Homosexuality
A couple weeks ago I said I’d write more on the issue of homosexuality soon. Since then I keep telling myself that I don’t have the time to write as thoughtfully and carefully as I want to. And I still don’t have the time. But, I’m going to throw out some thoughts anyway.
1. I don’t think very many people choose to be gay. I never chose to be straight. I just was. It just happened. And it’s the same way with those who are attracted to people of the same sex. They didn’t come down to a big decision at, say, age 16. For most of them, it was confusing, upsetting, mysterious. Most tried to pretend they didn’t have that attraction. They tried faking it, ignoring it, hiding it. Some even gave it the best try they could, went to a Christian college, married a good Christian person, and . . . remained attracted to people of the opposite sex.
2. I am pretty skeptical about most big “conversion” stories. Some think that it’s just a matter of repentence or prayer or exorcism or miraculous healing. And certainly our God is a big God and can do anything he wants. But I just haven’t seen many. I’ve known a few with powerful stories of being released partially or even completely from the struggle. But most have prayed, repented, struggled, counseled, hated themselves, and prayed more. No change. Not because they didn’t love God enough, not because they’re hardened sinners, not because they’re part of some movement to undermine family values.
3. Speaking of family values, I don’t buy the rhetoric that homosexuality is primarily responsible for tearing apart American families. That would be divorce. The breaking of promises by men and women in marriages is ripping apart our families. (On rare occasions, these promises are broken because one partner is leaving for someone else of the same sex. But that’s the exception.) The church must take seriously the words of discipleship on covenant keeping in marriage (e.g., Matthew 5:31-32), while showing compassion to those whose lives have been broken.
4. And speaking of compassion, where is it? Where does all this angry, hateful speech come from? When the Soulforce group was on ACU campus, they were amazed — stunned — that they were shown basic Christian compassion. How did we get to a place where that is surprising? Even here, there were flashes of what their lives are like. One ACU grad student had a sticker on to identify himself as one of the hosts. But after he delivered some students to a Sunday evening service, on the way out some students passed him, and thinking the ID meant he was a part of Soulforce said in a threatening tone, “F—ing fag.” All right, then. Have a good church service. Praise your little hearts out before the one who became flesh and dwelt among us, hanging out with the “tax collectors and sinners.”
5. It would help a lot if we could quit treating this like some special sin that deserves our fullest repulsion and rebuke. Sin is sin. When I read Ephesians 4-5, e.g., the sin that I hear spotlighted again and again is “greed.” But we’ve pretty much come to terms with that. A person can build bigger and bigger barns, they can participate fully in good old American consumerism (regardless of the consequences to the world), and we smile and congratulate them, hoping they’ll tithe. It would be so much easier for brothers and sisters struggling with same-sex attraction to face their temptations if they knew they were safe to share their inner lives with others. For a couple years, I led a group of guys in a weekly meeting. I was the only one who doesn’t struggle with it. Some were single; some were married. All were wanting a safe place where they could seek purity. All said that there is no way they could share this struggle before their elders, among their friends, or in their Bible classes without being completely ostracized and cut off. They knew from experience. And yet these were some of the best men I’ve ever met. They didn’t ask to be gay, didn’t want to be gay, had tried everything possible to be released from the temptation. But they all said that the most powerful resource to them was the care and compassion of other men in a group like that. Being with other men in a safe environment, they told me, made them less tempted — not more.
6. But that isn’t to ignore homosexuality as sin. While I think there are some powerful things being written about the hermeneutics involved — challenging things that we must address — I still believe scripture makes it clear that God intends for sexual relationships to be enjoyed between a man and a woman in marriage. (For what seems to me to be a convincing case, see Richard Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament; Stanley Grenz, Welcoming But Not Affirming, and William Webb, Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals.) It isn’t a sin to be a homosexual (in orientation — something we don’t choose); but homosexual behavior is wrong. As Hays writes, “The biblical witness against homosexual practices is univocal.” One’s stance against homosexual behavior doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with homophobic feelings.
7. The church should not endorse homosexual marriages, but should advocate (out of justice and compassion) for full civil rights for gay couples. Just because we may not endorse another person’s decisions doesn’t mean we don’t advocate for their protection and civil rights. Here people try to make comparisons with the endorsement of all lifestyles — as if our protection of civil rights for gays means that we need to protect the civil rights of pedophiliacs. Fortunately, most lawmakers see through that smoke.
8. Does this endorsement of heterosexual sex in marriage put a special, unfair burden on those who are gay in their orientation? This is from Hays: “Here a nuanced answer must be given. While Paul regarded celibacy as a charisma, he did not therefore suppose that those lacking the charisma were free to indulge their sexual desires outside marriage. Heterosexually oriented persons are also called to abstinence from sex unless they marry (1 Cor. 7:8-9). The only difference — admittedly a salient one — in the case of homosexually oriented persons is that they do not have the option of homosexual ‘marriage.’ So where does that leave them? It leaves them in precisely the same situation as the heterosexual who would like to marry but cannot find an appropriate partner (and there are many such): summoned to a difficult, costly obedience, while ‘groaning’ for the ‘redemption of our bodies’ (Rom. 8:23). Anyone who does not recognize this as a description of authentic Christian existence has never struggled seriously with the imperatives of the gospel, which challenge and frustrate our ‘natural’ impusles in countless ways. Much of the contemporary debate turns on this last point. Many of the advocates of unqualified acceptance of homosexuality seem to be operating with a simplistic anthropology that assumes whatever is must be good: they have a theology of creation but no theology of sin and redemption.”
