Final Chapel Session Leaked: Q&A Audio Now Posted

The fifth and final BJU chapel session of this week has been leaked to BJU News, meaning all of this week’s messages are now available for listening here.

This last session was a Q&A time, with a panel consisting of BJU Bible professor Jason Ormiston, Dean of Men Jon Daulton and BJU science professor Marc Chetta answering pre-submitted questions from students about the nature of homosexuality.

The session begins with Ormiston insisting that the questions are authentic and apologizing for not featuring any women on the Q&A panel.

Right-click here to download the file, or click below to play.

[audio http://audiofarm.org/everyidleword/audiofile/24134.mp3]

 

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Final Chapel Session Leaked: Q&A Audio Now Posted

  1. A James

    Did I catch that right? A student who has had victory over SSA should NOT try to help another student? I thought that was what this week was all about.
    Also, did I catch that right? After quoting Psalm 1, its message is negated by saying we should strategically build relationships, etc. to share the Gospel? I didn’t hear the proof text.

  2. Cardon

    This series of talks only further confuses anyone interested in trying to think clearly about this issue. If it had been done responsibly, there would have been some attempt to show how scripture informed the official position of the university in the past and now in the present. The five-sermon series provided more than enough time to trace the trajectory of their thought over time. They spoke authoritatively before and they are speaking authoritatively now. Without some reference to previous positions it all sounds arbitrary. How do we know there won’t be a wholly new position in a year or two with no reference to the current one? If the objective of the series is to provide guidelines for how to think about homosexuality, then an explanation of how guidelines can change so dramatically over a relatively short period of time is essential to understanding the authoritatifveness of the guidelines offered.

    This series has little (BJ) historical context. The Bible verses haven’t changed; the former president is now the chancellor and there is no indication that he has changed. What has changed?

    It is unfortunately not a very long stretch to conclude that, much like the Mormon “revelation” that integration is ok in the church just before BYU was fully excluded from all conference football games for not integrating, the change in BJU’s hermeneutic that now reveals a deeper meaning of scripture has occurred in curious proximity to dropping enrollments, finances cratering and accreditation seemingly farther away than anyone might have thought. Why not address this awkward juxtaposition explicitly in these talks? Many are wondering; why not clarify that while clarifying the past so as to make the present position more understandable?

    It is the combination of the timing of this series, the reluctance to address the past and to acknowledge the present complexities, that makes this series sound so sincere but on reflection feel so disingenuous and even slimy.

Comments are closed.