NWC students subjected to false teaching -again- about Homosexuality

Only students were allowed, under the auspice​​ of safety for those with differing opinions. According to attendees that contacted PRI, although the LGBT promoting students seemed to be talking about the meeting with anticipation, the majority of the students just wanted Northwestern College to take a stand one way or another and stop playing both sides!

So what was the false teaching part?

Julie Elliot explained three Christian views that she put on equal footing​:​

#1 Both orientation (homosexual thoughts and desires) and homosexual actions (sex acts) are sin.

#2  Orientation (homosexual thoughts and desires) are not sin, only homosexual actions (sex acts) are sin.

#3 Orientation (homosexual thoughts and desires) and homosexual actions (sex acts) are not sinful, and should be accepted in the Church.
Where ​is the false teaching here?  
In calling #2 and ​#3 a Christian ​perspective! 
​Julie gave a verse to support #3 from Acts 10:9 concerning Peter’s vision of unclean animals​.  

Attendees commented that this was a flimsy verse that had nothing to do with Peter accepting sexual immorality or homosexuality (sodomy)​, but it was about Jews like Peter accepting Gentile believers. 

Later in the same story it explains the meaning of Peter’s vision, and as you will read, it has nothing to do with accepting sexual immorality.
​Acts 10:34-35 says: Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts from every nation the one who fears ​Him and does what is right.

PRI says that this is clearly false teaching.

False ​teaching in that the subject matter and debate is over an issue concerning a sin that both carries the warning of exclusion from the kingdom for those who don’t repent, but also in that it contradicts the order of creation by Christ​’s own words in Mark 10:6 

(But at the beginning of creation God made them male and female)​. This is self evidently a perversion by general revelation even to those outside the covenant community.

The only logical conclusion is that those who advocate for #3 are nominal ​Christians who are willfully defying clear ​Biblical ​teaching on sexual immorality.

Julie Elliott says that the position of NWC is closest to #2 (homosexual thoughts and desires are not sin, only homosexual actions (sex acts) are sin.)

PRI: We agree the actions are sin, but overall this is false teaching as well.​ Two points:
1. The ​Bible teaches ​in multiple places that sin does not start with our actions, but with our ​desires! 
​ ​
Can anyone from NWC name a sin that ​is ​only a sin in action? 
For example, adultery…desire for this is sin​ according to Jesus. Jesus also taught that anger ​toward your brother or sister would result in judgment and being in danger of the fire of hell.  See Matt​hew 5:21-30​. 
And then there are those pesky Ten Commandments, written by God himself on stone.  Number 10 says you shall not covet, which is certainly a sin of the heart and not of our actions.  
 
​Again, the words of Jesus in Mark 7:20-23, “For it is from within, out of a person’s heart, that evil thoughts come—sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and defile a person.”
2. Heidelberg catechism 
Q&A 108
Q. What does the seventh commandment teach us? 
A. That God condemns all unchastity, and that therefore we should thoroughly detest it and live decent and chaste lives, within or outside of the holy state of marriage.

Q&A 109
Q. Does God, in this commandment, forbid only such scandalous sins as adultery? 
A. We are temples of the Holy Spirit, body and soul, and God wants both to be kept clean and holy. That is why God forbids all unchaste actions, looks, talk, thoughts, or desires, and whatever may incite someone to them.

​Anyone at Northwestern College want to dispute that homosexual orientation includes thoughts and desires for same-sex sexual activity?

Q&A portion of the discussion

During the Q&A time, students could text their questions to the panel members. Depending on the number of similar questions, they’d be asked of the panelists.
The attendees we spoke with complained that ​those leading the forum didn’t really answer the hard questions, but they did notice some bad answers.
Q. Would NWC hire an openly​ homosexual professor?
A. Yes, as long as they were not practicing.
PRI:  Would NWC hire a pedophile if he wasn’t practicing?
Q. We are unsure of the exact question.
A. Most Christians would say that the Bible (or God?) isn’t finished speaking on homosexuality (attributed to James Mead).
PRI: Are there professors at Northwestern who believe the Bible isn’t finished speaking on other sins?​
Q.We are unsure of the exact question.
A. We should encourage our homosexual ​’Christian’ friends to go to seminary (attributed to Tara Woodward).
​PRI​: Should we encourage our unrepentant ‘Christian’ friends to go to seminary?  
Since this was not open to the public,​ PRI has received this information from recollections of five people who attended. If we misrepresented what happened, we would ask that you email PRI so we can set the record straight (no pun intended).
Panelists included: