Is this a trend?
Posted on December 12th, 2006 by catalyst into the Pastoral Staff categoryIn our recent Homophobia post, we had a fascinating discussion on the subject of homosexuality and Christianity.
In the comments, the question of homosexuality seemed to turn on whether homosexuals are born gay or whether they choose homosexuality. Coincidentally, another Evangelical pastor just confessed to practicing homosexuality. Paul Barnes of Grace Chapel church in Colorado with a congregation of 2,100, recently stepped down from his position as head pastor.
Here's part of his confession:
“I have struggled with homosexuality since I was a 5-year-old boy. I can't tell you the number of nights I have cried myself to sleep, begging God to take this away.”
As a genuine question, why would someone in a marriage and pastor of a church choose to be gay? It just doesn't make sense to me.
Grace Chapel Associate Pastor, Dave Palmer, offered this thought:
Had the church been more of an environment of grace and had Paul been able to share his struggles in that environment of grace early on in his ministry experience, then I think it would have lessened the probability of his falling.
Update: Here's a good NY Times article discussing Gay Evangelicals.
RSS feed for posts
December 12th, 2006 at 8:46 am
Homosexuality is either genetic or a choice. If it is genetic, I don’t understand how God could view it as a sin, since he made it that way. If it is a choice, then I could understand how it could be a sin. Every person that I have known who is a homosexual that I asked this question of, has told me that their homosexuality is something that they were born with.
They said they had no more choice in the matter than I did in “deciding” to be straight.
A different thought is the concept of this man deceiving his wife, children, family, flock and friends. Living a lie, pretending to be someone you are not, that seems like a sin to me.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:40 am
Reforming Heathen wrote:
Just one observation, RH … God didn’t make us that way, we did, through sin.
As a race of people, we were warned not to eat of the knowledge of good and evil. The Lord warned us if we did, we’d die (Genesis 2:17). Homosexuality came into humanity through sin/death, just like every other affliction mankind suffers from.
I’m struck that the Lord spoke of sin in Genesis 4:7 in almost personal terms:
” … sin is lying outside your door ready to attack. It wants to control you, but you must master it.”
Consistent with the above, Paul spoke of sin as something he could not control in Romans 7:14-17.
I’m certain homosexuality is inhereted - whether through genes or the sin nature we’re born with.
Sam
December 12th, 2006 at 9:51 am
Heathen…
I beg to differ a bit….
The way I see it God created us with free will and free will lead Adam and Eve to our original sin. Thus we all have a “sinful nature” and could it be that that very same sinful nature is embedded in our genetic makeup? I don’t know, but sometimes I think yes.
I was watching Breaking Bonaduce last night (hey…it was a slow TiVo night, ok!)….and the episode revolved around how Danny basically realized he had grown up to be just like his father. Same exact anger issues, etc. even though he despised that his dad was like that.
Now there’s probably a nature vs. nurture argument there, but I just can’t help but wonder if some of that junk is given to us in our DNA, and thus we are challenged with our high calling to war against our sinful nature and try to live as righteously as possible.
Could homosexuality be a genetic trait? Sure. Just like a propensity towards anger or drinking or lust. But does being “genetic” make it an excuse not to fight it? No way!
If my dad was a drunk, and I enjoy drinking, then I guess I’ll just have to be a drunk, huh? Cause it’s in my genes?? Come on.
God gives us grace to overcome our very nature. Will we be perfect and completely concur it? Not in this lifetime. But to use it as an excuse to give in seems wrong to me.
But what do I know?
December 12th, 2006 at 10:10 am
I’m always fascinated by the differing opinions on this topic.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:29 am
And more fascinating…the differences of opinion of ALL who blog here on the spectrum of topics we cover.
But isn’t the friendly discussion of said topics wonderful!!
December 12th, 2006 at 10:53 am
I agree, the friendly discussion of said topics is a wonderful thing.
