Oct
18
2011
How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go
Just once, I’d like to see a TV interview go more like this:
Host: You are a Christian pastor, and you say you believe the Bible, which means you are supposed to love all people.
Pastor: That’s right.
Host: But it appears to me that you and your church take a rather unloving position when it comes to gay people. Are homosexuals welcome to come to your church?
Pastor: Of course. We believe that the gospel is a message relevant for every person on the planet, and we want everyone to hear the gospel and find salvation in Jesus Christ. So at our church, our arms are outstretched to people from every background, every race, every ethnicity and culture. We’re a place for all kinds of sinners and people with all kinds of problems.
Host: But you said there, “We’re a place for sinners.” So you do believe that homosexuality is sinful, right?
Pastor: Yes, I do.
Host: So how do you reconcile the command to love all people with a position on homosexuality that some would say is radically intolerant?
Pastor: (smiling) If you think my position on homosexuality is radical, just wait until you hear what else I believe! I believe that a teenage guy and girl who have sex in the backseat of a pick-up are sinning. The unmarried heterosexual couple living down the street from me is sinning. In fact, any sexual activity that takes place outside of the marriage covenant between a husband and wife is sinful. What’s more, Jesus takes this sexual ethic a step further and goes to the heart of the matter. That means that any time I even lust after someone else, I am sinning. Jesus’ radical view of sexuality shows all of us up as sexual sinners, and that’s why He came to die. Jesus died to save lustful, homo- and heterosexual sinners and transform our hearts and minds and behavior. Because He died for me, I owe Him my all. And as a follower of Jesus, I’m bound to what He says about sex and morality.
Host: But Jesus didn’t condemn homosexuality outright, did He?
Pastor: He didn’t have to. He went to the heart issue and intensified the commands against immoral behavior in the Old Testament. So Jesus doesn’t just condemn adultery, for example, as does one of the Ten Commandments. Jesus condemns even the lust that leads to adultery, all with the purpose of offering us transformed hearts that begin beating in step with His radical demands.
Host: You say he condemned adultery, but he chose not to condemn the woman caught in adultery.
Pastor: That’s right, but He did tell her to “go and sin no more.”
Host: But who are you to condemn someone who doesn’t line up with your personal beliefs about sexuality?
Pastor: Who am I? No one. It’s not all that important what I think about these things. This conversation about homosexuality isn’t really about my personal beliefs. They’re about Jesus and what He says. I have no right to condemn or judge the world. That right belongs to Jesus. My hope is to follow Him faithfully. That means that whatever He says in regard to sexual practices is what I believe to be true, loving, and ultimately best for human flourishing – even when it seems out of step with the whims of contemporary culture.
Host: But you are judging. You are telling all the gay people watching this broadcast that they are sinners.
Pastor: I’m not singling out gay people. I’m pointing to Jesus as the answer to all sexual sinfulness.
Host: But you are referring to gay people. Why are you so focused on homosexuality?
Pastor: (smiling) With all due respect, you are the one who brought up this subject.
Host: Are you saying that you can’t be gay and Christian?
Pastor: No. I’m saying that you can’t be a genuine Christian without repentance. Everyone – including me – is guilty of sin, but Christianity hinges on repentance. We agree with God about our sin, and we turn from it and turn toward Jesus. When it comes to Christianity, this debate is not about homosexuality versus other sins. It’s about whether or not repentance is integral to the Christian life.
Host: But do you see why a homosexual watching this might think you are attacking them personally? You’re saying that something is wrong with them.
Pastor: I think Jesus’ teaching on sexuality shows us that there is something wrong with all of us – something that can only be fixed by what Jesus did for us on the cross and in His resurrection. That said, I understand why people might think I am attacking them personally. Most people with same-sex desires believe they were born with these tendencies. That’s why they often see their attraction as going to the very core of who they are, and so they identify themselves with the “gay” label. So whenever someone questions their behavior or desires, they take it as an attack on the very core of their being. That’s usually not the intent of the person who disagrees with homosexual behavior. But that’s the way it is perceived. I understand that.
Host: If it’s true that a person is born with one sexual orientation or another, then how can it possibly be loving to condemn one person’s orientation?
Pastor: Well, we really don’t know for certain about sexual attraction being innate and set from birth. All we have is the testimony of people who say that they’ve experienced same-sex desires since childhood. Christianity teaches that all people are born with a bent toward sin. It’s possible that some people will have a propensity toward alcohol abuse or angry outbursts, while others may have a propensity toward other sins. Regardless, Christians believe people are more than their sexual urges. We believe that human dignity is diminished whenever we define ourselves by sexual urges and behaviors. Consider this: married men are sometimes attracted to multiple women who are not their wives. Does this mean they should self-identify as polygamists? Not at all. And surely you wouldn’t consider it hateful for Christians to encourage married men not to act on their desires in an effort to remain faithful to their spouses. It is the Christian way, after all.
Host: No, but it still seems like you are telling people not to be true to who they are.
Pastor: It only seems that way because you believe sexual desire reflects the core of one’s identity. It would help if you and others who agree with you would understand that in your putting pressure on me to accept homosexual behavior as normal and virtuous, you are going to the very core of my identity as a follower of Jesus. The label most important to me is “Christian.” My identity – in Christ – is central to who I am. So I could say the same thing and call you intolerant, bigoted, and hateful for trying to change a conviction that goes to the core of who I am as a Christian. I don’t say that because I don’t believe that’s your intention. But neither should you think it’s my intention to attack a homosexual person or cause them harm merely because I disagree.
Host: But the problem is, your position fosters hate and encourages bullying.
Pastor: I recognize that some people have mistreated homosexuals in the past. It’s a shame that anyone anywhere would mock, taunt, or bully another human being made in God’s image. That said, I think we need to make one thing clear in regard to civil discourse: To differ is not to hate. I hope we can still have a real conversation in this country about different points of view without casting one another in the worst possible light. The idea that disagreeing with homosexual behavior necessarily results in harm to gay people is designed to shut down conversation and immediately rule one point of view (in this case, the Christian one) out of bounds. As a Christian, I am to love my neighbor and seek his good, even when I don’t see eye to eye with my neighbor. Furthermore, the picture of Christ on the cross dying for His enemies necessarily affects the way I think about this and other issues.
349 Comments
Thank you so much. I would so much love also to see a TV interview go more like that.
May God bless you and lets keep praying and hoping. If God grants, we would see a TV interview or debate that will go that.
Maranatha,
Prayson
This would be good.
I think that’s a better still.
More on that another time.
Very good Trevin. Unfortunately, you will probably never see an interview go like this. Even if the pastor was saying these things, I think he would be rudely interupted by the host, so as not to get his point across.
Another question that would probably come up:
“So if adultery is the sexual problem we all face, as you say, do you think it is wrong for a monogamous homosexual couple to marry and remain faithful to each other, and if so why?”
Only one problem, and this is why it’s a pipe-dream…no TV host would dare let the guest complete a thought in anything more than a soundbite sentence or two. Well-reasoned paragraphs are not allowed.
[...] Outstanding post by Trevin Wax. [...]
Trevin,
You (the “Pastor”) write,
” If you think my position on homosexuality is radical, just wait until you hear what else I believe! I believe that a teenage guy and girl who have sex in the backseat of a pick-up are sinning. The unmarried heterosexual couple living down the street from me is sinning. In fact, any sexual activity that takes place outside of the marriage covenant between a husband and wife is sinful. What’s more, Jesus takes this sexual ethic a step further and goes to the heart of the matter. That means that any time I even lust after someone else, I am sinning. Jesus’ radical view of sexuality shows all of us up as sexual sinners, and that’s why He came to die. Jesus died to save lustful, homo- and heterosexual sinners and transform our hearts and minds and behavior. Because He died for me, I owe Him my all. And as a follower of Jesus, I’m bound to what He says about sex and morality.”
Can’t this be taken further?
Pastor: I’ll go even a step farther and say that even sexual activity in a marriage covenant between a husband and wife, if not done in faith, is sinful. This means than unregenerate spouses in the bedroom and outside of it can’t do anything right.
Follow-up:
Host: With the vast sea of unbiblically divorced and remarried Christians in good standing at their local churches, these heterosexual couples are, undoubtedly, guilty of adultery, correct?
Since these remarried heterosexual families are acceptable to your churches, would you refuse membership to married born-again homosexuals who are also repentant of their sins?
In the big picture it doesn’t matter whether a Church approves of certain people nor whether it deems they have sufficiently repented. It matters how God sees them. From my understanding of God’s view which seems to be congruous with the author & the Bible:
(1) the Bible defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and a marriage covenant is under God’s authority, not man’s (or government’s). In that case, the 2 were never married.
(2) if the 2 people still consider themselves married, then they have not repented toward God’s expressed view of sexual purity
[...] de uma conversa fictícia entre um pastor e entrevistador, daqui. Compartilhe:ShareTumblr. This entry was posted in Mini-Blog and tagged cristianismo, [...]
Magnificent, Trevin. I’d work just one more thing in here, in response to the interviewer’s question about Jesus on homosexuality: In his discourse with the Pharisees on divorce (Mt. 19 and pars.) Jesus emphatically reaffirms the creation of man as male and female, and marriage as between man and woman.
This is boss. Thanks.
Recently on Joy Behar she interviewed a pastor from GA who has divorced his wife because he was “gay.” He continues to preach at the church and his wife is still the CFO of the church. He is very persuassive and is teaching that this lifestyle is from God.
During the interview, Joy brought up that the Bible condemns eating shellfish and catfish. To which the Pastor replied (and I’m paraphrasing), “I love the Apostle Paul and preach mostly in his letters, but he promotes slavery.”
It would be good for you to add that dimension to this discourse.
Philip: It is evident that you are unfamiliar with the whole teachings of the Bible, both Old & New Testaments. No where does the apostle promote slavery. The Bible teaches that if one is a slave he does not need to be free from slavery to be a child of God, ie a Christian. I find it most interesting that people want to discuss a book (the Bible) of which they know very little as if they were experts.
GeoPolitico:
I think Philip’s point is that people believe this and it needs to be addressed and corrected. He doesn’t seem to be affirming the conversation he’s describing.
If I am right you are refering to Gene Robinson. All I can say there, is that if his Church had any moral Character and plain old guts they would have excommunicated him unless he was to repent and turn away from his choice of lifestyle and return unto Christ but prevent him from preaching until such time as has had sufficient time to show unto others that he had truly repented of his idolent and sinful ways.
True Repentance is defined as having Godly Sorrow and turning away and forsaking the sinful practice of which one has been participating in. Forsaking means once we forgo that practice is never ever revisting that practice again, because if we repent and then later fall back into the same sinful practice then the Sin become an even greater sin and the perpetrator shal come under even greater condemnation before God and Jesus Christ.
So repenting is not about giving lip service but about fully forsaking the Sin and never revisiting, because Christ has said, for he who has not repented of gross and moral sin, must sufferer even as I God have suffered the greatest pain and agony, before they can receive forgiveness. He was literally refering to Moral Sins mainly under the heading of Fornication to which he likened all moral sin including same gender relationships.
For the love of all that is good and holy, THANK YOU!!! It’s about time…
Your general tenor is dead on. If you simply remove the *sexual* qualifiers for sinning, I’d be cheering! The bottom line is that sin is pervasive across the human experience. Economic sin. Ecological sin. Political sin. Religious sin. As St. Paul sums it up “ALL have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God.” Thank God that while “the wages of sin is death…the gift of God is eternal life.”
Providing a moral compass is imperative. Making sure it is not stuck is also quite important.
In this hypothetical situation, what came first, being born-again or “married”?
If a homosexual becomes born-again, he/she would have a conscience about continuing in the sinful state of a homosexual relationship
by knowing homo- “marriage” is not biblical
[...] FROM Evangelism Of The Gospel source http://trevinwax.com/2011/10/18/how-i-wish-the-homosexuality-debate-would-go/ Article Continues Below Special Offer "Get Your Message Out Using The Internet!" FREE Webinar [...]
I would like to see an interview go this way also… though the pastor should also throw in the sins of greed and gluttony, which many of us pastors struggle with on a daily basis.
Jeremy Myers ask yourself which is the greater Sins, sins of Immorality or the sins of greed or gluttony which come under appitite rather than Moral Sinning upon which this interview was based. On this interview the extra sins you are advocating to be discussed had no bearing or relevence to this interview alone, they are a different matter and subject
As long as the basis of the conversation remains “who I am” as opposed to “what I do”, we’ll be losing.
Your focus on redirecting perceptions of personal identity away from who someone is sexually attracted to is exactly the correct approach.
I may well have an innate sexual attraction to people of my own gender. I might have a gene that causes me to be impulsive and short-tempered. Early childhood experiences could cause me to feel disconnected and seek multiple, shallow sexual relationships. I may feel special excitement and fulfillment by stealing trinkets of little value.
But none of those things makes me a homosexual, a wife-beater, an adulterer, or a shoplifter. My actions would place me in one or more of those categories.
Regardless of our own tendencies, temptations, or weaknesses, the one category we all share is that of sinner. From that we are helpless to release ourselves. We are totally dependent on a gracious and loving Savior.
Once we get an accurate view of the magnitude of our own sin we’ll be hard-pressed to focus on that of our neighbor. And the fact that my label is less stigmatized than yours will give me scant comfort.
Good outline Trevin. Thanks man.
Enjoyed this, Trevin.
[...] October 18, 2011 in Faith | No comments http://trevinwax.com/2011/10/18/how-i-wish-the-homosexuality-debate-would-go/ [...]
Sincere thanks for this biblical wisdom stated so very clearly and compassionately.
Clearly a well-thought article! I enjoyed reading it. The main idea that I do not understand though is why most Christians do not agree with same-sex marriage. If everyone sins, what is the difference between a man and a woman getting married compared to a man and a man getting married? It’s just confusing and very unclear to me why some people in the world are not allowed to go through this official ceremony.
Trevin: I agree in dialog with non-believers we do not clearly articulate the Biblical sexual ethic: all sexual activity, in thought, word or deed, outside of life-long, monogamous heterosexual marriage is sin. To be baited into discussing singular sins (whether adultery, pre-marital sex or homosexuality) takes us far away from the discussion we are all sinners and all need a Savior, who is Jesus Christ the Lord. We need to re-focus our discussions on the Savior rather than individual or corporate sins.
[...] How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go [...]
If you’re against all sexual sinning then maybe you should start campaigns against suggestive advertising, make-up companies, lingerie companies, etc.
Your bigotry is not Christian-like. Jesus couldn’t care less what genitals the person you love has.
Nevertheless , to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
1 Corinthians 7:2 KJV
Aphiest what makes you think that the Lord is not against suggestive advertising, make-up and lingerie for the sake of fashion, because he loves a modest person rather than the vain and shallow people who follow the worldly trends for the sake of peer approval and acceptance, you cdan also throw in body art and self mutilation as Christ taught that the body of a Man is likened to a Temple for the housing of a Man’s soul and is a Sacred eddiface, would you mutilate or desecrate a Temple of God, but when a person tattoo’s their bodies our self mutilates this is exactly what they are doing.
You are plain wrong and misguided in that Christ as you say does not care what genitals a person whom your love has, but he does care as to the manner in which you express that love or lust as it may be. He has condemned Men laying with Men and Women laying with Women and clearly a concisely stated that a Man shall leave his Parents and take unto himself a wife and cleave unto Her only, and he has also said the same for a Woman that she shall leave her Parents and take a Husband and cleave unto Him only. Nowhere has the Saviour commanded that Man or a Woman should leave their Parents and take as a Partner one of their own Sexual Gender and cleave unto them only. He as in Hebrews expressly condemned the practice through the teachings of Paul who was preaching the Gospel in an area where this was common practice.
God destroyed the twin Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah for the same practice and these are not fabled Cities but their remains have actually been discovered and catalouged and there has been found by archeologists that ther is much evedince relating to these practices.
So back to the drawing board for you Sunshine
how do you know what jesus and would like? where do you get any information about him?
Dustin Germain obviously in your feigned ignorance you have not heard of Holy Scripture or of a a comformation and testimony of these truths by the Holy Ghost whose role is to testify and witness the truth unto all Men with an honest and sincere heart.
Obviously from your ignorance you fail to fall into this category. So I suggest you go away and get yourself a copy of the Scriptures and honestly read them so as the Holy Ghost can comfirm and witness these truths unto you. If you will not do this, how can you ever declare yourself to be honest and sincere in Heart, as the evidence will be in you Actions.
well said bro
@dustin germain
The same place you did– I made it up myself by interpreting a bunch of garbage written by other people that made it up over the past few thousand years.
This is a perfect response.
Excellent! Truly, exactly excellent. So glad you wrote this.
I thought this was very well-written and thought-provoking. Great job writing it.
apatheist, what is “christian-like”? logic would dictate that you must have an idea about what it is supposed to look like or be, in order for you to know what its not.
[...] comments How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go? – Trevin Wax nails it. Of course, it’s easy to write this, but – speaking from [...]
@dustin germain
Non-judgement would be paramount. For as much as this article claims that Christians are against all sorts of sexual sinning, it sure seems like you guys are spending a whole lot of time on 10% of the population’s sins instead of the other 90% that’s heterosexual. Since you spend your time demonizing a small portion of the population it appears that you are judging them more harshly and wasting time that could be spent educating the vastly greater numbers of heterosexual people on proper behavior.
For the record, I’m a heterosexual, faithful, married man.
The sad part about the whole discussion is that there is no mention of violence on the part of the homosexuals against others. Why is this clear void in the discussion so painful and clearly evident? Why, because someone wants it that way. They do not want any discussion of the fact that homosexuals commit rape just like heterosexuals, that they take advantage of others, too. A recent issue of Whistle blower presented some of the problems with this reality in the military.
you have no arguments from me there. i completely agree with you. that’s not the point though- the point is that you don’t have any basis for saying what is or is not jesus-like or christian-like. For this reason it would be fair to say that the only source or authority that you possess that says that would say that true-Christianity is non-judgmental is your own personal belief and conviction, based on…nothing.
As a side note, your heterosexuality, marriage status and faithfulness, while nice, are irrelevant. I would consider your point with the same care and consideration if you were a promiscuous homosexual man.
Wow. Talk about tortured grammar. Ignore that post. Let me try that again, apatheist.
You have no arguments from me there with what you just said. I completely agree with you. That’s not the point though. The point is that you’ve no basis for saying what is or is not jesus-like or christian-like. For this reason, the only source of authority that you possess which makes the declaration that true-Christianity is non-judgmental, is your own personal belief and conviction, based on…nothing.
As a side note, your heterosexuality, marriage status and faithfulness, while nice, are irrelevant. I would consider your point with the same care and consideration if you were a promiscuous homosexual man.
Hmmmm, that “Pastor” seems to know more about what Jesus thought about sex than love…must be using a different Bible than mine.
Who are we to assume that what Jesus meant as man and woman are what we define by physical characteristics? We should see gender and sexuality as aspects of our personalities, and as a continuum – no one 100 percent masculine or feminine, but all of us somewhere in between. Some women are more feminine than others, for example. We are given both masculine and feminine attributes, why couldn’t Jesus have meant that a relationship should seek a balance of those attributes between partners?
@dustin germain
How about the whole “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” thing?
Seems like the vocal Christians out there do a whole lot more preaching than they do self-assessment and repentance.
And as for your argument about whether or not I have any basis for what is- or is not Christian-like, *neither do you*. When it comes down to it, it’s all what the individual believes, which is why the sentiments of tolerance and acceptance that you’ve expressed differ so greatly compared to what many of your co-Christians have stated. It’s completely arbitrary, and I’m allowed to have my arbitrary beliefs just as you are.
@Dr. James Willingham
You’re thoughts and comments here are despicable. Again, the whole 90%/10% thing– far more rapes are committed by heterosexuals than homosexuals, and the magazine you’re referencing is pure drivel.
For the record – the 10% gay population statistic is total fabrication created by Alfred Kinsey. All current statistics, even those provided by the gay community, suggest 3% to 3.5% of the US population is gay.
“How about the whole “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” thing?”
Case in point. You are just cherry picking things here and there while ignoring others. You go to the bible as your source of authority of what is or is not “Jesus-like”, and you like the parts you agree with, but if I were to post other things that Jesus said that don’t fit with your beliefs, you would rail against them and say “that is not jesus-like”
Here is my advantage- I don’t take a simplistic, ignorant, intellectually suicidal position on the bible that you have taken, but rather a measured, thoughtful and thorough one. I examine the whole thing carefully and then am able to say what is or is not “Jesus-like”
You don’t have to agree with what the bible teaches, but you also can’t have your cake and eat it too. I’m cool with you saying “I don’t believe in the bible” But don’t play games where you get to pretend you know what it says about Jesus’ life when you pick and choose indiscriminately what it says based on your own feelings and whims.
Well, I would like to see the argument put that way, too. The argument needs to go to the gospel and all sin. For those who think Trevin and all Christians are focusing on homosexuality, you’re missing why Trevin is writing this. The key is the picture at the top: Piers Morgan. I enjoy watching his show, and I have noticed how he seems to ask anyone who is Christian about homosexuality. He is the one who keeps bringing it up. But we Christians have to be ready to answer the question, because it will be asked, over and over.
Keep on keeping on, Trevin. Don’t mind the haters and cowards who use pseudonyms.
Thank you AGAIN for your take on the subject. You helped me immensely in another post where you addressed that the main difference between ‘this sin’ and ‘that one’ is Repentance. We must seek repentance for every sin…whether it be sezual, relational, with our words, attitudes, etc.
Thanks for the clarity. I only wish/pray that this discussion would really happen. Christians LOVE others, or should. It’s not about the SIN, but the ONE who takes it away!
Thank you, Trevin!
@dustin germain
“But don’t play games where you get to pretend you know what it says about Jesus’ life when you pick and choose indiscriminately what it says based on your own feelings and whims.”
Again, once the majority of those that are Christian eat your words, you’ll have grounds to tell me what I can and can’t do.
@Brian Watson
“Don’t mind the haters and cowards who use pseudonyms.”
If your co-Christians didn’t react with violence, hate, and shame against people with dissenting viewpoints, I’d feel fully comfortable discussing these things without a Pseudonym. Until then, the general intolerance and anger of your social group has forced me to obfuscate my identity.
@Apathiest: Why do you have to turn the argument toward extremism? No one here was “reacting with hate” toward gays.
@Edwin
I didn’t turn the argument toward extremism, Dr. James Willingham did.
My interactions with the majority of you here today have been civil, but I can’t feel safe exposing myself when the likes of him are present and vocal, much less those like him that are just lurking.