9. Is there a place for gays and lesbians in church? Absolutely. While we continue to advocate the biblical view of sexuality (abstinence outside of marriage and faithfulness inside of marriage), we recognize that we are a gathering of stumbling, bumbling seekers of Christ.
From Hays: “Can homosexual persons be members of the Christian church? This is rather like asking, ‘Can envious persons be members of the church?’ (cf. Rom. 1:29) or ‘Can alcoholics be members of the church?’ De facto, of course, they are. Unless we think that the church is a community of sinless perfection, we must acknowledge that persons of homosexual orientation are welcome along with other sinners in the company of those who trust in the God who justifies the ungodly (Rom. 4:5). If they are not welcome, I will have to walk out the door along with them, leaving in the sanctuary only those entitled to cast the first stone.”
From Grenz: “Even if we find such liaisons questionable, we might nevertheless assert that the church ought to minister to, and even provide a spiritual home for, homosexual persons. Regardless of the moral status of homosexual behavior, lesbians and gays are people whom God values, for whom Jesus died, and to whom the gospel must come. Further, the church is composed of sinners — redeemed sinners to be sure — but sinners nonetheless. It consists of people who are seeking to do God’s will in the midst of the brokenness of life. The church can only assist people to overcome sin and live in obedience to God if they receive the ministry of, and perhaps even participate in, the believing community. This is as true for gays and lesbians as for anyone else. . . . The church, therefore, ought not only to minister to all but also to welcome all into membership on the same basis. And this basis consists of personal reception of salvation by faith through Jesus Christ together with personal commitment to discipleship. At the same time, participation in the faith community involves a give-and-take. Discipleship demands that each member understand that he or she is accountable to the community in all dimensions of life, including the sexual. As one homosexual believer wrote to Richard Hays, ‘Anyone who joins such a community should know that it is a place of transformation, of discipline, of learning, and not merely a place to be comforted or indulged.’ Because it is a community of discipleship, the church in turn has a responsibility both to nurture and also to admonish and discipline the wayward in its midst, including those who are not living in sexual chastity, whatever the exact nature of the unchaste behavior may be.”
10. To me this isn’t first and foremost an “issue.” I’m writing about people I know and love. I want them to be safe enough to share their inner struggles; I want their wisdom through years of suffering to be shared with the church. I hope their triumphs can be offered as a witness to the power of the Spirit and their failings to be offered as a reminder that there is a serious dimension of “not yet” that the church tends to ignore. I want to be able to have them hear the words “go and sin no more,” and I want to be able to receive from them the same admonition, for my life is so full of shortcomings.
Mike
Fabulous, kind and wise insight. Inspired, even.
Kelly, please listen to James Dobson before you group him with Jerry Falwell. Dobson has been an easy target for many, and though I do not always agree with his stance on everything, he has offered encouragement to many over the years. I think he has had much of what he says twisted and spun. When I have heard him speak, he generally comes across with kindness and compassion. He is not perfect, but I do not believe he is the religious right wacko that many make him out to be without honestly listening to him, but by relying on edited sound bites, and others’ opinions.
Sorry, Mike, as you probably do not echo these sentiments, but I think that Dobson has taken an undeserved beating from many sides and he deserves a little bit more grace from critics.
First, Thanks so much for your thoughtful words of grace and truth.
My brother was a homosexual who died of AIDS about 12 years ago now. He was a really intelligent, sensitive person and he was deeply insecure as well. As a new Christian all I had was confusion when I tried to approach him.
I don’t think people “choose” to be homosexual or adulterers or fornicators or whatever. At least not cognitively. There seem to be deep mysteries in the heart of man when it comes to sexual identity formation. These involve both temptations and personality and experiences. I didn’t choose to struggle with lust. I was raised by an absent father, had access to playboys as a teen and found comfort in my fantasy world (it was a form of worship I now believe – where I went for my security.)
When you talk about not dealing with homosexuality, do we deal with any sexual sin very candidly in the church. (Or greed and materialism Or… of our culture today.) EVERY DISCIPLE needs a safe place to talk about and work through the issues of our hearts. I tried to do it alone for years. Didn’t work. For me a 12 Step group invited me to bring it all out of the closet. When it all came out of the darkness inside of me, it lost it’s power over me. Demons don’t fare well in real light!
Is the church a place for (redeemed) sinners? If it is, then we should more openly talk about the sin we have left behind in open testimonies. God does free sinners from shame and guilt. There is power in the gospel story – REAL power to bring healing and wholeness.
Thank God for how he worked there at ACU with Soulforce’s visit. Thank God He didn’t give up on me when I have responded poorly to homosexual sin. Thank God that grace continues to flow like a river.