I consider is unfortunate that many people feel so strongly about their position on moral issues that they find it impossible to realize that they may be in error. In fact, those people may have fallen into the trap of judging someone, when they may be mistaken. I find it so in myself to be this way. I guess that judgement is just built into human nature. The whole question of homosexuality being a sin is academic to me, as I am heterosexual, and that nullifies the issue to me personally.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:03 am
Reforming Heathen said: “Homosexuality is either genetic or a choice. . . . “
It could be both. As a gay man, I’m a weary of the causation arguments. If it is nature (genetic, etc.), then couldn’t there be unnatural gays and straights? If it is nurture (upbringing, psychological influences, experiences, etc.), then are not parents/society the real cause of homosexuality? After all, you are correct in that no one ever consciously chooses to have primarily same-sex attractions [At 31, I’m still waiting for heterosexuality to kick in
].
The causation arguments are not relevant to the religious debate. As seen in the comments above, the theoretical gay gene will never change the minds of those who are religiously opposed to same-sex behavior.
“. . . .A different thought is the concept of this man deceiving his wife, children, family, flock and friends. Living a lie, pretending to be someone you are not, that seems like a sin to me.”
I agree. The real sin here is not having same-sex attractions but maintaining a secret life from one’s life partner and infidelity. Unlike the other recently outed Colorado pastor, I’m more sympathetic to Barnes’s struggle since he seems to have kept his church out of the gay political debate and did not demonize gays. That said, he is still guilty of cheating on his wife.
Of course, there have always been people with predominantly same-sex attractions who have entered into opposite-sex marriages. There is even a Christian ministry in the UK that encourages hetero-married gays to be honest and to uphold their marriage vows. The ministry, Courage (www.courage.org.uk), was an “ex-gay” ministry, but changed its mission a few years ago when the leader included that such efforts were ineffective.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:21 am
I wonder how this scripture factors in, for how believers relate to gays?
Although I’m free from all people, I have made myself a slave for all people to win more of them. I became Jewish for Jewish people. I became subject to Moses’ Teachings for those who are subject to those laws. I did this to win them even though I’m not subject to Moses’ Teachings. I became like a person who does not have Moses’ Teachings for those who don’t have those teachings. I did this to win them even though I have God’s teachings. I’m really subject to Christ’s teachings. I became like a person weak in faith to win those who are weak in faith. I have become everything to everyone in order to save at least some of them. I do all this for the sake of the Good News in order to share what it offers. (1 Corinthians 9:19-23 GW)
Sam
December 12th, 2006 at 11:25 am
Sam
Will you be gay for me?
(Thanks for sharing Norm)
December 12th, 2006 at 11:34 am
Yes it could. I knew a woman who claimed to have chosen to be gay after being straight, then she switched back to straight. Was she bi-sexual? I don’t know.
Perhaps that is the most difficult thing for humans to deal with, not knowing the answers, not knowing the absolute truth. People who are deep in their faith sometimes make judgements about others based on faith, not on true knowledge.
Myself, I am perfectly comfortable in admitting that I simply do not know for sure. That puts me in conflict with some people who have used their belief systems to make decisions that they strongly hold.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:42 am
On another board, long ago, there was a gay man being taken to task by several fundy christians, and I wrote “for purposes of this discussion, consider me gay”, whereupon the brethren set upon me with all manner of vile accusation and condemnation. Oddly their treatment of me as a ‘gay for a day’ was no different than when I was awakened by the Spirit and led out of a dead, spirit-less, religious institution. Anyone who leaves the camp of religion, and truly ventures into the wilderness outside the gates, following the Lord only, will find themselves among the human casualties of sin.
In my experience, outside the gate I have found friendship, relationship, brotherly love, listening ears. Inside the gate, such was rare as people there are all about the appearance of piety, strength and faith. It was INSIDE THE GATERS who passed by the man who had been wounded by robbers and left to die on the side of the road. It was an OUTSIDE THE GATER who followed his heart and helped the wounded man.
One of the most noticable differences between an INSIDE the gater and OUTSIDE the gater, is honesty with self and others.
Believers who follow the heart of God will be gay friendly, I think.
Sam
December 12th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
Better said….Believers who follow the heart of God will be “sinner” friendly, no matter what their position on the “sin.”
December 12th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
Love the sinner, hate the sin”?