And to be very clear, I wasn’t claiming that people only react “with hate” to gays, I was claiming that they react “with hate” to anyone that doesn’t have their same views.
As I’ve stated before, I’m a married, faithful, hetero male, and I have personally been the victim of verbal and physical abuse for defending the rights of others.
If I ran a company, and some of my employees were spouting out hate speech and attacking potential customers, I’d drop everything and stop them before I’d start calling peaceful people with different opinions “sinners”.
“I recognize that some people have mistreated homosexuals in the past. It’s a shame that anyone anywhere would mock, taunt, or bully another human”
Don’t forget assault, rape, and murder.
Arguing whether one’s sexuality is natural or not is pointless. The issue is what we do to deal with people and why. I found it ironic that he also thought that being asked to not call homosexuals sinners for being gay was pushing on his core beliefs but seemed to forget that not everyone believes the same thing. Arguments like this are best solved when everyone comes to the table understanding that we don’t all see things exactly the same and speaking past one another is a waste of time.
Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.
@Apathiest: Your very first post accused everyone here of “bigotry”. Your second one outright called christian beliefs as “garbage”. May I asked what on this discussion prompted that?
Again, as Trevin explained on the blog post, “To differ is not to hate”.
I just don’t really get why it is such a big deal. In all the Scripture I’ve read, I have yet to find a single passage (that isn’t taken out of context) that condemns monogomous homosexual relations.
Perhaps I am just ignorant, but I decided to err on the side of tolerance.
Romans 1:18-32, particularly verses 26 and 27. I understand your caution but homosexuality is exactly what those two verses are talking about.
@Edwin
You said that I turned the argument toward extremism, which I refuted, because I did not.
big·ot·ry /ˈbigətrē/
Noun:
Bigoted attitudes; intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
I called Christians that believe homosexuals are sinners that need to repent bigots. Sounds intolerant to me.
gar·bage /ˈgärbij/
Noun:
A thing that is considered worthless or meaningless.
I consider the words in the bible to be without worth and/or meaning, therefore, “garbage” an acceptable term as far as I’m concerned. One man’s trash is another man’s treasure, as you are probably aware.
“Again, as Trevin explained on the blog post, “To differ is not to hate”.”
Of course– if this is what you practiced, I’d be all for it. Take the marriage issue, for one. You are completely within your rights to never, ever take part in a same-sex marriage, however you’re intolerance for those with views that differ from you forces your views on them. You’re not giving them the chance to differ, you’re not tolerating them, and you’re keeping them from doing something that in no way shape or form affects you. I feel that this could only come from a place of hate.
hate /hāt/
Verb:
Feel intense or passionate dislike for (someone): “the boys hate each other”.
Apathiest
Is it or is it not OK for Christians to believe that certain activities are sinful?
Please answer that.
Tolerance does not mean that we have to agree that whatever anyone decides to do is good. Why is everyone trying to change the definition of tolerance lately?
As a Christian man who has fought homosexual temptation my entire adult life, I want to speak about one aspect of this situation that many of us Christians don’t “get”.
I will most likely never have sex my entire life.
Think about it. For reasons unknown to me, I have very little sexual attraction to women but strong attraction to men. From the teachings in the Bible I cannot ever have sex with a man and I must marry to have sex with a woman. I do not believe it would be right to marry a woman who I merely desired to have as a friend.That would inflict serious pain on her and me.
What do I do? I deny myself, take up my cross, and follow Jesus by remaining celibate. He is absolutely worth it! He helps me along the way as I look forward to worshiping Him eternally in the perfect joy of His presence!
Mr.,
Thank you for your comment! This is how I have come to view this subject…I DO believe that men/women are legitimately attracted to the same sex, and yet God, in his holiness and wisdom, says that this is not the way. Therefore, the only biblical answer IS to take up your cross and to deny yourself! AMEN! Prayers for you as you continue to fight for godliness and run hard after Jesus. Just as I am tempted by different sin in my life, I too must say “no” to ungodliness and yes to righteousness. God bless and may God see you safely through this journey of life and may you see him in all of his glory, blameless and pure on that day!
That’s great to hear MR. Vaughan Roberts has written a very insightful blog on this issue here: http://www.e-n.org.uk/6028-A-battle-I-face.htm
@MR
So, how do you feel about homosexuals that are not Christian? Are you okay with them marrying one another, since they’re not Christian and your Christian views only apply to you and your fellow Christians?
Apathiest
What you are apparently not understanding here is that we do not wish to dictate how others lead their lives. However, when asked, we will state that an activity is a sin. And that seems to occur very frequently, often out of context with the situation at hand, for instance, Kirk Cameron and Manny Pacquiao.
We’d be glad to keep our opinions on the matter to ourselves. But we keep being asked, like when the matter of gay marriage is on the ballot. We can and we will vote and voice our conscience and belief. We aren’t asked what our opinions are on fornication, adultery, gluttony, lust, etc are very often. But if we are, we will state that they are sinful behaviors too.
In addition to sexual immorality being sinful, it is also a sin to condone others in sin. So yeah, we are not going to say that it is OK to engage in gay sex. Ever. We are also not going to say it’s OK to have heterosexual sex if one is not married to one’s partner.
Being a Christian means that we have had the knowledge of truth placed in our hearts, minds and souls. Belief in God, His Word, in His Son and the Holy Spirit is not just simple faith in something we cannot see, touch, taste or hear. It is revealed truth and we know it is real just as we know the chair in which we sit is real.
One day, this truth will be revealed to you too.
In the meantime, all we ask is that our beliefs be tolerated, and that we are not scorned, hated, threatened or discriminated against because we hold beliefs with which some others disagree.
I second what someone said earlier…Jesus DID speak expressly against homosexuality. Not to mention (and a non-Christian wouldn’t understand this), Jesus IS God, so every other mention of homosexuality in the Bible, from Leviticus to Romans and elsewhere…is JESUS speaking against homosexuality.
@Tim
Although I am not a Christian, I understand completely that you believe Jesus to be God.
And as it has been asked 100,000 times before, please provide me some citations of Jesus speaking out against homosexuality.
[18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. [19] For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. [20] For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. [21] For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. [22] Claiming to be wise, they became fools, [23] and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
[24] Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, [25] because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
[26] For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; [27] and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
[28] And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. [29] They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, [30] slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, [31] foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. [32] Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
(Romans 1:18-32 ESV)
[...] It is akin to trying to lose weight while on an ice cream diet. It can be done but not easily. Here Trevin Wax, through the means of an imaginary TV interview, provides insight into how we should [...]
“I recognize that some people have mistreated homosexuals in the past. It’s a shame that anyone anywhere would mock, taunt, or bully another human being made in God’s image.”
But no “We are sorry” ?
Listen to gay people who show up at church. It’s not about “To differ is not to hate”. It’s about real hate and real contempt shown towards people who (at some point when you are getting to know them) say “I am gay”.
I think something that gets lost a lot in these kinds of debates is where ideology meets action. I don’t take offence or cry bigotry if someone tells me that they *think* or *believe* that homosexuality is wrong (along with any number of other consensual things that the Bible condemns). Where I get upset is when they try to force that on belief on other people.
The reality here is that if you are a Christian, the best you can do is read and study the Bible and TRY to understand what Jesus meant, and how the text reflects on what God wants you to do. The fact that there are so many splintered sects of Christians shows that no one can make any serious claim about what is on the mind of God.
But if you live in the western world, you are living in a secular culture. The promise is that no one will tell you what to believe, and in turn you are to do the same.
This all comes crashing down, however, when we start trying to pass laws and amend constitutional documents on the basis of our interpretations of our religious texts and on the basis of our beliefs. If you can’t come up with honest non-religious reasons for these kinds of political actions, then you ARE being discriminatory.
The Gay-Marriage stuff is a great example of this. Gay people are seeking the secular privileges of being married (such as being considered family for cases of emergency), and many good Christians are trying to prevent that because of their belief that it is not what God wants. The way I see it is, if God doesn’t want Gay people to be married, then he will handle it in this life or the next; as a Christian, you don’t need the Government’s approval to be married (though it is convenient) — you need God’s permission. Let the gay folk have the Government’s approval — if you think God objects, say so. Ultimately it is the individual’s responsibility to seek God’s forgiveness, not our place to force them to conform to his will.
While my relationship with my wife may not be the be-all end-all of my identity, it is certainly a major part of my identity. And before we married, who I was dating was also part of my identity.
Sin, to most rational people who think about sin, is something that harms others or oneself. Otherwise, God would just be arbitratrily making rules. The fact that Christians continue to insist that my life is inherently harmful, not because of the times that I actually do something wrong (which I do), but just because of the form of the body of the person I love… It’s never going to fly with anyone who is gay and also values himself or herself and what our lives actually mean.
It just leads to poor, tortured souls like the celibate gentleman above.
I am sinful, but not because of who I love. Until you get that, you’re never going to win this debate, because saying otherwise *is* hateful to self-respecting gay people.
Tim & Apatheist: To be clear, there isn’t one quote from Jesus in the Gospels that condemns homosexuality directly. What does appear in the Gospels is a resounding affirmation by Jesus of the created order as that order is set forth in Genesis 1-2. Specifically, Jesus affirms: (1) that God made humankind “male and female” in the image of God; (2) that marriage is a man leaving his father and mother and cleaving to his wife, and the two becoming one flesh. In positively and specifically defining what marriage is, Jesus also states what it is not. Since Jesus’s affirmation appears in a debate over divorce its most obvious application is to divorce — but the application doesn’t end there.
MR: My brother, “may you be strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for all endurance and patience with joy, giving thanks to the Father who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light.” Your testimony has encouraged me to press onward more vigorously in my own struggles against sin.
I feel that this article is very distasteful. I do believe that “homosexuality” is biologically unintentional (please don’t misquote me, I’m trying to find the right words but can’t find them) as in its not a male/female union but I do believe we need to respect their orientation regardless. Not to compare gay/lesbians to them, but do you consider those mentally challenged children to have sinned or have been the result of a sin? It isn’t morally right. Think! Logic has done us much good and it doesn’t hurt to use some now.
I am a 16-year-old straight male. I realize many of you may consider myself childish and immature. I still stand by my statements. http://www.gifbin.com/bin/052009/1242032359_haters-gonna-hate.gif
That is why so many people spend their money to support NPR :}
Let me see if I get this straight:
The “pastor” is not judging homosexuals because he is not singling them out as sinners. OTOH, he is saying that pretty much everyone is a sinner.
That seems to me like he is judging everyone.
Oh, sure, he says it’s not him, it’s Jesus. Well, since Jesus has not spoken to him, what he *actually* means is that his study of the bible leads him to believe that God would deem almost everyone sinners.
OTOH, there are other people who have studied the bible (or at least parts of it) and decided that what God really really wants is that people don’t eat pork, which I assume the “pastor” has no problems with.
Therefore, his study of the bible contradicts that other person’s study of the bible. Or, going back to the original theme, he is actually saying that studying the bible leads *some* people (including him) to believe that almost everyone is a sinner, and other people (not him) to believe pork is sinful.
On further consideration, what he really means is that his study of an old book has convinced him that a specific supernatural entity considers all of us sinners, while others, studying other books are convinced that different supernatural entities will reincarnate us after our deaths.
But he will also tell you that those who believe a specific supernatural entity will reincarnate them are wrong, because their supernatural entity does not exist, but his does, because he has the correct old book, and the others have the wrong one.
So, what he really means is that, if you have the correct old book, and you understand it the way he does, we are all sinners, but if you read it wrong, you can’t eat pork, and if you have the wrong book, you believe you will reincarnate as a beetle.
But in fact, what he really is saying is “you are all sinners because I say so”.
Nope. You pretty much don’t understand.
1 Corinthians 1:18 explains why. But then, you might not understand that one either.
One day you will though.
(to Doc)
Jesus does care about the kind of genitals your spouse has and that they differ from yours for many biblical reasons. The greatest is what a marriage relationship represents. Christ is the husband and the Church is his bride. How a husband and wife interact and know each other intimately is the example of our relationship with Christ. We cannot save ourselves. We cannot show love if we only love ourselves. There must be a Savior and those needing to be saved in order for the relationship to work. That is God’s design. He explains how to live the happiest life you can through serving Him in the Bible. Before this idea is totally dismissed read you Bible from front to back, know it love it. Than talk about what it teaches.
Last I checked, if you believe the bible, Jesus closest disciple (Peter) died horribly after suffering great hardships.
Since he was close to him and had first-hand experience of his teachings, howcome their life was so NOT the happiest possible life?
Why do we only want to know a God that makes our life perfect with no obligation or inconveniences to us? Jesus didn’t come to make this life easy for us. In John 15:18 Jesus said, ““If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me.”
[...] por Filipe Schulz | iPródigo | original aqui AKPC_IDS += "6482,"; [...]
This is very nice, and I thank you for posting it. As a recently deconverted Christian, I do qualify that your argument is respectable without agreeing with it. One point that did sorely stick out to me was this line:
“Pastor: Well, we really don’t know for certain about sexual attraction being innate and set from birth. All we have is the testimony of people who say that they’ve experienced same-sex desires since childhood.”
That simply is not true. There have been a number of studies to show a genetic base for homosexuality, and these studies are strong enough that the majority of mental health institutions support the validity of the results. I think Christians are often far too presumptuous to assume that these studies are still just little theories. I know I thought that way as a Christian, and I am sorry for having been so dismissive.
Katie, Unfortunately you are mistaken on this issue. There are no studies that show a genetic foundation of homosexuality. These studies have been claimed, but never confirmed. The fact is there is no proven genetic cause, but neither will I say that it is a choice. Same sex attraction is not a choice, however our response to the attraction is a choice. MR, above, has made one choice, that he should be celibate for the rest of his life. Others have found help through organizations that eventually lead many to happy, fulfilling hetrosexual lives.
Katie science has yet to offer inconclusive evidence that same sex attraction is because of genetic defect. At present what is being bandied about is still only a theory or hyperboly which they are not willing to take the next step to test their theory. They are not willing to take the supposed gene from a person possessing and placing it in some person missing that Gene.
They are not confident enough to do so because of their fear of being so wide of the mark and finding that that person or even a number of persons to whom they would transfer this attraction gene into are3 not affected by this gene in that after a relatively period of time don’t develop this same gender attraction’
There theories are a bit like carbon dating which is only a theory based on the rate of decay of carbon within matter. This theory only applies under considered ideal circumstances, but then we know all circustances are not ideal and that carbon decomposes at different rates under less than the optomin circumstances.
So until Science becomes honest and deals with their Hypothses honestly, I for one will except the Scriptural accounts before the Scientific Theories and yes there is mention of all sexual sin in the scripture under the term fornication, which under Hebrew and Greek languages means unatural sexual orientation or not of God.
@Karen, you articulated this point extremely well. When I was a Christian, I had a constant internal debate over the fact that homosexuality is not even remotely harmful like I had always assumed of sin. I saw quite a few gay Christian friends get severely burned as a result, and I do wish this fact would cause Christians to cast doubt on some of those things they call doctrine, especially the terribly twisted writings of Paul.
Excellent hypothetical interview. One big problem. You seem to assume that all sexual desire is reducible to lust. Not true. Sexuality may – and often does – involve lust, but it’s also more complex than strong sensual appetite.
Trevin:
By the way, are you aware that we’re both contributors to Christianity Today? I enjoy reading your articles and mini book reviews.
Anyway, I’m curious if you’ve read Janell Williams Paris’ THE END OF SEXUAL IDENTITY? I’m reviewing it for the magazine along with some other books on homosexuality. Her book is relevant to this point you made:
“Most people with same-sex desires believe they were born with these tendencies. That’s why they often see their attraction as going to the very core of who they are, and so they identify themselves with the “gay” label. So whenever someone questions their behavior or desires, they take it as an attack on the very core of their being.”
Paris would contend (rightly, in my opinion) that the hypothetical pastor is mistaken in appropriating a socially constructed identity – “homosexual” (or “heterosexual”) – rather than using a divinely given identity – ”image-bearer of God,” “beloved,” and “human being.” Simply put, we do violence to same-sex attracted persons when we totalize their identity with a label like “gay” or “lesbian.” The Bible doesn’t recognize such labels; they are, like the rest of us, “beloved.”
Candle… that’ view is not biblical.
@Katie: “…homosexuality is not even remotely harmful like I had always assumed of sin.”
So, can I assume you would not see any problem with me peeking through your bedroom blinds (or anyone else’s) every night, without your/their knowledge?
No harm = no sin?
As someone who is just two day away from spending the evening with a relative who identifies herself as a Wiccan and a lesbian, this article could not have come at a better time. I anticipated sharing the gospel with her, but was a little unsure of how to talk about the issue of homosexuality, which is inevitably going to come up (from her), and retain all grace, truth and Christ-likeness as I do so. The Lord providentially brought me to this article I believe, which has provided a great amount of clarity, wisdom and gospel truth for the coming meeting. It will prove to be an excellent guideline, despite the fact that the conversation will most likely not flow the same way.
Interestingly, I just returned with my wife from our mid-week Bible study, which concluded by our praying for God’s wisdom in this upcoming meeting, and for my relative’s salvation.
Thank you Father for your hand of providence, and for answering our prayers earlier this evening. Thank you also, brother Trevin, for your love for the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, and for His Word.
I am straight, and I also live a celibate life. Come on, people. It’s not a big deal to live a celibate life in order to live a life that honors God.
What I’m saying is that a life without sex is not a life without love when you are loved by God and are living a life of purity to bring him honor and glory. I just do not believe that is any more difficult for a gay person to do than a straight person.
@MikeH
“So, can I assume you would not see any problem with me peeking through your bedroom blinds (or anyone else’s) every night, without your/their knowledge?”
Since when is spying on people ‘harmless’? An invasion of privacy can be incredibly harmful. It’s part of the reason why people spend so much time defending their right to privacy.
Was there supposed to be a DEBATE going on there, Trevin Wax? Because all that this piece contains is a proponent of one viewpoint answering insipid, vague questions (which said proponent selected for himself), all the while allowing himself the liberty to make a wide variety of unfounded assertions without having to justify them.
There is a debate to be had, to be sure, but it should hardly look like this.
You akin Christianity to a biological determined fact. It isn’t. Belief in Christ is a choice, a choice you make every day, wether it’s part of your self identity or not. Homosexuality isn’t a choice. It is a matter of biology and there is a large body of scientific evidence to prove it. Homosexuality isn’t just about having random and numerous sexual partners. There are many homosexuals that prefer long term monotonous relationships. Being “gay” isn’t just another term for homosexual. Calling oneself gay is about a whole host of things including being part of an international community, having a shared culture and thousands of years of history. Being gay isn’t just about sex. It’d part of a personal identity and an important part to many of us.
[...] How I wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go. This imaginary debate created by Trevin Wax represents all the typical questions/arguments from the secular realm generously, and is extremely helpful in demonstrating how to direct every conversation on this sensitive topic towards the gospel. [...]
@E D B: If I engage in an activity that no-one (including the “victim”) knows about, then who is harmed?
So, flowing from what Katie says, if no-one is harmed then it seems that it isn’t a sin.
[...] Wax wishes a TV interview about homosexuality would go just like this. I pray for that too. The whole thing is worth reading. Here’s my favorite [...]
Hmmmm so much to say. First off, let me say that I am a Christian and I believe the Bible. I believe that God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
I’m not sure what I think about the distinction between behaviour and identity. I think I see what you’re saying, but if someone lies, doesn’t that make them a liar? If someone abuses children, doesn’t it make them a child abuser? If someone looks after their children well, doesn’t that make them a good parent? Maybe I’m wrong, I’d like to know what you think. I can completely understand why someone would feel attacked when you attack their behaviour.
I do agree that homosexuality is wrong, but that it is among many, many other sins in the Bible. And I don’t think, as some have said, that this writer, at least, has focused on it unduly. If you look at his archives, they are mostly dealing with the problems within the church, not having a go at others. So, the comment about the head of a company dealing with his own employees first does seem to be already dealt with.
A lot of you seem to be arguing with a dichotomy between religion and secular/logic. Someone argued that unless something can be shown to be wrong with non-religious arguments, then Christians should stop trying to change the law on it. Whatever my views on homosexual marriage, I can’t agree with you on that point. It is a false dichotomy. “secular” logic made slavery out to be right and it was largely a Christian logic that brought an end to it. If William Wilberforce had kept to your logic, he would have kept his Christianity to himself and let slavery continue. THere is much more I could say on this, but this post is already getting long.
I have gay friends, both Christian and non-christian, that I absolutely love. And if a stranger came to my church who was gay (whether openly or not) I feel almost 100% sure he/she would meet with nothing but love. I say almost 100% because “churches” are not filled with Bible-believing Christians. There are people there who have come to find out more, some who are dragged along unwillingly, and some who are religious hypocrites.
That leads me on to my final point. Jesus does affirm, as has already been said, the heterosexual nature of marriage. However, the sin he more openly and often attacks is religious hypocrisy, in its many forms. He attacks people who dare to sully the name of God by having false religion. He wants pure worship for his father, and he is angry when he finds anything else. This being the case, all people should approach God, in fear and trembling, repenting of all sin as he is a God of “too pure eyes than to look on evil.”
Very good article.
The problem is the with sin of homosexuality versus the other various sins and how homosexuality is justified. Most people who have sin in their life know they need to change and clean it up. The rebellion of homosexuality for whatever reason tries to make right the wrong by saying its normal to like the same sex. However, it’s contrary to Jesus because you cannot breed life from death which is exactly what homosexuality does.
Until we come into the light and truly follow Jesus not settling, we’ll always justify sin nature. Jesus through his Spirit reveals to us the change that needs to take place. It’s up to us to deal with sin or keep justifying it. I choose to deal with all sin in my life.
Good job. I think John MacArthur would be one to do something like this.
@MikeH What a silly argument you present, it doesn’t even merit a response, though I see EDB already did (thanks). I’m sorry you have to get extremely defensive just because I once was a Christian and finally found its statutes untenable. I understand what sin is at its core – a separation from God. I was defining sin in terms of how Karen had defined it, which is actually a rational definition on a human level. I agree with Karen’s argument that loving another person is not harmful (though perhaps I should define this term for you?) and should never be considered a separation from God, quite the opposite actually.
Not knowing of something does not make it harmless.
If you take 20$ from my purse, and I never realize I was stolen from, you have nevertheless harmed me.
If you spread a lie about me, and I lose a friend without knowing why, you have harmed me.
If you read my diary, but never get around to blackmailing me with the contents, you have nevertheless harmed me.
If you spy in my window when I expect privacy and witness some intimate act, I may never know about what you have stolen from me, but it is stolen all the same.