What is considered homosexual “behavior?” Is it simply the outward act? Or does it also include homosexual thoughts? If I, as a heterosexual, am scripturally bound not to have lustful thoughts of another woman, then those who are homosexual are also bound by that same standard. If one no longer has homosexual thoughts, is he still homosexual? It’s not the same argument as alcoholics. The Bible does not condemn the thought of taking a drink. That’s only the temptation to which the alcoholic (or anyone else) cannot succumb. But a homosexual thought is in itself a sin. If one can master not having homosexual thoughts, does it not stand to reason that he is no longer homosexual? I just can’t believe that it’s not a choice. I can’t believe that God would create a being where homosexual thoughts or tendencies were innate. That would be predestination.
Good thoughts, as usual, Mike. Thanks. Under point 7, having recently moved from Connecticut (where I lived for about 12 yrs.), I think it’s important for Christians to know that current political struggles for the civil rights of homosexual couples are not as socially benign as they might seem. The fact is, legal rights and recourse are currently available to people who live together and/or share business and property interests. I’m convinced that the current push is not for the sake of gaining legal rights, but for the sake of establishing new legal definitions of marriage. That question, and I think you agree, is kingdom business. This is where, trying to be harmless as doves, we shouldn’t forget to be wise as serpents.
Again, does anyone have a response to my “divorce” question?
I truly am struggling with this and trying to understand our “stance”
In Him
Thank you, Mike for the best article on this subject that I have ever read. All of us need to hear that message.
I do think it is worth pointing out to the gay community, however, that there is a distinction to be made between unkind treatment, name calling and the like and honest, sincere biblical opposition to the act of homosexuality. The former clearly is “homophobia” and is sinful. The latter is not. Those who are fighting for rights to which they are entitled may hurt their own cause by labeling anyone who disagrees with their practice “homophobic.”
Mike, Mike, Mike… I’m liking you more and more. And as much as that is true, I don’t think I would’ve appreciated this post as much as I do w/o knowing that you have TAKEN THE TIME to get to know, to love, to seek to genuinely understand PEOPLE who deal with being attracted to the same gender. I really don’t put much stock into words from people who haven’t done that – as eloquent as they may sound. I just don’t believe it can really be done well w/o relationship.
I keep saying this, but I really believe how the church handles this will be a defining characteristic of Christianity in our day.
Regarding big conversion stories… I am also skeptical. I do, NO DOUBT see the transforming power of Christ at work in the lives of people who want to overcome these desires. Yet, we’re all bound in these bodies and will wrestle with that on different levels until we die, so what does conversion look like? It’s different for everyone! We’ve (unintentionally) marketed Christianity in the past in a way that tells onlookers, “Come over and join us… and everything in your life will get so much better!” And the temptation is there to do the same with Homosexuality… “When you’re a Christian, God will make you heterosexual!” That’s not what we’re promised.
This comment surely doesn’t reflect my whole heart… too much inside me. Hey, ask Sally G. to see an e-mail I just sent her yesterday on this subject. I am coming to visit in May, and I hope to meet you…
Lee, “If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sin is left.” Heb 10:26. I just have a hard time judging others hearts, but from time to time I try.
cathy,
i don’t mean to bash james dobson without good cause – actually i’m not trying to bash him at all. i’m more embarrased that to many, he is the voice and face of Christianity in America.
i find it hard to see him as a kind and compassionate person when he openly calls his listeners to boycott companies that give rights to gay couples (his web sites lists companies by name and rates how pro-gay they are) or when he urgers Christians to “protect” marriage by voting against civil rights and civil unions.
dobson, by his outspoken political activism and specific opinions, has created the misunderstanding that Christians in America must be republican, anti-gay, anti-abortion, etc. sure he says we’ll love them, but through our love we will make sure that they remain a marginalized, oppressed social group.
that just doesn’t make sense to me.
(i do apologize for lumping dobson and falwell together, however.)
Hi Lee,
Maybe we shouldn’t look at the divorce question and try to find a “stance” or overarching doctrine/law. After all, didn’t Jesus do away with the law? (Maybe that’s the reason we don’t have to be afraid that God is going to zap us today for “disobeying” his “laws”.)
I would imagine that your relative is carrying a huge burden–broken marriages–on her shoulders. Maybe that burden is there, not because she broke some “law” or “doctrine” or “stance”, but because she hurt people that she loved. She gets to deal with that for the rest of her life; that’s her punishment. What else do you want from her? To ruin another marriage? Would that somehow make everything all right?
Maybe the real punishment of “sin” is the consequences we carry around. I think Jesus came to lighten those consequences; maybe we should too, rather than making them even more burdensome.
Martin,
Thanks for responding!
I understand she is carrying a burden! I pray for her, I do! I know I sin daily and I am truly repentant and have to turn from sin and do my best not to sin again. I just don’t see how when God says “divorce is a sin” and he gives us guidelines for WHEN divorce is “acceptable”, people disregard these guidelines and “do their own thing”. How are we suppose to teach our children “divorce is wrong” (unless there is a scriptual reason) and then they see a family member who disregarded that for her own way. Do we teach them, Oh well if it happens just repent? God doesn’t care if you marry, re-marry and re-marry just as long as you are sorry??????I thought it was repent and turn from that sin. If she cheated with a married man, re-married and divorced and married again….is she not living in the sin??????
