I just listened to Tony Campolo’s speech to the Shepherd Initiative, a group seeking to engage the church in dialog over the issue of homosexuality and the church’s stance on such activities.
Tony is a conservative on this issue in that he believes that homosexual activity is sinful and that homosexuals should remain celibate. He bases this view almost entirely on Romans 1. His wife, Peggy, on the other hand, believes that homosexuals should be encouraged to form monogamous relationships and even marriages.
I want to focus this blog on Tony’s views, not Peggy’s.
Tony’s views would meet with approval from most evangelicals except for the fact that he claims that homosexuality is not a choice. In other words, he believes that since people are born with a (perhaps) genetic predisposition to homosexuality, counselors do them a disservice when they attempt to change their orientation.
What I most appreciate about Tony’s speeches is his call to the church to show love and justice to homosexuals. I also agree that there appears to be a predisposition in those who are homosexual. I don’t think that we can prove that it’s strictly genetic nor can we prove that it stems from any particular environmental factor(s). There is an apparent firestorm over Campolo’s views on homosexuality but I really haven’t seen or heard anything any more controversial than his belief that they can’t be “counseled” out of their orientation. On this, there doesn’t seem to be any scriptural backing for either side.
I’d like to hear more from you as to what Tony has said that would be considered controversial.
Ken – Your Shepherd Initiative link redirects me to microsoft.com. There is an extra “http//” in it.
all fixed … I have officially counseled the link to point to the proper web page. 😉
I’m with you on the predisposition thing. I also believe that some people make a decision by pursuing their physical lusts where ever they may lead — what Romans 1 is addressing. But to make that the absolute with no other exceptions doesn’t match up with what what we observe with other less stigmatizing sins.
Some people worry more than others – anxiety. Some people lose their temper more easily – rage. Some people can’t stop eating when they’ve had enough – gluttony. Some people always have to “one up” everyone else – pride. Some people can’t just have one or two beers – drunkard. Some people tend to exagerate – liar.
Yes the actual action is a choice but the desire or inclination is not. Here’s a heterosexual exercise:
Think about what your “type” of the opposite gender is. You might have a thing for olive skinned brunnettes or buff dudes with six pack stomachs. Whatever your type is define it. Now decide to change it.
We all have our own predispositions.
Thanks Ken for taking the link I found and starting this discussion. I found the link and website when looking into Tony’s comments about God maybe “not being as powerful as we all thought” in discussions about God’s role in Hurricane Katrina. That concept might well hold some weight in this discussion later. At least as far as where Tony’s viewpoint comes from on gays.
I have loved Tony Campolo over the years, saw him at the new years “Jubilate” concerts in the late 1980s downtown with the Gaithers, and read one of his books years ago that really encouraged me that it was OK to have fun and to be outwardly joyful as a believer in worship and in life. The book was called “How to be Pentecostal Without Speaking in Tongues”. The title is tongue and cheek. No pun intended.
We keep referring to Tony as conservative, but it seems like he is going more and more liberal and less biblical every year with his views as he gets older. He also has a seeming fixation with getting opinions from Jewish Rabbis that are generally very liberal anyway. His wife just seems to be over the edge, and don’t know where her justification comes from other than personal opinions and a desire to be liked by everyone.
When posting my reference to the http://www.gaychristian.net website I was most disturbed by the existence of the organization and website itself. I was not aware how organized and blatant some “Gay Christians” had become other than some gay churches. There are even Gay Contemporary Christian Musicians that do concerts in “gay friendly” churches and events nationwide. “Jason & deMarco”. When can we expect to hear them on 104.7 the Fish? 🙂 That might be the next step in CCM today.
In referencing Dan’s current teaching series about “Are You Safe”, could we not say that the term itself “Gay Christian” is an oxymoron? If homosexuality is a sin, can a person in an openly gay relationship continue on with no feelings of guilt or remorse and really be true believers? Wow! Now there’s a huge can of worms. I tend to lean more toward the “Free Grace” view of salvation/justification, but still really struggle with someone who is in a lifestyle/sin such as this one and professes to be born again. I know that we cannot judge their hearts as that is for God alone, but these people are not just anyone; these people are openly gay and openly professing Christ and completely justifying their lifestyle and that “Jesus Approves of it”.