On the other hand, if I find the love of my life, she returns the feeling, we vow to spend the rest of our lives together, we do so faithfully, and we enjoy each other intimately and sexually, who is harmed? What have I taken, and from whom? How can you be so sure that this isn’t God’s plan for me? Last time I checked, and I apologize for bluntness, but Jesus does not have sex with the church, so I fail to see how my relationship with my wife couldn’t be just as much based on that model as my straight brother’s. Unless, of course, you hold an unashamedly sexist sort of view where women are saved by their husbands only.
I too wish the debate would go like this. Not so much for the stance (which I don’t agree with), but for the rational and reasonable aproach to the topic. Religious conviction on what is right and wrong is important, and has as much right to shape our common society as any other philosophy. But many who self-identify as christians have shown time and time again an inability/unwillingness to engage in civil exchange such as you depict here. Perhaps the bigots and hate-mongers are a non-representative minority. But they are very vocal, and from my outsiders view-point their intolerance taints your entire group.
As to the larger question of homosexuality as a sin, can any true christian make a judgement of anothers actions without hypocrisy? I am no biblical expert, but I have read it and done my best to understand it. It seems to me that Jesus was very clear on the subject: “Judge not lest ye be judged” and “Let he who is withotu sin cast teh first stone.” I take these qoutes directly form Jesus to mean that no regular human being is entitled to judge another -in any way-. It is not for mere mortals to decide if this act is sinful or that one is not. It is not our job. Our job, by my reading of the new testament, is to try and repent for our own sins, each individually.
Unless you are immaculatley moral, it is hypocritical to even think you are qualified to judge anothers actions as sinful. “Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.
“
Justin, you need to look at the context of the verses that you are quoting. Jesus was speaking to the Pharisee’s who believed that they had kept the law in it’s completeness, even though they knew inside that they had not. As you read the entire passage, you will see that what Jesus is instructing is that the believer examine his/her own life first, acknowledge that he/she is a sinner and then approach other sinners as equally fallen sinners. It is also not in my place to judge a persons salvation, however I can judge their actions. We do this all the time – when a child behaves in a manner that we do not agree with, we judge the action and give them a time out, when a criminal breaks a law, we judge the action and sentence them to a punishment. We don’t say that the child is an evil child because they hit the cat, but we still judge the action. I certainly don’t hate the homosexual, or the adulterer or the gossip or the glutton, however I do hate the sin that is committed.
You may ask if it is possible to hate the sin and love the sinner. Absolutely yes! Have you ever done something so foolish that the thought of it brings you shame? Hurtful words spoken in haste? Foolish teenage act? Do you hate that you did that? Yet this does not mean that you hate yourself. I can love myself yet hate some of the things that I have done. It is the same approach that I take to other sinners.
Please forgive my numerous typos, I’m afraid my passion has overwhelmed my grammar.
@sarah Such a good point. Sexuality is not black or white. There is no archetype ‘man’ and ‘woman’. We all have varying levels of masculinity and femininity. To declare otherwise is to reject the biological and psychological nuances that make us human. In the words of King Missile, “Jesus was way cool”, but unfortunately he had a pretty antiquated view of sexuality. Soon, this conversation will go the way of slavery and stoning and witch hunts and we will collectively say ‘remember when people actually believed this?’
Generally though, I agree with your title. I wish the conversation were always so civil and everyone was given time to finish their thoughts and be heard. That’s how we advance society.
[...] How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go Kingdom People, Trevin Wax [...]
[...] http://trevinwax.com/2011/10/18/how-i-wish-the-homosexuality-debate-would-go/ Share this:TwitterFacebookEmailLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. Tagged Gay Marriage, Gospel, Legalism, Trevin Wax, WWJD [...]
I would add this is what is required of single heterosexual people as well.
[...] expressing a biblical, loving, and reasonable view about what the Bible says about homosexuality. Trevin Wax pens an interview with a fictitious pastor that is gets to the heart of the issue. In addition, it is gracious and [...]
[...] Delicious/christianheadlines/topheadlines Posted in Top Headline News Tags: Debate, Homosexuality, Opinion, Wish, would « Attack, vandalism won't silence God's truth Drowning in debt, EU hits moment of truth » You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. [...]
Thank you for editing and posting, rather than deleting, my comment. However I think you’ve slightly blurred an important point. I do have sex with my wife, so I think it’s important to note that *specifically heterosexual*, male-part-in-female-part sex is not something that Jesus does with his church. So, saying that male-female sexual relationships can model Christ’s relationship with his church while same-sex sexual relationships can’t… It’s eisegesis. The text isn’t there. It’s all assumptions and extrapolations.
As for the claim that this is continually brought up by non-Christians while Christians would be happy to sit in non-judgement-but-it’s-still-a-sin-land without further discussion: I can only laugh. The efforts to “protect” the other children in our daughter’s class from knowing, not of the intimate times my wife and I share in the bedroom, but of *the mere existence* of families like ours… Banning books, banning even the most innocuous and sexuality-free discussion… Attempting to ensure that our *secular* government will never ever recognize our marriage even while it recognizes divorce and remarriage, the marriages of atheists, marriages where sexual faithfulness is not expected, and other marriages that are just as “bad” in your interpretation…
You may not be on the street corner holding a sign condemning us, but anti-gay Christians are the ones picking this fight. I honestly don’t care if you think I’m sinful and not a “real” Christian and not “really” saved, but I do care when you act on these beliefs in a way that harms me.
@Karen, church leaders should be begging you to speak these words to their congregations.
[...] Read the rest. [...]
[...] More Here Like this:LikeBe the first to like this post. from → Academia, Bible, Bible Doctrine, [...]
Thank you, Trevin. Your “ideal” television interview of a Christian (pastor or otherwise) can also be a useful apologetic tool. I particularly appreciate your use of this to address the key issue of core identity; it’s either in Jesus Christ or it isn’t.
BTW, my wife and I greatly appreciated your presentations at the Psalm 119 Conference in Boston. Thank you!
How I Wish the anti-Homosexuality Christian Activists would act:
Equally condemning in voice and number, of all the sexual sins — for examples, a state by state campaign to pass Amendments on: adultery, pre-marital sex, divorce, & lustfulness.
How I Believe the anti-Homosexuality Christian Activists actually act:
All issues regarding homosexuality are more important, more dangerous and more sinful then any other – equal only to abortion. The other, lesser sins, do not require the same degree of protesting, law-making, and the like.
All of this is empty rhetoric until you tell your unbiblically divorced and remarried Christian brothers and sisters to “sin no more”. They can also start living chaste single lives if they sincerely repent.
The smiling pastor in this fantasy narrative can’t possibly mean what he says when he says this: ” My hope is to follow Him faithfully. That means that whatever He says in regard to sexual practices is what I believe to be true, loving, and ultimately best for human flourishing – even when it seems out of step with the whims of contemporary culture.”
Most american evangelical pastors have no problem exegeting “love your enemy” right out of the Bible. If you intend to follow him faithfully, how is it that most evangelicals support American wars and many support torture? How can anyone take this pastor seriously when Christians in the west are so willing to ignore what Jesus thinks is “true, loving, and ultimately best” about relating to our enemies? This is hypocrisy, plain and simple.
@David RE:
“Specifically, Jesus affirms: (1) that God made humankind “male and female” in the image of God; (2) that marriage is a man leaving his father and mother and cleaving to his wife, and the two becoming one flesh. In positively and specifically defining what marriage is, Jesus also states what it is not. Since Jesus’s affirmation appears in a debate over divorce its most obvious application is to divorce — but the application doesn’t end there.”
Keep in mind that the word “wife” was never written in the bible, and when you read “wife” it is the result of many translations throughout history, ultimately into English.
You have confirmed that current Christian hate towards homosexuals is due to personal interpretation of things that were said thousands of years ago and written down, transcribed, modified, and translated throughout history.
Not to mention that this still has absolutely nothing to do with non-Christian homosexuals.
This sounds like the view Eastern Orthodox Christians have. We don’t really embrace homosexuality but at the same time we don’t shun away or condemn people who are because of God’s love. Therefore we accept them, yet claim they are sinning. It’s a bit confusing. I think there’s nothing wrong with people being homosexual. Even have a cousin who’s a lesbian.
@Portia, I agree with you entirely. It’s a terrible pitfall of Christianity that no one who follows it knows how to follow it correctly (because the Bible is so full of inconsistencies, in my opinion), or according to them, they can’t because they are too clouded by sin (even though Jesus freed them from sin…?). Somehow we are supposed to see their love as a testament to God’s love even though their lives generally look quite a bit like any other stranger on the street.
That is why I wish Christianity could be a personal matter, but the Bible does urge its followers to spread “the Good News,” no matter how irrelevant or unwanted it may be.
Apatheist:
The Hebrew texts are not equivocal as to the word that appears in Genesis 2:24, which Jesus quotes in St Matthew 19 and its parallels. You are correct that the word does not literally mean “wife.” It means “woman.” I don’t think that advances your argument, though.
If I used your methods for evaluating arguments, I could just as easily say that “current apatheist hate towards Christians grows from personal interpretation of a tradition of thought, going back to Diagoras, Critias, and Democritus, which has been written down, transcribed, modified, and translated throughout history.”
To be a little more constructive, though, let’s see if we can establish some point of agreement from which dialogue proper might proceed. To that end, two questions:
(1) Does disagreement equal hate?
(2) Does identifying something that a person does as “sin” equal hate?
Cheers,
David
Exactly what I was thinking.
@Apatheist: Of course the word “wife” was used in the Bible. Take a look in Genesis 2:23. Note that in the preceding verse, it is also pretty clear that the wife was a woman. Sure, the Hebrew word is clearly not “wife”, but if you are suggesting that we don’t know the meaning of the original word, – that it’s a translation of a translation of a translation, or whatever – then you have no understanding of how Bible translation works.
Our current Bible is translated using a resource of,literally, thousands of ancient manuscripts, in the original Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic, that are cross-checked against each other to ensure the correct meaning is conveyed.
Note that I’m not actually weighing in on the homosexuality question in this post – so please don’t attack me on that count – but this sort of uninformed nonsense, in your argument, just makes me a little miffed.
@MikeH It is hard for me to watch believers become so selfishly accusatory in discussions like these. I wish you could see it defeats your ultimate purpose (assuming you’re a Christian), which is to reflect Christ’s love. Telling someone what they say is “uninformed nonsense” will never prove to anyone that Christ’s love is worth anything at all, even to you.
@Katie: In general, I would absolutely agree with you; however, no amount of “love” is going to change the opinion of @Apatheist and he has very firmly set the tone of his dealings on this site.
In this case, I’m calling it like I see it and maybe, just maybe (but I doubt it), Apatheist will hesitate to use the argument again, on the basis that he now knows it’s spurious, even though he thinks poorly of me. Maybe I’ll regret it in the morning but, hey, I can live with that.
Not that I would ever compare myself to Jesus but, if you take a look at your Gospels, you’ll find that He often, quite bluntly, called it as He saw it.
What I love is the absurdities you find when anti-gay Christian activists start talking about homosexuality in “Christianese”.
Homosexuals are trying to “create life from death”? Whaa? I solemnly swear that my wife and I have no basement laboratory. When we are together sexually, there is no death anywhere around and we are certainly, like most honest Christians during most of their sexual encounters with their spouses, not actually trying to create life.
@Katie: “What a silly argument you present…” etc.
I’m merely exploring your definition of morality. You appear to have rejected the idea of an objective morality, emanating from God, so, where does your definition of morality come from? When you discarded the Bible, what became your moral compass?
You seemed to be saying it was about “harm”, yet when I describe a situation in which no-one is apparently harmed, you want to take the moral high-ground. On what basis?
There are lots of people around (my daughters included) that think I’m being immoral by eating meat and wearing leather. Have they got it right? Several billion people disagree with them, but maybe it’s all the rest of us who have it wrong. Strangely, many of those same people that are offended by my carnivorous nature, apparently seem to think it’s OK to kill unborn babies; go figure.
There are women in the world that seem really happy to walk around in clothing that fully conceals them, but apparently there are others who understand better what is good for those women and demand that they be “emancipated”.
A hundred years ago, it was scandalous for a woman to show her ankle. Today, now that we are free of that outmoded prudishness, we have 24/7 pornography available to anyone with an internet connection and, in my humble opinion, we will have a generation of young men who have no understanding of real intimacy and a generation of young women who will regret it.
You rail against the “terribly twisted” writings of Paul. On what basis are they “twisted”? What special knowledge do you have, that generations of Christians didn’t? I’m not saying you are wrong, but where are you getting your standard from?
Personally, I’m undecided about the same-sex marriage debate. A big part of me says “what’s the harm?” and if it were to be put to a vote, I’m currently thinking I’d vote in favour of same-sex civil marriages. On the other hand, I’d do this knowing that I wouldn’t really then have a valid reason to vote against any other alternative models that might then be pushed.
It’s sad that you felt the need to leave the Church over these types of issues, but, bottom line for me, following a very long-winded discussion, is that when we discard God’s Word as our moral compass, when we discard our objective standard, we end up on a very slippery slope and I don’t really look forward to finding out what’s at the bottom.
I don’t know who the pastor is, or if this conversation happened, but I would love more like him speaking to the media. I loved it
Good work here Trevin thank you.
@MikeH:
“when I describe a situation in which no-one is apparently harmed”
That is decidedly unlike Christ — as the article says, Jesus preached that to lust was to commit adultery; just because you do something harmful and don’t succeed doesn’t mean that you are innocent of doing harm, just that you are bad at it.
If I steal something from someone that they meant to give me as a gift, no one was harmed, but I have still done wrong. If I shoot a man to kill, only to discover after that he is already dead, I have still done wrong. Just because you spy on someone and they don’t notice (and presumably you fail to observe something they object to you witnessing) you have still done wrong.
When God mandated that we be fruitful and multiply, He meant it each and every time you and your spouse come together to be open to another child per the constant Roman Catholic Church teaching. Protestants went off the road, into the ditch and have been falling into the ravine for 80 years, ultimately, devolving into this:
“We [same-sex partners] are certainly, like most honest [Protestants] during most of their sexual encounters with their spouses, not actually trying to create life.”
-Karen
Hasn’t contraceptive (unfruitful) sex always been rehearsal for homosexual sex? Now that millions of heterosexual Christians of all stripes have been engaging in fruitless married sex, did we think our collective sin wouldn’t find us out?
Judgment begins in the house of God.
@MikeH, I don’t understand why you’re assuming that I left the Church over “these types of issues.” My leaving the church was a long process brought on by many separate issues, many different from these. I held onto my belief in God as long as I could, because I wanted to believe. I simply cannot believe anymore, but my reasoning is way beyond the limitations you presume. I don’t take belief so lightly as to reject it over a few qualms. I’ve lost close friendships over this decision, so please don’t assume it was such a flippant, prideful act. I came to where I am honestly.
I, too, used to employ a lot of the same arguments you do, so I *think* I can understand where you’re pulling them from. I used to think the world would be a bankrupt place without God as our compass for morality, but then I considered how my non-believing friends seem to be more moral than some of my believing friends. I realized how much of morality simply stems from the natural human tendency toward survival and well-being and, well, common sense. If I lie, for example, I could build a reputation as a liar, and it’s possible no one would ever trust me again. It is much easier to do well in life if people can trust me, so I don’t run around lying. Also, I love people. I just do, and I don’t need God to tell me to love people for me to love them.
And again, I used the term “harm” based on someone else’s argument. Sin is separation from God in its rawest form. I know what sin is, and sin is a harmful thing in the sense that it severs a closeness to God. For people who don’t understand what this relationship with God is actually like, they sometimes understand sin as something harmful between people, which does grieve God. I was coming from that perspective. To be honest, I don’t think of the world in terms of “sin” anymore, because I don’t consider any grievance of God. I do think that spying on someone is harmful because invading privacy puts the other party in a place of vulnerability, whether they know it or not. I don’t believe morality comes from religious texts, because *something* we would call morality existed before those texts. Something innate that doesn’t necessarily have to be ascribed to God, though it very well may be if one so decides.
It actually disturbs me to think that people really would descend into chaos if they didn’t have God’s word telling them not to.
@E D B: I absolutely agree with you. That is my point.
[...] http://trevinwax.com/2011/10/18/how-i-wish-the-homosexuality-debate-would-go/ Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in KFD. Bookmark the permalink. ← Seven Things the Bible Says About Evil When life punches you in the face → [...]
@MikeH Claiming that no amount of love will affect a certain person (Apatheist) only casts doubt on the effective power of your “loving” God. Again, you present no valid reason for believing in your God.
Jesus also spoke in parables that he said you won’t understand, so I wouldn’t presume to understand the ways of Jesus.
@Katie: I wasn’t actually presenting a valid reason for believing in God, I was refuting an invalid one for denying Him.
If God wants Apatheist, He’ll get Him, even despite (or maybe because of) my efforts. If we can’t “presume to understand the ways of Jesus” who’s to say I didn’t say exactly the right thing at exactly the right time?
With respect to my other post: my apologies for my assumption about why you left the faith. Given your strong words in this regard, I jumped to a conclusion and was certainly not trying to belittle your decision.
As to the rest of your post,I agree that our morality is “innate” (even though we often ignore it) because (in my view), we are made in the image of God. However, apart from that innate sense, He also gives us specific standards in His Word, which we ignore at our own peril. Not because of God’s judgement, in most cases at least, but because of the natural consequences of our actions, which, because He loves us, He would prefer us to avoid.
@David:
“current apatheist hate towards Christians grows from personal interpretation of a tradition of thought, going back to Diagoras, Critias, and Democritus, which has been written down, transcribed, modified, and translated throughout history.”
Wrong. I’ve stated no hate, I’ve expressed no interest in stopping you from practicing your religion. My distaste for your views is brought upon by your co-Christians and their constant campaigning against equal rights for all people, Christian or not.
“(1) Does disagreement equal hate?”
No.
“(2) Does identifying something that a person does as “sin” equal hate?”
Again, no.
When you take it a step beyond disagreement and classification of a person that is (I’m excluding the self-hating homosexual Christians out there) not part of your sect and also attempt to keep them from enjoying the same rights and privileges that you enjoy in our secular society, I move your actions into the category of “hate”.
@MikeH
“Take a look in Genesis 2:23 dot dot dot et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.”
I did, and “wife” and “woman” are how the various translators translate “Isha”, “from man”. I even looked at G 2:22, as you suggested, and again, it seems to say things like “woman” and “wife” in the various translations. Are there any translations that specify the inverted genitalia of “Isha”? Is it possible that god made Adam a companion in the general sense?
Even if these tails have been told identically and translated impeccably since the first time they were written down, you’re still looking at something where the first written version of the story occurs thousands of years after the events took place.
If humans are capable of twisting and mangling the ~250 year-old words and thoughts of the USA’s founding fathers, with incredibly numerous records and accounts in a language that is largely the same as ours is today, you can’t expect me to believe that the words in your book, which is thousands of years old, are any less subject to humanity’s innate ability to twist the facts to their advantage.
He never did say he would refuse membership, he said that he would welcome them into the sanctuary to learn more about what Jesus wants us to do.
Copied from the interview:
Host: But it appears to me that you and your church take a rather unloving position when it comes to gay people. Are homosexuals welcome to come to your church?
Pastor: Of course. We believe that the gospel is a message relevant for every person on the planet, and we want everyone to hear the gospel and find salvation in Jesus Christ. So at our church, our arms are outstretched to people from every background, every race, every ethnicity and culture. We’re a place for all kinds of sinners and people with all kinds of problems.
[...] Opinion: How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go Recommended Church News Article From http://trevinwax.com/2011/10/18/how-i-wish-the-homosexuality-debate-would-go/ [...]
@MikeH “If God wants Apatheist, He’ll get Him…” Yes, this argument is part of why I don’t believe. The fact that a loving God just kind of “wants” certain people and “gets” them at his pleasure while the rest go off to suffer for eternity (even the ones who have reached their beliefs honestly like me and never once went out with the intent of rejecting or hating God whatsoever). I used to hate it when people would call God a sadist, but now that’s all he looks like, if he’s even real.
Apatheist:
Which was my point: Trevin stated no hate. Nor had I. Only disagreement. Go back and read Trevin’s post. He did not broach the civil rights issue, at all. All he did was answer the kinds of questions that are commonly asked of Christians when they are interviewed on national TV. Deal with the arguments presented here, not with your grievances against all Christians everywhere. Again, if I followed your rhetorical method I might respond to this hemming and hawing about “co-Christians” by pointing out how many Christians your co-atheists in communist China have slaughtered. But that would hardly be productive. Eye on the ball.
Very well. We’ve at least established agreement on two points. Happy to leave it there for now.
Stating that one should repent of something that is an integral, enjoyable, loving, and healthy part of one’s life is not loving. Self-respecting gay people will always find it hateful no matter what you tell yourself about it.
I believe I covered the part of sin that harms your relationship with God in that which harms oneself. That includes spiritually. I just came to the conclusion long ago that any God that would be distanced from me for this reason is no God I could believe in. It would be cruel and arbitrary – and my God isn’t. I am not farther from God because of my relationship with my wife.
Internet: that’s why I said “honest Christians”. No, sex with contraceptives isn’t a rehearsal for gay sex. That would be… Funny. No, it’s a modern solution to a time-worn problem: people want to have sex with their spouses even when another baby would be inadvisable. It’s a sweet idea that most couples would actually have sex without considering the odds, not merely always open to life if it should happen, but always actually hoping to create it. Before there were condoms and pills, there were other methods, less effective, but used nevertheless. Sex is so much more than reproduction, for all couples.
Let me tell you, if God wanted to miraculously bless us with life when we have sex, I’d be open to that – I’m not expecting it any more than old Elizabeth was, but I’d still be thrilled. Why do you think it’s less possible for us than for a heterosexual woman of 70, or who has had a complete hysterectomy? Do you believe God’s miraculous powers are limited? So why is it sinful for us, but not for her and her husband?
“If you think my position on homosexuality is radical, just wait until you hear what else I believe!”
I totally thought this was going in another direction. There’s a lot of really wacky things you could believe based on scripture. But yeah, believing that we’re lesser, sinful creatures who have to beg an undetectable, telepathic father for forgiveness, because we keep doing things that he created us knowing we would do, and which are only bad because he said so, is pretty radical.
Meanwhile, since I don’t believe in sin, I’d like to report that sex is really, really fun. And there’s no shame in it.
For those who consider themselves religious yet desire homosexual (AKA Contraceptive) marriage?
