- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Rookie
Joined April 2019
0
Views
0
Published
29
Comments
Published
Comments
If I were a high profile sportsman and Christian, I wouldn’t want anyone’s “toleration”. Toleration means “I will put up with your religion until such time it becomes disagreeable then I won’t put up with it and sack you”. Toleration presupposes the right to be intolerant. What Izzy has a right to is religious freedom…freedom of conscience…and the freedom to express that conscience. Now if at some time that expression becomes an act that directly impacts other’s freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or conscience, then the law must be invoked and those freedoms curtailed. Freedom of conscience ought to be protected from those who seek to diminish it, simply because they hold different views. Izzy has never advocated the restriction of free speech by others, never advocated any restriction of freedom of expression by gays in their lifestyle. If my memory serves me correctly, he was asked, on Instagram, what was God’s plans for homosexuals. What was Izzy to do? Lie? Deny his faith? Give an opinion that is contradictory to the Bible he upholds as his rule for faith and practice? No, he was honest, no doubt well aware of the ramifications of giving an honest answer. And that answer did not rail against gays…it did not express a personal antipathy or homophobic attitude toward gays. Nor did it target gays specifically. He quoted the Bible which says that every one of us are a sinner in some way or another, and if we want to live beyond this lifetime, we need to repent and accept Christ into our lives. This has been the Christian message for 2000 years, notwithstanding the wickedness of many during that period that twisted the message beyond recognition. No need for anyone to become offended; just accept the message or reject it. No-one is coercing anyone here…your own freedoms are not being impacted in the slightest.
If anything, Israel Folau was set up by someone knowing he would speak the truth, and then that person has sat back and is now enjoying the after-shock. Izzy has called sin by its right name. The so-called experienced Christian leaders who are now compromising their own faith and calling for Izzy to recant are the true hypocrites. And now the media is targeting his wife?
Who among any of us are outside the following descriptor…
Gal. 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
And you are calling out Israel Folau for speaking the truth?
Take offense at that if you like, but that descriptor applies not just to gays right? Who among you is not on the above list of offenders?
Folau speaks for the first time since sacking announcement
Quote: “promote beliefs which have no place in rugby union”…What evidence do you have that substantiates your theory that Izzie was trying to promote any belief to a place in rugby?
Rugby union would be a more inclusive, kinder place without Israel Folau and his backwards views
First, Folau isn’t condemning anyone to hell…he doesn’t have the authority. He is simply repeating what the Bible teaches is the ultimate destiny for not just sinners of one certain persuasion, but all sinners, including liars, thieves, murderers, adulterers, fornicators etc…in other words, all of us… except they repent.
Second, he is not discriminating against gays. He isn’t saying they can’t play footy…he isn’t denying them the right to live whatever lifestyle they choose…he isn’t saying or doing anything at all that could personally affect any gay person except in the case that gay person believes Folau’s statements. If they don’t, what difference does it make? If they do believe his statements, then they have the power to choose what they want to do about it. Taking offense at someone warning you of a certain outcome regarding a certain practice you are doing is nonsensical…Folau should be thanked for the warning, then ignore that warning if you choose.
Third, it is hypocrisy for the ARU to say Folau can believe what he wants, but not express those beliefs. What business does a sporting body, or employer, have in deciding how anyone should practice their faith? Now sure, the ARU must consider revenue that may be affected, but that has nothing to do with being “inclusive”. IF isn’t criticising the ARU for being inclusive, and spiritual destiny doesn’t affect that “inclusiveness” either. Otherwise there would be no room in Rugby for anyone because none of us ever have lived a life devoid of transgression against God’s commandments.
Oh, and finally, Folau’s right about Christmas and Easter. They are both rooted and founded upon pagan festivals and were borrowed by the early church to make it a smoother path for heathens to join the church. Both holi(y)days are fake.
Rugby union would be a more inclusive, kinder place without Israel Folau and his backwards views
IOkay, I am no lawyer, nor did I sign that contract, but from what I can gather, the contract forbade anything that was not in harmony with the inclusiveness of rugby. Right? So my question would then be, what did Folau’s post have to do with rugby…and where or when did he ever suggest that gays or anyone else should be excluded from rugby, or any other sport?
Or is the rugby union’s policy of inclusiveness extend to the kingdom of heaven as well?
Folau speaks for the first time since sacking announcement