Skip to comments.Reflections on Homosexuality
Posted on 08/05/2012 1:34:44 PM PDT by Morgana
While a student at Dallas Seminary a good friend of mine and I went to an IHOP to study for a Hebrew exam. My friend seemed unusually anxious, tender and, admittedly, a bit awkward. At some point during the evening I finally asked him if he was okay. He looked around cautiously, then in a whisper said to me, I need to tell you something I have never told anyone else before.
Okay, I said. You can tell me anything.
Im gay. With that, I stood up from the table, invited him to stand up, and gave him and a hug and told him he was my brother and that I loved him.
I dont think that heterosexuals like me can even begin to fathom the intense anxiety embedded within the heart of a gay individual, particularly if he or she is still in the process of attempting to be public about his or her inner-world. Being sensitive about such things, while at the same time affirming and embracing values that are higher than whatever brokenness and messiness we have, whether gay or straight, is tough.
Ironies Christians Must Wrestle With
Here are some ironies that I see regarding homosexuality and Christianity in general. First, I am blown away by the number of couples who claim to be Christian who are living together outside of a sanctioned marriage covenant, are sexually active, etc., and yet willing to denounce homosexual marriage as inappropriate and sinful.
I am also intrigued that our more liberal friends in the church and society move heaven and earth to dismantle the biological/genetic differences between men and women, and yet go to great lengths to amplify the supposed biological/genetic differences between a homosexual and a heterosexual.
I wonder how many heterosexual married men sitting in our pews voice disdain for homosexuality but go home and quietly turn to the Internet to watch lesbian porn.
The church seems so concerned about gay marriage, but I wonder where we were when no-fault divorces were first redefining our culture.
What if all the money and manpower available to Chick-Fil-A on August 1, 2012 were directed by Chrisitans toward eradicating the water crisis in Africa or poverty in the inner-cities of America?
When in general terms gays and lesbians find genuine love and care from within their own community and not from followers of Christ, then perhaps their claim we are homophobic is right on.
Values We Must Own, Whether Gay or Straight
Hebrews 12:15-16 puts forward a remarkable statement that on the surface is confusing: See to it . . . that no one is sexually immoral or unholy like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal. The confusion comes because in the Old Testament story of Esau selling his birthright for a bowl of soup (see Genesis 25:29-34) there is not one reference to sexual immorality. What is it that the writer of Hebrews is saying?
He is laying out a principle of life, one that is applicable to the heterosexual person and homosexual person, and it is this: Esau was born hungry and needed food for survival, but that did not necessitate Esau letting his hunger define him and cause him to set aside Gods very best (in his case, the all-important blessing of birthright) for lesser things (a bowl of stew). From this insight consider the following reflections:
First, being born a certain way, whether real or perceived, does not justify forfeiting Gods best for our lives. Esau was hungry, understandably so, but to throw aside what God had designed for his life due to his hunger was completely inappropriate. The assumption that one has a disposition toward certain behavior or beliefs does not justify settling for something that God has not prescribed. As it relates to sex and sexuality, this means that settling for something less than Gods prescription of a one-man/one-woman covenant relationship, as ordained by God in Genesis 1 and 2 and affirmed by Jesus in Matthew 19, is sin, whether one is gay or straight.
Secondly, we must discern how to satisfy our real or perceived dispositions without settling for something less than Gods best for our lives. For Esau it would have been to strongly deny the temptation to forfeit his birthright, satisfying his hunger with something less than the grandiose enticement put before him. As it relates to sex and sexuality, for any of us, straight or gay, it must mean amplifying meaningful intimate relationships without the sexual overtones. It might mean embracing or at least acknowledging an orientation while not letting certain behavior get the best of us.
Thirdly, it might mean we simply dont get the bowl of soup. You mean, I am not allowed to be sexually engaged unless it fits within the one-man/one-woman covenant relationship? Yes. That is exactly what that means. The only alternative to the marriage covenant between one man and one woman is celibacy, regardless of whether one has a gay orientation or a straight orientation. There are no exceptions to this.
Fourthly, we must distinguish between conditioning and conduct. Esau was conditioned by the fact of his existence and his immediate environment to be hungry. Being conditioned a certain way is not inherently wrong. It is what one does with that conditioning that merits attention, and for him it was to throw good things away to satisfy his hunger. With this in mind, it is notable that the Bible never speaks against homosexual orientationonly those who practice consensual homosexual acts (see 1 Corinthians 6:9, for example). This has huge implications for gays and heterosexualshow we perceive one another and ourselves.
