A Lack of Vision from World Vision

As the Hollywood American Indian Stereotype would say, World Vision's U.S. President Richard Stearns "speaks with a forked tongue."

From one side of his mouth, Stearns insists

"It's easy to read a lot more into this decision than is really there," he said. "This is not an endorsement of same-sex marriage. We have decided we are not going to get into that debate. Nor is this a rejection of traditional marriage, which we affirm and support."

From the other side he says

"Changing the employee conduct policy to allow someone in a same-sex marriage who is a professed believer in Jesus Christ to work for us makes our policy more consistent with our practice on other divisive issues," he said. "It also allows us to treat all of our employees the same way: abstinence outside of marriage, and fidelity within marriage."

How does this decision "affirm and support" traditional marriage? By making this decision, what World Vision has done is exactly what Stearns claims not to have done: They have inserted themselves into the debate.

Stearns goes on to say that World Vision is simply "deferring to the authority of churches and denominations on theological issues."So World Vision is an organization that does Christian work, that claims to adhere to Christian principles, but those principles are in a fluid state, dependent upon the views of denominations?

The Bible says sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is sin. If World Vision says it adheres to the biblical definition of marriage, then this decision is saying to the world that homosexual sex is the only sex acceptable outside of marriage.

World Vision says it is deferring to denominations. Where World Vision should be deferring to is biblical authority.





http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2014/march-web-only/world-vision-why-hiring-gay-christians-same-sex-marriage.html