"some music was meant to stay underground..."

Anti-Gay Heavy Metal Preacher Suing Rachel Maddow For $50 Million

Bradlee Dean, president of the "You Can Run But You Can't Hide" Christian ministry, who describes himself as a "heavy metal preacher" and "a renowned hard metal rocker who came to Christ after suffering a hard life as a young boy," is suing political commentator Rachel Maddow for $50 million. Dean is a member of the band Junkyard Prophets, which is the official band of the ministry.

According to the complaint from Dean, which can be read here, he is suing Maddow for defamation when she quoted Dean's views on homosexuality, Christianity, and Islamic Sharia law, which was taken from a radio show Dean took part in.

The complaint alleges Maddow and other news stations are attempting to discredit him in order to harm the presidential campaign of Michelle Bachmann, stating "This explains the malicious attacks on Bradlee Dean and his ministry, which are being used to harm the presidential campaign of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, who is a conservative Christian."

The quote in question from Dean is as follows, and the television segment in which Maddow discussed the issue can be viewed below (the section about Dean starts at 1:40):

"Muslims are calling for the execution of homosexuals in America. They themselves are upholding the laws that are even in the Bible, the Judeo-Christian God, but they seem to be more moral than the American Christians do. Because these people are livid about enforcing their laws. They know homosexuality is an abomination. If America won't enforce the laws, God will raise up a foreign enemy to do just that."

A statement from Dean regarding his remarks and the news commentators that have reported on it can be found here.

You can also check out Bradlee Dean's website for his film "My War: The Testimony of Bradlee Dean" by heading over to this location.

What's Next?

Please share this article if you found it interesting.

You can get related band news and info in the sidebar and on the respective band pages.


49 Comments on "Heavy Metal Preacher Suing Rachel Maddow"

Post your comments and discuss the article below! (no login required)

Anonymous Reader
1. Casual Observer writes:

Well, this is silly

# Aug 1, 2011 @ 9:36 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
brandedcfh420's avatar

Member

2. brandedcfh420 writes:

$$$$$ grab by a religous zealot!!

# Aug 1, 2011 @ 9:39 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Hellspawn's avatar

Member

3. Hellspawn writes:

Oh BOO FVCKING HOO! She repeated something you said? OBVIOUSLY WORTH 50 MILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT. Fvck this guy and his sh** brand of religious mongering.

# Aug 1, 2011 @ 11:03 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Netromancer's avatar

Member

4. Netromancer writes:

It's fun to slander folks with made-up statistics and religion-fueled hate banter, eh, BradlEE. Not so much fun when your own words are shoved back in your face on public television. Rachel, you little minx, you remind me of my 3rd Grade Teacher. Marry me...

# Aug 2, 2011 @ 12:36 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
5. mudguts666 writes:

What a F**king joke this is!!!!

# Aug 2, 2011 @ 12:54 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
6. DreamHeater writes:

Keep metal out of your homophobic religious bullsh**.

# Aug 2, 2011 @ 1:36 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
BrianMN's avatar

Member

7. BrianMN writes:

As MU's unofficial homo mascot, speaking for f@gs across the globe.......I can honestly say one thing to Dean....FVCK YOU B****H.
Metal musician he is not.
A talentless, junkie hack who goes around saying gays should be executed and Muslim countries are following the word of God more closely than we are for doing the same.
His lawsuit will go nowhere as will his garbage band or his ministry of lies.
When all else fails........quote Tom Araya....."DIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!"

# Aug 2, 2011 @ 9:09 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
wilco's avatar

Member

8. wilco writes:

ah a quik run on how to make fast money
total bullsh**

# Aug 2, 2011 @ 12:24 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
9. Josh_of_Doom writes:

Someone needed some publicity.

# Aug 2, 2011 @ 3:07 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
ZMA's avatar

Member

10. ZMA writes:

There is just sooooooo much that can be said about this. But I'm just gonna say I hate all of this and leave it at that.

# Aug 2, 2011 @ 4:49 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
11. duncan hills writes:

this guy should have looked at metallica before calling himself metal.

SUING PEOPLE - DATS NOT METULZ.

and this man should not be allowed to encourage the association of metal and homophobia. who you like to have sex with does NOT affect what kind of music you make.

# Aug 2, 2011 @ 7:11 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
R10's avatar

Member

12. R10 writes:

True that Z! Fvck this video,dont wanna watch it! Fvckin metal preacher,pfffff! Fvck this sh**,and Michelle Bachman too!!!! b**** has been slinking round NH,giving speeches and sh**,she would literally give Palin a run for her money as true political lightweight! Politics and religion,so fvckin sick of it!

# Aug 2, 2011 @ 8:09 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
heavy1's avatar

Member

13. heavy1 writes:

"Metal Preacher" is an oxymoron and this dipsh** is just a moron!