With that said I so appreciate and agree with what Tony says in his talk about how the institutional church treats homosexuals and are so judgmental to them with no love at all. He is exactly right! We have to be salt and light to the world and love those people. Genuine godly love. The same goes for anyone in any sin as all sins are equal in God’s eyes right? I also thought is was so great of him to go and speak in front of a group of homosexuals to share his views and love those people. That’s just what Jesus would have done!
Though I do not think that Jesus would have been in such agreement with this “gay audience” and received as many applause lines as Tony did. IMO.
With the premise that all sin is equal, and that homosexuality is a sin, lets get into the heart of the matter. What about the man in adultery that refuses to give up his mistress and justifies it? What about the person that is stealing money from people with a scam and won’t stop and justifies it? What about the person who is on drugs and won’t get help and justifies it? OK. What about the homosexual that proclaims Christ and completely justifies the relationship? What does the Bible tell us to do after exhausting all Biblical procedures to confront those people in love? Yes we pray for them, know that God can bring them back like the prodigal son someday, but at some point we must move on. I think the Bible uses the terms “cast them out”.
How can Tony say on one hand that homosexuality is a sin and then say that some are born with it, and should not be pushed/counseled to turn away and go strait? That seems to be a contradiction. In many cases of homosexuality, a person being led to Christ and being born again has made a transformation and a gay person became strait. Even married someone of the opposite sex and had kids. But in the case of “Gay Christians”, what are we supposed to do? These people believe they are already born again, and should be treated just like heterosexual couples. How can we then really have a discussion about the transforming power of Jesus with them?
Now in referencing back to Tony’s previous comments about the hurricane and how God “might not be truly all powerful”. Would this argument also work for this issue? If God is not all powerful then he probably is not in control of creation, and genetic mistakes can happen, and people should not be responsible for what they are. Just like birth defects. What a great crutch to use for any tough theological issues. Just say that “God is not all powerful”.
Here’s a tough one. Think about this. Can any of you say that you never had a single homosexual thought as a child, adolescent, or even as an adult? Maybe just once? For 5 seconds? I had some of those thoughts when I was about 8. I remember reading that most men have some “confusing sexual thoughts” when they go through puberty. Be honest with yourself. What if you had acted on that thought? Could you have gone into that lifestyle if you had entered into that sin? Maybe. Why are homosexual acts so common in prisons? Think about it. Are criminals born that way, or fall into this inside the prison walls because of the influences around them.
Just so you know that I am not spouting off my opinions only, I have some personal dealings on this subject.
1> My very best friend at the church where I was born again as a teenager was very effeminate, but a really great guy who seemed to love the Lord and dated girls in High School. He was brought up without a father in the home and four sisters with his mother. We believed that this “all feminine” influence his entire childhood and teen years made him into the person he became. He developed Hotchkins Disease but was treated and in remission. While in the hospital, while I was away at college, I found out that he had an “encounter” with another person of his same gender, and from that point forward went all out for the gay lifestyle. Did he have me fooled all those years thinking he was strait but just effeminate? I met Mary a couple months after returning from college and I now realize that he was jealous of Mary! However, he was still in our wedding, and I was still his friend. I was very ugly and judgmental to him later on, and our last conversation was with him having a screaming cursing tirade and he left slamming the door behind him. I hope he is OK now and maybe had a spiritual revival or awakening. I made the mistake of being nasty and judgmental instead of loving him in the Lord and encouraging him to examine himself and seek the Lord. I just might get up the gumption to track him down again soon and try to encourage him a little.
2> Before Mary and I were married (we were dating) I worked for a company in Marietta and the person I worked for was a Southern Gospel singer that was very well known in Alabama. He was also quite effeminate, and made me a little uneasy, but he proclaimed Christ and made references to women he had dated so I was able to easily look past the outward. We were both professing Christians and both loved music and performing. I rented a room from him for a time, and it was a bizarre situation that I was very happy to escape from. He also seemingly became jealous of Mary when we became engaged, and had a very ugly situation when I moved out of the apartment. I later found out that he had some problems with teenage boys in some youth groups he was leading, and that he had a past history of homosexual behavior with other people he worked with in his southern gospel group. I was so glad to be out of that bad situation, and for Mary’s constant support and love.
