Chick-fil-A: Convenient Biblical Truth

How many Christians do you know who make a broad statement about “Religious Truth” while conveniently forgetting about other more deliberate and clear cut biblical guidelines?

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “Chick-fil-A: Convenient Biblical Truth

  1. Ben, I’m disappointed – not only in your stance represented here but in your apparent lack of Biblical understanding. I’m sad that so many cite the antiquated commands of the Old Testament as a reason why we should accept homosexual behavior. Have you read the New Testament? How about Acts 10? How about Romans 1? How about 1 Corinthians 6? Do you claim to be a follower of Christ? Does Jesus endorse immorality? Are you saying that I should do a guy or that I should forego bacon? Are both the same in your eyes? Either way, this post is preposterous.
    Your Brother, Dan, has taken a difficult stand for his principles. He’s taking unbelieveable heat for it. His comments did not come from a place of hate but of personal conviction which everyone should be allowed.
    Chic fil A is also closed on Sundays due to their convictions. That means that they would rather forego probably 1/5 of their revenue than ask their employees to miss assembling with other believers. I don’t really care if a person meets with believers on a Sunday or on some other day. I do, however, respect integrity. Obviously you don’t. Obviously, you lack it yourself. Sad that you’re a youth leader, yikes!
    So, vilify and boycott if you like. I’m going to eat more chik’n.

    Like

    • I know you’ve read my blog before and I’ve appreciated your comments, so I’m a bit surprised by your response here. I would express my equal disappointment at the tone you felt necessary to respond to this particular post; especially regarding the piety in which you attack my personal integrity and ministry. I don’t know you personally so I will not make equally unfair judgments on your character or faith based on what is perceived as homophobia. But let’s be clear as I have done so in previous posts, this isn’t about my supporting homosexuality as a sin. It is about those individuals who pick and choose which parts of the Bible they wish to dwell on and use to control others. Chick-fil-A is merely a perfect example for this behavior. I have nothing against Chick-fil-A or its beliefs; and truly appreciate them for sticking with them despite the obvious financial ramifications. But where does 1 Cor 6:19-20 (your body is a temple) fit in when a chicken sandwich, waffle fries, and sweet tea are over 800 calories (don’t forget your chocolate shake for 780 calories)? Isn’t gluttony a sin as well since it is giving into self indulgence and loss of control (2 Tim. 3:1-9; 2 Cor. 10:5)? And how then do you explain when Paul says that a woman should be silent and should not teach a man (1 Cor. 14:34; 1 Tim. 2:12), but Chick-fil-A has 14 females in Director positions or higher. Jesus himself said that divorce is contrary to God (Matt 19:1-9), yet nearly every denomination accepts divorcees along with Alcoholics Anonymous and Overeaters Anonymous when they are all included in the same list of sinners who will not enter the kingdom as homosexuals (1 Cor. 6:9-10). If a grace-centric, New Testament based religion can grow to accept those “sins” why must we treat the other with such vehement animosity? What an increasingly secular and unbelieving world sees is the hypocrisy of Christian’s who choose one verse over another, regardless of whether one is in the Old Testament and considered nailed to the cross (Col 2:14), or not. That is the hill I seek to overcome with posts like this. To ask the question behind the question so that others will see a walk with Christ and a connection to like minded believers as freedom and joy, not mindless Pharisaical rules and bitterness.

      So yes, I have read and studied not only the New Testament as so many Christian’s claim they have, but also the Old Testament which so many Christians have not. Basing your Christian life on the New Testament without the context of the Old is in my opinion poor spirituality. As for my youth ministry; you know nothing of the teens I work with, the problems they face, the questions they ask, or the work I do to help guide them into a Christ centered adult life. Based on your response here I could make assumptions about your own ministry, but I will not do that.

      So I apologize if you took offense to my question about Christians who pick and choose their “Biblical Truth”. It had as much to do with promoting homosexuality as it did with boycotting Chick-fil-A, which I said neither and to note I’ve never eaten at Chick-fil-A anyway. Thank you and good luck in your ministry journey.

      Like

      • Hey Ben,
        Sorry if I came off strong. I can do that sometimes. I’m pretty passionate. Here’s how I understand your position. “Because there are things in the Bible over which Christians disagree or are inconsistent, they should remain silent regarding their convictions over ‘Biblical Truth.'” Is that what you’re saying? If so, I stand by the content if not the tone of my previous post. If not, please clarify a bit more.