Count the costs:
Secular political science scholar Dr. Eric Kaufmann, at the University of London, has written the following book: “Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth?”
Which religions will survive?:
(1.) Old Order Amish.
(2.) Quiverfull Evangelical Movement.
(3.) Traditional Latin Mass Catholics.
(4.) American Mormons.
(5.) Hasidic Jews.
(6.) Muslims.
Can a religion which even allows contraception survive?
Not according to Dr. Kaufmann.
What’s the winning recipe? Make love and, when you do, make babies. Teach them about God and your faith tradition all-day everyday.
maybe if your opinion was based on something other than 2000 year old magic book with no evidence this would be more acceptable
“Can a religion which even allows contraception survive?
Not according to Dr. Kaufmann.”
The fact that there are gay people would seem to refute this hypothesis. Also, people convert to other religious beliefs at points in their lives other than childhood. This hypothesis does not make sense in the context of the evidence, and must thus be discarded.
@David
If Trevin updates his “interview” above with the following question, I’ll retract my accusations of hate.
Interviewer: So all of the sinning and whatnot aside, do you support the movement to allow secular homosexuals to attain the same rights and privileges to marriage that you and your fellow heterosexuals enjoy?
Pastor: Certainly. While my religion has it’s own definition for “marriage”, I understand that in our secular society that the term has come to be used to describe a legal status offered by the government to consenting adults, and would have no problem voting “Yes” to grant the same rights and privileges to all people in this country, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.
Once that happens I’ll believe you when you say this interview and your posts don’t come from a place of hate.
What this presumably fictional pastor says is only true if you are willing to accept a 2,000 fantasy novel as fact. Belief is no virtue.
@David
“Again, if I followed your rhetorical method I might respond to this hemming and hawing about “co-Christians” by pointing out how many Christians your co-atheists in communist China have slaughtered.”
I’m not an atheist. I don’t think that my feeble human mind is remotely capable of understanding the vast complexities of this universe or its origins. I frankly just don’t care, hence the “apathy” portion of my handle here.
Just as your “co-Christians” have throughout time slaughtered innocent people with differing viewpoints, my “co-atheists in China” as you call them, are also responsible for these reprehensible acts. And just as you would (I hope) be vehemently against abuses such as that by members of your own religion, I, too, am against those actions taken by anyone, without regard to their religious affiliation, or lack thereof.
I’m not going to say that your religion doesn’t classify homosexuals as “sinners”, they clearly do, and it’s your right to do so, but let me ask you this: Do you support the right to a secular marriage between two consenting adults in the United States?
If you don’t, you’re applying your religious viewpoint to people that are not (again, I’m not counting the Christian homosexuals) part of your group, for reasons that I can only see as hateful.
“The fact that there are gay people would seem to refute this hypothesis.”
Homosexuality does not have religious text/tradition handed down to succeeding generations. Homosexuality is not a religion. Homosexuals and contracepting Christian heterosexuals are bedfellows.
Homosexuals and contracepting heterosexuals view companionship and org*sm as #1. Newborns? Almost never on their list.
“Homosexuality does not have religious text/tradition handed down to succeeding generations. Homosexuality is not a religion.”
It does, however, provide a counter-example. It is a community of practice that exists despite the fact that its members do not procreate. If you’d like another counter-example, one more explicitly religious, why are there still monks and nuns? They should have died out centuries ago, right?
I just can’t fathom the mindset you seem to be using. Sex is fun. Sometimes, people want to have fun without life-changing consequences. If there exists a perfectly safe way to do that, why not make use of it?
@Matt Prorok
It doesn’t matter how they classify particular physical acts or people that participate in them, what matters is that they’re forcing their views on people that are not a part of their religion.
Want to say that sex without offspring is sin? Go right ahead, I don’t care how you classify it, because I’m not a part of your peer group.
All we should ask is that they acknowledge that homosexuals deserve their rights just as heterosexuals do.
How about we ban legal marriages for everyone, make the legal/governmental procedure a “civil union” (for ALL people, straight, gay, asexual, whatever), and if you want a “marriage” you can have a little certificate printed by your church. Where’s the harm there?
[...] How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go: Great blog from Trevin Wax that aims to help believers clearly communicate what the Bible teaches about homosexuality. [...]
What is so infuriating about this piece is how compassionate and revolutionary the author thinks he is. *gag*
I have looked over all of the comments on this site, and I feel that I have some things to say. I am an evangelical Protestant, and while I have not had any friends who are personally gay, I have tried to think of this issue from the viewpoint of somebody who is and who, in fact, sees it as a part of his/her identity. At 24 years of age (well, as of tomorrow), I have never been in any kind of romantic relationship, so I have trouble thinking of my identity as being defined relationally, yet there have been many things that I have considered to be a part of myself that I have questioned and that I have had any often do have a lot of trouble letting go of. There are, for instance, aspects of my personality that I have considered to be a part of me that do not seem to harmonize with biblical standards. Yet, in the end, I know that we were each individually created by God with our own personality and with our own strengths and that the Spirit does grant us our unique gifts, but we all, by nature, have certain traits and tendencies that are the result of sin. And these tendencies are not the same in one person as they are in another. I am not saying that I can ever REALLY begin to imagine what anybody else has to go through or what anyone else has to struggle with, so I can really only speak for myself and speak according to what I believe that the Lord teaches us.
As for the issue of tolerance, I do think it is important to emphasize that there is nothing necessarily wrong with saying that something that somebody else is doing is sinful. I mean, everybody does that to some extent, and because I believe that God has given us His Word and that He does allow us all to understand it (progressively and often along different trajectories) that I am justified in arguing from what I believe that His Word says. At the same time, it’s not a matter of saying that I am more or less worthy of eternal life than you. It’s really a matter of coming back to the point that we are all in need of a Savior to free us both from the consequences of sin and from the power of sin in our lives. Sin destroys our internal harmony, our relationships with others, and our relationship with God, and we need God’s grace to counteract the results of sin and to restore harmony and inner purity.
Finally, I did like Trevin’s post as I have liked the majority of his posts in the past, and I did not find any of it to really be “hateful.” The issue of civil marriage did not even come up, so as much as one might think that the issue is somehow “implied,” it really isn’t. As for my position, I don’t think that the government can change anybody’s heart, and I don’t believe it should try to. If we were really consistent, we’d have to also say that marriages where the husband and wife don’t really love each other should be banned, but we all know that would be ridiculous. So, to be honest, I really am apathetic about the political issues. It would make virtually know difference in whom I voted for.
@Ryan, I really do appreciate you coming in as a gracious voice among a lot of (sometimes harsh) disagreement. Since I’ve been in your place before, I know how much a truly God-fearing Christian does want to love others unconditionally and love God above all. The idea that even a Christian’s tolerance can still appear “hateful” stems from the fact that a Christian who believes the Bible is the inerrant word of God does believe that homosexuality is sin. As long as you believe it is a sin (something worthy of going to hell), there will be gay people who find that accusation hateful and offensive, no matter how much you try to wrap up your disagreement in love. As a Christian, you might have to accept that taking such a position is simply going to put you in that camp. I do respect your opinion personally, though, and I thank you for bringing calm to this discussion.
[...] The Debate – Trevin Wax shares how he wishes the debate on sexuality could go, just once, when a Christian pastor ends up to television discussing the issue. Alas, if our children lose the crown of life, it will be but a small consolation that they have won the laurels of literature or art. —Charles Spurgeon [...]
Your forgot the 2nd part of that verse. He told the woman to go and sin no more!
Great stuff. Too bad the host didn’t finish by asking, “What must I do to be saved?”
That woulda been 10/10!
It would indeed be good to have a debate like this in public space because it shows how anti-humanitarian these beliefs are. Sexuality is innate, necessary, and beautiful. (Like many other inherently beautiful things it can be used for bad purposes, but that’s another story) It comes in many forms, and its purpose is not just procreation but also the maintenance of relationship.
Jesus was a person who enjoyed the physical side of life (cf. the Pharisees sneering at him for not being ascetic enough with respect to food and wine). Just because the bible says nothing about his sexuality – because honestly, that wasn’t at the core of his teachings in any way, it was about having an attitude of lovingkindness and respect towards all people in society, especially those belonging to marginalized groups such as publicans, prostitutes, etcetera… – doesn’t mean he didn’t have one.
[...] Last, but not least, I’m following a new (well new to me, at least) blog: Kingdom People, written by Trevin Wax. He breaks into Forum Friday with a post on the homosexuality debate. [...]
[...] Trevin Wax, “How I Wish The Homosexuality Debate Would Go.” [...]
[...] How I Wish The Homosexuality Debate Would Go – This is a great post by Trevin Wax. The title of it says it all. [...]
Wakeup”’We do not condem the Gay community, We offer repentance and the word to them,
And yes, homosexuality is a choice and is a sin against the word of Christ..
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be deceived: no sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals, thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, or swindlers will inherit God’s kingdom.
Neither will you because:
1) there is no god
2) if there is a god, the chances he caes abou you are remote
3) if he exists and he cares he’s unlikely to be the god of the bible
4) if he exists, cares and he is the god of the bible, the odds of your specific sect, founded less than 500 years ago, being the one that knows exactly how to please the fickle entity are negligible.
5) If he exists, cares, is the god of the bible, and he is exactly as your sect describes him, he can go catch a flying fig, because he’s an almightly bastard.
Just saying, dude!
@Gary
I don’t care if you call it sin or not, it’s your right, but in our secular society our laws should not enforce your opinions on people that are not a part of your group.
I could say that in my belief system, we find people that dislike homosexuals are guilty of “fart-knocking” and that you’re all “fart-knockers.” Just because I think you’re a “fart-knocker” doesn’t mean you care, and just because I think you’re a “fart-knocker” doesn’t mean I should get to keep you from enjoying the same rights and privileges I do in this country.
@Apatheist…
What “rights and privileges” are you referring to? If you’re referring to marriage, homosexual adults have the same right to marry as any heterosexual adults.
Please define your terms. Blessings!
Interesting dialogue. I find that much is misunderstand in Christianity, as a Jesus follower. We have heard it said, hate the sin, love the sinner. Do Christians hate sin, yes. Does God hate sin? The Old Testament bares witness to this. Let us consider why Christians, why God hates sin. With this term sin, let us consider this word close relatives to evil, wrong and immoral. When we consider these terms someone may be hurt, harmed, offended, etc. When this happens relationship is broken, damaged, in disrepair. Now whether we look at rape, lying, killing, adultery, child abuse, homosexuality; in these venues harm is done to a person, an individual. In rape a woman or man are forced to have sex, thus intense pain physiologically occurs. Let us look at lying, lying corrodes trust, respect. Adultery affects loyalty, trust, among many other issues. Killing, enough said, child abuse, enough said! Homosexuality, let us look at this, since this is the topic of concern in this debate. Homosexuality, let us consider the results, aids, lack of love, this is a false love. Why would anyone, whether heterosexual or homosexual say if they love someone, want to give another a disease? STL’s have been around for ions. Look at Hollywood for example, or rock stars Rock Hudson, Freddie Mercury of Queen. Sin, evil, wrong, is hated because of what it does. Consider a bully, should the behavior of a bully be tolerated? We dislike, hate the bullying, but love the person, and try to help them. Is bullying in one’s DNA? What makes a bully? Relationship breakdown! Alcoholics, is this a choice or in DNA? More than likely it is a learned behavior. One step further, if someone runs over your mother and kills her, would you hate the action or the behavior? Feelings run and rage like a river, and need guided. A friend dies of cancer, do you hate the friend for getting cancer or hate the cancer? God, in His sovereignty gives us choices, just look all throughout the Bible. Do we dislike, hate some choices people make – yes! Why, because they cause harm, are cruel, cause guilt, diminish the quality of life. Whether you are homosexual or not, how do you feel, what do you think when you are wronged, when you are sinned against? Do you hate what was done? And this is being intolerant! And Christians are vilified for this! Very interesting indeed!
“That means that any time I even lust after someone else, I am sinning. Jesus’ radical view of sexuality shows all of us up as sexual sinners, and that’s why He came to die.”
Most Christians don’t have the balls to lay the absurdity out in plain view. So I appreciate that you do.
Now that we can all see the absurdity, however, perhaps we can think harder about it (or at least harder than I did about it for my whole life as a Christian):
Scenario A) God decides to create humans with deviant sexual tendencies that nobody can avoid. Then he calls some of them “sinful,” and sends his son to die so we can be saved from the way he made us. Furthermore, nothing actually changes once this happens–everyone continues to inevitably lust for as long as the body lives. Finally, most people go to hell, and don’t get the benefit of being saved from these sinful desires.
Scenario B) We have such strong sexual desires because natural selection destroys the genes of people who don’t care about sex, and amplifies the genes of people who are sex-crazed. Those genes are in us. Sexual desire is strong because it is the driving force that got us all here–and because it’s so strong and emotionally charged (and indeed, the driving force behind much behaviour), it generates all the social stigmas, taboos and thorny moral issues we see today.
*
I used to think that Scenario B was really bleak, and refuse to believe it. But they’re both terribly bleak–it’s just that one of them actually makes sense, whereas the other doesn’t.
@drobbrown, it seems you have very little understanding of genetics, and these analogies are pretty atrocious.
Sheesh. Talk about jousting with a straw man. People, when you write BOTH SIDES of a “debate,” it’s NOT a debate. I know it must feel good to shoot down easy counterarguments that you’ve put in the mouths of your opponents. But that has zero intellectual credibility.
Try debating a real believer in gay rights. You may not win the debate, but you might learn some things, and be better positioned to teach some things.
[...] Wax on How I wish the homosexuality debate would go. This is a great [...]
I would like to add Matthew 15:19, where our Lord did indeed speak out against homosexuality,” For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:”
The word fornication means ‘ illicit sexual intercourse
a) adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
b) sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
c) sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,12
metaph. the worship of idols
a) of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols
From blueletterbible.org
My apologies, I hit the submit button before I was finished! The Lord stated what the results of this sin were in Matt.15:20, “These are [the things] which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.” So Christ did indeed speak out against homosexuality.
As a sinner saved by grace from this bondage, I am aware of all the loopholes. I do pray for the truth to go forth and for sinners to be saved.
Besides the religious aspects of this post gay sexuality goes against the design of the body.The male penis was not designed to be put into another man’s anus.The anus was designed to get rid of human waste.The anus doesn’t provide natural lube.When you think about it,it’s just gross.But we can justify anything we want to do.There are adult men who claim they were born to be attracted to young boys,but we know that’s not true.
If homosexuals insist they are born that way, why is a lesbian couple giving their 11 year old son hormone blockers so he can choose his gender? Here is the link http://www.christianpost.com/news/christians-speak-out-against-blocking-puberty-letting-boy-choose-his-gender-58547/
Lyn, it may come as a surprise to you, but homosexuals don’t go to homosexual college and study to pass some sort of homosexual exam and become certified homosexuals.
In the real world, there are lots of people who do lots of wacky stuff, some of them homosexuals, and some not.
Your comment makes as much sense as if I were to ask you “since christians believe the world was to end earlier today, why are you commenting on the internet instead of in heaven”.
Roberto,
As a former lesbian saved by God’s grace, I know why I, and all of fallen man do the things we do…to fulfill our forbidden sinful desires and insatiable appetite for all that is contrary to God’s Holy Word. James 1:13-14 clearly states who is to blame for sin, ‘but every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust’. We do not just stumble into sin, we choose it. As I have already stated in Matthew 15:19, sin originates in our hearts.
These two women have no business raising children, that story proves it. As for the homosexual march, there is an agenda by them to cram their sin down the throat of society and scream ‘tolerance’ all the while. God’s word is clear, those who practice homosexuality will not enter His kingdom (1 Cor.6:9-10). Christ died so we may live, not to sin but to serve Him, love Him and spend eternity with Him. Be reconciled to God, believe and trust in what Christ has done…His death, burial, and resurrection. He is the only hope for the sinner, after this life is over, where will you go?
Lyn, no, you don’t know why others do things. You may know why YOU did things.
Or rather, you believe that’s why you did things. I bet at the time you believed your reasons were different, and in the future, you may believe your reasons were yet other, different ones.
After this life is over I will not go anywhere, because I will cease to be. That’s why I try to do good in this life, since there is nothing else beyond it.
If I were to do good in the hopes of heavenly reward, it would be akin to my son’s being good in hopes of dessert. I have grown beyond those childish ways.
Hopefully some day you all will grow too.
BTW: agreed, those women are quite nuts. OTOH, so are many christians.
Lyn: BTW, you did not state anything in Matthew whatever or other. You are supposed to believe some guy called Matthew stated whatever that verse says.
Take care!
Roberto,
You believe everything happens by chance, or randomly? Ok.
Do you believe it is wrong to walk up to a stranger and randomly take their life?
If someone rapes your daughter or your wife, is this a random act and is it wrong?
Also, what is your basis for saying these women are nuts?
Well-said! Sin is a more comprehensive and insidious problem than we realize.
Justin,
The issue of homosexual marriage is one of theology. Ephesians 5 teaches that marriage was instituted by God as an earthly picture of the relationship between Christ and His church. Husband=Christ, wife=church. To allow homosexuals to enter into that covenant would be to confuse the theology behind marriage.
Also, as someone else mentioned, when Jesus was discussing marriage with the Pharisees (Matt. 19, I think), He said that “in the beginning God made them male and female. For this reason a *man* shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his *wife* and the two shall become one flesh.” Marriage was instituted by God for H glory, and it’s His prerogative who He wants to allow to participate in it. His Word is pretty clear about it.
[...] An imaginary TV interview about homosexuality and the Church, with a tenacious provocateur host and an uncommonly irenic pastor/interviewee. [...]
lyn: Oh, the randomness gambit! I don’t believe everything happens by chance. For example, I am not typing random words here, I am thinking and deciding what I type, then acting in consequence.
If someone raped my wife it may be random in the sense that the rapist was not specifically intending to rape my wife. It may be random in that the rapist may have decided to do it in the spot instead of having a frapuccino.
And in both cases it is wrong, not because some deity says so, but because we live in a society where we have an agreement that raping women is wrong, and because raping women is hurtful.
Your morality, on the other hand, is taken from a book. A book where a man offers his daughters to be raped in order to protect other men and is praised for it. I rank that between weird and not gentleman-like.
My morality is human, and earned. Yours is frail, and given. My virtue is obtained through work and deeds, yours is obtained through blindly following precepts handed to you without the possiblity of discussion. I consider mine a much improved version.
My basis for calling those women nuts is, their actions are insane.
Eric: you are for some reason ssuming the church(es) are the arbiters of what marriage is, or should be.
That may have worked in, say, France in 1250, but hardly is the case nowadays.
Follow-up:
“Host: With the vast sea of unbiblically divorced and remarried Christians in good standing at their local churches, these heterosexual couples are, undoubtedly, guilty of adultery, correct?
Since these remarried heterosexual families are acceptable to your churches, would you refuse membership to married born-again homosexuals who are also repentant of their sins?”
Answer: If by “married born-again homosexuals” (aka “flaming snowflakes”) you mean a homosexual couple who is still together and engaging in fornication, thus showing that they are not BIBLICALLY repentant (remember Judas claimed to be “repentant”), then yes, membership in a Biblical Christian church should be denied. Or, in short, your apparent paradox is no paradox at all if you define repentance as “turning away from sin and turning to Christ as Savior AND Lord.”
I would add that you have used an example that is not Biblically black and white (divorce and remarriage) to compare to an issue that is very clear in Scripture (same gender sex is sin). That is equivocating, a false analogy.
Cary you arguement on re-married Christians in good standing in the Church is in many ways falical because not all divorces are are due to as you seem to intimate. More divices are often due to selfishness on the part of one, sometimes two in the marriage, another big cause of divorce is due to a lack of trust between husband and wife, rather than infidelity, and the third greatest cause for divorce is emotional problems in one or the other, where one is unable to cope with everyday problems and pressures. Your contention that it is due to infidelity is merely a furpthy and a typical response from the leftist intolerance brigade. Infidelity is only the 4th greatest cause of Divorce, and whose fault is it that divorce is so prevelant. It is not the Churches, but interfering big Brother or Government who changed the way that divorce is handled making it so easy for those not fully committed to their marriage to opt out under the guise of irrecosnsilable difference. In my time I have rarely seen a Divorce that is truly due to an irreconcilable difference but more due to the reasons I have stated. If people could do away with the underlying causes irreconsilable differences would not be on the Radar.
Have you heard of the Gospel Principle of teaching Men correct Principals that they may Govern themselves, or to put it another way, be able to gain self Mastery over their own carnal desires and appetites
So Cary I would suggest you look to stop blaming the Churches for divorce and lie it at the feet of where it truly belongs, at the feet of individuals and the Governments for making it so easy for couples to divorce on a percieved whim rather than divorced on truth and responsibility.
With Man having free been given his agency by God, at the end of the day there is always a choice, no man or woman can say I have no choice, and all must be accountable for the consequences of any such choice. Whether we like to accept it or not we ourselves are responsible for our own Eternal Destinies, not God, he only put in place the Law and frameworks and as such is with Jesus Christ only the Judge and where required the dispenser of Mercy while satisfying the needs of Justice.
So Cary back to the drawing board for you to dream up some more lamebrained ideals and cockamany philosophies. All men are commanded to live in this World but not to be of it and it’s ill concieved perceptions and philosophies because they are no match for the Wisdom and Moral Laws of God.
[...] Am I an Attachment or Scheduling Mama @ Kingdom People {because quite frankly we need more spoken Truth!} [...]
It’s so true that in this debate anyone who is a Christian or doesn’t believe homosexuality is right is always judged and intolerant and even hateful. They are never given the chance to explain themselves or say the reason of their position. They are also condemned for the hateful crimes that happen to homosexuals. I, as a Christian wish that my stand on this topiccould be heard, like the pastors was in this scenario. It is a sin but so are many other things. But the good news is Jesus saves us from our sins.
@MR
For reasons unknown to me, I have very little sexual attraction to women but strong attraction to men.
============
Well, that is exactly the problem with most people who have developed a homosexual problem: lack of knowledge about their own personality and psychological development and dynamics.
The best thing any person with a homosexual problem could do is to investigate why they had the need to develop same-sex attraction in the first place and what hampers their complementary-sex attractions?
NARTH therapists and researchers have done a lot to investigate the question, and have produced a great deal of knowledge on the subject, contrary to the APA, which is a completely incompetent and unprofessional organization regarding the question.
@Tad
But we can justify anything we want to do.There are adult men who claim they were born to be attracted to young boys,but we know that’s not true.