I am only bringing this up because Mike said in statement #3 he didn’t believe homosexuality was ruining the family, divorce was. He said this and I’m just giving a personal example.
Again, thanks for those who are responding. It really helps to get different view points.
I worked at Focus on the Family for a time, and advocating rights for homosexuals in any way is considered blasphemous. If I were a secular lawmaker without a basis in Christianity, I would have no problem supporting homosexual marriages, as they don’t seem to be any more destructive than heterosexual ones. I wrestle with that.
Mike,
Why is it a sin? Left handed people are born with the predispostion to use a certain hand. Being left handed is not a sin because being left handed or more importantly choosing to throw left handed does not damage the community.
There has to be some reason or logic behind why it is a sin. For instance pedophilia destroys a community.
What is so destructive about two homosexuals engaging in a monogamous relationship from the git go? No one has answered this question when I have I asked. It all boils down to the Bible tells me so. But the Bible tells us a lot of other things we choose to ignore ie helping 56 year old widows.
Lee, as someone who has been divorced and remarried, I have been grateful to God a thousand (or more) times over that He led me to a church home more than twenty years ago where there was acceptance and compassion. I wish more Christians were so. If you haven’t experienced the hellaciousness of divorce first-hand, you probably aren’t familiar with the often-wordless scorn that goes with it; the shame; the embarrassment.
Does “taking a stand” require that we, as fellow-sinners, insist that our divorced brothers and sisters submit to our need for their public penitence at a time when their self-esteem may be next-to-nonexistent anyway? Or do we let God take whatever stand He pleases to take? If we insist on this measure from divorced people, should we not also insist on it from those who get drunk, are greedy, are swindlers, are gossips, are those who judge others rather than judging others’ deeds for themselves?
I could not agree more that divorce is horribly destructive. I’ve been there, and I would never contradict God’s own words that He, too, hates divorce. But – like homosexual sin – is it really something that needs to be made worse by singling it out and shining a spotlight on it so that some may be publicly condemned while others at the fringe of the spotlight’s shadow are somehow considered righteous because they have not been touched by this particular sin?
I agree fully with about 95% of what you have shared. I’m him-hawing over about 5% of it. I do have a couple of questions. When you say people don’t choose to be gay, just like you didn’t choose not to be, what is that assumption based on? (this is sincere, not sarcastic) In your mind, whose hands is it in, or who sets sexual orientation? Is it God? Is it passed on genetically, and who started it? Is it early life experiences? Is it ever just a choice? Can people always be trusted in saying that it wasn’t their fault, that they themselves are not to blame for making a poor choice?
Just wanted to explore your mind a bit, if you have the time to respond. Thanks.
Martin,
I thought Jesus came to fulfill the law, not do away with it. If He did away with it, there’d be no consequences to lighten…
Otherwise, I look at the NT and I see a pretty decent emphasis on obedience, no?
You are a wise and godly man. Preach on!
from Grenz:
“Discipleship demands that each member understand that he or she is accountable to the community in all dimensions of life, including the sexual. … Because it is a community of discipleship, the church in turn has a responsibility both to nurture and also to admonish and discipline the wayward in its midst, including those who are not living in sexual chastity, whatever the exact nature of the unchaste behavior may be.”
i don’t think i really buy this idea. is this being practiced already, in some way other than the scandal and reaction to the revelation of extramarital affairs of highly visible church leaders? how could this accountability work? some form of public confession? why should i be expected to reveal to the church what goes on in the privacy of my bedroom? it strikes me as a way to keep tabs on or control the sex lives of unmarried people, a minority group in most churches. i have a feeling that married people would be automatically assumed to be chaste and less under the watchful accountability eye.
it is also striking to me that the people preaching celibacy to the unmarried are always themselves married.
Hi J.P.,
Paul seems to argue that we are not under law, thanks to what Jesus did–check out his arguement in Romans 6 (”. . . you are no longer subject to the law. . . “) and Galatians 2 (”I am not one of those who treats the grace of God as meaningless. For if we could be saved by keeping the law, then there was no need for Christ to die.”) When one has stressed obediance to laws for so long, it is hard to understand that there is so much more. (And if obedience to the law is so important, when was the last time you tithed at the temple as commanded in the law?)
The “consequences” I was talking about are us living with our sins. For example, if I cheat on my wife, the very real consequence TODAY is that I will have trouble sleeping tonight, I’ll feel guilty, I will probably end up hating myself, I will hurt my wife, etc. THAT is punishment enough! The consequences of hatred are that we are totally miserable b/c of those terrible feelings. Jesus frees us from those burdens by showing us a better way.
Hope this clarifies what I said a bit. Thanks.
I greatly appreciated this posted entry.
I find nothing more reassuring when discussing a topic such as homosexuality and finding a leader in the church who lets it be known that we should welcome homosexuals, just as we do heterosexuals. Not only that, but I appreciated you touching on the point of homosexuals possibly being born that way, as it seems a lot of the time that many Christians like to think homosexuals have just made the choice to be interested in individuals of their same sex; meaning they can just “make the choice” to not be that way if they wanted.
Honestly, whether we are born with an attraction to one sex over another, I don’t know (nor do I think anyone truly knows), but I do know that it is reassuring for homosexuals to hear a leader in the church being willing to suggest that that COULD be the case.