December 12th, 2006 at 12:21 pm
What is the real reason why people have problems with the gay community? There were over one hundred and sixty comments on the topic of homophobia. That is probbaly more comments than on any other topic this blog has ever had. And I know because others and myself have stirred up some crazy emotions in the past. But what is the root of all this hatred towards gay people. What if everyone found out that Paul, (who never spent a day with Jesus mind you but wrote two thirds of the New Testament, that’s a different issue altogether), was gay. He did write the famous, “why do I do the things that I hate……”, in Romans. If you read that closely it sounds that he is struggling with something that sounds strangely familiar. Now I am not saying this is what he was struggling with. But what if it was? I wonder how that would change people’s outlook on homosexuality.
December 12th, 2006 at 12:46 pm
Permit me to think aloud on that, a moment.
What IS sin?
Note that in Genesis 4:7 God speaks of sin in PERSONAL terms, that sin has will (it wants to devour you) and intent (it is crouching at the door to pounce on you) and purpose (it wants to master you). Paul speaks of it in terms of being slave to it (Romans 7:14-17), which makes sin a slave-owner, task master, or over-lord. It has the power to compel Paul to do what he does not want to do.
So if we are told to love the sinner and hate sin, what is it we hate?
Do we hate the homosexuality? Seems to me that homosexuality, like anything else which afflicts men, is not the sin, rather it is the manifestation (symptom) of sin which has afflicted us with death, disease.
Seems to me that IF we really understood the identity/nature of sin, that statement “love the sinner, hate the sin” would literally translate to “love people, hate satan”. Yet the way it is translated most often is “love people, hate the symptom”, whereby people often set out to eradicate the symptoms of sin, while ignoring the root cause.
Paul said in Ephesians 6 that our fight was against evil itself, not with flesh (which we know to be corrupted / afflicted by sin). Yet for all our Bible study, learnedness, supposed spirituality - we continually make war against the flesh, wounding people.
The war against homosexuality is really no more/less than an ignorant and misguided value judgment of the flesh - that one man’s affliction caused by SIN (an external spiritual force) is more heinous than another man’s affliction. The fat man says “thank God I’m not gay” - the gay man says “thank God I’m not a leper”. In this culture, gays are the new lepers.
Has it ever occurred to us, that eating from the tree of “Knowledge of Good and Evil” has really screwed up our ability to judge good and evil? We call the homosexual “evil”, because he has the symptoms of SIN infection?
What does “hate the sin” mean to you?
December 12th, 2006 at 1:32 pm
Heck if I know… that’s an expression that I hear used all the time.
December 12th, 2006 at 2:03 pm
Wasn’t my intent to put you on the spot, Heathen. I’ve heard the expression for 20 years myself and only just now questioning it.
December 12th, 2006 at 2:36 pm
“Hate the sin” to me is very much like how you describe “hating Satan” Sam.
I hate that I see in myself a propensity to get angry, or to deal with lust, and I hate to see others who are burdened by the weight of sin in their lives. While I hate the sin, more truly I hate the original source of that sin!
So when I see a drug addict, I don’t hate him/her at all, I hate the Devil for having temporary victory over them and engrossing them in their sin. I feel compassion for the sinner, cause really…that sinner is ME!
Does that makes sense? It does to me, but it might not to anyone else. And it doesn’t mean that at times I don’t fall back into my trap of myopic, judgemental Christianity. But again, that’s MY sin!
December 13th, 2006 at 6:58 am
I said this in the last blog post on this topic but I feel it’s worth saying again. Christians who condemn sinners (of any kind) and judge them as being unworthy of Salvation are themselves committing the worst kind of sin: hatred towards their brother. To make homosexuality (or anything else) a “Heaven or Hell” issue is throwing away the message of the Gospel - you know, the Gospel in which we are all saved by belief in Jesus and we are no longer slaves to the Law?
Am I saying homosexuality is not a sin? No, but I don’t think it is any more “vile” than pride, selfishness, greed, gossip, and a host of other sins that Christians are so willing to ignore in their own pews and pulpits. Thank God that we are not required to live sinless lives to assure our Salvation because none of us would make it.