=============
Exactly, but liberals are so afraid of the the truth to be known about the equally problematic causes for homosexuality that they must censor every piece of knowledge about the social, familial, and environmental contributing factors towards homosexuality or bisexuality.
That’s why many people with a homosexual problem (and their liberal fanatical supporters) say: I don’t know why I am homosexual –but so neither should you or anyone else–no one should know anything either, we should all be completely ignorant.
No one wants an ignorance policy shoved down society’s throat concerning pedophilia causes, but liberals are desperate to keep everyone ignorant when it comes to homosexuality.
You can’t normalize homosexuality if you start moving away from ignorance and becoming knowledgeable about its causing and contributing factors. You are then forced to face how many dysfunctional or egotistical or problematic factors lie at the base of the development of a homosexual or bisexual psychology.
No one is born homosexual or bisexual, but liberals cannot face this most basic human fact.
@Karen–
On the other hand, if I find the love of my life, she returns the feeling, we vow to spend the rest of our lives together, we do so faithfully, and we enjoy each other intimately and sexually, who is harmed?
=============
The list of harm is so long, but just to continue with the point made in my previous posts, the question is why did you need to develop sexual desires for another woman? Secondly, what impairs you from feeling attraction to men?
The greatest harm done by your ideology is that it is an ideology fundamentally constructed on denial and ignorance. Such questions may never be asked or investigated exactly because the answers will show you were not born determined to have a homosexual psychology, and only became so because you were not able to develop a healthy, wholesome attraction to men.
The most important question to be asked here is why.
============
I find the love of my life, she returns the feeling, we vow to spend the rest of our lives together, we do so faithfully, and we enjoy each other intimately and sexually, who is harmed?
What if you don’t? What if the other woman with a homosexual problem doesn’t return your feelings? What if you are not faithful? Why hold up this example when a great number of homosexual or bisexuals (the latter, who by definition are not exactly faithful) are not anything like this? Why not talk about all the harms involved then?
@Alessandra
Your prejudice to this issue is bleedingly obvious here, with the way you sling the label “homosexual problem”.
Why are you so determined to believe that people who are gay are psychologically damaged? There is a long list of homosexual behavior observed in nature; it certainly makes more sense that being gay is a natural state than to guess that a bonobo chimp was molested, or became spiteful of lady chimps through rejection or some other nonsense. You throw out the APA on this matter essentially because you don’t like their conclusions, despite the training and research involved in coming to those conclusions.
Science isn’t afraid of understanding why people are gay, and more than it is afraid of understanding why people get sick or why some people have blue eyes. Just because there isn’t a consensus of the cause doesn’t mean they’re not looking, it just means that they’re not as interested in jumping to conclusions. Statements like “No one is born homosexual or bisexual [...]” is frankly unsubstantiated, and the implications are the cause of quite a lot of the hate that gay people suffer from. I would posit that if there is a “homosexual problem”, then THAT is it.
Finally; as someone who knows some bisexuals, I take offense to this slander: “[bisexuals] by definition are not exactly faithful”. That is an old, totally unfounded belief. Yes, bisexuals are attracted to men and women; no, this DOES NOT MEAN that they need to have multiple lovers. They’re no more interested in multiple partners than any heterosexual people are (which again, varies from person to person).
While the rest of your rhetoric is incredibly biased and ignorant, that particular statement is outright insulting and prejudiced.
Where did your moral beliefs come from Roberto? Why is rape wrong, and why are the lesbians who have the 11 year old nuts?
Another question for you Roberto, why do you spend so much time on a Christian blog?
Lyn:
I will take the liberty of answering both your posts here. It makes things easier.
Rape is wrong to me because it hurts a person, and humans valuable to me. Also, as I mentioned already, there is an agreement in our society about what is right and what is wrong.
Since in my world view humans are the most valuable part of existence, reaching this specific decision, “rape is wrong” is very easy.
OTOH, are you claim christians do not reach this conclusion on their own and need external supernatural guidance in order not to rape other people? I seriously doubt that if you had not read the bible you would be raping people.
As for why I spend so much time in a christian blog:
1) It’s not so much time. I get email when someone comments, and it takes me like, 1 minute to read the comment, including answering if I want to (I touch type and the christian discourse is so shallow it doesn’t require major brain effort to answer).
2) I fight confirmation bias.
3) You lot are quite amusing, it’s like seaworld but without the fishy stink.
4) I enjoy expressing opinions clearly and seeing what comesback after it gets filtered by intentional blindness (going in) and dogma (going out).
5) Sometimes, I have managed to convince people of minor things.
6) If in the future some digital archeologists finds this page, I want him to that western civilization did not consist solely of christians spouting condescending noise to each other.
I could go on, but I will not. On the other hand, Lyn, why are you spending so much time talking to me? Let me introduce myself!
I am a married man (To a woman, just in case you wondered!) I have a cute kid. I do well economically. I live very very far away from you. I am an atheist. I don’t mind what you christians do in your sunday club. I have not intentionally harmed anyone that I can recall. You fully expect me to burn in hell.
Which one of those statements sounds wildly out of place?
Roberto,
I appreciate your answering my questions. I find it strange you think an agreement in society determines right from wrong; obviously a rapist or murderer does not agree with you. What causes some to rape, murder, steal, cheat, lie etc.?
Can a list of do’s and don’ts keep a society from spiraling out of control?
Now here is a personal question directed at you, if you do wrong, for instance, view porn, lie to a loved one, speak rudely to someone, do you feel any guilt, shame or remorse?
where do we draw the line as to what is right and what is wrong? who determines such?
Lyn:
Of course there are disagrements about what is right and what is wrong. For instance, I don’t consider watching porn to be a bad thing. I in fact consider it less harmful than watching a wrestling show.
As a society, we reach agreements, we achieve consensus, and we write them as laws. Those laws are the expression of what we think is the difference between good and evil.
And if you break those laws, you can expect to suffer a punishment for it, and by that, I mean a verifiable punishment, which at least tries to be proportional to the crime, even if the US is working hard to make that not be the case.
So, who determines what’s right and wrong? We all do. And since I am breaking the rules of the society I belong to, and going against what I was taught, I indeed feel remorse and guilt.
However, it should be pretty obvious to anyone that has met a small child, remorse and guilt are hardly natural responses to lying, cheating or hitting someone with a stick. They are learned responses.
So, going back to a question I asked already: Do you believe that if you were not a christian, and had not read the bible, you would go around raping and murdering? And the only thing preventing that is your religion?
I don’t think you would. Or at least I hope you won’t! Imagine if this small conversation caused you to lose faith for a minute and made you, say, pet your cats in an inappropiate manner. That would be a heavy burden in my conscience.
I believe that all of mankind is born evil – we lie, steal, cheat deceive, covet, have immoral thoughts and actions because we are wicked and sinful. God gave all a concsience, that is why we have this built in ‘right from wrong’ knowledge that you say society as a whole decides. There has to be a basis for attaining the knowledge of good and evil, that basis is a God given conscience. It is when unbelievers like yourself suppress that truth that society runs amuck…immorality, greed, corruption, addiction, the destruction of family as designated by God.
Two things Roberto, why did you consider it necessary to enter into a covenant of marriage with your wife if you deny God’s existence? Also, why is porn okay but not pedophilia?
Why would you need to view porn, is your wife not enough? Porn is a way for men and women to satisfy their lust. If you love someone the way God designed for a man and woman to love, there would be no need for lustful desires.
My beliefs are based on the word of the Living God, a God who is merciful but will not let sinful man go unpunished for their wickedness. It is inherent truth that manifests itself as foolishness to those who are perishing. God left His mark, proof of His creative power and His existence in His creation…the sun, moon, stars, mountains, oceans, rivers, lakes, deserts, flowers, birds, animals, fish and lastly…man himself speaks of a divine Creator. You will not comprehend this unless God grants you understanding.
Your denial of God certainly does not make His existence null and void, it just means you will one day face His wrath.
Here is a true testimony in the death of an athiest….
The noted French atheist, Voltaire, died a frightening death. Let me quote for you the exact record as published, “When Voltaire felt the stroke that he realized must terminate in death, he was overpowered with remorse. He at once sent for the priest, and wanted to be ‘reconciled with the church.’ His infidel flatterers hastened to his chamber to prevent his recantation; but it was only to witness his ignominy and their own. He cursed them to their faces; and, as his distress was increased by their presence, he repeatedly and loudly exclaimed, ‘Begone! It is you that have brought me to my present condition. Leave me, I say; begone! What a wretched glory is this which you have produced to me!’
“Hoping to allay his anguish by a written recantation, he had it prepared, signed it, and saw it witnessed. But it was all unavailing. For two months he was tortured with such an agony as led him at times to gnash his teeth in impotent rage against God and man. At other times in plaintive accents, he would plead, ‘O, Christ! O, Lord Jesus!’ Then, turning his face, he would cry out, ‘I must die-abandoned of God and of men!’
“As his end drew near, his condition became so frightful that his infidel associates were afraid to approach his bedside. Still they guarded the door, that others might not know how awfully an infidel was compelled to die. Even his nurse repeatedly said, ‘For all the wealth of Europe I would never see another infidel die.’ It was a scene of horror that lies beyond all exaggeration. Such is the well-attested end of the one who had a natural sovereignty of intellect, excellent education, great wealth, and much earthly honor.” (Dying Testimonies of Saved and Unsaved by Rev. S B Shaw, pp. 49-50.)
Dear Lyn:
Oh, the famous deathbed conversions! You really need to improve your reading material. According to witnesses that actually were at Voltaire’s deathbed, his last words were: “Now, now, my good man, this is not the time for making enemies.” It was his response to a priest at the side of his deathbed, asking Voltaire to use the precious few moments left to renounce Satan.
As for blaming me for the dissolution of family, immorality, greed, corruption, and so on… I plead not guilty. I live a fairly decent life.
Again, I ask you the third time: if you had not read the bible, or did not believe in it, would you be raping and murdering people? In that case, I posit myself as your moral superior, since not having read it nor believed it, I do not do those things.
On the other hand, if that is not the case, then the requirement of god as source of morality is proven unnecessary and excessive, and your argument falls flat on its face.
Therefore, your choice, either god is not necessary as a source of morality, or you are a much worse person than I and I don’t deserve your disapproval.
As for porn and my wife not being enough: why are you assuming she is not there and/or not watching? I love her and I lust after her. Also, it’s a lot of fun.
Also, if you have to ask why I consider porn ok, and not pedophilia, well, I think it should be obvious based on our previous exchanges. I will be happy to repeat myself if you really need it, but I suggest you just move up a bit in the page and reread.
Do you notice that I have been calm and rational, friendly and relaxed this whole exchange, while you, in the last post, seem half way to bursting a vein?
This is because I *am* calm and at peace with myself and others, while you are descending into a frenzy, throwing at me promises of eternal punishment, and calling me wicked.
From where I am standing, you seem to be suffering a great deal. If your church has a counseling service, please ask for an appointment. You seem to be a really, really angry person.
roberto,
First of all, reading my bible is NOT why I am a Christian, I am saved by the supernatural power of a mighty God, Jesus speaks of this in John 3:3. Now, as for what I would be doing if God had not saved me, I would be doing just as you are, lusting, sinning, and denying there is a God. That is what I did before God saved me…I willfully sinned, just like you are doing.
I have responded to where morals come from…your conscience. The more you
deny God’s truth ( you being society in general) the more you fall into a society gone mad. I was not blaming you solely for the downward spiral of society, it is tons of dead in sin sinners like you, who deny there is a God, suppress the truth, and go headlong into sin. Your viewing porn is just as sinful as the pedophile’s
actions (Matthew 5:28).
As for Voltaire, his was no deathbed conversion, instead he died a miserable
agonizing death. He was terrified, you obviously did not read the article. You too
will be terrified, unless God shows you mercy. I pray He does. You can talk all big and tough, most do until they, like Voltaire, are on their deathbed.
As for your charge that I am angry, or irrational simply because I give you God’s truth, you are dead wrong, your soul is at stake and you are blinded by your own foolishness. Your constant visits here definitely mean something, there is a reason you frequent this blog. Athiests typically do not hang around Christian blogs, what would be the point?
Roberto, I have given you truth, Christ died to save the ungodly. You have no hope when your life is thru, unless you cry out to God for mercy. May He save you while you still have breath in your lungs.
As I can tell from this accusation by you -From where I am standing, you seem to be suffering a great deal. If your church has a counseling service, please ask for an appointment. You seem to be a really, really angry person – my words are getting under your skin. God’s truth does just that, you will either cry out for mercy or you will lash out in sarcasm and/or anger.
Any further exchange is pointless, I pray for the redemption of your soul, for it is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God (Hebrews 10:31)
Time to move on Roberto, i have no desire to stoop to childish levels and throw out silly accusations, time is precious and slips away silently.
May the Great God of heaven and earth look upon you and be gracious to you
Dear Lyn:
It’s mildly amusing that you can say “Your viewing porn is just as sinful as the pedophile’s actions (Matthew 5:28).” and with a straight face, in the same post say that when I said “you seem to be in pain” I was “lash[ing] out in sarcasm and/or anger.”
As I already explained, I don’t actually frequent this blog. I just commented on this article (which I reached via a link from somewhere else) and subscribed to the comments.
So, unless someone replies, I am not here, and I don’t see it. In fact, I have not even bothered reading any other pages in the site.
Also, why shouldn’t atheists frequent christian blogs? Your lot is supposed to be welcoming, and appreciative of the chance to show us the light and truth of religion, right?
As for Voltaire’s death, you say “you obviously did not read the article.” If you are referring to the book by Shaw, you are absolutely right, I have not read it. However, I must tell you: what the book describes is not true in this case. There are contemporary descriptions of Voltaire’s death, by people who where actually there, and it’s not like that.
Again, you seem to have a really hard time answering a very simple question. Were you not a christian, would you be a rapist or murderer? Is your christianity what’s holding you back from that? It’s *easy* to answer! I would expect most reasonable people to just say “no”. But you seem unable to do it.
And finally, sorry, but it’s not you who says when I speak or not, what I speak of or not. If the owner of the blog came and said “Hey, Roberto, stop rattling Lyn”, I would show proper respect for, shall we say, the owner of the premises, and stop.
But you, dear Lyn? You are just a commenter like me. A commenter, I must say, that is starting to look rather agitated by my simple and friendly words, for reasons I can’t quite grasp.
I will not be praying for you because it would be hypocrisy to do so, but hey, I wish you peace!
Lyn:
When you state that your morals come from your conscious, you are telling us that morality is intuitive. But then you quote the Bible for specific Moral tenants (like pedophilia being equivalent to watching pornography), implying that morality is dictated.
If both of those things are true, then there would be a greater natural consensus on lots of morally ‘grey’ things, including pornography, homosexuality, blasphemy, and slavery. And additionally, you are effectively declaring that anyone who does not agree with you, regardless of if they (think) they are saved (or are otherwise believers), that they are denying God.
You are claiming that your interpretation of the Bible (which you feel is correct) is the only valid interpretation; thus anyone who disagrees is not Christian. I would question that implied authority; you are passing judgement on others, something I imagine only God is qualified to do.
Perhaps better than average, but still with many of the same fallacies. “Well, we really don’t know for certain about sexual attraction being innate and set from birth. All we have is the testimony of people who say that they’ve experienced same-sex desires since childhood.” Nope. We have also the testimony of people who say they’ve experienced other-sex attraction since childhood as well.
This sort of thinking can only come from those who are innately bisexual or homosexual, but repress the homosexual attraction. For most people, there’s no way one (innately heterosexual, most people) could “chose” to be attracted (it’s almost an oxymoron, attraction is almost by definition something that happens automatically, instinctively, not a conscious decision. “Ah, there’s a woman. She has a highly symmetrical face, her body is in shape, therefore I’m going to voluntarily feel attracted to her, as I’m not in this moment, before I’ve made this evaluation and the decision”) to someone of the same sex, just as no one could simply decide to feel appetite for some food one does not like. And this one should be somewhat easier, but still does not happen, even though the taste for cuisines is by far not as hard-wired as heterosexual attraction, which is the overwhelming rule all over the animal kingdom.
Funnily enough, some gay/etc activists (those who speak against the “male-female dichotomy”, saying we’re in a “post male-female dichotomy era” or something) “and “anti-gay” activists seem to be the only ones who believe otherwise, that one pretty much voluntarily chooses to whom they feel attracted. All of them either never consider the flaw in their thinking, failing to notice how their own heterosexually seems hard-wired from birth, “chosing” otherwise being impossible regardless of any religious thought even crossing their mind, or never seem to consider that their sexual preferences, even if it’s “no preference one way or another” may be hardwired, then think everyone else is the same, when the vast majority are heterosexuals who simply can’t consider “acting homosexual” by choice, without feeling repugnance by the thought — even if they have nothing against gays or lesbians themselves.
And the whole thing about Jesus forgiving the adulterous woman is probably an interpolation anyway. And some people say that it’s not that stoning is not in the rules anymore, only that in that particular situation the rules were not satisfied.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsuzoreoXb1qitjhco1_500.jpg
Edb,
Right and wrong come from God, the concsience is what is pricked when you do wrong. This is from Romans 1…
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
When God’s truth is suppressed, society goes amuck, everything goes as man toots his own horn and dictates out of his own corruptness what is acceptable, as if society can overrule God.
I continue on, I never said my interpretation is the only correct one, and would appreciate it if you would refrain from false accusations EDB. The only way anyone can understand God’s word is if He opens your understanding, read Luke 24:45.
John 3:3, ‘I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again’. For a biblical explanation of this read Ezekiel 36:26-27.
This post concerns homosexuality, let’s get back to the topic at hand.
Dear lyn: You say “I never said my interpretation is the only correct one” and immediately say “The only way anyone can understand God’s word is if He opens your understanding”
Allow me to explain why that seems like a contradiction in terms to other members of this argument who are, perhaps, more interested in formal logic than you are.
You, of course, claim to understand the word of God, and that Luke is correct, therefore you are claiming that your understanding comes from god himself, because he “opened your understanding”.
Since it is obvious that god would not reveal contradictory “correct” understandings, and yours comes from god,your understanding would, indeed, be the only correct one.
In short, dear Lyn, you are claiming that your interpretation is the correct one, and that there can only be one correct interpretation, therefore, you are claiming that your interpretation is the only correct one.
So, when you say ” I never said my interpretation is the only correct one”, you are wrong, or lying. I will give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you had not worked out the implications of what you wrote, and that you were, therefore, just very wrong.
Lyn:
The Bible also states that Blasphemy is an unforgivable; the gravest of sins. I find that rather incredible — that to curse God’s name is a greater sin then murder. The Book endorses sexism, slavery, selective murder, and all sorts of physical abuse that should turn the stomach of any modern person, Christian or otherwise.
“When God’s truth is suppressed, society goes amuck”
Has society gone amuck? I’m sure you’ll jump on saying ‘yes’, but let’s stop and look. Crime (especially violent crime) has been declining for years in most of the world. The standard of living has been rising similarly. We are living longer, happier lives in general.
So what has gone amuck? And before you say anything — are you sure things are getting worse, and it’s not just ‘Golden Age’ thinking? If not, are you merely railing against the (perceived) increase in sexuality in western culture?
This brings us right back to the article at hand; there is no small number of people who think that there is nothing wrong with Homosexuality, and we believe that God doesn’t have any issue with it either. And what I gather from the way you’ve been responding in these comments is that if someone disagrees with you (at least, on homosexuality) that you believe they are “filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents”.
What I am saying is that I do not believe it is anyone’s place to come to those conclusions about another person. No one can be certain of the true intention of God; you must follow your faith as your heart guides you. No one benefits from demonizing and discriminating behavior.
[...] Wax, on his amazing blog, made a post a few days ago titled “How I Wish The Homosexuality Debate Would Go“. Here’s a few excerpts. “Pastor: I think Jesus’ teaching on sexuality shows us [...]
@ EDB, If you get a chance you should take a look at Paul Copan’s book, Is God A Moral Monster.
@ Others, Copan has also done some good work on inerrancy.
That said -
@ManyOthers…
I think you can agree with the content of the blog post, but you cannot and ought not to have a reaction, such as “I enjoyed it” or “I am glad you posted it”.
If anything this issue is a cause for sadness and should push you to pray unceasingly.
“Be joyful in hope,
patient in affliction,
fervent in prayer.”
~ Romans 12:12
Its not an opinion its Gods word.All will face Him, no matter what your belief…what was, what is, and what is to come is Christ.
Dear Gary: Indeed that is your opinion.
[...] Wax had a pretty terrific post titled How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go. Wax envisions a very clear-headed brother on a show where a host tries haplessly to land the usual [...]
[...] In one of his best pieces to date, Trevin Wax imagines a somewhat ideal media interview with a pastor on the homosexual debate. [...]
If anyone thinks Gods word is somones opinion, that person has alot to loose, for eternity.
You make sure that your thoughts are 100%, absolutely right, no error, not your opinion, true fact, no what if??.
Still…God will accept you into His eternal kingdom..all you need to do is ask and receive, it is not given it is offered.
[...] Trevin Wax’s Blog. This is exactly what I wish would happen as well [...]
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me. (1 Timothy 1:8-11 NIV)
Honestly I’m so sick of this debate. Here it is clear in the bible for believers & non-believers to see. Take it or leave it, just be sure of one thing, everyone will be accountable to god when they die, so make up ur mind here & now whether to take up the cross & follow Christ leaving your old ways & habits behind or be closed to the fact that there is sin in each one of us which is clear when u take a second to look at your/my heart in comparison to christs.
All this arguing and debate . . . look how long this thread is. And all this hate, violence and arguing in the world over this issue, abortion, and so many other things that religion seems to bring divide to. And who’s spiritual beliefs are “correct” and who’s are not? Every devoted person to every belief will tell you they are right? I was once a Christian but these days I don’t know what to believe anymore. I’m so sick of all the bickering and hate that it drums up. It seems as if there was a God, He could have been a lot more clear on all this stuff and left us with a bit more to go on than what we have in the manner with how it was supposedly given to us. Things should be more clear God, I’m sorry. Even the best of theologians and thousands of years of study do not bring agreement to it all. How is mere mortal man supposed to make sense of it all? I just don’t get it anymore.
[...] button issue nowadays. But it seems that the discussion surrounding it too often misses the mark. Here is a great example of how a discussion of these issues could go from a Christian perspective. I appreciate the clear [...]
@Harlin J.
Keep your faith, Christ was, He is, and He will come again.
All this trbulation was prophecied by Him. Every time a Christian states a point on Gods word there is a lot of persecution. If you go liberal no one seems to care.
Walk with Christ no mater what. He will be there for you. Read the book of John for starters..