3> Finally, my dear sister in law was married for a number of years to a man that is now in prison. We are in touch this this man with letters of encouragement and hear back from him sometimes. They had a son that is now 18 and comes over to our house frequently. Mary and I are the only “normal” and happy relationship that he is around in his life. This is because my sister in law is currently involved in a long-time homosexual relationship with a woman and they live together. Amazingly coincidental that this other woman she is involved with worked at the same company I did with the Southern Gospel singer 20 years ago! This has been traumatic on the boy, and my sister in law has had battles with drugs and alcohol over the years. She is not a happy person, but we are so thankful that we are able to be in their lives to love them just as they are. She knows where we stand, but she also knows that we are there for her and would do almost anything to help her or her if she really got into trouble.
Knowing more about my own life story what do you think? I am not sure these examples prove whether this is learned behavior or genetic. For me it was very convincing that the environment people are brought up in can sway a person one way or another.
I was really on a spiritual high during those teenage years or maybe I could have gone that way with the influences around me. I can thankfully say that I never had any real thoughts or desires since that time I was 8. Also the love and strong attraction for my lovely (wife to be) back in those days would have blinded me to any of that mess! She was and is one great woman!
Last week David Ennis commented to me about how these Gay Christian groups and Gay Churches justify the seemingly crystal clear verses and stories about God’s judgment on homosexuals in the Bible. Sodom and Gomorrah? Romans 1:26-27? Maybe a discussion on some of these specific verses and stories might help us to understand the “Gay Christian” point of view, and help us to relate to them and better show the love of Jesus to them if we encounter discussions on this topic in the future.
If homosexuality is a genetic defect, and incurable, then it is NOT a sin, and should have all of the respect as a heterosexual lifestyle. I just can’t find that justification in the Bible. Can You?
This is my brain dump. Typing this has helped to put my thoughts in order on this subject, and brought back some tough memories in doing so. I hope you enjoyed it, and maybe understand this subject a little better now that you have seen a little window into my own life.
So much to think about, thx!
Even if it is a “genertic defect and incurable” doesn’t mean that it isn’t a sin. That implies that we can all be counseled to perfection and be cured of our sin nature.
I see it as a moot point whether the orientation is genetic or not. It is not my attraction to women that causes me to sin but my specific actions and where I fix my mind. The same goes for the opposite orientation.
I think we are saying the same things though. I agree that it the church should handle it as a discipline issue. That opens the door for discipling a lot of remarried people too though.
For extra reading on the topic of a lifestyle of sin see http://www.guiroo.com.
Are you saying that our sinful condition is a genetic defect? Our sinful condition is a spiritual defect and not a physical one right?
My point was that if homosexuality is a physical/genetic defect then it can’t be sin can it? If it is genetic they can’t fine the defective genes, so there is no cure. Then we should treat it like a sickness and not sin.
I ask these questions with sarcasm as I don’t believe it is genetic.
The blind man’s blindness was not sin was it?
Here’s another point. Tony seems to think this issue is not so important since Jesus did not discuss it in the New Testament. That makes this sin somehow lesser than others? That contradicts every principle that all sin is equal! Could Jesus have discussed every subject? I am glad He did not as the Bible would fill a couple of rooms.
Can some of you come up with some other sins that Jesus did not talk about specifically in the NT?
Abortion comes to mind as a biggie!
Help me out here….please?
Dave, you are right on in your assesment of our predispositions. Jonathan Edwards called is our inclinations. We all have particular sins that we are prone to whether due to upbringing or environment. We are free to chose what we want, but we all only choose what we are inclined to choose (that is the extent of our freedom) (And none of us are inclined to choose good; thus, none of us will ever choose God). I will never choose brocolli at a restaurant even though I am free too. Likewise, I do struggle with my anger in ways that my wife never does.