# Aug 3, 2011 @ 12:10 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Necrovomit's avatar

Member

14. Necrovomit writes:

what a fag

# Aug 3, 2011 @ 12:55 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
slade900's avatar

Member

15. slade900 writes:

why is this sh** on here poor form

# Aug 3, 2011 @ 6:12 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
cynic22's avatar

Member

16. cynic22 writes:

Everyone involved in this is a dumb idiot

# Aug 3, 2011 @ 5:42 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
17. mudguts666 writes:

The one who say things about fags are most likely to be themself one. To be honest who cares what he thinks.....Let's not give this anymore energy!!!

# Aug 4, 2011 @ 11:07 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
18. thora zine writes:

eee the heinousness of bloated fundies rockin for the lord! not good. what an awesome stroke of luck, however to have discovered such a great forum! yay
*cheers*

# Aug 5, 2011 @ 12:40 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Southern_Bastard's avatar

Member

19. Southern_Bastard writes:

VOMIT of course the conservative christian homophobe metal is RAP/FUNK bullsh** metal VOMIT horrible all the way around

# Aug 5, 2011 @ 11:21 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
RTB's avatar

Member

20. RTB writes:

Maddow 90% of the time is a vile off the chart far left, myopic, biased reporting, egotistical piece of sh!t...but i cant really fault her here
unfortunantly

# Aug 5, 2011 @ 12:33 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
utoad9's avatar

Member

21. utoad9 writes:

Maddow is a master of using the right wings' own words
against them. This lawsuit is laughable. I'll paraphrase Newt Gingrich...."If you hear anyone saying what I was recorded as saying,it's a lie!" ROFL

# Aug 7, 2011 @ 10:18 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
22. Greyback writes:

Bachman is ugly. This Christian guy is a nutjob. I hope they chuck this crap out. Off to drink a Snapple.

# Aug 12, 2011 @ 5:28 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
RTB's avatar

Member

23. RTB writes:

Bachmans 100 times hotter than maddow though
most women are

# Aug 12, 2011 @ 7:45 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

24. Drum_Junkie writes:

^ Not all lesbians are the hot ones that you find in p0rn.

There's no way this guy is going to win.
He said what he said, and she called him on it.. bluntly.

I like how in his press statement, he said that he's not out or persecute anyone, but in the next breath says that he won't tolerate the gay lifestyle.
Come on BradlEE, show me where in the Bible that it says that Christians have a right to target non-christians.

# Aug 12, 2011 @ 7:56 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
hellrat's avatar

Member

25. hellrat writes:

Well it may not be DIRECTLY prescribed in your good spriptures mate, but it could just be that poor, ignorant bradfvck is just following the long history of persecutionist examples laid before him out of centuries past, and that his viewpoint is currently supported by the honest perspective of MANY of his contemporaries? I don't know... just a thought :)

I especially like it when those factions of ancient religious emnity form bonds of 'alliance' in response to secular taboos such as homosexuality

really shows the true depth of the fvcking Faith eh?

pretty fvcking primitive if ya ask me...a regular goddamned canine mentality

# Aug 12, 2011 @ 9:32 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
OverkillExposure's avatar

Writer

26. OverkillExposure writes:

As a Christian, once again I find myself in agreement with Drum Junkie and in admiration of his cool disposition, but... sadly, hellrat does have a point. There IS a long history of distortion of Jesus' teachings, which HAS led to chaos and general suffering. That kind of groupthink he mentioned, the kind that distorts something pure and wields it to the advantage of ambitious or hateful human beings, is hardly limited to Christianity, but it's a tragedy in any case. Still, this inspires me to dig toward the roots of faith - i.e., Christ Himself - rather than chuck the baby out with the bath water.

# Aug 12, 2011 @ 10:00 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
27. Heathen writes:

Bible calls for and justifies the death of non christians more than it says to love and tollerate, and certainly never tollerant of gay folks. If you follow the bible through, by the time you love thy neighbour they're all christian or dead, anyway.

# Aug 13, 2011 @ 12:59 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
28. Syrion writes:

@OverkillExposure: most if not all of the homophobia is in the old testament: the manual for nomadic jews "three hairs away from being baboons" (to quote Lewis Black, a secular jew). Understandable considering homosexuals don't help much in the "survivability of the tribe" (as in: not getting children). But those backward ideas have no place in non-nomadic societies thousands of years later.


Some points:

Murderings gays is more moral than allowing someone to be who (s)he is? If he truely speaks for his god: he just invalidated all christians who claim morality lies with their deity. It appearently still is the egocentric, genocidal megalomaniac from the old testament.

