Southern Baptist Leader Takes Pro-Torture Stance Against NAE Anti-Torture Statement

Bob Allen
03-19-07

A Southern Baptist ethicist accused the National Association of Evangelicals of using tortured logic in a recent statement denouncing cruelty toward detainees in the U.S.-led war on terror.

Daniel Heimbach, professor of Christian ethics at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, last week in Baptist Press termed an NAE-endorsed anti-torture statement "a moral travesty managing not only to confuse but to harm genuine evangelical witness in the culture." Heimbach, who has supported the use of torture in certain cases in an online dialogue, faulted the 18-page NAE statement for moralizing against torture without specifying particular acts to which it objects.

The danger of the NAE's "diatribe," Heimbach said, is "that it threatens to undermine Christian moral witness in contemporary culture by dividing evangelicals into renouncers and justifiers of nebulous torture--when no one disagrees with rejecting immorality or defends mistreating fellow human beings made in the image of God." Heimbach has long argued against an outright ban on torture, saying the United States should instead base interrogation of prisoners on "just war" principles guiding use of force in military conflict.

"Heimbach misuses the rules of just war to support a pro-torture position," said Robert Parham, executive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics. "Just war rules are intended to restrain the rush to war and violence. Just war rules are misused when they become a pretext for moral cover that allows death and denigration. Given the nature of this guerrilla war, the principle of non-combatant immunity by itself is enough to rule out torture as a morally acceptable step."

"He and other Southern Baptist fundamentalists are again isolating themselves from the larger evangelical community for high-partisan reasons," Parham continued. "They are so hardwired to violence that they have abandoned the core Christian conviction that all human beings are made in God’s image and deserve human rights.” "Torture is morally wrong," said Parham. "Southern Baptists are becoming the pro-torture denomination"

Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, agreed with Heimbach there "could exist circumstances" where uses of coercion are necessary.

.....Mohler is the person of gay baby fame.....

http://www.ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=8671


more on Mohler from Time............

An Evangelical's Concession on Gays
By Michael Lindenberger
The old and often bitter debate over what causes homosexuality took an unexpected turn this week in the wake of comments by a leading conservative Christian theologian, who says fellow evangelicals should accept that science may one day prove homosexuals are born gay. "We sin against homosexuals by insisting that sexual temptation and attraction are predominately chosen," wrote the Rev. Albert Mohler, the influential president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Mohler's position is a startling departure from years of insistence among fundamentalists that gay rights advocates are wrong when they say homosexuality is not something they choose.

Even more surprising, perhaps, is the implication of Mohler's statement that science can help inform Christians' response to moral questions — a rare admission among evangelicals. "The Al Mohler example is certainly a departure," said President Richard J. Mouw of nondenominational Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, the largest evangelical seminary in North America. "Evangelicals, and I am one, haven't always exhibited very clear thinking about science and spirituality."

Indeed, evangelicals have for years defined themselves in large part by their insistence that every word in the Bible is true — no matter how strongly science may suggest otherwise, according to Dr. Bruce Prescott, executive director of Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists and one of Mohler's sharpest critics. "I wrestle with Al Mohler all the time; he is one of the key leaders of the fundamentalist takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention," Prescott said. "But I think this might be the first chink in any of these leaders' armor. At least it suggests that they are trying to reconcile science and scripture.... The first step is to realize science has something to say."

In an interview with TIME, Mohler said his statement on gays does not change his views on the morality of homosexuality. "There has been among evangelicals a fear or a misunderstanding that if a scientific causation of homosexuality were discovered that that somehow removes the moral responsibility of the persons making these choices," he said. "But that is not true. The Scripture doesn't say we are responsible only for the temptations we choose. The basic sinfulness of homosexuality, that wouldn't change."

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1599987,00.html

Who's a super-"christian," who gave a high-five to our boss (who looked uncomfortable accepting it) when he found out that the bomb that killed some high-ranking Al-Qaida guy was built in Oklahoma (where we're located). He once talked about how we needed to torture "these people," and I "agreed" and suggested that maybe we could put a crown of thorns on their heads, whip them, then make them drag a log for a while before we nailed their hands to it. That would probably make them want to tell us anything we wanted to hear.

Got quite an icy stare over that.

TlalocW

like imagine, for example, you had a group of people practicing the wrong religion. What if the only way you could get them to denounce their faith was to torture them?

I suppose that's better than being the pro-lynching denomination, but not by much.