The problem here is that Christians have perverted the message of the Gospel and openly condemned the sinner with unbridled hatred. How do you tell someone Jesus loves them and then publicly campaign for laws that reinforce that hatred? (Oh man, I know I just opened another can of worms!)
Why can’t Christians treated everyone as a person worthy of the same Grace that they have received?
December 13th, 2006 at 8:07 am
I agree with you, FIC………
December 13th, 2006 at 8:18 am
I fully expect the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse to come down from the sky now.
Just kidding, I’m glad that we can at least agree on this.
December 13th, 2006 at 8:29 am
I love your heart FICM…
It is a “seeing Jesus” thing. No one can truly see Jesus and then hate homosexuals, or make the focus of our culture into a hating homosexuality thing. Even if we were to all agree it has unhealthy elements to it, why turn our entire Church culture, and US culture, into a continual battle over this matter?
I can only imagine how lonely, how rejected, and how wounded I’d feel if I were trapped in that lifestyle, and looked out from within that lifestyle to the only people on the planet who actually might have the answer to helping me escape from the painful elements of my lifestyle, and only see anger, rejection, mockery, and harshness staring me in the face.
Where would I go to for hope, if I didn’t like that lifestyle, if not to the followers of Jesus, because all I could see in them was hatred for me? So many are not happy in that lifestyle, but I can only imagine how trapped they must feel.
Let’s show them Jesus in our lives, and leave final judgments to Him whom John says is “Love.”
December 13th, 2006 at 9:31 am
I don’t think the question is about a particular sin but the question of what sin is. If the goal of the old law was to love (agape’) God and love (agape’) our neighbor as ourselves then the definition of sin is love-less-ness. Self-ish-ness, not self-less-ness. We’re not called to “fix” anyone, we’re called to agape’ them. Consider: Jesus sits and eats with tax collectors and “sinners” and tells them how there is rejoicing in the presence of God when a “sinner” comes home to God (not joins a church or religion) and who got upset? The Pharisees. Jesus’ story from a Jewish (I are one) perspective is of a Jewish kid who leaves home for gentile country, spends his daddy’s money on hookers and booze in that gentile country, winds up broke and friendless and gets a job feeding a gentile’s pigs. A total BOMB! BUT, when he comes home, he’s welcomed as the son he always was. (Luke 15) As Jesus ask his listeners when he told the story of the Samaritan who rescued the man who was robbed, “Who was the most neighborly to the fallen man?” “The one who rescued him”, is the answer essentially. “You do likewise”. There, all said in three words. “You do likewise.”
December 13th, 2006 at 9:36 am
Thanks Mark,
I think you may be on to something with the whole “you do likewise” business.
Good work.
December 13th, 2006 at 12:44 pm
Tom Sparks said:
Tom, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that your intentions are sincere, but this comment is very condescending and demeaning. I and most gays I know only felt as lonely, rejected, and wounded outsiders when we were in the fundamentalist/evangelical Christian community.
I know some conservatives’ propagate the notion that the “gay lifestyle” is sexual promiscuity, fetishes, self-centeredness and HIV/STDs. While I will be the first to admit that my life is far from perfect, I can assure you that my “gay lifestyle” is very mundane and lacks many of the symptoms featured in conservative Christians’ homosexuality pamplets. If I were to seek “escape” it wouldn’t be from my “gay lifestyle”. I would hope your understanding of Jesus’ message is more than “lifestyle”.
I do agree with you comment that it’s about “seeing Jesus” and to me that means knowing that Jesus reveals Himself to each person in His own way and in His time. Jesus’ didn’t dismiss people because of their lifestyle, rather he shared a meal with them, healed their health, gave them hope, called them to be children of God and told them to sin no more. While I’m sure you and I have theological differences, I hope we can at least allow God to reveal God’s message in each others lives without stereotyping.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:08 pm
Bravo Norm!. Very well written.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:09 pm
Norm,
Thanks for your gracious comments, to what were obviously uncomfortable statements on my part.
Let me assure you that I do not have a completely settled understanding on the matter we are discussing. It is just too big of an issue for me to be dogmatic about it.