Those who participate in the gay lifestyle may be inclined to do so. I actually beleive that, because if they weren’t inclined to it then they probably wouldn’t go down that road. However, that doesn’t excuse them from their sin nor does it excuse me from my sins. Too often the issue is taken off of the sin and a holy God and onto defending/justifying the how or why someone is the way they are.
I am with Pat on this one. Just as there is an apparent “genetic” predisposition to alcoholism, there seems to be a predisposition to homosexuality. Since my Dad was an alcoholic, I may also have the predisposition. The inclination is not, in and of itself, a sin. The sin part comes when I act on the inclination and get drunk or dependent on alcohol.
In the same way, one who is inclined to homosexuality doesn’t sin simply by being inclined. He or she sins when he or she is involved in illicit sexual liaisons–in this case it is with a same-sex partner. Those who are prone to heterosexual promiscuity sin when they are involved in illicit sexual liaisons with the opposite sex.
Both homosexuals and heterosexuals would be guilty of sin if they were to give in to their proclivities and pursue lustful thoughts about the objects of their desire.
Do you guys agree that if one is an alcoholic that he remains an alcoholic for the rest of his life–whether or not he touches alcohol again?
So are you guys seem to be agreeing with Tony about the predisposition, but not to the choice? I could agree with this possibility, and David’s argument makes sense. Tony says no choice is involved and it sounds like we all disagree with him on that point.
Do you not think there are environmental variables too as I referenced above? Weren’t studies done that showed many homosexuals came from troubled homes or abuse? How about my friend that lived without a father with a mother and four sisters, or my sister in law that was married and had a child before her current lifestyle?
Did anyone other than David read my most recent “novel” above, and the examples I gave? Does anybody care to comment on anything I said other than David? The issue of openly Gay Christians in the light of Dan’s current teachings? Anybody? If not, then I won’t bother to burn this kind of mental energy in the future, and just give David a call on the phone when I have thought or two. 😉
Here’s one last attempt to take this to deeper dialogue….
Should homosexuals just try to live a celibate lifestyle as Tony says and not really worry about trying to change, repent, and that maybe God could change their hearts and affections toward the opposite sex? Should Tony have questioned these people’s genuine faith that he was speaking to? He did not.
If we take Tony’s full view it would seem that God makes mistakes or that God is not as powerful as we all believed, just as Tony commented on about the recent hurricane. That is why I tried to make the parallel to Tony’s view about hurricane Katrina, but it seems that nobody wants to comment or have a dialogue about this outside of the predisposition argument.
Alcohol and drugs are man made substances that are addictive. Sexual and emotional relationships between a man and a woman were specifically created, ordained, and blessed by God for companionship and for reproduction. This is the foundation of our very existence. Yes there are sexual additions too. This is a perversion of God’s plan, just as is homosexuality.
For me this issue is more important than alcohol or drug abuse because these urges and attractions are God given and God ordained since Adam and Eve.
And by the way, my Father and both of my brothers were alcoholics, and I was on that path until I was born again. Without that intervention from God I am sure I would be one too. Are we limiting God’s power and what he can do with homosexuals that come to Christ? This is the paradox with the “Gay Christian” group we are discussing here. Can they really be born again?
Are alcoholics always alcoholics and are homosexuals always homosexuals? If both are things are sin, and we must just control our natural or predisposed urges to both and be celibate, then were is the transforming power of Jesus Christ in all this? Where is the victory?
I once read a book in College called “Your God is Too Small”. I think instead of making excuses for people and behavior, we must show them Jesus, and lead them there with genuine and intense love without ugly condemnation. A church like GF is a step in the right direction as the best way to show them Jesus is our love for each other, and we do that pretty well as a body.
IMO. What say you? Thats why this blogsphere exists.
Got to run so I can’t address everything but I’ll reply with another question.
Should a single, Christian, heterosexual just try to live a celibate lifestyle and not really worry about their attraction to the opposite gender?
I don’t think Tony should question their faith but identify homosexuality as sin* — he did do that. Considering what the dialogs were about it wouldn’t seem the time or place to laydown the fire and brimstone.