Not sure if the "gays are unnatural"-card was played in this video (not watching it, I don't want to ruin my good mood): there are thousands of documented cases of so-called paraphilic behaviour in non-human animals (homo-sexuality amongst that, even making the bigger part of that). As far as I'm aware there are NO documented cases of christianity in non-human animals: so what's *really* unnatural?
Although, I wouldn't be surprised if some sick persons indoctrinated/trained their pets to be "religious". In Germany a neo-nazi had trained his dog to do the nazi-salute on a certain command. (Related in imposing human ideology on a pet.)

Besides that, ironic how this preacher labels himself as heavy metal, considering the leather outfits from a gay subculture in this genre introduced by a certain famous gay frontman.

# Aug 13, 2011 @ 5:50 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

29. Drum_Junkie writes:

Hellrat: You're right - alot of christians have that self-righteous viewpoint and attack 'in the name of the Lord'. The problem I see, is that I don't find any verses to support it. "Vengeance is MINE says the Lord".
And yes, their actions do show the true depth of their faith.

OverEX: Thanks again for the supporting post. I especially liked how it led to the root of our faith - Christ. Well done!

Heathen:
Could you be so kind as to point out chapter and verse that supports your viewpoint? I don't see it. Here's what I find:
a. Matthew 5: 43-48 (Jesus says to love your enemies.)
b. Galatians 5: 14 (The law is summed up to love your neighbor as yourself) regarldless of whether their Christian or not.
c. Colossians 4: 5-6 (Tells Christians to be wise and have a message full of grace when dealing with non believers)
d. 1 Thessalonians 5:15 (For Christians to be kind to each other and everyone else.) Notice the distinction made. Christians should be kind not only to those that believe, but to those that do not.
e. 1 Peter 3: 15-16 (Be prepared to share God's message, but do so with gentleness and respect.)

So, there are five verse telling Christians to act peaceably toward those that do not believe. Can you show me just one to the contrary?

Syrion:
Your 1st point truly illustrates that Bradlee is not speaking for God and shouldn't be speaking for Christians either.
To your second point, is there really any benefit in validating human behavior based off animal behavior? Our nature is not the same as animals. Animals simply lack the capacity for that thought process. The fact that humans have spent 99% of their existence searching for a higher power strongly suggests that it is quite natural.

# Aug 13, 2011 @ 9:23 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
30. Heathen writes:

"Non Christian" refers to "those who do not follow the Jedeo-Christian 'god'" and "those of other relgions," and further could be those that do not follow the rules set out in the Bible, such as being gay. That's a very cute Bible you have there. You liberal protestant? If you just skip to the sex scenes and skip all the violence and don't develop the plot did you really see the same movie? Using a book as old as the bible to justify a modern perspective is difficult, and uses the bible selectively no less than any other group that uses the bible to justify themselves. How you deal with the bad stuff says more than how you deal with the good easy stuff, as a modern liberal Christian, does it not? Isn't that why there are letters of appology by churches? There are so so many verses, use a search engine. I don't like bible sports. I could copy and past a massive amount of material, but I don't think that's appropriate. I'm not really going to do that well in the protestant bicker line, where one group bickers with another over bible interpretation and ceremony, and interpretation of history. Not applicable. But the jist is non Judeo-Christian folks are without god, are antichrists, should be killed, and not be made friends, yes some is in the NT. Liberal protestant types can be practice exclusivism, too, not just the "bad" guys that bash gays that are easy to hate.

# Aug 13, 2011 @ 11:54 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

31. Drum_Junkie writes:

Heathen:
True, a non-christian is simply a person who doesn't believe that Jesus is the son of God and the savior of all who choose to believe. I wouldn't categorically lump all gays as non-believers as that assumes they all share a common non-belief. I'm not really big on labels such as liberal Protestant, so that doesn't mean much to me. I wouldn't say my bible is cute, but thanks. It's a bit worn - I would say it has character. :)
On your movie context comment, I agree. It IS important to see the entire picture and to take the Bible as a whole. The central theme of the Bible is about God's love. The old testament illustrated God's love for the world and how he cared for the Israelites - his people of the first covenant. He cared for them like a father - with love, instruction and also with discipline when necessary. The OT also foretold of a Savior for them which is Jesus. His life, death and resurrection is told in the Gospels of the new testament also showing God's love for mankind. The rest of the NT deals with how God cares for His people and how they are to live with each other sharing that loving gift. That's the basic jist. It never says Christians should persecute non-christians. Not that I can find in my worn bible or through google.
Since you didn't provide any examples, I'm not entirely sure of what you meant by the bad stuff. But, how Christians deal with the bad stuff is exactly why they should stand up and condemn non-christian behavior from other christians. The purpose of apologies of the church during the 15th-16th centuries were not admissions of guilt, but a rebuttal and defense of their beliefs.
And googling for verses to support a view of christians attacking homosexuals, I found none. I mean, there is Leviticus 20:13, but that was directed at the Isrealites for how they were to treat other Isrealites. It did not give them the right to go out and persecute anyone outside of their tribe. It was a law within their group and the punishment was consistent with other neighboring civilization at that time. In context (seeing the big picture), there is also Leviticus 19:18 saying to love your neighbor as yourself.
I never asked for massive amount of material to support your view - just one. You made a statement in Post 27 that the Bible calls for and justifies the death of non christians more than it says to love and tolerate. I just ask for a simple proof to back up your claim.