For all I know, in God, He may see differences in this area. It is possible He may approve of the lifestyle for some and not others. Those who communicate dogmatism on such an issue irritate me, and I don’t want to be named in the camp of those who do this.
I have lived 54 years, and in those years I have changed many perspectives on many things I once thought I’d never change on, so since I’m not personally infallible, and since you are completely confident your approach to life is in harmony with Jesus, I see no reason to challenge that.
Some here will be upset with me for not doing so, but when I can approach this area with “I know 100% for certain” how God views this area, and if it turns out to be 100% “NO” to it, then I will answer differently than I am right now. I’m just not certain I’m ready to approach it that way currently.
I’m as aware of what the bible says, as is any body. I’ve studied the subject from as many angles as I can, utilizing both Greek and Hebrew to do so, and still I back away from saying I know exactly how God sees it all.
As was evident in my previous comments, I tend to approach it from the assumption that God desires to draw folks out of this lifestyle, and my current “understanding” is that it represents sin, but before I would throw somebody away with my “current” understanding I would simply say what Mary said to the servants at the wedding of Cana…”Whatever He says to you…do it!”
If that is still condescending then I apologize. I hate it when people do that to me. I admit I experience an inner tension over this area. The tension of wanting to honor both you and God. I respect both of you, and I want only for you and myself to know Him, love Him, and walk humbly before Him.
Please forgive me if I’ve failed in addressing this with grace. You handled me with true grace.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:11 pm
And bravo Tom Sparks!
December 13th, 2006 at 1:20 pm
Norm,
A few more comments on “lifestyle,” versus “who one is.”
I honestly don’t know the answer to this either. I think I hear your frustration with me choosing to refer to it as just a “lifestyle” choice, when it is quite possible you believe it is how God “made you.”
I know the classic arguments to this, as I’m sure you do, but right now I don’t care about those arguments. It may just be a lifestyle, and it may be there are genuine dimensions of biophysics that incline one to a hetero lifestyle and one to a homosexual lifestyle. I think scientists will argue this for some time to come, so who am I to conclude on the matter.
I admit to being one who would encourage either the lifestyle be abandoned or the genetic inclinations be resisted, but as I said before, I’d rather that be a conclusion between you and God, not you and me. If you’d like to get together for a glass of wine, and enjoyable fellowship, I’d love it. My convictions in this area wouldn’t hinder me from enjoying warm and honoring conversation.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:28 pm
Norm,
One more thought…
If I have still failed to respond to your concerns in a way that creates more focus on God than ire with me, please know I’m trying. I admit to not understanding much of what life might look from your perspective, but I want to…
December 13th, 2006 at 1:37 pm
One thing that I have noticed, much to my dismay, is that many christians that I associate with show a rather pronounced homophobia. This saddens me, because I believe that ostracizing a person, showing displeasure, anger and even hatred towards them is not consistent with Jesus’ teachings.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:54 pm
Exactly…how could one, at the same moment, be both homophobic and loving?
December 13th, 2006 at 1:58 pm
It’s an impossibility. I believe that Jesus taught love, not intolerance and hatred.
December 13th, 2006 at 2:08 pm
We’re just seeking understanding I think, RH.
December 13th, 2006 at 2:08 pm
Here’s where I want to be…I look at Jesus in the Gospels, and there is something that radiates out from Him that causes folks from every lifestyle, sinful behavior, etc., to want to be near Him. What was that?
Obviously He wasn’t condescending, as I sometimes am. Obviously He wasn’t condemning. Obviously He didn’t preach fear. Obviously He took people where they were, risked extravagantly loving them “just as they were,” without trying to subtly fix them, convict them, or rebuke them. He just loved them.
How do we get there? Somehow I think it is linked to crying out to Him for a tender heart. Being harsh comes naturally. Having a tender heart requires an incredible willingness for the cross of Christ to address the hard areas of our hearts.
I don’t want to care what it takes. I just want to go there.
December 13th, 2006 at 2:20 pm
Same here. That is why I am a “Reforming” Heathen, as opposed to a “Reformed” Heathen. I am a work in progress, imperfect, flawed, but trying.