*Many people add certain behaviors to the requirement of the Gospel (ie: you MUST be baptized), in this case some people have removed certain behaviors from the requirement of the Gospel. Identify the sin, exercise church discipline and let the Holy Spirit do His job.
Dropping the bomb now…. ~:o
You must realize that the huge difference is that God gave heterosexuals an “outlet” if you will that is not sinful. An option that is blessed and ordained by God. Marriage and sex inside of marriage. Is God discriminating against homosexuals? There must be some good reason that God did not bless these kinds of same sex relations.
A Christian heterosexual should not be celibate unless God calls him or her to that, as in Paul’s case. Otherwise that person needs to bring their pre-marital sexual desires under the Lordship of Christ and remain abstinence until marriage. Not always easy, but what is right. There is that great verse… “Marriage is honorable and the bed undefiled”. If you are married then “have at it” my friend! That is God’s way and is beautiful and wonderful. All of the people at GF with all of those kids would agree as would I! ;^)
Heterosexual pre-marital sex or adultery is clearly defined in the Bible as sin. I believe that only the most liberal churches disagree with this point. I believe that homosexuality is also clearly defined, but these activist groups have found ways to justify and come up with their own interpretations. That is the main point of my concern here.
Unfortunately for these people God does not lay out the option of marriage for homosexuals. The verse that “It is better to marry than to burn” in your desires was for heterosexuals. From my perspective Homosexual thoughts and actions are sinful in relation to what the Bible seems to teach, and from seeing real life examples previously noted.
Impure heterosexual thoughts and actions are sinful only outside of marriage. Then even in marriage those thoughts are sinful only when they are for someone other than your spouse. Is it wrong to lust after your own wife? 😉 I sure hope not!!!
The group Tony was speaking to was just not just some generic homosexual activist group, but a homosexual activist group that professes the name of Christ, and is openly fighting for acceptance in the evangelical church.
It was great that Tony was there, but some of what he and his wife said was damaging in my opinion since he gave them comfort and even some justification that it is not all their faults and that it is kind of OK.
With the current teachings at GF about “Are You Safe” when asking the question of if these people are genuinely born again or not, you would have to say no because of this “continuing sin” in their life that is completely justified in their eyes with no sorrow, remorse, or repentance. The opposite is true in their case. They are celebrating and actively pursuing their lifestyle under the banner of Christ. Not saying that I agree 100% with all of the points in the current teaching series at GF as again I lean more toward “Free Grace” and not so heavily on “evidence”; it’s just that it is very interesting to discuss this point in the light our our current teaching, and to understand where the GF leadership would stand on this point. Especially Dan and Kevin as we had a great talk on the teaching last week.
Leaders? Agree or Disagree? I relinquish the floor as “resident windbag blogger” for further discovery and discussion.
Are you sure about that? While marriage is honorable, doesn’t Paul describe marriage as a secondary option for those of us that can’t seem to control themselves? Do we consider our married selves the biblical standard of behavior or the extremely forunate that we have options?
In our western culture and especially the church, singles are considered “incomplete” or “lesser” when Paul describes singleness as the better way. I think we can all agree that the celibate (no matter what their orientation) carry a great burden.
Now you can’t be going back to procreation arguments for marriage as God’s standard – the world is no longer in need of that. (Heresy at GF, I know.) 🙂
C.A.-Non-leader jumping in here. There seems to be a tendency in your blogs to come to terms with an activity that the Bible calls sin, but one that has no acceptable outlet. I contend that the desire one has for the same gender is neither natural nor one that has an acceptable outlet. God gave us a desire for the opposite sex. Any deviation from that is the product of our sin. It is not right.
One other question you had was about the tranforming power of the Spirit. Upon conversion, we are created anew and the Holy Spirit indwells us. However, that isn’t and automatic blank slate. We are still disposed to sin-particularly those sins that we favored before conversion. Paul gives us an excellent example of this as he laments his struggles with sin in Romans 7. As we struggle and strive to honor God with our bodies, we rely on His grace and power. As we mature and grow in our faith, we will gain more victory over those sins. That is the power of God’s grace.