# Aug 14, 2011 @ 9:50 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
32. Syrion writes:

Drum Junkie: It's not "validating", it's comparing with the rest of nature of which we're part of. (Personal opinion, just like our different stances on the judeo-christian (and muslim) god).

To be honest, I think the core principles of most religions (and some economic-political philosophies as socialism) are "equality" and "respect each other". With those in mind I see a lot of people out of step with what they're claiming to be. Especially those in positions of power who use the theories of those ideologies for their own benefit.

By the way, I think that "love thy neighbour"-rule is also aimed at Isrealites/jews amongst each other, since it's part of the Isrealite/jewish part of the bible.

# Aug 14, 2011 @ 1:08 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

33. Drum_Junkie writes:

Syrion:
Very thoughtful points and thanks for the clarification on validating vs. comparing. With that in mind, is it correct to say that animal behavior is the only measuring stick for comparing to human behavior? I don't think they are entirely mutually inclusive. Certain natural animal behavior is not natural human behavior and vice versa.
Two examples: Some animals eat their young. We know it's not natural for humans to be cannibals.
Humans have a vested interest in Science and understanding the world in which we live.
Animals don't have the mental capacity for such higher level thinking. That doesn't make it unnatural for us though. Religion is an obviously accepted practice and is a valuable tool in the psychological and philosophical studies. That being said, I respectfully disagree that Christianity is unatural because it has not been observed in the animal kingdom.

Even the ideas of equality and respect are not observed in animals to the extent that they are in humans. (not so say that animals don't show it - many do, but not to the extent that humans have evolved those concepts.)

I completely agree that there are many people out of step with the core beliefs of their faith, and many times it is BECAUSE they're in positions of power that they use it to their own benefit. 'Absolute power currupts absolutely.' I personally don't believe religion has any place in politics. Politics perverts the religion (not just Christianity, either).

I also agree that the love thy neighbor rule is aimed at the Israelites/Jews amongst each other. Sorry for not making that clear in my previous post.

# Aug 15, 2011 @ 9:48 AM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
americanpatriot1's avatar

Member

34. americanpatriot1 writes:

Lotta great points from DJ. I don't profess to be a Bible scholar, hell, I've never even read the thing, but I never heard about violence towards gays, or even non-believers for that matter. Besides that, Rachel Maddow is an ignorant Liberal twat that has been caught so many times in instances of shoddy journalism. Anyone who takes anything seen on MSLSD seriously kinda needs to have their heads examined. Including that fake preacher. Not doubting his love of Christ, just doubting his sense of perceived reality.

# Aug 15, 2011 @ 10:38 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
35. Heathen writes:

Geez, Drum_Junkie, I’ve talked to you before. A brief post turns into a challenge demanding a lot of material. I’m beginning to think you’re eager to talk on your religion ;). I have over 1300 verses from the bible that are considered violent. Pick one? There are an incredible number geared toward “nonbelievers” and “disobeys of god’s law,” which “nonbelievers” inevitably fall under the authority of. Exodus 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Exodus 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed. Exodus 22:24 And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword... Exodus 22:28 Thou shalt not revile the gods (more than one??), nor curse the ruler of thy people (good for tyrants.) Exodus 30:20-21, wash up or die. Exodus 30:33 Whoever puts holy oil on a stranger shall be "cut off from his people Exodus 34:20 …and if thou redeem him not, then shalt thou break his neck…. Exodus 34:14 For thou shalt worship no other god (again more than one?): for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: 2 Thessalonians 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 2 Thessalonians 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth… Over a thousand quotes on violence, hundreds more on intolerance, nonbelievers, the backward laws. Luke 12:49-53 “I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.” Hebrews 12:29
For our God is a consuming fire. Luke 22:35-38 And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough. Revelation 21:8 But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.” Isaiah 13:15-16 15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through; all who are caught will fall by the sword.16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their wives ravished. God the rapist/murderer. I don’t actually believe a word of this crap. I only see despicable words used by despicable people to commit despicable deeds. Never underestimate what a person with an advantage will do, including when enabled by a Bible.

Why is one message in the bible universal, such as love, when other less palatable messages like treatment of gays is considered specific to the historical context from which it came? Others use the bible universally for the less savoury messages, while keeping the more lovey ones for just theirs and their own.