December 13th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Are there practical solutions to our impasse??? If Law is codified morality and reflects the perfect character of God, how does the church balance the tension of justice and love found in the character of God??? As christians can we practice loving justice to the homosexual community???
Or is the concept of loving justice an impossible contradiction to flesh out in the christian community???
December 13th, 2006 at 3:34 pm
Cowboy,
Not impossible, but certainly it calls for much that even the most mature in the faith wrestle with.
This is a great question! It truly is, at least from my perspective.
I must stand with God on everything He has clearly identified with as sin, and yet do so in the same way that Jesus did it. How did Jesus present the justice of God as He spoke graciously and lovingly to the prostitutes and tax collectors of His day, such that even at the risk of rejection, or worse - stoning, the woman known to the Pharisees as a prostitute came into a dinner party, quietly knelt down at Jesus’ feet, and washed His feet with her tears?
How did He not sacrifice the justice of God by showing such a powerful love to her that she risked all, just to be near Him, and obviously was experiencing the overwhelming love of God coming from Jesus?
It mystifies me.
Is the first place we go with those we feel are in sin, to the place of confrontation, or first to showing the reconciliatory love of God. The “we beg you, in behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”
I want to do this with those who are practicing homosexuals, and everyone else, both because I don’t fully know how God relates to homosexuality, and also because even if I did, and even if he hated it, He would still have me approach those there with an almost unbearable intensity of love.
If my spirit perceives Jesus at all accurately, I think He could spend a few brief moments with people, and so overwhelm them with the love of God, in just the way He looked at them, in the tone of His voice, and His gentle way, that no matter what folks were wrestling with they knew it was safe to be near Him, and would do just about anything to get there.
December 13th, 2006 at 3:52 pm
I couldnt agree more!!!
Can political activism, regardless of its negative press, create legislation that embodies loving justice? In other words, is it possible to fuse into legislation the “tension” found in G-d……
December 13th, 2006 at 4:11 pm
I truly doubt it. Theoretically it could have worked for the nation of Israel, but it didn’t. Paul seems to indicate that even in a Theocratic government, because of the sinfulness of man, external laws only go just so far.
Ultimately they tend to just expose man’s sinfulness, not solve or even successfully restrain it. I’m sure stoning, or the electric chair form some kind of restraints, and as such I can see their value, but by the looks of death row it obviously only goes just so far.
Beyond that, when believers continually look to government to solve all their tensions over moral issues they are looking in the wrong place. To some degree morality can be legislated, but to the degree that really matters only a changed heart, governed by the King of Kings, will embody true moral inner legislation.
In other words, far more than for reasons of the laws of the land, I seek to walk in a moral manner before a holy God, whose holy ways are always the very best protection for my life.
December 13th, 2006 at 6:04 pm
I like how David says it in Psalm 143
Psa 143:2 Enter not into judgment with your servant, for no one living is righteous before you.
This is the man who was a man “after the heart of God,” a type of Christ, the ultimate OT grace man, great grandfather of Jesus’ humanity.
I assume he was correct. This matched with Philippians 3
Phi 3:9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith–
says it all…
So what is my hope? Certainly not my own righteousness, born of not doing certain things! It is firmly settled in one thing - His righteousness imparted to me by faith in Jesus’ work.
Is there any individual, who acknowledges the truth of this, that God would not apply it to? I can’t think of any. Not any…
I agree that we must be willing to put away all sin, but who decides what that is? You and me? I don’t think so. I think this domain belongs to the only wise God, and only to His body when He has made clear His truth.
Is there a place for the community of faith to take a public stand against certain things? I believe there is, but I believe the when and the where is very delicate, and when the issue being raised for decision is shrouded in “any” question, then I believe our caution signals should go off all the more. If Jesus treated the woman caught right in the act of adultery was shown grace, (a sin that contains no question whatsoever, as to its sinfulness, and deserves stoning) this should tell us much about how we relate to those we are concerned with, for whom we may not fully comprehend their whole story and God’s fullest conclusion.
Until then, my understanding is that we turn it over to Jesus, and love like He loved, so that any declaration we ever make about any sin is born out of love, not human opinion or human disgust.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:16 pm
Tom Sparks said:
Tom, thank you for clarifying your thoughts. As someone who formerly held the theological view that homosexuality is outside of God’s will, I do sympathize and understand the theology.