David, yes some do remain single, and do struggle, but the option is there for all people, and God does approve of marriage and sex in marriage.
I pray for anyone that is lonely and incomplete to find that partner to share their lives with. I have a friend that is single and really does not want to be, and really struggles with this.
I agree with you Pat 100%. My point is that Tony seem to be saying that a homosexual changing his orientation after being born again is not likely. That really bothers me. There is always and outlet. The outlet is our salvation and the ultimate joy and release from having our sins forgiven right?
If homosexuality is a sin, then we do have the power with the Spirit indwelling us to have victory over that sin or any sin, and joy in that victory?
Victory does not mean perfection or that some will never struggle with the tendencies again, we should never limit God and the transforming power when we are born again. I know that some do change and are married and even have kids. I also know that this is not the norm. Is that because we are failing as a church with our hate and judgment? Is it because this is a sin that is very hard or impossible to reverse the effects? Should the effect even be reversed? I don’t know the answer, but we should not limit God and what he can do in someone’s life.
Their outlet is the joy of their salvation, and if they are able get the “full victory” and change orientations, they can marry and have a fulfilled life and achieve that other “outlet” with God’s full blessing. 🙂
Again, I’d say that a predilection toward homosexuality is not a sin in and of itself. I certainly believe that a person with that bent can marry a member of the opposite sex and enjoy a heterosexual relationship and serve God all his or her life.
I think that the Holy Spirit, in progressively sanctifying that person, can give them a measure of victory over their inclinations. I don’t, however, believe that one will ever be completely free of his sinful urges this side of Heaven. Therefore, C.A. I would respectfully disagree that one can get the “full victory” (You really can never know if you’ve achieved a “full victory” until your life is over, right?).
If a person with homosexual tendencies, recognizes the sinfulness of acting on those urges with members of the same sex then chooses to remain celibate, I don’t think it is incumbent upon that person to be “reoriented” in order to be a follower of Christ. Just like any celibate person, they should find their fulfilment in their relationship with Christ if they can.
If they burn with lust, then they should seek God’s favor in finding a member of the opposite sex whom they could marry and have a God-honoring relationship.
By the way, the sin of lust isn’t simply the inability to control your sexual urges. The sin of lust involves the misuse of that which God has ordained for the marriage bed. It involves a dehumanization of the one who is lusted after. So C.A., although your argument is compelling and well thought out, I find it comes somewhat short. You asked if it is wrong to lust after your own wife. My answer, ABSOLUTELY. Ask her. Would she want to be thought of as a life-support system for genitalia or would she rather be loved by you with Agape love? I would think that the couch would become my permanent bed if my wife thought I was lusting after her instead of desiring her as a wife.
Good discussion going here, boys. Any girls care to wade in?
That’s just it, they aren’t incomplete … but that’s another topic.
Thanks for focusing us Pat. What exactly do you mean by unnatural? Homosexuality occurs in nature (which mankind is a part of) pretty frequently. It has been observed in: antelopes, boars, bulls, chimpanzees, cows, ducks, cats, dogs, fruit flies, geese, gorillas, gulls, horses, humans, langurs, rams, sheep, macaques, monkeys, turkeys and vervets.
Something else interesting about those penguins is that they usually stay with the same partner.
I just think there are so many exceptions and bizarre quirky exceptions in nature that we just can’t rule out “natural causes” — whether it’s genetic or chemical or whatever.*
I do agree with you though that there are no acceptable outlets though as we are held to a higher standard as humans.
For the record I’m not saying some people can’t be counseled out of it. I’m just saying it’s not an absolute that cancels out the idea of natural causes.
*God makes plenty of people that have fits of rage and other unChristian types of behavior due to chemical embalance and neurological disorder.
Ken, I don’t think we are that far apart on this. I used some terms to make a points such as “full victory” and “lust” that were really not the best use of those words in that particular context. Let me elaborate.
