Choe is a first-year undeclared student and congregant of Bread of Life Church.

By Connie Choe

Jennifer Shane’s submission in Monday’s paper represents the pinnacle of pseudo-Christian ignorance and makes me sorry that so many people have no idea what the religions they claim to be a part of are all about. (“Religion used to promote agenda,” Daily Bruin, Viewpoint, Nov. 26)



I am not trying to force Christianity on anyone, but Shane brought up several topics that are addressed clearly in the Bible, the holy book of the religion she claims to be a part of.

Shane asserts that Christianity is being “contorted” to further “intolerance towards gays” in the same way that it was used to support slavery. The difference between the two issues is that the Bible does not have to be contorted to say that homosexuality is wrong. It says it flat out. In I Corinthians 6:9-10, the scripture reads, “Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolators ... nor homosexual offenders ... will inherit the kingdom of God.” This is also mentioned in Leviticus 18:22 and Romans 1:26-27.

A strict interpretation of the Bible does not claim that God despises gays anymore than it claims He despises the rest of humanity. There is not a single person in the world who has never lied, stolen, had sex outside of marriage, cheated or committed some sort of sin. If God hated sinners, He would have to hate everyone, wouldn’t He? But He doesn’t hate the people; He hates the sin. Does this make God intolerant? No! If God were passive toward sin (which the Bible says is of the Enemy, Satan), then why would He be God?

Shane also asks why He would create something He doesn’t have control over. The answer is that He does have control over everything – this is what makes Him God. He gave us free will for His glory, but He is still sovereign. If He wanted things to be “easier” He could have just made us little drones with no free will. He does whatever He pleases. He is God, remember? But what would be the point of that?

Shane goes on to say that people try to refute what she believes by saying “God trusts us to do the right thing.” Well, I don’t know who these people are, but they obviously haven’t cracked a Bible open recently. Of course God doesn’t “trust us to do the right thing.” He already knows that every person has sinned or will sin – why else would He have sent Christ to die as a sacrifice? He could have just left us without a Savior and said, “Well, those who are good get to go to heaven and those who are bad don’t.”

She says that another “Christian excuse” is that “we just don’t understand God’s ways.” Of course we don’t understand God’s ways. He’s God. If He gave us all of the answers to the workings of the universe, our brains would probably explode.

In the next paragraph Shane asks why God would send His Son to die for us, if He didn’t “think enough of us” to bestow us with the knowledge of why homosexuals are homosexual. God loves us like we are His children, and that’s why He sent His Son to die for us, not because we deserve wisdom (or a Savior).

Shane also implies that God is intolerant for “accepting” Paul (who had been a murderer of Christians prior to his conversion) and not “accepting” homosexuals who are “peaceful and devoted people.” I cannot imagine what she means by “accepting” unless she means salvation. If she does mean salvation, then the answer is simple for any Christian. The Bible says that salvation is by grace alone, through faith. This is the whole point of Christianity. It didn’t matter if Paul was a murderer, a homosexual, or a prostitute – or all three, because when Paul became a Christian he was forgiven all his sins through Christ.

Also, God is not against welfare. Anyone who says He is has indeed manipulated Christianity. In fact, God encourages us to give to the needy in many places in the Bible. The feeding of the five thousand is not a contradiction of any sort. Maybe Shane is reading a different translation of the Bible, but I’ve got four gospels in New International Version here that say Jesus didn’t ever ask the people to stay (Matthew 14:13-21, Mark 6:30-44, Luke 9:10-17, John 6:1-15). That’s not to say that He didn’t want them to stay, but the example that she chose is not relevant because she paraphrases the story incorrectly to suit her argument.

Shane goes on to say that anyone who has “fallen for the propaganda of the people on Bruin Walk, who by no means shed any grace on this campus” should question them. She has made the assumption that since one ignorant hyper-conservative misuses the Bible that all Christians are bad. Would that include the author herself, who is supposedly a Christian? Or maybe she just means Christians who believe in the Bible. This kind of broad generalization is where prejudice begins.

The article then gives a list of questions that should be used to fend off any of those Christians, should they ever try to “offer you a bible study.” Every question sounds like it’s coming from a girl who was raised Catholic by her family, but is now having doubts and wants to vent. (I cannot blame Shane. I had the same questions and confusion about my faith until a few years back.)

Shane says it is “hard for (her) to remain firm in her Christian faith” when no one wants to answer her questions. Perhaps her faith is not so strong as she would like to think. If she’s a Christian, why is she trying to drive people away from Christianity? If she’s a Christian, why doesn’t she believe that the Bible is the truth? Not everyone has to believe in the Bible, but for any religion, it’s a pretty good idea to believe that the book your entire religion is based on is right, otherwise, what are you putting your faith in? I’m not trying to condemn her either, I just think she’s got a lot of questions and she has not tried to find the answers in the right place.

If she really wants the answers to these questions, she should seek the guidance of any biblical theologian ... or perhaps she should consider humbling herself and asking one of those “people on Bruin Walk.”