        Like

      • I have witnessed first hand the results that years of abusive and hypocritical Christianity has had on people very close to me. As a result I have become hypercritical of Christians who feel necessary to share their interpretation of truth. Many of those people end up using their truth in judgement and condemnation of others. That makes it even harder to share the real truth that Jesus Christ died for them and loves them. Dan Cathy has as much right to share his beliefs against gay marriage as Howard Schultz (CEO of Starbucks) has the right to support it. I believe people should stand for Biblical Truth however they feel God has revealed it to them. What I don’t believe is when the biblical truth leads to things like Cathy’s follow-up comments of homosexuality coming from “depraved minds” and accepting gay marriage is “inviting God’s wrath on America”. That’s when I take a step back. If Biblical truth leads to feelings of hate, animosity, and disgust can it still be considered truth? Thank you sir for your follow-up and your comments. I appreciate the opportunity to grow through this dialogue.

        Like

  2. Shoot, Ben. I’m gonna have to disagree with you on this one, too, since in the Gospel Jesus declares all food clean, saying essentially that it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles because it just goes back out, but instead, it is what comes from the heart that defiles–the desires we let loose in the wrong direction. Gluttony is bad, but food is not. He repeats this declaration with Peter in Acts 11 as well. We all have tendencies to certain sins, but that doesn’t mean it is right to act on them. We have a ministry for homosexuals called Courage, and we have had some very good testimonies at something we call Theology on Tap from those who have chosen celibacy rather than going with the recent trend because they know the great call to holiness that comes from Jesus. Not just for them, but for everybody who calls themselves Christian. But sin is, like you say, a tendency that everyone has and that everyone needs to work against just like in AA. And divorce, no matter what people say, is still wrong. It is just another part of our society that needs healing. God bless…

    Like

    • lamehousewife,

      If I’m wrong, please correct me, but in Acts 11:6-8: “I looked into it and saw four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, reptiles, and birds of the air. Then I heard a voice telling me, ‘Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.’ “I replied, ‘Surely not, Lord! Nothing impure or unclean has ever entered my mouth.'” I’ve compared this to other versions, and specifically, God gave him permission to eat non-kosher food that time, assuming he was following Jewish tradition. But that’s the thing, the Holy Spirit gave him one-time permission to eat the unclean meat. We have free will to eat whatever we want, but Acts 11 only gave <> a one-time buffet pass to unclean meat.

      Like

      • Actually, that passage is not about food at all. In the passage in question, Peter has been asked to go to a Gentile house and is wary about preaching to them at all. This dream is God telling him that the Gospel is for everyone and not just the Jews. Eating pork or whatever has nothing to do with it.

        Like

      • There are four senses in Scripture: the literal, the allegorical, the moral, and the eschatological, so the vision of which I am speaking which is also found in Acts 10:14-15 means both to not worry about the food regulations anymore and to preach to the Gentiles even though they were previously thought of as “unclean” because the Gospel is for everybody. It takes awhile for Peter to completely understand this but by Acts 15, he has the hang of it. Jesus talks about this same issue in Mark 7:19. St Paul covers it again in Romans 14:14 and 1 Timothy 4:3-5. BUT, like Ben reiterated below, it is the heart of man that is need of conversion. We are all dealing with sin in our hearts, so we can no longer judge anybody by outside appearances because we are all unclean in need of the saving grace of God. The heart is for God only to judge.
        My only disagreement was in suggesting that Chick-fil-A was sinning with their food when they are not. I also think Ben is more concerned with the hypocrisy of many Christians when they call out one thing but not another. I do agree with him on that, but I don’t know if Chick-fil-A in particular has done that…I just don’t know.
        Have a blessed weekend!

        Like

    • Thank you and I believe we aren’t that far off, where I came from a different approach of “if we’re going to accept one we should accept them all” (obviously not the best response) yours was better stated “sin is sin and we need to work together to overcome it”. I appreciate you bringing the text in Mark. Earlier in the chapter Jesus quotes Isaiah saying “you honor me with your lips, but your heart is far from me”. He says similarly in Matthew 23:23 “You have neglected the more important matters of the law – justice, mercy, and faithfulness”. In neither case is Jesus saying “Forget the law, it’s all about love”. He even tells the woman caught in the act of adultery, after shaming her accusers, “go and sin no more”. But that is a far cry from the stance many faithful have taken of “Ain’t no homos gonna go to heaven” so lets “round ‘em up behind a fence to rot”. That heart is what I believe Jesus is referring to as “what comes out of a man defiles him”. Not just the actions we may find appalling (murder, theft, or homosexuality), but also the heart and mind that spew hate. Because, if you hate your brother you are equal to a murderer (1 Jn 3:15; Matt 5:21). “And many will say to me lord, lord, did we not prophecy in your name and drive out demons and perform many miracles; then I will say to them plainly ‘I never knew you, away from me evildoers'” Matt 7:22-23. Have a great weekend.