# Aug 16, 2011 @ 4:29 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
36. Heathen writes:

I can’t completely agree on “True, a non-Christian is simply a person who doesn't believe that Jesus is the son of God and the saviour of all who choose to believe.” There are people who choose different forms of Christianity that don’t even require them to believe in Jesus as a literal thing. Also, a person who truly practices pluralism in religion COULD in fact believe your statement WITHOUT being Christian and without taking part in that exclusivism necessary in many Christian denominations. But isn’t it a bit of a tip off that there are SO many denominations that practice exclusivism, or sometimes inclusivism, that claim to be the one and only true way to “salvation” that religion is man made? What about being “A” way, so simply being a practice and community? I think this is kind of a downfall in religion. No one is stopping anyone from going down the road to their church and doing their thing, going home and doing their thing, going to work and doing their thing, yet SO much bickering over particulars, SO much exclusivism even though there are SO many Christian branches, and out of this you get folks that get all hostile and start picking enemies, and sometimes start taking on a “persecuted” attitude, and it seems weird as an outsider seeing this stuff, because it’s bred so much in the imagination. I find it strange people go into this room, get a talking to, and leave with a bunch of enemies, feeling persecuted. What if salvation is just getting out of the house, socializing, having a purpose within a group, not feeling so lonely? Not counting gays as nonbelievers unique to your position. Not all Christians agree.

Who wouldn’t want to be on the favoured side of this violent, intolerant, jealous, vengeful god? Is that God’s love? Obey and be loved or suffer “his” wrath, or rather, the wrath of “his” people? It’s just the actions of people against others, and strange beliefs like the beliefs of others brought on the vengeance of god through natural disasters and being victims of violence, because god loves those that obey “him” are highly unusual. Yet, people still do this all the time, in the case of Japan’s earthquake and others, and even onto themselves and their families on more trivial matters. What is so disturbing about this is that like “A cruel god makes a cruel man,” that when not obeyed (or in so many words obeying “gods” laws) these people take on vengeance theirself in order to oppose their own measure of control and get those laws obeyed, or wish more harm (vengeance) from this “god” on others in this way. Sounds kind of like somebody missed the point, when they said to kill all these people who attempt to “curse” or “hex” (and who actually believes in this these days?), when upholds of the “law” are free to curse and hex all they please. Seems a little hypocritical.

Believing that homosexual people can be believers is unique to your Lutheran family, or those inclusive to that belief in Christian systems, that believes that gay people may practice Lutheranism, and, for instance, in Canada recently, voted to allow gay and lesbian minsters. This is not the case with many other groups, who feel that they do “uphold the law.” The bible absolutely does not support gay and lesbian rights. If you take extraneous passages to suppose that belief in you modern system, so be it, but it’s not conservative religion, and is not the “law” in the bible.

Relevant to the video, Jesus DID support the laws written in the old testament, which include laws on homosexuality: Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. There is plenty of blood, fire, and damnation in the new testament that is the inspiration for violence throughout the centuries in Europe. On top of that, you get this “god’s chosen people” mentality which has been used again and again by mob after mob calling themselves the “one true faith” or the “real Israelites.”

# Aug 16, 2011 @ 4:32 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
37. Heathen writes:

Also on the video, Christians targeting gays are pedophiles is nothing new. This has been done anywhere there is a pseudoscientific attitude and enough conservative Christians to form a considerable proportion of the government (America, Poland, for example.) You start with the bible, then the old outdated psychology that lumps homosexuality and sexual orientation with the sexual diseases like pedophilia (obviously this was written in a Judeo-Christian culture in a different time,) then go on to conclude that since it must be a gay man that molests a boy (why would a straight man molest a boy?), most pedophiles are gay, therefore no gay rights we can‘t enable this monstrosity, lets deal with this abomination, and round about back to the bible’s laws on homosexuality. Pedophilia is not sexual orientation, but they have attempted to discourage gay rights by associating the universally repulsive word “pedophile.” It’s idiocy. I think people like this spend way too much time engaging in gross fantasies about others that hold little merit to the truth, and would do little to effect their daily lives if they let up and let go. Who cares about the couple next door. Live your own life.

There is no universal mass market Christian. If you have a particular faith that you practice, it does not apply to all, or all Christians. There are many, many different religions that call themselves “Christian” and attempting to label behaviour as “Christian” or “Unchristian” by your own measurement isn’t really that universal at all. There are many people who would call YOU unchristian for not upholding the more vile aspects of so called “Christian” life outlined in the laws in the bible, and not practicing this level of discrimination and intolerance. Good luck building the universal Christian. It doesn’t exist. Agreement within the Lutheran group, maybe a possibility.