God Bless you.
Christians, it is not necessary to attempt to convince non-Christians about the truth of homosexuality, nor is it appropriate. We are not sent out to be the moral police of the world. We are sent out to share the gospel message – that is all. When a person accepts our beloved Nazarene, then, and only then, can he or she possibly be in a position to understand His truths. The only people we should be preaching these types of messages to are our fellow Christians who already have the foundation in their souls. We muddy the waters and lead people to lose focus when we do otherwise, and it is absolutely impossible to convince someone of truth who has no foundation of truth within their hearts and souls. Please – stop. Get back to the core message – Jesus Christ Lord and Savior. Focus on righteousness only when the person has been transformed… because, as the true believer knows, this is the only possibility for righteousness at all.
Religiously:
It’s the teachings of our lord Jesus that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Socially:
It’s not that it’s bad, they would not be doing nothing socially wrong (like robing or killing someone). However to support homosexuality maybe harmful for the country and its economic stability since children are needed to replace older generation and that it’s only possible through heterosexual relationships.
(Science can create babies in pitry dishes but that is another subject since it involves when does human life begins and if its acceptable to “play” with human life like that).
So economically its good that if a teenager or even an adult starts to have homosexual desires to be discourage of them (and not force them out or be excluded as a contagious desiese)
Ps: sorry if my English was not the best since it’s not my native language)
Amen!! I think it really hits the nail on the head the example of men lusting after women other than their spouse not defining themselves as polygamists.
I do appreciate the tenor of this piece but I think it perpetuates one central flaw: while arguing against a ‘gay’ identity, it says there are gay people. The key issue here is one of behavior, not of essential nature. A so-called gay person is a heterosexual person who performs homosexual acts. The gay identity was invented to put on the cloak of civil rights associated with immutable traits such as sex or skin color.
Second problem is that it does not fully answer the question of why the focus on homosexuality. The main reason is not that it an especially bad sin but because it is one of the sins (along with abortion) that our culture is not just tolerating as other sins but is positively glamorizing. Whoa unto him who calls good evil and evil good.
OMG! Was this real? Is there a video of this?? HAHAHAHAHA!
If someone was actually was on Piers’s show and said that, they would have gotten owned!! Talk about public humiliation. That’s as bad as saying raw milk is unhealthy!
OMG! Was this real? Is there a video of this?? AMEN!
First of all: How can a person hate gays? They are so nice!
Secondly, it is wrong to tell someone that they can’t love someone who is their same gender.
Third of all: Jesus loves everyone! So all true Christians should too!
People don’t need to be reminded of this. They should already know it.
I so agree with you. Thanks for voicing that.
Very well written article which a lot of people seem to be missing the point of. This is one Christian encouraging other Christians to speak and act from a place of love and to NOT consider homosexuals any differently then themselves. He’s not judging others, he’s calling himself and every other Christian a sinner too. He’s putting every single human being in the same category and calling them equals in the eyes of God. And he’s calling Christians to realize it and live it out. This is a good thing!
People claim Christians are intolerant because of their beliefs but people are also intolerant of Christians. Allow this man to encourage his brothers and sisters to respond in love, to an issue that is continually thrown at Christians. And if you disagree, fine. Certainly part of the freedoms countless Americans have died for allows us to have differing opinions doesn’t it?
Yes, people call themselves Christians and behave badly. They have killed and raped and assaulted in the name of Jesus…and in the name of Allah, and in the name of Ares…and in the name of Satan…and in the name of insanity and any other scapegoat they think they can dump their responsibility on. In every group of the human race, there are people who behave in such a manner than the entire group becomes tarnished.
Christians are tarnished by some horrible people who kill and assault those who have or perform abortions; politicians are tarnished by some who have been completely dishonest and vile; women are tarnished by some women on ‘reality’ TV shows that portray them as conniving, vengeful, disrespectful, gossips, adulterers, and husband-stealers; men are tarnished by some men who use their physical strength to dominate, rape, and assault women; adolescents are tarnished by media reports of them being utterly apathetic, ungrateful, lazy, selfish, rude, ‘spongers’; the Ku Klux Klan tarnishes the reputation of Caucasians…do I need to go on?
The bottom line is, this article is about recognizing that especially in this area which has been a source of strife because of the ongoing political debates, Christians have failed to show love and tolerance and the author is reminding them of that and calling them to a higher standard. We are all the same, none of us is any better than another and life difficult and it sucks sometimes and we all need to just embrace each other as human beings, share support, show love and live our lives the best that we can.
‘we really don’t know for certain about sexual attraction being innate and set from birth. All we have is the testimony of people who say that they’ve experienced same-sex desires since childhood. Christianity teaches that all people are born with a bent toward sin. It’s possible that some people will have a propensity toward alcohol abuse or angry outbursts, while others may have a propensity toward other sins.’
Hmm I see, so no judging there then. Homosexuality is just an inconvienient tendency like alcholism. I praise the Lord I have been free of fundamental christianity for thirty years now, and every year since has been sweeter, since I was born again at the age of twenty and finally threw off the chains of self hatred, condemnation of everyone else who wasn’t a christian, and a belief systen based on the ethnocentrism of western monotheism.
Intrestingly enough, my brother, sister, and father have all recently decided to leave New Frontier churches because of their intolerance of any other views than those of their leaders – who are I notice without exception male. Of course homophobia, the fear of homosexuality, is predominantly experienced by men who feel that their position is in some way threatened by other men. An all male leadership would be particulary susceptible to this tendency I would imagine. The extraordinary amount of time spent on the dicussion of this topic by men in positions of authority in the church – and not only New Frontier ones – can surely only be explained by the fact that they can’t leave it alone, it draws them to it like moths to a flame.
Why do you think that interviewers always ask you about it? It’s because you spend so much time talking about it, you are obsessed with it. It is a shame that Jesus didn’t talk more about the evils of child labour, pollution of the environment for profit, or bankers bonuses, but – hey ho – they arent in the Bible so lets just bang on and on about men having sex with eachother.
Besides clearly sharing the truth with clarity, the other stunning thing about this “interview” is that both people remained calm. So many times we Christians have difficulty responding with grace and instead come off as judgmental and unloving, thus providing more ammunition and seeming hypocritical. It’s not as hard as we think to be compassionate without compromising. As a former struggler who now helps others walk free, I wish more Christians could share the truth with compassion.
[...] Mensagem | Tags: graça divina, Jesus, MensagemVi este texto lá no iPródigo, que traduziu do sr Trevin Wax. Coloco apenas um trecho aqui, para ler o texto todo você vai precisar ir lá para o [...]
What you say about Jesus is not true. Jesus does care how we handle ourselves sexually, because he had to carry the weight of all of these sins regardless of the specific type. He felt the spiritual separation from His Father that was meant to be the consequence for each person because of our sin.
My previous comment was directed to Apathiest’ comment about Jesus not caring what the genitals are of the person we love.
Mary:
I’ve been hands off here for a little while (still looking in to a recommended book), but this reminds me of another question that I believe is important here: why is it sin?
We know that God abhores sin, and that we as humans are sinful. Sure. But why is any particular sin… sinful? Moral relativism suggests that causing harm is a reliable measure in which we can identify immoral activity, but the Bible is moral absolute; things are immoral because we are told that they are.
So the question raised is — are sins bad because of some sort of consequence that we may not be aware of (such as in the case of homosexuals) and they are declared sins because God is protecting us? Or, are sins bad because the fly against God’s subjective morality?
In the case of the former, that God is a messenger of absolute morality, could we not ask for moral clarity and revelation? I imagine many people would feel far more comfortable understanding why God forsakes their sin.
In the latter case, is it not possible that God’s judgement may change in light of changing society?
@Thom Hunter: Both persons remained calm because there were no two persons. It’s just one person throwing softballs and accepting replies unchallenged.
Of course, in such cases, people would remain calm. It’s like wondering why a plant in a hothouse is green in winter. It’s because it’s easy.
I recognise so many of my friends in this piece. This, more than anything else I have read, points to some very deep issues that prevent Christianity from accepting homosexuality as a potential fulfilling way of being.
The prime issue is that Christianity sees man (and woman) and world as essentially evil (Christians would say ‘fallen’). They wouldn’t say it, but Christian belief hangs off of this particular belief. Because this is a hidden article of faith, salvation makes sense. And because of this belief, they can brush aside all arguments in favour of accepting homosexual people and practice into their communities by saying that these arguments only reveal the fallen nature of humankind. This is where we run up against a brick wall that has sadly blinded many on both sides to any form of *real* compassion.
What this pastor doesn’t seem to realise is where homosexuality differs from alcoholism, poly-relationships and drug addictions. All of the latter things actively and obviously detract from a person’s life. You can see it when it happens – and the community’s judgement of them is not required to reveal this damage. Homosexuality is different. Homosexuality does not actually hurt, emotionally or physically, either the lovers or the community and family around them. It is only the strong negative reactions by the community that bring about the depression, the angst and the rejection felt by most of us. There is nothing inherent about same-sex sexual, long lasting, monogamous relationships that destroys people’s lives, or prevents them from flourishing.
To counter this, Christianity says, ‘Ah, but you’re wrong! Homosexuality creates a rift between you and God.’ My question then is, ‘What kind of God are we worshiping?’ Is He the type that has set in place an arbitrary set of moral laws (such as those against homosexuality) that would ensure that certain otherwise innocuous acts would offend Him deeply? This seems to me to be a lesser god, one who is petty and insecure. The way I understand God to be (God, not god), is one who is great enough to handle the minor difference we churn up with love, compassion and understanding. I do not see why homosexual sexual relationships (if they are firm, loving and committed) are verboten – taboo and unquestionably wrong in the eyes of God.
Ultimately, as well written and clever as this piece is, it only reveals (and does not deal with) the issues at the heart of the debate. I think Christianity needs to defend these claims if we are to take their taboo seriously: Why ought we believe that humankind is fallen, rather than just complex? Why ought we believe that homosexuality is part of this fallen nature? Why ought we believe that God truly finds this offensive (while still being the loving God we claim Him to be)? Why ought we believe that homosexuality damages people, or prevents them from flourishing?
E.D.B.
Jesus said….. go unto the WORLD and preach the gospel to EVERY creature.
You my friend…. are one of the every creatures. Jesus told us to preach to people so that they might also be saved.
@l No he didn’t.
E.B.D.
There really is no difference on the sins we do. God (Jesus) said that if you’ve done ONE of these, you have done them ALL!
I could make a case that it’s ok to be an axe murderer if you’d like:
Someone murdered my family and I ‘felt’ God let me down and I have this feeling and I can’t let go of it and I don’t think I should. I mean, God gave me this feeling right?
Wouldn’t he want me to exact revenge on this person? So, I should take care of by murdering the person with an axe.
But to go to the human question of why God made these ‘sexual’ rules?
1. God said so. Yes, sounds demonstrative and all that, but in the end… that’s why. We don’t set the world in motion, maintain it in any real way even though we may like to think we do.
2. People die from sexually perversion
3. People are not procreated from sexual perversion
4. Homes are NOT better off because of sexual perversion.
5. Divorce comes from sexual perversions
6. Guilt associated from the sexual perversion permeates the person, thereby depressing them
There are many other reasons why. Everyone (including yourself)understands why. You understand because you are not a stupid person.
The issue is: are you going to subject yourself to God’s rules or not.
hey robert… are we going to throw snowballs and act as children?
yes he did
@l
Well, at least I spell your name correctly.
It’s a perfectly valid argument, even if it’s one you don’t like. You said “Jesus said [blah blah]“. I say he did not.
Your evidence he said that? It’s in the bible.
If we go by that standard, I have here a copy of a book, about the same age than the bible’s oldest bits (give or take a millenium), that says your soul will be weighed after you die by a hippopotamus-headed god. Says so *right here*.
So, sorry, you are just asserting the rules. That doesn’t mean the rules apply, or even exist, only that you are claiming it.
So, since I don’t accept your basic premise that “Jesus” and “God” (in the sense of supernatural beings described by the bible) exist, no, he did not say that.
Maybe someone called something similar to “Jesus” said something like that in the middle east 2000 years ago or so. I am fairly sure someone also said something like “hey, that is a cute camel”. Doesn’t mean I must consider camels cute.
Re: I
“There really is no difference on the sins we do. God (Jesus) said that if you’ve done ONE of these, you have done them ALL!”
As I said earlier, the Bible also states that Blasphemy is an unforgivable sin. If doing any sin is like doing all sins, then God either forgives all or forgives none — do you see where I’m coming from here? These are the sorts of interpretations that make me wary to anyone who claims absolute understanding of the Bible, and more over why I believe that God’s morality must be more complex and understanding than a list of rules. This goes back to earlier in the conversation about sin and morality as defined by the idea of ‘harm’.
To meet your further points:
1. I would hope that a kind and loving God who would make the world and breath life in to it would have a more nuanced reasoning for his moral structure than “just ’cause”, and that’s one of the primary issues with sin as described in the Bible.
2. People die from many things. People drive cars at unsafe speeds and die, yet speeding is not a sin. (The Bible is also quite vague on Vehicular Manslaughter.) You can get sick or injured in almost any kind of sex, beyond what’s condemned in the Bible. So why are we singling out things like homosexually which can be practiced as safely as heterosexuality?
3. This point always brings rise to the consequential question; If sex is merely for procreation, should we allow infertile people to have sex? By extension, if marriage is to create a family for children, should we allow infertile people to marry? And if non-procreative sex isn’t always bad, then with the developments in technology for non-traditional conception (such as artificial insemination and surrogacy) why should homosexuals be allowed to marry?
4. You’ll need to be more specific about why “Homes” suffer. I have seen many homes much better off because a family supported and accepted gay family and friends — especially since those people would be suffering powerful rejection from people they love had they not been supported.
5. This is patently silly. Divorce comes from a lot of things. The statistic suggest that Divorce happens most frequently with couples who wait until marriage to have sex, and then find themselves incompatible. This flies against your point (since I would expect that premartial sex would count as ‘perversion’ in your umbrella) — as those who as less religious often have stronger, longer lasting relationships.
6. Doesn’t that guilt come from a person being judged by other human beings exerting societal pressure on them? As I stated before, I believe only God can judge a person — a human passing judgement on another person is merely a violation of the request to ‘love thy neighbor’.
I don’t think you really have any valid reasons here — I think you’re just trying to rationalize your dislike for people who find happiness in a way that makes YOU uncomfortable. Am I wrong?
I don’t believe we have a choice to be subject to God’s rules or not; but I do believe that God’s judgement is not merely a score card of sins committed against forgiveness offered.
E.D.B.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
Flee Sexual Immorality
12 “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be enslaved by anything. 13 “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”—and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14And God raised the Lord and will also raise us up by his power. 15Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! 16Or do you not know that he who is joined[d] to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two will become one flesh.” 17But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. 18 Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin[e] a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. 19Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, 20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
Saying people get divorced for all sorts of reasons is a red herring. People murder for all sorts of reasons, but that doesn’t mean murder is ok.
God says homosexuality is an admonition
Another dogmatic statement. Whether you believe that is a horse of another color. You don’t and have been given numerous reasons why, yet continue to make excuses.
That’s understandable. Sorta like when I tried to justify my own sins.
As far as disliking people I’m glad you didn’t say hate because I’d be hating my brother. I’m sure to let him know on Thanksgiving that you said I dislike him too! Egads I’m glad you know me so well! lol
You then tell me I’m basically being silly in my comparisons.
Well, if you can make up another interpretation of homosexuality and what the bible says about it, I can make up my own interpretation of what murder is and what I can do about someone murdering my family can’t I?
Or, are you telling me dogmatically that I don’t have the right to make my own rules like you want to?
It’s easy to say well, people divorce for all sorts of reasons when I was actually stating it as ONE reason out of the many that I stated, or in fact could further be stated.
Again, you’re not looking for reasons. You’re looking to validate your own feelings.
I never stated divorce was good in any situation. In fact, it sucks. However, divorce is only a end of means from a sickness of personal sin. Whether the sin is adultery, fornication or the many forms of selfishness:
They’re sins.
God hates sin in all form whether a believer or not.
Re: I,
Please bare with me; I’m not completely sure I understand what you’re trying to say here, but let me address it as best I can.
There is something incredibly suspect about quoting the bible with the word ‘homosexuality’ (or its permutations) anywhere in it, since that word was coined near the end of the 19th century. English has been very happy over its life as a language to lift words from every other language when it lacked its own, so I would assume that if the original writings meant ‘homosexual’, we would probably be using that word in our vernacular.
It’s interesting how your translation chose to take “The Effeminate” (from the KJV) and make it “Men who Practice Homosexuality”; there is no archaic definitions of ‘effeminate’ that makes that implication that I can find. Seems like a stretch to me, though I could argue with what ‘the effeminate’ does mean. Even then, the KJV is still about 1200 years from the first Bible in any case. I don’t know how accurate it is either.
“are you telling me dogmatically”
What dogma? Do you even understand what that word means? I’m not saying we can redefine divorce, murder or homosexuality. I’m saying that I don’t think that God cares about a little sin score-card when you die — I would assume that God can make a far more even measure of a person than that.
You keep going back to the idea of killing people and redefining murder, but what about something like Self Defense? It wasn’t even a legal concept until the 1600s. In fact, the Bible advocates ‘an eye for an eye’ justice in quite a few places — another of many morally dubious ideas in the text.
“Again, you’re not looking for reasons. You’re looking to validate your own feelings.”
You’re accusation is easily reversed. You’re not looking to understand God; you’re wielding a repeatedly translated book like a knife to use against others. I have no intention or expectation of being authoritative; I merely have the point of view that the Bible is a tool to know God, but it is not perfect, nor is it the only tool. The context of the book is as important as the text; it was written by men. Divine inspiration or not, men are fallible.
EBD..
Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
1 Kings 14:24 And there were also sodomites (qadēš) in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.
qādēš – Is a word that refers to male temple prostitutes so one might argue that the context of this passage has to do with engaging in pagan worship. However, that doesn’t negate the fact that sin is what God calls sin and it means to fail to live in accordance with his will for your life.
Genesis 1:27-28 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Genesis 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him…Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Genesis 2:24
God never did and never will create men to have sex with men, or women to have sex with women. That’s because of the debasing of humanity.
Sin.
Absolutely NO reference to ANY other sexual relationship except for man and woman.
Again, you have offered no references that back up your claim. In a court of law you’d look pretty foolish quite honestly.
Play a word game all you want. You may believe you’re winning now my friend, but in the end… you will not.
God wins. It’s his earth, his rules and you can snub your nose at him all you want.
Re: lew
“Again, you have offered no references that back up your claim. In a court of law you’d look pretty foolish quite honestly.”
Really? Are you sure? Because I think I said, “I’m not an authority” and “I believe”. My interpretation is different from yours. I also said earlier that I don’t believe that anyone can be certain their interpretation is correct — I don’t remember excluding myself from that list, but please let me know if I did and I’ll write a retraction. I offered no references because I don’t see any value in them. I don’t associate any weight with yours, because I question the inerrancy of the Bible — I thought that was clear at this point.
“Play a word game all you want.”
What are you even talking about? That I think as modern people with modern language we may be interpreting a repeatedly retranslated work differently than it was intended when written? How is that a game, and not merely a rational line of inquiry?
“You may believe you’re winning now my friend, but in the end… you will not.”
Here is where we most clearly differ. We disagree — you clearly believe in the Bibles message as written (and translated), where I believe it is merely one of many tools which God has given us to understand him; I believe that rational inquiry and philosophical questioning are other ways that we can know God.
More importantly than our philosophical differences, you believe I am going to hell, and I do not reflect your veiled accusation. As I stated before, I would expect a good and loving God to have a morality more complex than a list of grievances, a point we clearly seem to disagree on.
[...] How I wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go – Trevin Wax did an amazing job with this short post. If people would approach the homosexuality debate like this we would gain some ground and considerable understanding. [...]
E.D.B.
NO SEXUAL RELATIONS OUTSIDE OF MAN/WOMAN Marriage!
Even if I took your interpretation (which I do not again) it still doesn’t wash! There are NO passages you can show of man/man, woman/woman, 3 ways, 4 ways, man/animal, relations. That is because they’re are none.
If that isn’t clear cut my friend…..
Your argument for interpretation is lacking. You want latitude on YOUR interpretation of a word so that it fits your sinful desire. You can come up with your own interpretation, but you have to allow for someone else on say whatever word that’s your pet word.
God has allowed us to live longer than we should. Be thankful you (as I am) are not dead already. You’re not here for yourself just like I am not. We’re here to glorify God. I certainly do not do that all the time, but I recognize that fact and don’t try to run counter to His Word. God isn’t here to give us everything we want just because we want it.
By the way, I said nothing about hell. If you were pricked by the scriptures, then that is good. I stated you shouldn’t snub your nose at God. Nor any other issue that doesn’t line up with scripture.
Please read the verses posted throughout this thread. They are clear and absolute in their meaning. Very straightforward.
1 John 3:4-10
Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. 5You know that he appeared to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. 6No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. 7Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. 8 Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s[b] seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. 10By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.
Be Holy as I am Holy.
And if it is difficult even for a righteous man to be saved, what will become of irreligious men and sinners?
“This is patently silly. Divorce comes from a lot of things. The statistic suggest that Divorce happens most frequently with couples who wait until marriage to have sex, and then find themselves incompatible. This flies against your point (since I would expect that premartial sex would count as ‘perversion’ in your umbrella) — as those who as less religious often have stronger, longer lasting relationships.”
Don’t believe the lie EDB
Actually studies show people who cohabitate and/or have premarital sex have a 50% higher divorce rate than those who do not. Also, those couples have a higher rate of domestic violence, more extra martial affairs as well.
If a female cohabitator has a baby, the male cohabitator has a much higher chance of leaving the relationship within the next 2 years. You obviously know what that means.
HIV/Aids is rampant
STD’s are rampant
Gono is rampant again
Syph is rampant again
Clamyidia is rampant again
Guess what?
None are gotten by people who hold to biblical principles.
Ok, now I feel I have to step in.
Lew, you seem to be arguing for the infallibility of the Bible. Let me ask you a couple of questions – the first having to do with God not allowing polygamy:
1) How many wives did Solomon have?
2) How many concubines did he have?
3) Is one technically married to a concubine?
4) What are you supposed to do to your house if you find mildew in it?
5) How many textile or fabrics may your clothing be made of?
6) What may women wear to church? Don’t they ALWAYS have to have their heads covered? (Sounds a lot like a certain other religion to me).
7) What may women not do in church? St Paul says no talking!