Finally, I think my favorite part of your post was point 10, where you mentioned “I’m writing about people I know and love. I want them to be safe enough to share their inner struggles”. Though I am not a homosexual, I too know individuals who have attractions toward members of their same sex, and I too love them no differently than I do my heterosexual friends. And I want them, as well as others to feel comfortable talking to me about their struggles and issues they face, just as my heterosexual friends feel comfortable talking to me in trust about issues.
Recently, I have taken up several entries on my blog covering my thoughts and ideas on homosexuality as I had been following the Soulforce mission to ACU, as well as thoughts on a LGBT Symposium that I recently attended at my current educational institution–which in its self turned out to be a GREAT day of knowledge and information, as well as a brief look into the life of LGBT individuals for a heterosexual as myself. I have found that through my writings and willingness to openly discuss such a topic as homosexuality, and being accepting of individuals who struggle with these types of desires, has actually encouraged a friend of mine to disclose to me their struggles with homosexuality. I appreciate this because I feel, homosexuality, like any other struggle an individual might face, should not be forced to be “closeted”.
Martin,
If there’s no law, why is it cheating?
–
Posted interpretations of the March 27 Taylor County phenomenon, albeit intelligent and perceptive, have yet to attain the truly penetrating level of analysis based on the ancient order of things and the socioreligious backdrop deep in the heart of Texas.
In the days of our youth, when truth was upheld and error exposed, a flaxen-haired gospel preacher, clutching a coiled Holy Bible, articulated a telling argument on the evils of dancing and the sins of the flesh.
The telling argument: If dancing (a.k.a. daintcin’) did not draw its popularity from banal sexual urges, then let men dance with men and women with women. Such a requirement, it was thought, would rob dancing of its popularity.
So provocative was the danger of bisexual dancing that identification of such with “the hill” would surely have undermined the reputation of the “dear Christian College” and perhaps even interfered with fund raising. Naturally the higher-education authorities sought informants on heterosexuals who would do such things. Indeed, the pear got pretty prickly when in 1962 a photograph of a heterosexual duo waltzing in a dramatic production somehow wended its way into the yearbook. Similarly, a wall in the middle of the pool facilitated swimming while blocking that incredible hedonistic threat—”mixed bathing.” Those were the days, when truth was upheld and error was the only thing exposed.
Fast forward now through all the swimsuited coeds who have won pageants and the arrival of the campus’ swing dancers, much the concern among defenders of the socioreligious orthodoxy, and you see how the challenge evolves.
But a bold windfall of logic has just eviscerated the dilemma.
Returning to the gospel preacher’s telling argument of long ago, yes, why not have men dancing with men and women with women? A novel solution! No chance of dancing and swimming causing pregnancy and sending your soul to Hell.
Thus will be brought to pass the ideal, long suppressed in code but now uncloseted, for which so many have sung so fervently and frequently for nigh unto a hundred years, “While we GAILY sing let praises ring / For our Alma Mater true!”
DAVID
Mike, what I wonder about is that I doubt that pedophiles decided one day they wanted to be attracted to children. I would not think that would be an attraction one would seek out but we certainly do not see much coming from any direction that suggests because pedophiles can’t help it, society should accomodate it. I know you were not saying that, but many in Christendom want to condone homosexuality because homosexuals can’t help their orientation. I just wonder about this.
Mike,
I don’t disagree with much of what you say. But I wonder whether your #7 reflects a naïve view of the Gay Agenda, which, as I understand it, seeks not “full civil rights” for gays and lesbians, but unqualified approval of what many Americans consider a sinful lifestyle. In fact, gays and lesbians already enjoy full civil rights (i.e., the rights protected under the Constitution), and after Lawrence v. Texas (2004), they now enjoy sexual privacy rights that even heterosexuals had not obtained. By “rights” you probably mean *benefits* that the government has decided to bestow on certain groups. But is it really unjust not to support tax credits for gays and lesbians or to force companies to pay for their partners’ health care? The government, in doling out benefits, already distinguishes among all kinds of groups based on myriad factors, including sexual relationships. (Couples merely living together, for example, can’t get married-couple tax benefits, and aren’t guaranteed health coverage from each other’s employers.)
To be sure, vitriolic protesting against gays and lesbians is hardly Christ-like. But I’d say it’s quite a stretch to argue that “justice and compassion” require the Church to “advocate for full civil rights for gay couples,” which could be interpreted as a call to march in lock-step behind the Gay Agenda.
I guess I’m at about the same place in theory. But what I am wrestling with now is how does this play out in the real world? Do we fight for homosexuals to be able to marry (I think your answer to that is no.)? Or “legal/civil union”? With concern to benefits and insurance issues in the workplace.
I just get stuck in the real world stuff. The theory is much easier for me.
I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with you, Mike. In fact, I feel like my sins far outweigh that of any of these who suffer in silence or even those who don’t suffer. But the wonder of it all is that I am forgiven, cleansed and I’ve even been able to finally forgive myself. I live for the day when we can sit together and be open and real and feel accepted and loved because we are all children of God doing the best we can in a fallen world.