      Like

  3. ben,
    first, i want to thank you for allowing comments. so many these days are not willing to. but i’m so sad to see you are ‘judging’ Chick-Fil-A’s freedom of ‘choice’ by mocking their christianity. i guess your ‘tolerance’ and defence of ‘choice’ is reserved only for those you agree with and you consider ‘normal’.
    you don’t care for their ‘choice’ to support the ‘traditional family model’? so don’t go to chick-fil-a. it’s really not necessary or mature to mock and ridicule them for taking a stand you disagree with. get over it and just get a Whopper.
    -mike

    Like

    • Mike, thank you for your response. If I was truly closed to differing opinions than my own, I wouldn’t have approved several comments to the post. I welcome and enjoy the discussion to help not only myself, but hopefully others who have questions and thoughts and look for a place to share them without fear of condemnation. But this post which happens to include Chick-Fil-A has as much to do with my personal opinion about their business practice or freedom of speech as the parable of the talents has to do with banking. While I’ve never eaten there (because I’m a vegetarian) I have nothing against them. When I found the meme I thought it a very appropriate metaphor for what many Christians do, which is finding convenient truth for one area while ignoring others.

      Like

      • thank you very much for the reply and for the forum. i wasn’t particularly trying to say you don’t ‘allow’ opposing opinions, but that your ‘tolerance’ seems to extend only to those you agree with. two different words with different implications. tolerance is shown not just by allowing, but by being polite and not mocking others you disagree with.
        what i see in the original article was an opportunistic jab at christianity and christians based on chick-fil-a’s support for ‘traditional marriage’.
        the companies statement didn’t put forth a position that ‘condemned’ homosexuality or homosexuals and didn’t particularly say anything about sin or christianity. they just stated their support for ‘traditional’ heterosexual marriage. you chose to take the cheap shot at christians and their ‘hypocritical’ application of the Old Testament Law.
        i was just trying to help you out by telling you your ‘freudian slip’ is showing. thanks again for the opportunity and your reply.
        -mike

        Like

  4. so i guess my question is “why someone who claims to be a christian himself (i have no reason to disbelieve your claim, brother) is mocking another ‘christian’ company for a biblically informed support of heterosexual marriage?” what’s the motivation? i can’t figure it out. is there such a societal pull to agree with homosexuality and Gay marriage that it is affecting our treatment of other believers?
    -mike

    Like

    • I appreciate your feedback and candid critique. Yes, the meme is mocking and sarcastic and I apologize if it offended you or anyone else as that was not my intent. Would the post have been more suitable without the meme and rather question and critique Dan Cathy’s comments and motivation? Would it have been better had I taken a clear harsh, condemning tone as many “believers” have done with various posts I have made? Are those the only two responses Christian’s should have, joyous acceptance or righteous condemnation? (no sarcasm here, just genuine questions my friend). Again, the meme and post were using the example of Chick-fil-a in discussing when and how Christians use scripture to their advantage while possibly ignoring other aspects that may cause them to be personally uncomfortable. I had never thought of Dan Cathy or Chick-fil-a’s comments in that manner until my cousin shared it with me and I felt it an appropriate conversation. My belief is that Christianity has taken up the rallying cry of Gay Marriage while overlooking the many other “sins” of the world we have come to accept. But moreso, is there such a religious pull to condemn homosexuality and Gay Marriage that we are becoming more permissive with other believers in their treatment of the LGBT community? Thank you for the discussion and opportunity to continue to think and grow on the matter. – Ben

      Like

  5. there is a ‘religious pull’ because many ‘religions’, not just biblically informed christianity, condemn the practice of homosexuality as agaianst God’s created nature. and as such, cannot in good conscience accept or advocate for gay marriage. the problem is not why those ‘mean old christians’ are standing in the way of ‘progress’ but why so many (still the vast minority of society and religious people by the way) refuse the same ‘tolerance’ for that good conscience to the point that it makes them take chick-fil-a’s stands of ‘support’ for traditional marriage and twists it to what they weren’t saying (‘self righteous’ and ‘hypocritical’ condemnation of homosexuality) in order to mock only christians and people/companies who have freely made a ‘choice’.
    in your ‘about’ you say you are a christian… and i said i am more than willing to accept your profession at face value, but what would your motivation be for twisting chick-fila’s statement to what they did not say only to use it to mock their right to stand for what they feel in good conscience is both biblical and good? why would you take an intolerant and sarcastic stance and misstate chickfila just to make a point against what they weren’t saying?
    as i said before, i think your fruedian slip is showing and with as much respect and sensitivity as I can express, maybe what you claim to believe is not what you actually do believe and you are unconsciously trying to either ‘change’ what it means to be christian or subconsciously trying to ‘sarcasm’ your way out of it. either way, please have as much tolerance, not just allowance, but respectful, non-mocking and non-rude just to make a point, tolerance for those who of good conscience and free choice have chosen to respectfully taken a biblically informed stand that you may disagree with.
    thanks again for the opportunity to respond.
    -mike

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s