of those Bible believing Christians

So, since Christianity is offensive (1 Corinthians 1-2) to them and the homosexual views are to us, how should we respond in the public arena? Simple: CIVILY, CONERSATIONALLY & ADMITTINGLY that both of us have an agenda and that is to convert as many people to our movements as possible!!! Giving each other equal access in any and every public arena is essential (not private or religious of sector of course, people should have rights to protect their domains or voluntary communities).Let the best idea win!

Since I am not insecure about the potency of the Christianity in the end I believe God's purpose will prevail if the Body of Christ is equipped and assured of God's resources and presence within. Evangelism happens when societies function normally or when your persecutor gives you a chance to communicate your points. Total censorship for the early church would have eliminated Christian influence and conversion. So, we as Christians need to be careful what we are fighting for on the political front, because censorship in public life can come back to haunt us.

In the public arena their has to be ongoing debate about "truth" and "society norms". You never read in the New Testament that any of it's leaders in a jointed effort tried censor their fellow citizens of Rome. Rather in the midst of the darkness and warped theologies the Apostles, Laity and Church Fathers evangelized and defended the faith. They backed up their message by having communities that lived out the Gospel through love. They exercised church discipline and saw doctrinal purity as essential. Their lifestyle and ideas were so compelling that citizen after citizen became Christians. It became such a massive movement that even political leaders saw conversion and acceptance of Christianity in their nation as essential for national survival. That was the beginning of Church-State relationship and the beginning of the downfall and impotency of Christianity.

In my facebook response to this good brother, who was engaged enough to ask this question I wrote the following:

Hi brother,

I don't mind if you respond or disagree publicly. I don't care about my reputation, long as I am faithful to the one who enlisted me. Part of the video presentation is to spark conversation and debate so we may all grow and be challenged. SO, thank you for your critiques.

Far as the "homosexuality" being taught. What I mean is in the public sector we as Christians cannot censor them if we expect others not to censor us. It should be equal access. In the public sector the best ideas should win in open debates. Parents these days have to engage their kids about homosexuality, atheism, etc. No longer the days of just passively raising your kids. We need to prepare them with Christian apologetic and doctrine and ultimately when they grow up they have to make their own decision. Since I am not insecure about the truth of God's Word and Christian philosophy I know that Christianity will be persuasive to a lot of people, including youth. All I am asking for is that they don't censure Christian apologetic and philosophy and we don't censure them.

What do you think about this issue of "Public Censorship vs. Public Debate"?

Written by :

Jack Hakimian