Martin,
I appreciate the further clarification.
I guess what I was really trying to nitpick is, if in fact there is no law for us to be responsible to/for/etcetera, then what is the standard for obedience? Does obedience, in fact, have any meaning anymore?
And then what happens to “Trust and Obey”?
I wholeheartedly agree with the biblical notion that we love the sinner and hate the sin. Where I depart from some of what you said, Mike, are the following.
First, I think the research “jury” is still out on whether homosexuality is the result of genetics or environment. Since it is not politically correct to do that sort of research right now, I’m not aware of any such ongoing studies, so I believe we are wandering into unproven territory to say that homosexuals are born that way and have no choice. Perhaps, just as there seems to be a genetic link with alcoholism and certain environmental and behaviorial factors that create an alcoholic, maybe there are certain genetic predispositions to homosexuality (eg. hormonal, etc.) that when combined with environmental factors and behaviors create a homosexual. Like MOST other human factors, genetics and environment each seem to play a part. What does seem to be the case is that many if not most adolescents go through a period of time when they question their sexuality en toto, and that can include a sort of hero-worship and fantacizing about a member of the same sex or even some same sex experimentation. That does not, as the gay rights movement often claims, mean that person is a homosexual. Many of those same adolescents truthfully and forcefully claim their heterosexuality later in life.
Second, I do not agree with most of the gay rights movement because their stance seems to focus on the notion that we should treat “homosexual” in the same category as race, gender, etc. One cannot change his or her race or gender (at least not genetically speaking, even if the plumbing is changed.) Homosexual behavior can be changed, altered or abstained from, just as any behavior is under our own control (albeit difficult at times, but still controllable).
Having said that, I do believe it is our God-given responsibility to welcome all sinners (liars, adulterers, cyberporn addicts, gossipers, slanderers, AND homosexuals) into our fellowship, wherever they are in their walk, so they will come to know our Lord Jesus and share in the riches of His gifts. I believe we have a responsibility to go with all sinners down into their pain with them and love them through the redemptive process, affirming their victories and encouraging them in their struggles and failures. For me, that does not mean buying into the gay rights movement, its rhetoric, or its tenets (including same-sex unions). Compassion is not the same thing as endorsement.
Thanks for posting about this hot-button topic. I think there is much more to be said on it.
Mike, this is a great post. Within the past year a good friend in my men’s group disclosed to our group that he is homosexual. He used to practice as a kid, but since college has battled these urges (no practice) for 20 plus years. “Joe” has kept his secret mostly to himself, with the exception of a few close guy friends. He said he’s received very positive and loving support from those he’s told. I have a great amount of respect for him. Joe is a great person and the type of friend everyone should have. He doesn’t want this in his life, but acknowledges that most likely it will be a lifelong battle. I can relate to battling certain urges/sins and praying for strength. In many ways were are the same, but just dealing with different issues. As you state, sin is sin. We all far short.
Mr. Cope,
Thank-you for addressing this important topic. We must LOVE THE SINNER but compassionately stand against the sin. This goes for ALL sin, whether it be worrying, lying, stealing, murder, alcoholism, greed, homosexuality etc.
There is so much contradiction in the church…. I agree with you, all SIN is SIN. This brings back memories to my Harding days…. on the sitcom “Ellen” the main character announced her homosexuality. I rec’d emails/fwds from Harding students to boycott products that advertise during the show. The same people that sent those e-mails faithfully watched the show “Friends” every week, which promoted sex out of marriage, living together before marriage etc. etc. etc. Hmmmm….. I found that ironic.
I volunteered for a teen suicide hotline years ago and learned that homosexuality is one of the leading reasons that teen boys take their own lives. I wonder if Christians had a more loving attitude toward this sin if the stats would be lower.
Anyway, Mr. Cope, I agree with you for the most part. However, could you please elaborate on #7? What “civil rights” are you referring to. If you mean fair employment, housing, etc. I agree. If you mean the right to get legally married I only agree if you mean marriage between a man and a woman. Please discuss further. Thanks.
Shouldn’t church be seen as a hospital for the sick? Everyone is welcomed but everyone is encouraged to heal.
I have enjoyed reading your blog since discovering it just prior to the ACU lectures. I’m a student at Harding University Graduate School of Religion and have enjoyed reading your blog and the comments people make.
Have you read Mark D. Smith, “Ancient Bisexuality and the Interpretation of Romans 1:26-27.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 64 (1996), 223-56. I read this last November in my class on New Testament World.
Not to interrupt this conversation (between Martin and Jeff/J.P.), but maybe the standard is love. I’m 34 years old now, and my dad is in his mid-60’s. He loves me, and he has proven that he will stand by me through anything. There will never be anything I will ever do for which he would disown me as his son.
There’s not a human being walking this earth that I admire more than my dad. Not a human opinion that I value more. At 34 years old, I live a life in obedience to my Dad. He doesn’t have list of laws for me. He doesn’t have to tell me what to do. I know what he values and what he believes is honorable. I desire to honor him by being the kind of man he admires: a faithful disciple, a loving husband, a devoted father, a loyal son, and a good citizen.
I would say obedience defined as adherence to a law has shallow meaning. Obedience defined as a devotion to the wishes of a loving Father means more. It might also be Biblical.