I’ve taken a bit of risk here – you may be one of those who follow all of these rules – you may even burn your house down when you find mildew in it. But I’m guessing not. Even you interpret the Word in light of what you believe to be moral. Yet, why is your moral standard better than E.D.B.’s? I don’t have any evidence that your moral standard is better than mine – not in the Word at least.
(Remember, Jesus said: Not one iota will be removed from the Law. Therefore, even Old Testament laws apply today – at least, to non-believers (the irony!). That means it is bad for non-believers to eat pork, crayfish etc., for non-believing women to have short hair or to enter a place of worship and speak, and so forth).
Also, I want to know why I should believe that God did say that homosexuality is a sin? The bible has been translated countless times – and trust me, older translations cared less about doing things word for word. We have had a number of corrupt Popes and a very questionable Emperor Constantine involved in deciding just what the bible says and what should not be included – see the Council of Nicaea. It seems more plausible to me (and to the rabbis that study the matter) that the Bible is a multi-layered historical text that records not only the original message but also the social mores of different times.
History has also shown us that whenever a people feel threatened or want to unify themselves, they cast out and attack those who are different. How are you sure that the Bible doesn’t just record those moments in history when the Jews/Christians felt most persecuted and decided to denounce all irregularity? If this is the case, then the anti-homosexuality passages you quoted reflect more on the lack of love in the writers (and trust me, there were many!) of the Bible than the love of God.
I think before you can convince either E.D.B. or me of your point that God hates homosexual practice, you need to defend the source of your ‘knowledge’ – why are we to believe that all the passages you are sprouting are the Word of God?
Also, Lew. Why should I believe that these plagues are visited on us because of the Christian God? Can’t a Muslim say exactly the same thing and point to passages in the Koran to support what he is saying? Can’t a Hindu say the same and say that it is the capriciousness of the gods? Why can’t I see these things as relating to population growth and density rather than to sexual immorality? Or to social change? Or simply to a hangover of irrelevant religious values that get us to think that men should behave in one way and women in another (re: high rate of divorce)?
Your evidence does not support your claim – it is too erratic.
Once again, Lew, you are looking for reasons not to love people practically. Love would be to understand others (who are different to you) compassionately, to welcome them into you community, to stand up for them when they are downtrodden, to lift them up when they are weak. I can see none of this in your passage-quoting. You aren’t doing any of this out of love for us – you want to be right, and your words show it.
Perhaps one day you will enjoy a sumptuous feast in heaven with us, sinners and your enemies, burning and being tortured as the entertainment (read Psalm 23:5 and Boethius – early Christian philosophyer). But I can tell you, even if that was the reward for your ‘discipline’ and legality, I would rather love too much than too little, I would rather suffer for loving the outcast who has hated and hurt no one than gain from casting him out.
Aidan,
Please don’t give me this hate stuff or I’m holier than anyone else or conjuring up O.T. cermonial shellfish laws that you know are not part of the N.T.
What I believe I’ve done is quote scripture in context concerning this topic. Those references do exactly as you are asking me to do. I need not make any further points about scripture or what Jesus says.
Actually I will leave one more.
Jesus said go and sin no more to the woman who had 5 husbands and was shacking with another.
That means I am not supposed to say
Watch porno all day long every day and say…
I’m a porno watcher and it’s ok. God made me that way.
Hey I’m an adulterer, but God made me that way.
No, he says… I am holy, you be holy.
We won’t be perfect, but we’re not supposed to snub our noses at God’s Word.
By the way, Solomon repented and took actions against his sins were that got him into trouble. He was brought down by his sinful choices and in fact, he died because of it.
I’m not even close to perfect, not holier than anyone else on this board, but I can’t live as a adulterer, porno reader or any other sexually sinful person.
The scriptures back it. I didn’t dictate the bible. God did. God saves whom He wants.
Very well done. Always bringing it back to Christ and getting at the heart of the matter is the only way to keep it in accordance with the gospel. Again, well done.
It’s a shame “Christianity” strays so far from Christ. We need the gospel in our lives. If Christians always brought it back to the fact that we are all sinners and fall short of God’s glory, so much would become clear.
[...] Trevin Wax, “How I Wish The Homosexuality Debate Would Go.” [...]
If Christian heterosexuals would be called to account for the divorce and remarriage that has become rampant since no fault divorce it would help. About ten years ago I was switching radio stations and came upon Dr James Dobson who noted divorce amongst Christian was higher than amongst non Christians. Ever hear this preached in your church?
Look at the 1st Commandment You shall have no other gods before me. Now ask yourself how many Christians do any of us know including ourselves who at sometime has made money their God. How many churches preach about this?
And how many church’s preach against greed, laziness, pride, gluttony, envy? These are sins as well in the Bible and yet how many Christians are ever reminded of these sins? What about the 4th Commandment? How many Christians prefer football on TV to going to church?
Personally I believe abortion like active homosexuality are sins. But I also believe they are the sins Christians tend to talk about the most because they are the sins least found amongst active Christians.
Folks who are obese deal with the sin of gluttony. People who shop for things they cannot afford are dealing with the sin of envy.
In the end we need to obey 2 Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
The Bible says, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 – “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (NIV).
Also,Leviticus 18:22 – “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.” (NIV)
In addition, Romans 1:26-27 – “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” (NIV)
Those are the verses that clearly condemn homosexuality. But the verses are not pointed at homosexuality alone. It is just pointing out the various sins that were occurring in Corinth and Rome. Homosexuality is just another sin on the list, but the Bible also says that sexual sin is worse because our body is a temple of God. So if you are a homosexual, you are no worse a sinner than a liar. But to be saved we have to repent of all of our sins and trust in Jesus Christ as the Savior of our sins. As the Bible says 1 Corinthians 6:11 – “And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” (NIV) We are ALL sinners. But when we become Christians, we are born again. God begins to weed out those sins from our life. He convicts us of our sins and we are to listen and flee FROM sin TO God! It’s not an easy road as someone stated above. It is constant failure and forgiveness. But the goal is to run the race as if to capture the prize. Die to self and live in Christ.
Lastly, I want to say to those who may be gay. A Christian pointing out your sin is loving in the sense that if you see a friend walking towards a cliff unknowingly. You should tell him before it’s too late. It’s not intended to be bigoted or hateful. The Bible also says that if someone refuses the gospel to shake the dust off your feet and leave. Do not cast pearls before swine. So those who have heard the gospel and refuse to repent, it is a Christian’s job to move on to the next person who is lost. God Bless. Great article.
To add on to what you and lyn have been discussing. The fact that you know rape and murder are wrong testifies to the fact that you have a conscience, which proves God’s existence. If there were no universal/supernatural right and wrong, who would care. Every where people know it is not right to do these things. Everyone knows not to steal from other people because it is a God-given moral law. However, Jesus came to show that no one can follow God’s laws, thus the need of a Savior. The ungodly suppress the truth in order to do the things they want/desire to do instead of being transformed by the power of God. We love atheist, that’s what all true Christians were before being saved by Christ Jesus Our Lord.
Mother Lodebeth, I agree completely with you. However, i would contend that most of these people are not “C”hristians, they are christians. Jesus said narrow is the path and are few that find it. He also said you will know them by their fruit. And there are many that will say in that day didn’t i do this or that in your name. And he’ll say depart from me you workers of iniquity. So I would encourage you and all other true Christians to be faithful to God in word and deed. Live the word and preach it and let God do the rest. But your comments are spot on.
@jay: tl;dr: no, it doesn’t.
Longer version:
No, that I “know” rape is wrong doesn’t prove god exists. Even if it did prove “a” god existed, it wouldn’t prove your specific god exists.
On the other hand, quoting scripture doesn; t further your argument since … well, the devil himself quotes scripture in Matthew!
You are acting out of faith. Your faith is blind and unthinking. One day you will open your eyes and feel the light of reason. It’s a lot like it, eith the difference of being real.
[...] From Trevin Wax: [...]
Haha, Christians writing an entire article obsessing about homosexuality, and then THIS:
“Pastor: (smiling) With all due respect, you are the one who brought up this subject.”
Real-life satire is alive and well.
Pastor: (smiling) With all due respect, you are the one who brought up this subject.
By the time I got to this point in the article a picture of the “pastor” had formed in my mind. He (of course “he” and not “she”) had a smug smile, something like Charles Krauthammer, a smile that immediately communicated, “Why, silly boy, how could you ever doubt me?” Yuck.
I noticed immediately that Trevin never describes the facial expressions of the interviewer in the screenplay. The script seems a bit light in the area of character-development. Especially the interviewer’s.
In the debate *I’d* like to see, the interviewer might actually understand and talk about the fact that many Christian denominations affirm and accept gay and lesbians as members and pastors. The interviewer might know that the word homosexuality didn’t exist until late in the nineteenth century and is never used in scripture. The interviewer might have known that Jesus never spoke about homosexuality at all, but that he did say a great deal about humility, love, and caring for the “least of these,” especially for those regarded by society as outcasts. The interviewer might have thought about how Christians found support for slavery in the Bible, and then discovered how wrong they had been; and how the Bible was used by some Christians to prevent women from serving as pastors, while many Christians interpret the Bible differently on the subject; and how Jesus speaks strongly about divorce and remarriage, but most Christian churches (even those who will not ordain women) do not practice a strict, literal interpretation of Jesus’ words on *that* subject. Finally, the interviewer might have been familiar with “What God Has Joined Together: the Christian Case for Gay Marriage” by Meyers and Scanzoni, and with “Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality: Explode the Myths, Heal the Church” by Jack Rogers. There are biblical scholars who disagree with this author’s perspective on this issue.
“The Word has to be free to remake and reform the Church over and over again” (G.C. Berkouwer, “Understanding Scripture,” Christianity Today, 1970, as quoted by Meyers/Scanzoni).
Romans 1 (New International Version)
1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— 2 the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3 regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life[a] was a descendant of David, 4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power[b] by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. 5 Through him we received grace and apostleship to call all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from[c] faith for his name’s sake. 6 And you also are among those Gentiles who are called to belong to Jesus Christ.
7 To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be his holy people:
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
Paul’s Longing to Visit Rome
8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being reported all over the world. 9 God, whom I serve in my spirit in preaching the gospel of his Son, is my witness how constantly I remember you 10 in my prayers at all times; and I pray that now at last by God’s will the way may be opened for me to come to you.
11 I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong— 12 that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith. 13 I do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters,[d] that I planned many times to come to you (but have been prevented from doing so until now) in order that I might have a harvest among you, just as I have had among the other Gentiles.
14 I am obligated both to Greeks and non-Greeks, both to the wise and the foolish. 15 That is why I am so eager to preach the gospel also to you who are in Rome.
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. 17 For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last,[e] just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”[f]
God’s Wrath Against Sinful Humanity
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
Me:
Nuclear bombs weren’t in the bible either, but there are verses about hurting other isn’t there? lol
The debate is about homosexuality, and these verses speak very clearly about it. You can apply these scriptures to the other items listed as well. So, if you’re an adulterer and a church ‘open and affirming’ of adultery, pedohphila, thievery, etc… you’d have the same problem as a church that is opening and affirming of homosexuality. They’d be considered quite outside the bounds of orthodoxy. I’d say much deeper than that myself.
I must admit my disappointment in the comment section of this posting. It would seem as though the people most able to defend against a more liberal interpretation have relegated the task to those whose approach lacks the insight of an academic. It is not that I have anything against passionate apologies. I just prefer logical ones, and there is a deafening silence coming from one side of this debate. I know that this blog attracts many conservative intellectuals who have something to add, where are you?
Lew, Chapter and verse are recent additions to scripture. Nowhere is this more evident (and problematic) than the transition between Romans chapter 1 and 2. I believe that if you look a little closer, you will find that Romans is directing you to point your finger at yourself.
OMG.
I was involved in this very discussion with… surprise, surprise… other christians.
I took the very same line as the pastor on this and I was told by this forum of christians that I needed to experience the “True Love of God” and stop promoting hate against homosexuals… these christians pretty much reverberated word for word the very argument that the “host” used here.
It is mind blowing to see this played out here after what I went through today… God is truly a God of wisdom and knowledge.
hmm, i agree, he may either be using a difeerent and more standard bible than yours, or your understanding of what you read is jaundiced and u have no clear understainding of what the pastor is saying. My advice, read the bible some more!
Biff,
Can I be a unrepentant serial rapist or pedophile? No, didn’t think so.
Here’s a renditon of II Tim 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That means that ALL is for ALL Christians. So, if one says they’re a Christian and a homosexual, I say that you need to take the WHOLE armour of God into affect. Since II Tim 3:16 says so. Since it does, then I have to take Romans, Corinthians, Lev. Deut or any other book of the bible that speaks against those sins.
So, just because you don’t like rendering scriptures that assail against homosexuality, beastiality, pedophila, adultery, thievery, liars, cheaters, gossip or any other range of sins, isn’t for you to be angry against me.
Be angry against God. It’s His Word and he has said:
16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Well William… looks like God was speaking directly to you for a very important reason. Take that to mean to stand with God on this and other issues. It’s getting really ugly out there especially with the UN trying to pass laws against this being able to do this.
Lew, Since I have read your previous posts, I realize that any further exchange is likely an exercise in futility, with very little chance of providing any productive discourse for either of us. That being understood, I can’t sleep tonight anyway.
Yes, of course, you have the ability to be an unrepentant serial rapist and pedophile. The only thing that you would need is the belief that you should be. Unfortunately, given your embrace of the “WHOLE armor of God”, the Bible is not as clear on the subjects as you appear to assume (provided the objects of desire are not to be set apart for God).
What I find curious, is the way in which you are so well-versed in the art of reproof and correction, yet appear to be lacking at the task of instruction of righteousness, beginning with your own. Perhaps it is not the “WHOLE armor of God” that convicts you after all. Instead, you may prefer only the armor which you choose to convict with.
I am not angry with you because you rendered some scriptures which assail sin. I am not even angry with you because you shamelessly overlook the passages which assail your own. In fact, I am not mad at you in the least. What I harbor for you is pity.
You expend your energies seeking to justify your righteousness by focusing upon the shortcomings of others. All the while, remaining burdened with the lenses of failed tradition and the blinders of societal and moral presentism.
What compels you is not your desire to provide salvation to others (which is not even within your ability) but your desire to alleviate your own insecurity and fear. It is a losing proposition, as your compulsion necessarily separates you from what “hangs all the law and prophets”. I fear that given your mindset of legalistic dualism, you miss the point entirely.
Biff,
I am not righteous at all. If Paul’s righteousness was as filthy rags, mine has to be exceedingly less than his. I’m a dirt bag and I know it. I am saved by the blood of Christ.
Being saved, that doesn’t mean I’m supposed to continously watch porn or having homosexual sex every day.
If a person is trying to walk right and falls, then they fall. Ask for forgiveness and walk again. It doesn’t mean walking in the sin and here’s the kicker… saying it’s OK to do it.
If you could point out scripture that says differently, then I’d be welcomed to review it.
This is what I think is right Biff,
http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/peter_lumpkins/2011/07/not-all-southern-baptist-calvinists-agree-with-al-mohlers-confusing-views-on-homosexuality-by-peter-lumpkins.html
Ephesians 5:31
New King James Version (NKJV)
31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
Genesis 2:24
New King James Version (NKJV)
24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
lew, Actually, the way I see it, you also believe that it is okay for you to continue walking in your sins. Right after you sanctimoniously feigned your acknowledgement of being a dirt-bag (aren’t we all in the end), you immediately followed with another attempt to vindicate your sins, as you commit them only once (but clearly over and over and over again). Then, without hesitation, you affirmed your own salvation.
Of course, it is okay for you to view each sin as an individual occurrence, but you lose some credibility when you pick and choose who is “walking in sin” as a result of that view. Moreover, like those you decry, you do not seem to accept the nature of your sins, or even want to overcome them. Like the homosexuals and backbiters, which Romans 1 describes, you have given yourself over, and have become the hypocrite that Paul describes in Romans 2.
I do not guess I should be surprised by the article and video that you posted (yes, I read/watched it). Unfortunately, the gentleman giving the sermon appears to be engaging in highly questionable mental gymnastics to prove his point. He searched so hard for validation of his beliefs that he misrepresented scripture, history, and likely the nature of sin itself. To be clear, some of his assertions were probably not inspired by differing interpretations of scripture; they were patently false. He was either lying or an idiot. I do not know what bothers me more, the fact that he was given a platform, or that he apparently has a following.
Like you, this gentleman has clearly been blessed with God’s omniscient discernment while trapped within this life of flesh that we all share. He, and those who believe likewise, are apparently not burdened with typical human weaknesses. It seems as though their only weakness is their inability to administer the retribution that is required of God’s perfect judgment. They selflessly do what they can to overcome that particular shortcoming though.
Look, I do not care what you believe about homosexuality (or any other sexuality) being right or wrong. That is not the topic which I am engaging in. I am much more interested in your sins, specifically as they relate to homosexuality. Neither of us posses the ability to save or condemn anyone. The most that we can do is to strive for an understanding of our motivations, attempt to regulate our own actions, and hopefully live lives that are worthy of emulation. Until we achieve those goals, any reproof or correction directed to others is somewhat tainted.
Put aside your insecurity; it is manifest as pride, hypocrisy, and contempt. Nothing good will ensue from it for anyone, but particularly for yourself.
When I first read this article I was intrigued. I don’t think it was a perfect conversation, but I do agree that it allowed the person being interviewed the chance to speak. Over and over again I have noticed that one of the biggest faults Western (especially American) news/media has is the constant interruptions. I can’t stand to watch someone interrupted as they attempt to answer the questions the interviewer asks of them. Why bother inviting them on to speak if you don’t actually let them speak. In that sense, I loved this article.
In the sense of the homosexuality debate, it seems that the original intent of this article was simply to spark conversation and redirect reporters to reporting and Christians to the Bible. It was a great idea Trevin. However, this stream of comments slowly became less and less civil. Rather than sparking discussion and encouraging understanding…this has become a pointless cycle of argument and rebuttal. I just read ALL of these comments carefully and noticed that we are all literally doing the OPPOSITE of what the article is asking of us. While it’s content could be interpreted as “one-dimensional,” as unique individuals WE are not. We can look at this in so many ways. A great opportunity for dialogue has been lost, only to be replaced with incoherent debate (sorry intellectuals, even your posts are falling on deaf ears).
Few of us are bothering to listen to/hear out the alternative views expressed. Stop and think for a moment…any time you apologize or say you understand someone’s point of view and then follow that statement with the word BUT, you are negating that apology/understanding. The word “but” can be found almost 200 times in these comments. Clearly, there has been a lack of understanding, listening, and compassion.
As for the topic being discussed…I have really struggled with my feelings/beliefs about this over the years. When I was younger I followed the “hate the sin, love the sinner” model of Christianity. Then I experienced a close friend and mentor realizing that he had always been attracted to men. Did this change any of the good work that God had done in my life through him? I didn’t even have to pray over this or reference scripture. I know who God is and regardless of sin, He loves us. So I love my friend. I continue to consider scripture and pray over these things, but I do not hate. I do my best to love in all circumstances.
I don’t have a perfect answer for you all. I don’t know how to reconcile politics, scripture, doctrine, tradition, secular ideas, and personal feelings. I simply work to explore this issue with the utmost care. I deeply hope you can do the same. I didn’t write this to be self-righteous or to sound holier-than-though. I simply felt that I needed to say something, as reading these comments had become almost unbearable.
For all those who have been angered, hurt, or belittled because of this discussion board…I apologize. No but. I am sorry.
For those who are still fired up and will simply ignore these words…please at least try to understand where this post came from. Not from rebuke or hostility, but from a place of concern and care.
You are all loved.
Thanks SH for your thoughtful comment. I have read this article and many of the comments. I think the heart of this issue is:
1. Do Christians and Chrurches take a position on homosexuality?
2. Does this position include homosexuality as a sin?
This is the main line of disagreement based on my understanding of this entire discourse.
Jesus was born over 2000 years ago. What we read today in the Bible was written for an audience and government system limited by historical realities. A lot has changed in 2000 years and allows us leeway to interpretation. I say leeway because:
1. Slavery is condemned across the world
2. Women can vote and have the same jobs as men.
3. Gay marriage is being passed in states and nations thus officially recognizing that a man-man and woman-woman relationship is legal.
We will never know what Jesus would say if he were here today because he was speaking in context of the times in which he lived. These three issues, slavery, women’s suffrage, and gay marriage were entirely unacceptable subjects of their time and I would say that Jesus condoned and possibly fomented these practices. However today, Christians accept and agree that:
1. Slavery is wrong and Jesus is against it
2. To discriminate against a person for a job or a voice due to her gender is wrong and Jesus is against it.
3. That Christians agree to disagree with homosexuals and their supporters…that man-man and woman-woman relationships and the love they make are sinful.
From a historical perspective, it took over 13,000 years for slavery to be abolished from its roots during the neolithic period. Mauritania was the last country to abolish it in 1981 (!!!). Based on what I have read, Jesus even avoided the subject on numerous opportunities.
Women have been around much longer than 13,000 years and they have only been able to vote beginning in 1860′s in the western world. It is only within the last 50 years that women have been able to work at the same jobs as men. Again, did Jesus take a position on this?
The evidence that we have for Jesus and the apostles against homosexuality is that it is wrong to be promiscuous, wrong to fornicate, and wrong to commit adultery with anyone regardless of gender differences. Perhaps if gay marriage existed 2000 years ago, Jesus would have said something different.
Homosexuality is a difficult topic to be sure for Christians. It is unfortunate to me that churches and pastors take a position on this issue based on what I think is circumstantial evidence. I think God is greater than the two questions I have posed above and that our understanding of God is incomplete due to a wealth of factors including our own imperfections.
I am and have been Christian for years. I also have one gay uncle, a gay cousin, and a gay nephew. I could not agree more with what this pastor is saying. It is possible to love the “sinner” (like we all are), but not like the sin. I love each of those men and would give my life for them all if I needed too. However, I disagree with their lifesytle. I like what he said about disagreeing does not mean hating. I love and pray for all of those people who are homosexual, alcoholics, fornicators, and for myself b/c I am not perfect. I do not judge, but pray. I think that is Christ’s love. Thanks for sharing!!
Not all Americans are Christian. Not all LGBT Americans are Christian. For this reason, we cannot, as a country, legislate morality without violating people’s first amendment right to freedom of (and from) religion.
[...] marriage yesterday, this post of mine from last fall has jumped to the top of my page views again. “How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go” Just once, I’d like to see a TV interview go more like [...]
Great job!
Great article.
We ALL have our vices, but their existence doesn’t make them our identity.
