‘Gay Christian’ Walks Out of Christian University Chapel After Hearing Biblical Sermon +Revoice Founder Chimes in

Asbury Theological Seminary President Timothy Tennent came under a bit of fire from the gay Twitterati last week after one of their students publicly announced on social media that they had walked out of the chapel service after he preached a perfectly orthodox and biblical sermon on the topic of ‘personhood’, according to the Juicy Ecumenism.

Tennent preached the message during the seminary’s new year convocation. Asbury is not a conservative seminary by any stretch; they are in the United Methodist tradition and are the largest seminary of the Wesleyan-Holiness movement, and this seminary in particular is known for promoting egalitarianism. Still- they have so far resisted the push of the pro-LGBTQ movement and take a biblical perspective on the issue of homosexuality.

For this reason, Tennennt gave a high level and mildly esoteric discussion on the relationship between oner’s expressive self and what it means to be human, saying things like:

“New individualism….is a new vision of human personhood has created a seismic dualistic separation or fracturing of the human will from the physical body. In this twist of Neo-gnostic dualism our bodies become moldable, like plastic contingent instruments which must be conformed to the intuitions, feelings and what other social constructions we may dream of in order to conform to our understanding of ourselves.”

Heady stuff. Tennent made similar comments like this, explaining how some people within the LGBTQ community do likewise, and that the whole idea of a man trapped in a woman’s body is based on an ungodly individualism and a skewed sense of self. The whole message can be heard here, and there was nothing remotely controversial about it.

This didn’t stop a vocal left from condemning Tennent and the school after one of their students announced that he walked out as a result of the message, feeling disrespected and like the seminary was making the campus a “dangerous place” for him.

Elijah Drake identifies as a “side B” “celibate Gay Christian” and a “Celibate SSA/gay student” who wrote this thesis arguing that it is perfectly acceptable to identify himself by his sin and sexual proclivities. Though professing to hold what is the “orthodox position” (It’s not. The sexual attraction itself is a sin, not just the action) It’s clear that there is something seriously wonky with his theology if that is the reaction he had after listening to such a benign sermon.

His actions afterward sealed the deal that he was being petulant, showing up in the front row for the next message with his ‘gay pride’ shirt on, demanding that the speaker look at him and geared up to walk about again in full view of his peers if they cross his line again, all the while receiving clout on the internet for being “brave” and “savage” and “a badass”

Even Revoice founder Nate Collins got in on the action, telling him he was “so, so sorry” that he was experiencing this, and gave little praying hands after he snapped the above picture with his pride shirt.

Despite hundreds of tweets directed his way, many from openly “side A” “gay Christians” inviting Drake to come to they/their seminary while bashing Asbury (“I know a really gay-affirming place isn’t for everyone, but I love working at @VUDivinity because we are queer & trans-inclusive & in admin, anything mostly run by lesbians is just gonna be better organized.”) Tennent has not responded publicly to the brouhaha. We have reached out for comment and will update this post accordingly.

9 thoughts on “‘Gay Christian’ Walks Out of Christian University Chapel After Hearing Biblical Sermon +Revoice Founder Chimes in

  1. Google is paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life has improved completely! Take a gander at what I do………… http://Moneystar5.cf/

  2. The Bible is clear. God does not respect sin, much less an abomination. And Christians should not either. We are told “from such turn away”

    This student and his twitter pals can wail and gnash their teeth for the rest of eternity. They can roll around on the floor holding their breath like a spoiled child, until they black out, for all I care. It will not change God. It will not change His Word. It will not change me. I have zero pity for anyone trying to force everyone else to support, condone, accept, or affirm abominable sin. Zero.

    1. As far as I’m concerned, it’s long past time for 1 Cor. 5 to be exercised. They all need to be walked right on out the door and be banned from returning. Let the prodigals wallow in the pig sty.

  3. From the beginning, evil children have been shaking their impotent fists at the precepts from God that forbid their favorite sins.
    Clay. Potter.
    Shut it, prancing soy boy.

    1. Dr. Scooter Van Neuter, you consistently employ overtly profane language. Why do you use your tongue in this manner? James 1:26 If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless.

      “The man who has a detracting tongue cannot have a truly humble gracious heart. He who delights to injure his neighbor in vain pretends to love God; therefore a reviling tongue will prove a man a hypocrite. Censuring is a pleasing sin, extremely compliant with nature, and therefore evinces a man’s being in a natural state. These sins of the tongue were the great sins of that age in which James wrote (as other parts of this epistle fully show); and it is a strong sign of a vain religion to be carried away with the evil of the times. This has ever been a leading sin with hypocrites, that the more ambitious they have been to seem well themselves the more free they have been in censuring and running down others; and there is such quick intercourse between the tongue and the heart that the one may be known by the other. On these accounts it is that the apostle has made an ungoverned tongue an undoubted certain proof of a vain religion. There is no strength nor power in that religion which will not enable a man to bridle his tongue.” Matthew Henry

      1. Was it ‘prancing soy boy’ that you found ‘overtly profane?’ Yikes!

        While I appreciate you cutting and pasting Matthew Henry’s excellent teaching on one having a ‘detracting tongue,’ I assure you I was totally silent while typing (although I may have been moving my lips a little – God forgive me).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.