Hi Jeff,
If Christ has “fulfilled the law” and we are no longer “subject to the law”, what law are you following? Did God just change out the six-hundred-some-odd laws he gave under Moses for a new list that begins with Matthew in the NT?
Hi J.P.,
Perhaps there is something even bigger than obedience to laws. Ike Graul seems to have hit on it. Even though God does not hold us accountable to the law, he still has wishes and desires for us–things which he wants us to do, but I don’t look at those as “laws” set in stone and handed down from the mountain. We aren’t His subjects, but his children.
Martin,
You didn’t answer my question.
–
Hi Jeff,
I think we have swerved a bit from the main topic. I’ll respond to your blog as comment.
Thanks for holding out for an answer!
Martin
Jeff and Martin, forgive my interruption, but we are now under the Law of Grace, Love and Mercy. Jesus put it the best, imho.
Matthew 22:36-40 (New International Version)
36″Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
This reply by Jesus puts the “law” in perspective, imo. It takes the attention off of us and puts on God and our fellowman. If we act out of love for God, we will live be constantly seeking His face and His will. Likewise, if we love our fellowman, we will not steal from him, lie to him, etc. We will be looking for ways to serve rather than be served. The Ten Commandments have all been brought forward into the New Testament, with the exception of Keep the Sabbath, the only commandment not reiterated in all the New Testament.
Again, sorry for butting in here, but then I’m not known to be a shrinking violet type. lol
Thank you for your courage. I’m the guy you write about. Married … attended Christian college … and have struggled with same-sex attractions all my life – before and after marriage. I’m even in ministry.
The church MUST seriously address this issue. Far too many are followers of James Dobson and less followers of Jesus on this issue.
Those of us who are gay/bi and deal with same-sex attractions are no different from heterosexuals who love the Lord. Our struggle is different. But we all struggle. And it tears our hearts out when brothers and sisters condemn us, slander us, and shower us with hate-filled words. We didn’t ask to be this way. We just are. Love us!
You can see (hopefully) that I am still too uncomfortable sharing my name because I fear what some of my brothers and sisters may say if they knew who I really am.
Thanks again for your courage.
Martin and Ike, I can give a thumbs up to that.
Pastor Mike,
I’m in a support group of Christians struggling with homosexuality. I have said for years that I hope in my lifetime to see a shift in the straight members of the body of Christ toward accepting homosexuals as people just like them: someone who has a problem/sin/addiction which they cannot overcome by themselves – not by their own will or strength, but by learning how to allow the grace of Christ to be lived out in them and through them. The trick is, FELLOWSHIP with STRAIGHT Christians is an irreplaceable ingredient in us learning and walking in this.
I am so happy to see possible evidence of the shift for which I have been longing in your blog.
Thank you.
Wow, great post Mike. I really appreciate your insight into this. And I have really enjoyed the comments that followed. Not all on subject, but very interesting non the less. Also appreciate that no one lost their cool in the discussion. It is always good to hear different opinions.
I was moved by your testimony, Preacher Mike, and can see that your stance comes from actually getting to know gay people. You are a man to be respected and with whom one would like to sit down and have a discussion. This is where bridges get built.
I do disagree with one of your statements, which you quoted from someone else:
“Heterosexually oriented persons are also called to abstinence from sex unless they marry (1 Cor. 7:8-9). The only difference — admittedly a salient one — in the case of homosexually oriented persons is that they do not have the option of homosexual ‘marriage.’ So where does that leave them? It leaves them in precisely the same situation as the heterosexual who would like to marry but cannot find an appropriate partner (and there are many such): summoned to a difficult, costly obedience, while ‘groaning’ for the ‘redemption of our bodies’ (Rom. 8:23).”
Unless called to celibacy, the heterosexual person who has not yet found an appropriate partner walks out their door every morning with the hope that today may be the day I meet Mr/Ms Right. The homosexual person living within your described world view has no such hope. I think that makes the two experiences as different as night and day.
“The church should not endorse homosexual marriages, but should advocate (out of justice and compassion) for full civil rights for gay couples.”
thank you for your advocacy for our civil rights. could a gay couple also be a part of your church?
I agree. I see all these people complaining about movies like brokeback mountain and they feel like staying away from all homosexuals, when in reality if you just look around, premarital heterosexual sex, drugs etc. are all over the place in TV and Movies. It’s just the terrible things we get used to that we don’t notice.
Mike -
I didn’t comment on this topic yesterday because I didn’t have the time to sit and think through all I wanted to say on just one point you brought up that bothered me. But just now I found this succinct, insightful and astute (attempted to your post, that failed) comment by Frank Bellizzi over at his blog, “Frankly Speaking” that says much better than I could have what I wanted to say yesterday.
I’m really glad he wrote it and set it forth so well and hope you’ll read it, too, and think about what he says because the legal ramifications and subsequent moral implications for marriage, among other things, could be, and I predict, would be huge and very detrimental to Christianity.
Here’s what Frank said:
“In his post, Mike says: “The church should not endorse homosexual marriages, but should advocate (out of justice and compassion) for full civil rights for gay couples. Just because we may not endorse another person’s decisions doesn’t mean we don’t advocate for their protection and civil rights.”