I was just praying that someone would have an articulate Christian response to all of this hoopla about the “gay debate”! I was really tired of this conversation involving hateful exchanges on both sides.
But I’d like to see the evangelical community take their response a step further. I feel as if the strategy with homosexuality has been to quietly disagree and hope that nobody calls us bigots. Meanwhile, people on other sides of the debate (there are a multitude of different, non-Christian positions on this issue) are putting out messages full-time, in both political and non-political ways, encouraging anything and everything but trusting in Jesus Christ to cleanse us of our unholy desires. Please, I’d like to see more biblical support out there for people like me, who struggle with this and want to see change. Not just more sermons on why homosexuality is unbiblical, although those are good. But people like me feel left out, that our sin is either unmentionable or political, and we struggle in the dark. I’d like to see more biblical ministries and books that deal with this problem in a practical way.
Hey Anonymous, I struggle with SSA as well, and I completely agree. The church needs to do a better job of ministering to it’s members who struggle.
There are not really any great resources that are solid theologically and practically helpful (that I have found). Tim Chester’s “You Can Change” does offer a very practical approach to evaluating your life and approaching sin from a heart level instead of just behavior. John Piper has a few good sermons on the issues, and he is very sympathetic to those who struggle.
In the end, fighting this sin is the same for any Christian who fights any sin. The difference is that people who struggle with SSA feel that they can’t talk about it and therefore struggle in isolation. I’d encourage you, if you haven’t already, to seek out biblical community and be open and honest about your struggle. I have several close friends who know about my struggle and it’s made dealing with it so much easier.
It would have been cool if Kirk Cameron had this interview to guide him in his Q&A with Piers Morgan.
They don’t offer type big enough or bold enough for this amen but…AMEN.
[...] How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go — While all the above posts are from the last three days, this was written last year. Still, I thought it was fitting to include here this mock interview written by Trevin Wax. I recognize that some people have mistreated homosexuals in the past. It’s a shame that anyone anywhere would mock, taunt, or bully another human being made in God’s image. That said, I think we need to make one thing clear in regard to civil discourse: To differ is not to hate. I hope we can still have a real conversation in this country about different points of view without casting one another in the worst possible light. Rate this: Share this:FacebookTwitterEmailMoreDiggRedditStumbleUponLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in Combing the Net and tagged Amendment One, Barack Obama, Collin Hansen, Denny Burk, gay christian, gay marriage, homosexuality, J.D. Greear, Jared Wilson, Rachel Held Evans, Trevin Wax. [...]
By this logic, no one should be allowed to marry because we’re all guilty of sexual sin.
[...] the conversations would, indeed, look more like this and this. Share this:TwitterFacebookLinkedInLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This [...]
[...] “How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go” by Trevin Wax is a great example of how Christians can respond to questions about homosexuality [...]
Its simple.scripture clearly says that homosexuality and any sex outside of marriage is a sin. Take it or leave it, the path is narrow.
[...] “How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go” by Trevin Wax Host: So how do you reconcile the command to love all people with a position on homosexuality that some would say is radically intolerant? [...]
[...] compromise the truth or unlovingly/inarticulately explain the truth. Trevin Wax hopes that more interviews on homosexuality can look like this one [...]
[...] How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go by Trevin Wax [...]
[...] and this bit is pretty good when it comes to laying out a clear sense of what it means to be a Christian who [...]
Very well said and needed to bring the discussion back to Christ and the need of forgiveness of ALL sins.
[...] 4. Trevin Wax on how he wishes the homosexual debate would go… [...]
[...] the rest here… ShareLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. Posted in Culture, Life | Tagged [...]
It is interesting to note that Pierce Morgan is the one who insists on pursuing the homosexual debate. And for the Host to discuss “Love” as all acceptance is puzzling to say the least! If “Love” were to be all inclusive, then no parent would ever discipline a children’s behavior. But isn’t real love to correct a child to turn from non productive behavior to encourgae them to be & do better? And this example goes not only for children, but for adults who need to contiunally take personal responsibility for their behaviou & learn to be better!
Pastor (actually Trevin Wax): “any time I even lust after someone else, I am sinning.”
Pastor (actually Jesus): “anyone who looks at a wife lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”
Why is Pastor Trevin Wax’s definition of “sinning” so very much larger than Jesus’ definition? Trevin, you should consider that Jesus said, using the same Greek word translated above as ‘lust,’ ““With desire I have lusted to eat this Passover with you.” Like everything God created is good (1 Tim 4), lust is inherently good. It only becomes sin when man uses it sinfully.
“Lust” simply means “desire intensely.” We are not to desire other men’s wives intensely. We should not lust for them. We should not feed our desire for them and intensify it by through looking at them, always wanting more and never satisfied. Instead, we are to desire our own wives. Lusting for our wives is good. This whole “lust is a sin” thing causes so much destruction in humanity. It is a shame that it so often seems to come through those who call themselves by the name of Jesus.
No mention of Paul in this interview from the subject. Why?
He connects homosexual “passions” to pagan worship, explicitly, in Romans 1. This is the only passage of the Bible making direct reference to the idea of orientation.
Perhaps there is no mention because we know that paganism does NOT cause homosexuality. It has existed in all cultures, in all times, in all political situations. In the East, West, Indigenous tribes… It is throughout the animal kingdom. It is, in fact, natural. Paul asserts otherwise… that is the real problem. Some think that the Bible is still a scientific document.
We also know that Paul thinks people should remain single if possible, and that marriage, while not sinful, is not helpful either in the end times (1 Corinthians 7).
And we know that asking someone to repent on an ongoing basis for something they feel naturally, which is an expression of love, is a primary cause of severe mental illness. It is not evidence of love or grace. It is one thing for people to be aware of their own “guilt” in how they live their lives. It is quite another to live feeling ashamed every second of the day. Anyone who has actually taken these words of Evangelical leaders literally knows that there is a VERY big difference. One may think that it is the same thing, but not feeling worthy of any basic love, relationship, or other connection to others, because of how one is oriented, does nothing to produce joy, peacefulness, humbleness, or anything of the like. Humility is NOT the same thing as feeling humiliated.
Of course, Paul is the only one in the Bible that mentions the sin of Adam and Eve casting a shadow over humanity. In fact, original sin is Augustine’s concept, not technically Paul’s, or Christ’s.
I wonder why that discussion was left out of this theoretical “interview.”
People suffer for different reasons for being different. People of color suffer at the hand of white majorities. They suffer differently than, say, women do in a male dominated culture. And LGBT people suffer differently than those two groups. But that suffering is very real. I see no effort for Evangelical leaders to get in touch with their own suffering in the same way. Not really. Perhaps there are those who live in their woundedness. But LGBT people don’t have to live this way. And as so many LGBT people of faith can attest to, living unashamed is the beginning of a walk of faith with God, not the end of one.
God hates heterosexuals. God Loves Everyone. God is a contradiction. The God you perceive is not real.
[...] and being a jerk, check out Trevin Wax’s hypothetical conversation on homosexuality here. We simply do not know how to disagree in [...]
It would be nice to have a clear voice like this.
Living the lifestyle as a homosexual is a sin,you cannot live that lifestyle and be a true christian,to be a christian you must repent of your sins when you do sin so if you keep living that homosexual lifestyle then you are not repenting. Why do you think when God made Adam He gave him a woman as a mate instead of another man. God also says to multiply the earth.Why do you think only a man and a woman can make a child. Because God did not intend for man to man relations or woman to woman relations. Now that’s the Gospel.
I would like to see this added:
Host: You believe this issue is one of the most important issues in the “culture war;” why is it more important and worth more of our political time, energy, and money than sins like murder (capitol punishment included), adultery (divorce included), and being bad parents (disowning gay children included)?
Pastor: Good point; I don’t know. We can’t use the Bible to preach against inter-racial marriage anymore like my father in the 1960s and 1970s, so I guess this was the next best thing on our list.
Host: Our producer, who is gay, had a sandwich for lunch this afternoon. Did his gay lunch invalidate your straight lunch?
Pastor: Absolutely not!
Host: Then how is his gay marriage going to invalidate your straight marriage? If it’s a civil ceremony and only recognized by the courts, then what difference does it make if your church recognizes it?
Pastor: Marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman, whether they’re both Christians, Muslims, Mormons, Satanists, or Wiccans or atheists; just not two men or two women.
Mr. Wax-
I really love the sentiment and the ideas you’re trying to evoke here. I really do. However, I have seen the reality play out many times, and it hurts me to say that this is not the dialogue most believers are having, or the loving tone most believers are conveying.
I am a devout Christian and have spent years in collegiate ministry, and over the years I have come to believe so fully that God’s love rests equally on homosexuals as it does heterosexuals. In fact, I would go so far as to argue being gay no more condemns a man than being straight redeems him. However, taking this position has cost me dearly. I was urged to leave a Christian ministry, I was dropped by several friends, and I have earned some derision for my views, even though I believe they are rooted in Scripture.
I have seen firsthand how violent, vitriolic, and vicious people get when it comes to this issue, and I have seen even the most devout Christians resort to trashing other believers who defend gay rights. Yes, to be very fair, I’ve seen the reverse, where Christians who argue for longheld traditions are cast as ignorant, simple-minded fools. Both hurt me, because I have dearly loved friends on both sides who are sincerely faithful.
Saying all this, I do appreciate what you said, and wish life were so simple, and that people were so reasonable. My faith has taken a lot of blows over this one issue, and I’m at the point where I have grave misgivings about the future of the church in America.
Thanks.
Thank you, thank you, thank you! This is the best explanation I’ve ever heard in the topic of homosexuality. If more Christians spike like this, we may be seen as powiple who live like Jesus did!
Wonderful article; thank you for articulating Biblical views so well! Kathy Durling
@Apartheist
Jesus never expressly came out against bestiality in the Bible either. But does that mean that Jesus was accepting of bestiality?
The logic of “Jesus never said it” is faulty. Even the idea of Sola Scriptura is! The Bible wasn’t written in a vacuum. There was a Christian tradition that gave us the NT.
For someone who claims to be speaking tolerance, calling the Bible garbage is a sure way to ruin the conversation. If you believe my beliefs are garbage, why should I try and have a civil conversation?
Way too complicated of a response and way too many words….keep it simple…Jesus would have. He says in Romans people who would not glorify or thank God because of the futility of their thinking their darkened foolish hearts were given over to the sinful desires of their hearts…to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another…and were given over to shameful lusts …even the women exchanged natural relations for unatural ones and were inflamed with lust for one another and men committed indecent acts with other men,. and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Why do you think so many people have gotten aids?….because of sexual sin. So say what God says..He calls it unnatural, indecent, perversion, inflamed with lust, shameful and that the penalty will be brought upon thmeselves. That’s whats wrong with the body of Christ today…everybody tries to be too nice..just say it like the word of God does and if they listen the truth will set them free.
This is a clearer expression of Christian ideas about sex. But let’s be clear here. If he does not want a gay marriage, he doesn’t have to get one.
Sex outside of marriage is not illegal.
Sex inside marriage is not illegal.
Gay sex is, in many places, not illegal.
To deny gay persons the same rights as non gay persons, is discrimination.
If sex inside marriage is morally preferred, and not allowing gay persons to marry is discrimination, then the Christian choice should be obvious: allow gay marriage.
Instead, it’s Christians who are blocking the marriage equality process. This man claims it’s not strictly a gay hate thing, well, if that’s true, then why do using the standards of his argument suggest that it is?
As an African American, I am offended that LGBT has used Civil Rights to forward their agenda of sexual immorality. I am outraged that the NAACP recently renamed as the NAALGBT, Jessie Jackson, Joseph Lowery, and Al Sharpton is encouraging pastors to support the president. A position that the Scriptures clearly condemn. A position that I vehemently condemn. Discrimination against sexual “orientation” is just a hijacking of the Civil Rights Movement. Put my black skin on for a nano second and you will know what discrimination is all about. To confuse racial issues with sexual immorality is just cover for the continuation of sexual sins.
Many of you have no sense about the fact that Jesus, pre-incarnate, is the God the Son. He was there when He gave the Word in the beginning. So to say that He didn’t say anything about homosexuality is error. Jesus is the Word (Read John chapter 1, verse 1-3). So Who do you think gave the Word that called same sex an abomination (Leviticus 18:22).
Finally, as an African American, LGBT is riding the backs of Blacks and enslaving us once again. Note these statistics from the CDC.
In 2009, black men accounted for 70% of the estimated new HIV infections among all blacks.
The estimated rate of new HIV infection for black men was more than six
and a half times as high as that of white men, and two and a half times as high as that of Latino men or black women.
In 2009, black men who have sex with men (MSM)1 represented an estimated
73% of new infections among all black men, and 37% among all MSM.
More new HIV infections occurred among young black MSM (aged 13–29)
than any other age and racial group of MSM. In addition, new HIV infections
among young black MSM increased by 48% from 2006–2009.
In 2009, black women accounted for 30% of the estimated new HIV infections among all blacks.
Most (85%) black women with HIV acquired HIV through heterosexual sex.
The estimated rate of new HIV infections for black women was more than 15 times as high as the rate for white women, and more than three times as high as that of Latina women.
So, do we really want this to continue the charade or be truthful about the fact that homosexuality and sexual immorality of all kinds is against the will of God?
[...] I wish the homosexuality debate would [...]
Or you know, there’s nothing wrong with any of us and we should stop worrying about what ancient sky gods would think of us.
You shouldn’t be ashamed of yourself for any sexual urges. It is not a sin. And don’t let deluded and uneducated people who cling to religion because they aren’t strong enough to take responsibility for themselves make you feel ashamed with made up rules. The bible is not a legal document and as we grow as a society gay people will have the right to marry. That’s the problems with us humans… we get smarter. And we deserve equal rights.
Yes, gay people are just dying to go to a church that believes they are sinning. What a joke.
Here’s a comment for CD and ABBY, one thing we are’nt saying homosexuality is illegal we are saying that it is a sin. God’s law has a higher standard and is way more important to keep than human laws. And also,The Lord Jesus Christ is not any ancient sky god He is the one and only true GOD.I wish you would believe that because it IS true.As the LORD said one day every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that He is God.That means everyone who has ever existed, even the unbelievers,but it will be to late for them because they will spend eternity in hell.The word says “to live like there is no GOD makes you a fool.
This is the kind of conversation that CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, LGBT supporting media are afraid of. The truth ministered in love. This is one of the best presentations of the truth about all sexual immorality ever compiled. The next step is to be able to present this to the world to show that the church is serious about turning this around. That is, the fact that we can’t stand and that we are weak willed about this issue. Quite the contrary. We are willing to discuss this any where, any place, any time should an opportunity be afforded.
I wish he would of used something other than “homosexual” or “homosexuality”. I am faithful follower of Jesus who is dedicated in following Him. Not that works mean anything but I am active in my church in serving, I am actively involved in sharing the gospel with those outside of the church, I stay accountable and love dearly the homegroup I am a part of, and I try to practice the spiritaul disciplines. Works mean nothing but hopefully they provide some evidence that points towards the faith I have in and for Jesus. I love Jesus so much. I try to keep my eyes centered on Him. He is my love and my heart. He is my everything. I fight against sin and unwanted desires, as to keep my eyes focused on Him. There is nothing more I want than to praise His name. There is nothing more I want than to know Him. I am also a man with dominately samesex attractions. I don’t act out on those samesex attractions. I am happy to give my life to Jesus. I am happy to be a celibate. Jesus called none of us to be alone, so I reject my singleness in accepting Him as my present and future hope. I embrace that His Spirit is with me always. Don’t get me wrong I long for companionship. Long for it deeply. I tried to go straight, spent years in Ex-Gay ministries and reparative therapy; it just didn’t work and ended up with debt which I am still paying off equal loans for a private college. But thats ok, I gave it an effort. So I am content to have Jesus as my everything.
The thing is so many folks who write on the gay issue seem to completely forget about us who are loving Jesus but have samesex attraction yet don’t choose to act out on our desire. In this post for example homosexuality is used in all different ways that it would have even me excluded from the kingdom of God. I hope that you guys are wrong when you inadvertently write that or like that all people with samesex attractions are excluded from being Christians and thus part of God’s kingdom. But you know what even if I am excluded from God’s kingdom with my deep love and faith in Jesus given also in a life of celibacy towards Him; thats ok mostly though would break my heart. I love Him. I am more concerned now with Him being made known. I am more concerned with Him being praised and adorned. Its about Jesus, its not about me. But I do think you guys are wrong when you write intentionally or unintentionally with your language. I feel the presence of God in my life. I see Him active in my life and in those around me. So I would ask for you guys to think about how you write things. A post like this can be very discouraging for someone like me. At the best it makes us feel like we are second class citizens in the Kingdom, always underneath the heterosexuals and never good enough in this life or next. At the worst it makes us who feel like there is nothing we can do besides hope for a miracle so that we can meet the base minimum to be a Christian. I don’t know about the rest of y’all but I do believe the Fall effected all parts of us as humans, including our sexuality. So all of us have to reorient our sexuality through Jesus by the Spirit towards the Father. So please think about how things like this post comes across.
*Cross posting this comment to another thread which basically comes out with the same result.
Ben: “I wish he would of used something other than “homosexual” or “homosexuality”.”
Who’s “he”? You mean, Trevin Wax?
Would it be better if Trevin Wax specifically named it as “Same-Sex Behavior”?
“I don’t act out on those samesex attractions. I am happy to give my life to Jesus. I am happy to be a celibate.”
Fantastic obedience to God’s Commands in Scripture!
Just like celibate unmarried heterosexuals who are faithfully obeying God’s Commands in Scripture to not fornicate.
“The thing is so many folks who write on the gay issue seem to completely forget about us who are loving Jesus but have samesex attraction yet don’t choose to act out on our desire.”
That’s not what I see. Many, if not all, Christians that I know of praise celibate homosexuals.
@Ben surely you realize that you are not the majority. I’m a divorced woman which is not a popular thing to claim. Everyone talks like it is so accepted in the church these days but that is not what I am finding. I’m not saying that people don’t love me. I know that they do but I’m not on anyone’s mind when they talk about divorce being a sin. They don’t worry about how they word things.
I have repented. I am not out trolling for a husband inside or outside of the church like lots of women do either. It used to bother me but I can see that I’m different than a lot of divorced Christian women.
That makes me and you the exception rather than the rule. Remember our identity is with Christ and not our flawed sinful life of the past.
Late to the party here, sorry. I don’t know if anyone has mentioned Andy Stanley yet, but his position (and he’s in the top 5 of “high profile” pastors in the U.S.) is that he just flat won’t go on these shows.
I agree with him. I find Trevor’s “script” pretty troubling. He’s not winning a debate, even if he’s representing the Bible and Christ accurately (and I would dispute that slightly).
The bigger issue is that Trevor would consider going on a show like this in the first place. It’s just flat the wrong forum. Time & energy should not be spent even considering it. There is no way to “accurately” represent Christ in a forum like this.
This battle must be fought one-on-one in covenant friendship with homosexuals – its the only way – and its the way we’re (largely) unwilling to consider.
Beautiful. Thank you!
[...] http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2011/10/18/how-i-wish-the-homosexuality-debate-would-g… Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. [...]
[...] to speak with those who disagree with love, truth, humility, paradigm-shifts and boldness. Go here. Like this:LikeBe the first to like this [...]
Excellent article. We are ALL Sinners!
[...] read Trevin Wax’s dialogue post, “How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go,” where Trevin explains how he wish Christians would respond on TV shows like [...]
Hi all, I take the point about homosexual urges and homosexual activity. I commend celibate people struggling faithfully with homosexual urges and would like to see them acknowledged by this interview as a celibate heterosexual man (single celibate people often seem to go unacknowledged until we sin then judgement is quickly passed). Generally though I think this is a really good treatment of the subject and wish we saw interviews go this way. I think a major point we almost always miss about sin is that it is primarily about our relationship with God. I think Christian thinking is often hijacked by a secular understanding of sin that defines it without reference to God purely by reference to ‘human feeling’. Though this is a shifty position because different humans feel different things. I think its important that we communicate that this is not an option for the Christian we must come to the Bible as a whole and reason with it. The problem is that’s not sound bite stuff and you always get nonsense arguments about the Bible supporting stoning children and the like (which is largely unreasoned and does not take into account the fullness of God’s revelation). Anyway thank you for this article. God blessed me by it.
[...] also want to link to this article called “How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate would go.” It was linked to in the article I talked about above. It is one of the best short [...]
[...] How I wish the Homosexuality Debate would go [...]
I think it would also be useful to note that just as I and others must, as Christians, repent daily of certain sins (a pretty bad temper in my case) and fight to keep them in check, so must a homosexual who wants to follow Jesus.
And, since we’re dealing with all these modern folks who are so proud of how “uninhibited” they are, some middle-aged man whose physician wants to check the old prostate every so often (who wants cancer?) should just come out and say that anyone who likes getting the equivalent of a prostate exam has to be nuts, and anyone who gets his kicks giving it has to be more than just a little bit cruel.
[...] Por Trevin Wax. Copyright © 2013 The Gospel Coalition, Inc. All rights reserved. Original: How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go [...]
I fail to understand how one can claim that Jesus is God (gods are immortal), and that he died for our sins. The argument that he became man and sacrificed his life for our sins is also inconsistent. Where is the sacrifice if what you are apparently losing will be returned to you in a short while
Mr. Dewar you have to understand GOD THE FATHER, JESUS THE SON, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT, are all the same GOD. ALL existed before the creation of the earth and man. GOD BEING IN THREE FORMS, at the same time is hard for us as HIS creation is hard for us to understand . At the same time easy for him because HE IS GOD not a human. I hope this helps.
[...] How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go – Trevin Wax. Rate this:Share this:ShareFacebookTwitterEmailPrintLike this:Like Loading… [...]
I would also add that since those engaged in the homosexual lifestyle have a higher rate of suicide, alcoholism, drug abuse, sexually transmitted disease, and that the Jesus, who in the beginning was the Word, says an unrepentant sinner will not inherit the kingdom of God, For a Christian to sit by and let a person head down a path that leads to physical, emotional and spritual death is NOT the most loving way to be. Those who want them to continue on the path to destruction just because they want too, would be no different than some giving a person addicted to meth the money to go buy some. Those people demanding acceptance are the ones who are demonstrating the most hate.
God is a God of Love, but he is also a God of virtue and rightenous. You cannot claim, as some have, that he will forgive all sins, both repented and unrepented because he is a God of Love. He only forgives the former, not the latter.
Meant to say good comment but I believe it was a God comment too.
Godd comment Trevin..i agree with you wholeheartedly