# Aug 16, 2011 @ 4:35 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
38. Heathen writes:

I don’t envy your task. You’re left constantly trying to sell the bias of peace and love, which I think is noble, and if not even truer than the brimstone type because people create the atmosphere and commit the acts centered in the name of religion, imo, only, there are others, and what bugs me about that approach is not attempting to find peace, unity, harmony with fellow human beings or the cosmos or whatever, but trying to downplay the past Lutheranism and it’s predecessors. Most things CAN be explained away by taking in the context of the time they were written or committed, and committing to the fact the Lutheran Church listens to the values, wishes, and desires of their people and attempts to accommodate them in their values of their institution. It’s a good survival tactic, and is good, effective communication. Making the bible into 100% lovey fluff and attempting to make Luther a modern man just doesn’t work for me. If there’s a “cross you bear” for the history of the religion you associate with, I guess I feel like a accountable practitioner would take that on in the most honest way possible, and even evolve their faith somewhat around their perception and insight into that “suffering” without necessarily compromising the ideal goal of peace and love in life, while gaining insight into hardships, which I think is a unique challenge of that path. Certainly, Luther may have been inspired enough to regain a non-Rome centric life for many, but come on now, this guy did not support women, gays, pagans, other Christians, etc, and did do his share of killing pagans, other protestants, etc, to the point where I referred to earlier letters of apology, which I was referring to modern ones to the Jewish community, because Luther’s words were used by Hitler himself and used as the model of the treatment of Jews at the time, to the letter. Sadly, that is not as long ago as some of these other acts, but some religions allow themselves to develop uniquely in each country to accommodate the people there. He was a product of his time, and surely this is a consequence of the Lutheran Church have a longer history than some others, being founded in a time where learned behaviours advantageous in the Roman religion-centric communities are not that palatable to more modern people. Sad how people take a book like the bible, or Luther’s writings, and find in them an advantage to commit such cruelty in a different age, regardless of the inspiration.

# Aug 16, 2011 @ 4:47 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Anonymous Reader
39. Heathen writes:

I don’t think the outcome of religion (going back to Greek religio, and all the good stuff) is to disseminate others to the point that they no longer hold any humanity or worth in the eyes of the practitioner, but unfortunately, that is what happens a lot in violent religions. Is it really “A cruel god makes a cruel man” or “a cruel man makes a cruel god?” I thought the point of compassion was not to include others in your beliefs, but to let them have their own. I don’t think the bible is a great reference for morality or thought, or even society. But, I do think that if you realize with the least bit of empathy what makes people tick, that the bible CAN be a “friend” in looking at the struggles in the world and how they effect others in the “quest for peace and love” but I think it comes with a sense of sorrow and disbelief that such petty behaviour is the best there is, but that some things are out of people’s hands at times, like natural disasters, rape and murder, cruelty and intolerance and the ill effects of human thought and belief, war, illness, famine, the death of a child, and that there is a better alternative to trying to cope with these issues than just hate, envy, and more intolerance. That even though some things are beyond our control, how we treat ourselves and our neighbour can lend a help. But, no, I don’t think it’s a message of love. I think it’s more why humans have such a hard time finding it. I also don’t think you’re spreading “gods” love of message, per se, I think you’re spreading the love of the Lutheran community, which is not less valid, imo. There are a LOT of different religions, many based on the bible, and there is no universality among them, and a lot of bickering (who holds the greatest advantage.) On the note that “God IS love” as a universal theme, you couldn’t possibly invalidate ANY expression of that regardless of the religion of lack thereof, belief in god not even necessary. I guess I don’t know if you view “god” as all things, beyond all things and not part of the world, infused in the world itself, or all things including the “self” people try to emulate in “Jesus.” I guess I also don’t have a problem with people who see that kind of “god” in the pagans and women and homosexuals, and even demons and gods and witches, in the bible, and look at the “chosen people” in a similar way, not in a necessarily advantageous position for the reasons explained in Christianity for believing in their way and their way alone, against all others. The rest is warmongering. We can choose how we act within our own limits of perception to enable or discourage others, and on religion, it’s a choice. And I guess it’s also important for people to not forget their own roots, values, family, and identity in the face of this religion. I think it leads to problems. Kudos to Luther for his part in that, even though I think he was a d***. And on the bible, to look around and say that “god” is treating other people so much better than me, and be so jealous to believe in cursing and violence, is just not a very good attitude. It seems like every other jerk in history used that book to validate their racist, sexist, homophobic, authoritarian views and take them out on somebody.

tl/dr, told you I don't like to play bible sports :) It's too much material.

# Aug 16, 2011 @ 4:48 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

40. Drum_Junkie writes:

Hey Heathen, just wanted to let you know that I've read your posts. It's going to take some time for me to review it all. :)

However, I promise to give a response. You took the time to write quite a bit (which I do appreciate), and I owe you a properly thoughtful response.