In response, I said, ” . . . I think it’s important for Christians to know that current political struggles for the civil rights of homosexual couples are not as socially benign as they might seem. The fact is, legal rights and recourse are currently available to people who live together and/or share business and property interests. I’m convinced that the current push is not for the sake of gaining legal rights, but for the sake of establishing new legal definitions of marriage. That question, and I think you agree, is kingdom business. This is where, trying to be harmless as doves, we shouldn’t forget to be wise as serpents.”
Now, here’s why I wrote that. From my recent experiences in the State of Connecticut, I think that the homosexual lobby has a big plan. If I’m right, then it goes like this:
Since we know that a flat-out declaration of war in favor of gay marriage isn’t going to achieve what we want, here’s what we’ll do. First, preying upon the sympathies of people who would never vote for gay marriage, but who do value fairness, we’ll tell the stories; like the time when Jim couldn’t even visit his life partner, Steve, who was in the ICU because, after all, Jim is not related to Steve by blood or by marriage (a close parallel to the specter of “back-alley abortion clinics” used to shore up Roe v. Wade).
This will tug at the heart strings and will motivate the anti-gay-marriage people to strike a compassionate compromise: civil unions. But (and this is the part those straight dunderheads don’t get) the difference between what we’ll call “civil unions” and legal marriage will be the difference between Tweedledee and Tweedledum.
Then, once this becomes the norm, the shift from “civil union” to “marriage” will simply be a change of language. Hey, it worked for “gay” and “queer.” Why not “marriage”?
Next, as the grammatical distinction disappears and the legal realities emerge, it’s a simple matter of a couple moving from, say, Connecticut to Tennessee. The question of the legal standing of the same-sex couple will, quite literally, become a federal case. Finally, de facto marriage will be declared “marriage.”
I think that’s how the play-book reads. If so, then people who oppose same-sex “marriage” should not be fooled into a compassionate support for so-called civil unions. The homosexual lobby is well-funded, influential, savvy, and, above all, determined. Christians should not, in the name of love or any other reason, go along with them.”
Mike I agree with most of what you said. It is a terrible tragedy that we do not acknowledge and speak against all the various forms of sin in this world. We must simply be more compassionate towards those that are struggling with sexual sin.
However, I disagree with the idea that we must advocate for “full civil rights.” I think we must be very careful when confronting political questions that have to do with “rights.” By advocating for such rights we support a narrow view of citizenship that exalts individual desires over and above the needs of the general welfare. We end up supporting a view of citizenship that is focused on the self rather than the community at large. Government’s job is to protect the common good. Marriage between a man and a woman, and as a protected and esteemed institution, provides much stability and order to the common good, which in turn provides the majority of our neighbors with justice.
I have written more on this at my site Two Cities: http://www.twocitiesblog.blogspot.com
Mike,
Why is it a sin? Left handed people are born with the predispostion to use a certain hand. Being left handed is not a sin because being left handed or more importantly choosing to throw left handed does not damage the community.
There has to be some reason or logic behind why it is a sin. For instance pedophilia destroys a community.
What is so destructive about two homosexuals engaging in a monogamous relationship from the git go? No one has answered this question when I have I asked. It all boils down to the Bible tells me so. But the Bible tells us a lot of other things we choose to ignore ie helping 56 year old widows.
two things
1. to Mike- our comunity is truly blessed by your words of Faith and Love.
2. To the other conversation- (Martin, Jeff, etc.)
My husband had an affair, (more than one actually), and then left. Now, he has asked for forgiveness and has even started going to church, Praise the Lord! But if he never asked for forgiveness from God, are you trying to say that God would not hold him responsible. That his “supposed” guilt would be enough? I’m sorry but I don’t think God, who HATES divorce, is ok with that. If so, then what is the point of Heaven and Hell? Jesus did not come so that we can do whatever we want whenever we want. Yes, he came to show love and so that we may be forgivin but you have to truly repent and do your best to not do it again. I don’t understand how you’ve come to the conclusion that our possible guilt is enough.
Mike -
Thank you for your courage and thoughtfulness in addressing this matter publicly. I appreciate your care and experience in dealing with people who have struggle and do struggle still! It is one thing to talk and give opinions on homosexuality, but it is quite another to develop relationships, nurture, counsel, and shepherd people who genuinely fight with this! You are a testament to true, honest, real, and God-honoring faith being lived out daily! I appreciate your ministry here.
I know you wanted to expound more on some points… could you consider giving more depth to point #7? Particularly, the part about it being the same as offering rights to pedophiliacs. (I know why this is not sound argument, but I can’t articulate it!)
Dear Mike,
While I`m not as settled as you are on this complex issue, I applaud your forthrightness concerning the civil rights issues surrounding same sex couples. And AMEN to divorce ripping our families apart instead of homosexuality. To suggest otherwise is a bit ridiculous. I appreciate the discussion on your blog and am glad to see that people are actually interested in listening to each other instead of yelling the loudest. That gives me hope.
Mike-
A deep and courageous post. Thank you.
To Lee-
I would like to respond to your questions, but Mike’s site is full enough tonight. You can read a response at gampac.blogspot.com.
C