I used the term “full victory” very loosely. I think if a former homosexual found Christ and found attraction in someone of the opposite sex, was married and happy, while sure of their salvation and serving the Lord, I would consider that a “full victory”. Though this person surely could have the same tendencies and urges of the former life. Though some could have complete healing/deliverance from this and never have those urges again. Don’t you think? This goes back to my point of not limiting God based only on our own personal experiences.
I would also agree with you that if a person that is in that lifestyle realizes that it is a sin, repents, comes to Christ, and chooses to be celibate then brings his continuing urges and desires to the foot of the cross instead of acting on them just as victorious (full victory) as the first example above. However the second person could really struggle and need lots of spiritual love and encouragement. But they too could also have complete healing/deliverance too and still decide to remain celibate.
The Bible clearly teaches in the NT an “option” to handle our urges should we not be able to control ourselves. I see this as “God’s failsafe”. Though the other person in the relationship would probably not be too thrilled with this being a reason for getting married.
1 Corinthians 7:9
“But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion”
As far as lusting, I was just making a joke with a poor use of words about the affection I have for my wife. I’m sorry for that. I was not being serious about lusting as that is a self-centered term like I would lust for a double cheeseburger at Wendy’s. Maybe a triple for me……Beefy! 😉
A definition of lust…
lust-luxuria – self-indulgent sexual desire, ersonified as one of the deadly sins
I meant to say that it is OK to desire your heterosexual marital partner in a sexual context. Nothing wrong with that at all. Thinking about your mate is not lust and is not sinful. Now dwelling on it can’t be good.
A marriage only built upon the sexual and the physical (Eros love) is not a true relationship. The Christ centered love for your mate (Agape love) has to be the foundation and provides the stability and longevity in a relationship. Agreed Ken.
Now Ken, back to the point of the “Gay Christians”. How do we as believers deal with these people that seem to want acceptance so badly in the evangelical church, and are telling us that our views and interpretations of scripture are wrong and that we are just paranoid and homophobic?
These people are not repentant or remorseful at all. The church might be to blame for some of this IMO. They have fully justified and accepted their lifestyle and gender choices as normal. For them it is neither a choice or a sin. Yes, we have to genuinely love them in Christ, but we simply cannot accept their interpretations of scripture, and we would have to question the validity of their profession of faith in Christ if we follow the principles laid out in the current teaching series about “are you safe”. Their life does not match their profession. I am on the fence about this particular part, but again find it a very interesting question to ask in light of the current teaching series.
I would love to hear some opinions on this particular as this one of the main issues of concern I had with this seemingly well organized “Gay Christian” movement.
I don’t think we have too many if any female bloggers here, but it would be nice to have that perspective here more often to balance all of the blog-based testosterone that we all fling here every day. 🙂 Maybe Donna Farr could have a blog of her own as the head of the woman’s ministry? I know my wife would get on the GF blogsphere more often.
So Ken, do you now think we agree more than you originally thought, or do I need just some shock therapy to fall in line? :^
I’ve got a question. How would you all respond to a new church movement – consisting of adulterers.
Let’s call it the Adulterer’s Christian Movement. Their motto: When honoring the marriage commitment is just not enough.
How would we look at that? Would we have endless debates about the propriety of Adultery – and whether or not it was a sin – and whether or not the members of this group could reign in their urges to step out on their betrothed?
Would we question whether or not they were born “Adulterer’s” – genetically altered and thus incapable of avoiding that little office tryst every now and again?
Would we?
We sin because we are sinners.
I am willing to make an emphatic statement. A person who continues to live a life of sin, who is not repentant of it, who, in fact, is a champion of that sinful lifestyle is not a Christian. Ultimatley, no one can know for sure but God. That doesn’t mean that the person won’t become a Christian the very next day and become convicted of their sin, but should they remain in that pattern of sin and lobby for the acceptance of it, no profession of Christianity will convince me it is authentic.
That doesn’t mean that we wash our hands of said person. It is just the way we use our minds and Scripture to assess the person we are interacting with so that we may know how to proceed with them in our future relations. Do we encourage them to “give up” their sin thinking that they are already beleivers (regenerate) or do we try to focus on Holy God and what the Scriptures say about sin and their lifestyle evidence to the contrary of their profession? Do we counsel them to renounce their sin when we think they are not beleivers or do we pray for the Holy Spirit to come upon them and create in them a clean heart (regenerate them)?