# Aug 16, 2011 @ 6:13 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

41. Drum_Junkie writes:

I didn’t realize that we’ve talked before. What thread?

Well, there’s a lot to discuss, I’ve put my primary points in all caps, like the following:
I’M NOT TRYING TO MAKE ANYONE INTO A CHRISTIAN. I AM ONLY PROVIDING MY OWN PERSONAL BELIEF FOR CONSIDERATION. IT IS YOUR CHOICE TO AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH ME, AND I RESPECT YOUR DECISION EVEN IF I MIGHT NOT AGREE.

Addressing your comment #35:

Here is my understanding of the Bible verses you listed.

These Exodus verses were laws given to the Israelites, applicable to them at that time in the context of their history.
Exodus 22:18, 22:20 Breaking of the first commandment
22:24. you left out vs. 21-23 telling them to care for the foreigners, widows and orphans.
22:28 My translation has God singular (NIV) The rulers of the Israelites were intended as those God appointed and therefore not tyrants.
30:20-21 you took that one way out of context
30:33 God wanting reverence for worship
34:20 was talking about a donkey’s neck – not a humans.
34:14 references 1st Commandment. The jealousy is similar to jealousy in a marriage. If a partner turns away from the marriage, isn’t it expected that the other would be jealous?
^These all were rules for the Israelites. I can’t see any reasonable interpretation to promote killing non-Christians.

2 Thess. 1:8 Describing God’s punishment of evil at the second coming.
2 Thess. 2:12 you left off the last part of the verse “…but have delighted in wickedness”
Luke 12: 49-53 Jesus talking about the division between good and evil.
Hebrews 12:29 The consuming fire is meant as protection to Christians. Ref. Deut. 9:3. Luke 22:35-38 Jesus telling the disciples that their journey would be difficult after he leaves them. The “It is enough.” is Jesus telling them to stop. See vs. 50-51 where Jesus condemns the use of the sword and heals the soldiers’ ear.
Revelation 21:8 Punishment of those that turned away from God.
Isaiah 13:15-16 Here, the prophet Isaiah was foretelling of the capture and enslavement of Israel. God wasn’t the one murdering/raping, the invading conquerors would be.

Given your interpretation of the verses, I can understand why you would have a lot of doubt and skepticism. I can’t explain why some interpret the Bible differently, I can’t explain why you interpret the verse the way you did. All I can do is hold up how I understand them. If you choose to agree with me, then great. If you don’t, that’s ok too. Sure I’m disappointed, but I CANNOT MAKE YOU OR ANYONE ELSE BELIEVE. All I can do is pray that God will give people faith in Him.

# Aug 22, 2011 @ 12:25 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

42. Drum_Junkie writes:

To Comment #36:

You took my description of a non-Christian and used it to explain different types of Christians. Maybe I didn’t explain myself well. My description wasn’t meant to define and limit a non-Christian to that one guideline. Sorry for the confusion. I think the reason for the many, many denominations illustrates that no Christian fully understands God. Not me, not Luther, not BradlEE, not anyone. THAT IS WHY WHAT I’VE WRITTEN HERE IS ONLY MEANT TO BE MY ATTEMPT TO PRESENT ONE POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION. MY GOAL IS TO TRY TO BRIDGE A COMMON UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN BELIEVERS AND NONBELIEVER, SO THAT ACCEPTANCE AND TOLERANCE CAN OCCUR !BOTH! WAYS. My focus is on Christians to be tolerant of non-Christians, and to present myself humbly as an example to nonbelievers that Christians aren’t always the fire and brimstone bible thumpers that are so vocal in the public eye.

I don’t think that the natural disasters are God’s vengeance for disobedience. I also disagree with anyone taking it upon themselves to administer “God’s wrath”. As I’ve said before, I don’t see any verses telling Christians to persecute people. The laws in Exodus were specific for that time and were comparable to punishments given by other neighboring peoples. Hammurabi had said “an eye for an eye”. He was Babylonian.
How can you expect the laws in the book of Exodus to be applicable to both time periods? Would it really be better to restate Ex. 22:20 like “He that gives sacrifices to any other god shall be fined and charged with contempt of the Lord?” I don’t think so. Those laws were applicable then, because they matched the value system in that era.
I seek to obey God, not for fear, but because I love and respect Him. I obey my parents because I love and respect them, and I hope that my two kids obey me and my wife for that reason also.