As I stated in my earlier comment above, I’m weary about committing myself to any particular theory regarding the sexual orientation. So, I would never describe my sexuality has God ordained.
If a person experiences prodominatly same-sex attractions and is philosophically opposed to same-sex behavior, then it seem celibacy would be a reasonable option. Unfortunately, celibacy is rarely upheld as a positive option even among conservative Christians. Instead many attempt “ex-gay” treatments or dive into hetero-marriages like Revs Haggard and Barnes in the hope their attractions will change.
My main dispute was your use of the term “gay lifestyle”. First, the “gay lifestyle” doesn’t exist — at least in my life and the lives of most gay people I associate. While there are certainly are people who choose to live the stereotypical, sexually promiscuous lifestyle, it’s certainly not true that all people with same-sex attractions have a defined lifestyle.
Secondly, I don’t believe Jesus’ message is about ‘lifestyle’. Contrary to the conservative Christian pop culture, Christianity is not about lifestyle. Jesus’ message is about people’s heart toward God and their neighbors — not about having the right lifestyle.
Thirdly, same-sex attractions have very little to do with lifestyle. At one time, it would seem both Rev. Haggard and Rev. Barnes excelled at the heterosexual lifestyle. However, these men have jeopordized their marriages, careers, and reputations because their attractions were more than about lifestyle.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:22 pm
and people say this blog is all about bashing people and disrespect. this is probably one of the most genuine, heartfelt discussions I have ever seen on the matter. well done to all. I’m proud to be a member of this blog.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:42 pm
I totally agree! Once again, I think it comes back to giving ownership for these issues to the individual themself, in their relationship with God. If He’s saying “I’m calling you to approach this from a celibacy perspective,” then I would encourage that. If He’s saying “I’m calling you to resolve the desires through counsel, or whatever, with a view to hetero marriage,” then I’d want to encourage that.
When we take people’s personal ownership away, in whatever they are working with, we ultimately dishonor God, who alone can change people, and we dishonor the person by using rejection as the only means of effecting our will for them. In these days I’m trying to move away from telling anybody to do anything in particular, and am far more comfortable with recommending they take it up with Jesus. It’s so freeing to let God be God, instead of playing God proxy.
I also see your point about the use of the term “lifestyle.” I don’t have a Christian lifestyle, I love God and live for Him. I don’t have a hetero lifestyle. I love my wife and enjoy serving and blessing her. These are things born out of who I am, not just a lifestyle I have chosen. They flow from personhood, not conformity to someone’s notion of an acceptable lifestyle.
Thanks for taking your time to help me see a different perspective to a very difficult aspect of life. I would never describe myself as an expert in this area. I have thoughts and ideas, and I want those thoughts and ideas to be consistent with the truth as it is in Jesus, but I’m not confident in this area that the body of Christ has seen all it needs to see in such a complex area. In the face of ignorance it seems to me humility trumps dogmatic arrogance every time.
December 14th, 2006 at 6:43 am
“Gay lifestyle” sounds like a label that let’s people marginalize an issue and the people affected by it.
Certainly it can’t have anything to do with dress, speech, mannerisms, for we all go through stages of style - my kids have gone through ‘grunge’ style, ‘goth’ style, ‘country’ style … I’ve been through ‘rocker’ and ‘anal aerospace analyst’ style (not sure I’m finished with that one)
… Funny, each of those ‘life styles’ affected my speech, dress, mannerism, friends, etc. Ultimately though, I found my style which must reflect that after 50 years, I’m finally at peace with me and my Lord.
Ruling out all the appearance stuff, “gay lifestyle” can only refer to overt sexual promiscuity, which I can certainly understand is offensive. Funny, I’ve never met anyone who fits the stereotypical “gay lifestyle” image as is often portrayed in pop culture media, or as defined by homophobic religionists. Every gay person I have met, by all appearances, has been very much like me, except that they have a same sex partner. It’s awfully difficult to dislike someone who is very much like me, unless of course I were to succomb to stereotypical thinking, and apply an undeserving label to that person so I could hate them like God does (BTW, that’s sarcasm, or is it sardony?)