John, see this article.
Adultery? No, but I think I could make a pretty good argument for polygamy. (But again, that’s another topic.) 🙂
Pat, you said:
So are you willing to put all the remarried “Christians” that were divorced when adultery wasn’t a factor in this category as well? Christ clearly calls them adulters by getting remarried.
…..So are you willing to put all the remarried “Christians” that were divorced when adultery wasn’t a factor in this category as well? Christ clearly calls them adulters by getting remarried…..
My short answer is that Jesus said it and unfortunately, yes. IMO
Unfortunately I also have personal insight to this issue.
We discussed this very point at lunch today as a family. Mary was married once before when she was very young for a very short time, and her “husband/youth pastor” deceived her from day one and was not the dedicated Christian he claimed or lived. He left her after a while and during their separation and long before the divorce was finalized he committed adultery among other things we won’t discuss here. He is the one that filed for divorce.
Had it not been for the fact that he left Mary, and filed, and most importantly committed adultery, I could not with a clear conscience have marry her. I was only 19 at the time dealing with all this. A matter of fact I had Mary contact this person one more time to be sure there was no chance of reconciliation. Might sound crazy to some, but it gave me the assurance I needed. I never really considered it a real “marriage” as to me it was a sham so this guy could maybe have sex, and since to Mary this person became a total stranger on their wedding night.
Truth is truth no matter how difficult. Jesus was clear about marriage and remarriage and those are tough verses.
I think this would be another very good subject for another new blog, but at this point I am going to hang up my blogging fingers and leave the rest to you guys.
Thanks for taking the time to hear my very long winded opinions on all this and other blogs. I really appreciate it.
Blessings to you all.
First, I think we all agree that everyone struggles with one sin more than another.
I think we all agree that there is both a genetic and an environmental component to this struggle.
Since God is sovereign, then we can safely say that God ordains the environmental factors just as he ordains the genetic factors.
Therefore, to say that one’s genetic heritage lends itself to a predisposition to sin should be no great difficulty. We don’t hold say that a child sins because his father was an abusive drunk. We say he sins when he follows in the footsteps of his father and commits abuses in a drunken state. We recognize that the environment in which he was raised lent to his sin but we hold him accountable.
In the same way we can look at one’s genetically based predispositions not as sin in and of itself. We call sin, sin when it is **committed even though the sinner was influenced by genetics.
In other words, we are without excuse. Perhaps genetic predispositions are part of the curse brought about by the Fall.
As always, I’ve enjoyed reading the blog entries; this one hits close to home because I’ve had counseling clients of mine broken with the idea that there was no way to see God’s grace because of their attraction to members of their own gender. Several things I’ve come to in trying to approach this subject from a Biblical worldview:
1. We’re all fallen in every aspect of our being: spiritual, physical, emotional.
2. God in no way makes exception for a homosexual relationship no matter how loving, inspiring, or monogamous.
3. Same sex attraction is quite distinct from homosexual activity (I agree with Ken, David, et.al), but..
4. Same sex attraction (while, unlike homosexual activity, is not a sin) is a perverted form of eros. How is it perverted? Our society? fallen genetics? bad parenting? All of the above? I dunno. But it definitely is a case of something created wonderfully be warped very badly. Something went very, very wrong here.
Clinically speaking, what’s my “success rate.” I’ve yet to see a person who got rid of the temptation completely. I’ve seen tempted bisexuals focus only on the opposite sex and take spouses. I’ve seen tempted homosexuals (ssa’s) live chaste lives and devote all of their lives to Christian ministry, but I’ve yet to see a person who once struggled with this who did not consider it his or her potential weakness. Joyfully, I have seen God’s grace of forgiveness displayed in their lives as all of us have over our sinful struggles.
Jeff, I wish we all had the opportunity to put our money where our mouth is…as it were. Thanks for getting in the trenches and thanks for a well-thought-out post.