Regarding homosexuals, I do believe that the bible is against it. It may be considered a sin, but no greater or less than any other sin. Christians sin as much or more than non-Christians. The law is only authoritative to those that put themselves under it. If one doesn’t believe, then what value is the law to them? If they do, then they should try to follow it. That is the beauty of God’s love to me. Though I fail, I turn to him sincerely and admit that I messed up, He forgives like it never happened, and I make a renewed effort to try again. The wrath of God comes to unbelievers at the end of times when the Lord comes to Earth and collects the believers, leaving those that would not accept His gift without His grace. That is my personal belief and understanding.

# Aug 22, 2011 @ 12:25 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

43. Drum_Junkie writes:

To Comment #37:
I agree wholeheartedly that there is not any scientific evidence that makes a homosexual any more likely than a heterosexual to be a pedophile. People like BradlEE have twisted and presented biased and invalid studies to support their views.

On the Universal mass market Christian: Agreed, they don’t exist. The best one can do would be to define Christian and Unchristian behavior. I’m sure BradlEE would call my behavior unchristian for not supporting his viewpoint, just like I believe his interpretation is wrong. I AM ONLY TRYING TO POINT OUT AN ALTERNATE VIEWPOINT FOR OTHERS TO SEE AND JUDGE FOR THEMSELVES. I HOPE THEY CHOOSE NOT TO JUDGE ALL CHRISTIANS AS INTOLERANT BIGOTS LIKE THE HEAVY METAL PREACHER IN THE VIDEO.

# Aug 22, 2011 @ 12:26 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

44. Drum_Junkie writes:

To Comment #38:
Ah Lutheranism… Just because I am a member of the LCMS, doesn’t mean that I accept there beliefs 100%. I am my own person. I never mentioned anything uniquely Lutheran in any of my posts. You made that connection. I was raised a Lutheran, yes, and the Lutheran structure makes the most sense TO ME, when compared to the other denominations in my town. So, I choose to worship there with the church family I have grown up with. But, do I believe it is 100% correct and beyond reproach? By no means. The Lutheran faith is not a substitute for the Bible. No one Religion or denomination has it 100% correct.
As far as Martin Luther, the man, goes. He was a man and therefore imperfect. He did some great things that he should be commended for, and also promoted some frankly evil things such as the persecution of the Jews. The Lutheran Church was right to apologize for the consequences of his later writings. I’m not sure what you expect the present Lutheran church to do in light of those facts. Should they announce the apology constantly, like some type of scarlet letter? I don’t think that is necessary. They apologized for it. Those racist writings are not in use today by the Lutheran Church. (Not being familiar with the Lutheran Church in Europe, I sincerely hope not.) Let the past be the past, learn from it and move forward into the future.

# Aug 22, 2011 @ 12:26 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

45. Drum_Junkie writes:

To Comment #39:
I honestly had a hard time following this comment. You touched on a few different topics on this one, so I’m sure what your intent was. I think I do agree with many things you said though.
I think religion (all religions) should be used to build people up and not tear people down.
I hope by now you don’t think I am trying to shove Christianity down anyone’s throat. I haven’t said “Believe my way or else!” I AM ONLY PRESENTING MY VIEWS AND REASONING FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE HOPE THAT PEOPLE FIND IT BENEFICIAL.

You ended with… “It seems like every other jerk in history used that book to validate their racist, sexist, homophobic, authoritarian views and take them out on somebody.”

Yes this is very true. And the same can be said for many other writings, both religious and philosophical, and otherwise secular.

Whew!... that took a while. If you want the last word, your welcome to it. If you want to reply and continue our discussion, I’ll let that be your choice. Just ask for a response at the end - if you want one from me.

# Aug 22, 2011 @ 12:27 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
hellrat's avatar

Member

46. hellrat writes:

^I'm not sure who is more deserving of the Rant-o-saurus Rex title here, but you two dudes are each viable contenders :)

NP---Road to Madness---Queensryche the Warning

# Aug 22, 2011 @ 1:25 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

47. Drum_Junkie writes:

HR: I guess it's something I'm passionate about. ;)

You've left a few rants on a Gojira thread not too long ago as I recall - and educational too. Taught me a bit about vigilante practices of the sea shepherds.

# Aug 22, 2011 @ 1:43 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
hellrat's avatar

Member

48. hellrat writes:

now DJ, the Rex is a very prestigious title to take out...I say that as a former champion myself :)

seriously, I was just givin ya guys hell...I've enjoyed reading both of you perspectives, some quality points from each corner

Carry on brothers, battle strong \m/

# Aug 22, 2011 @ 3:03 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address
Drum_Junkie's avatar

Member

49. Drum_Junkie writes:

Oh, I know. No worries brother! If you were seriously bothered by it, you would have gave us both a keyboard lashing. haha!

# Aug 22, 2011 @ 4:50 PM ET | IP Logged Reveal posts originating from the same IP address

To minimize comment spam/abuse, you cannot post comments on articles over a month old. Please check the sidebar to the right or the related band pages for recent related news articles.