Maybe the label exists for that reason? Because IF homophobes saw gays as whole people and that they are just like heteros in every way except for being attracted to members of the same sex, they’d find it difficult to hate them like the Bible says (again, note the sarcasm/sardony). So, to make it easier to hate them as a group, people have resorted to making up slanderous accusations about gays.
December 14th, 2006 at 8:43 am
Tom Sparks said:
Tom, I’m glad we agree. Of course, what “He’s saying” is a matter of personal belief. Having gone through my own “ex-gay” attempt, I would say that most people with predominantly same-sex attractions are not able to “resolve” their desire through counseling — but that’s my own bias. Revs. Haggard and Barnes would seem to confirm that same-sex attractions are not easily resolved.
It is very important to empower people to live up to their own beliefs — even if their belief is “I don’t know”. I believe God equipped each of us with the ability to find God’s will in our lives.
I’m glad you understand my point. Please forgive me if I had a screechy tone about the “gay lifestyle” comment.
Please know that I also hope to continue to learn and have enjoyed this dialogue. I would never consider myself an expert either, but hope to continue to learn.
December 14th, 2006 at 9:42 am
John444 said:
Gay and gay-positive media certainly share responsibility for promoting the “gay lifestyle” stereotype. After all, who wants to watch a show about a boring gay suburban couple?
I’ve never understood heterosexual conservative Christians’ obsession with homosexuality. Liberal theology, gay pride, gay rights, and gay marriage/partnerships don’t prevent conservative Christians from following their own beliefs in any way and yet Rove/Robertson/Dobson have all successfully used the issue to activate their supporters. The stereotype is that the most outspoken homophobes are harboring their own sexual struggles. Certainly, Colorado pastor Rev. Haggard and Oregon Christian Coalition leader Lou Beres confirm this stereotype.
December 14th, 2006 at 10:29 am
Reformed Pope, glad to see someone read that (ha ha ha ha ha). With all the hype in “churches” about who is “right” and who is “wrong” and the extremes examples one often hears you would think there is some kind of pre-judice in the church. WOW, who’da thunk? “Hate the sin”? Where did Jesus ever tell you to “hate the sin”? Where did Jesus tell us to hate? If we love others as we should we should then the question of hating anything doesn’t come up. Let God change what needs to be changed. Our place is to be like Jesus, God’s nature coming through from the inside out. And since none of us can rain down fire and brimstone at will, best leave that to God follow Jesus’ teaching. We will be known as his students if we have agape’ one for each other. What could be plainer?
December 14th, 2006 at 10:40 am
Apologies. REDUX since my typing is so flawed:
Reformed Pope, glad to see someone read that (ha ha ha ha ha). With all the hype in “churches” about who is “right” and who is “wrong” and the extremes examples one often hears you would think there is some kind of pre-judice in the church. WOW, who’da thunk? “Hate the sin”? Where did Jesus ever tell you to “hate the sin”? Where did Jesus tell us to hate? If we love others as we should we should, the question of hating anything doesn’t come up. Let God change what needs to be changed. Our place is to be like Jesus, God’s nature coming through from the inside out. And since none of us can rain down fire and brimstone at will, best leave that to God. We are to follow Jesus’ teaching. We will be known as his students if we have agape’ one for each other. What could be plainer?
December 14th, 2006 at 11:11 am
“hate the sin”
Interesting thoughts on that phrase. Jesus definitely expressed righteous anger at the money changers and merchants in the Court of Gentiles, however we are instructed not to sin in the midst of our anger. I guess I’ve always accepted that hating sin was Godly, but I then we will only hate ourselves when we fall. I think the closer we come to knowing God’s heart the more that sin will disgust us and force us to choose between God’s way or our way. Up until recently my hatred of my sin kept me from bringing it before God except to sheepishly confess that I was sorry. Now I try to share with God my deepest desires, including those which are sinful, and ask him to replace the sinful ones with the desires of his heart. So, this is all to say that I agree with Mark that I don’t see a place for hatred in the Christian ethos. Great conversation guys and gals.