Any sexual practice beyond the scope of one-man/one-woman convenant marriage is sin, whether one is homosexual or heterosexual. Period.
We are exhorted to limit our fellowship with believers who persist in sexual immorality (see 1 Corinthians 5:9-13), whether gay or straight. This may even include family members or friends that we dearly love. The goal, of course, is restoration (see Galatians 6:1-2).
We should welcome all who in their hunger and thirst for righteousness willingly humble themselves before the Lord Jesus (Gal. 6:10).
Quit arguing with gay people about whether or not they were born gay. All of us have real or perceived dispositions to contend with. The question is whether or not we will fully surrender ourselves to the Lords will for our lives.
There is never a place for mistreating or being disrespectful to a homosexual. Or anyone, for that matter. Ever. Doing so is evil.
If heterosexuals have found themselves mistreating or being hateful toward homosexuals, then they must repent. We must remember that Jesus bled for all people. Everyone has worth and dignity.
If homosexuals (and heterosexuals, for that matter) are making sexual choices apart from Gods one-man/one-woman covenant marriage context, then they must repent. God never condemns the orientation, but he is crystal clear regarding his expectations for the unique and powerful gift which is sex.
I need not ask how many FReeper men do the same!
I refuse to be preached at by some dopey pastor who has not lived in a gay activist metropolis for over 30 years like I have! I learned everything I need to know about gay male behavior working at Studio 54 in the 1970s (Truman Capote, Mick Jagger and Roy Cohn - I mean you!).
I’m Protestant but I think this is an interesting Roman Catholic response to this topic:
Arrrgh. Sometimes I just can’t keep my trap shut!
That is funny because I am Catholic and the preacher who wrote this article is Protestant.
Honestly I feel he made some good points in bringing to light the lack of sexual morality of even heterosexual Americans.
We need to hear this more often from both Protestant and Catholic clergy.
Good arguments. There always is compassion in Christianity—or should be. But to ever act like sodomy is not an obvious sin is grievous, as it is for other sexual sin. To enable sinners is evil. To push for laws that recognize the act of sodomy as a “right” is also evil. “Just Law” forbids it.
To not condemn evil, is also evil. Sinners always should understand what is Right and Wrong-—and they do, if they listen to their heart. People should never encourage sin, and dragging people into the sewer. That is really unchristian and confuses the next generation.
Christian Ethics are the basis of American Jurisprudence-—or was when we had a Constitutional government of Rule of Law (Justice).
You may be right, but I’ve never seen any Freeper men argue that, because we do it, it mustn’t be labelled a sin.
I sin every day. Whether I repent or not is between my higher power and me.
A lot of good and a little bit of error in this article. Overall, though, I agree heartily with his message.
Homosexual behavior is not right and the behavior is to be eschewed. Abuse of homosexuals is not godly behavior.
All of us are born sinful—whatever sinful habits we learn, whether sins of a sexual nature or of a different kind are to be avoided.
What do you think he got wrong? He seems to have hitten quite a few marks correctly.
Is not this ‘pastor’s’ tolerance of what God has told us is intolerable the very reason the sexual degeneracy presence is growing in the congregations and poisoning the pulpits?
I believe Pastor Matthew’s main point was something to do with what Jesus said about helping your brother when you have something in your own eye. Know what I mean.
We are quick to be very harsh on homosexuality, with good reason, but on the flip side look at how much heterosexual sex offends God?
Every day Wagglebee, and other FReepers like him including myself post stories of how condoms are being passed out to 12 year olds. Okay those 12 year olds are not making water ballons with the condoms! So we can all see that sexual morality in America has gone in the tank and it is not just homosexual sex.
I think the homosexualist movement would probably never have gained the power it has now if it weren’t for the acceptance of the birth control pill and abortions earlier in the 20th century. Both Rome and the major Protestant denominations had the same view about these issues until the Anglicans endorsed usage of contraception around 1930. The whole divorce of procreation from the act of sex paved the road for the mind-numbing idiocy of same-sex “marriage” today.
Pastor Matthew, I'm really sorry Chick Fil-A Wednesday bothered you, but incidentally, what did you think about the militant sodomites trying to bully people AWAY from CFA? Any disapproval for them?
Pastor Matthew, it's true that there's a water crisis in Africa. There's a drought in the US as well. What should we do about that?
Also, Pastor, how exactly do you propose we go about "eradicating poverty" when Jesus plainly said that the poor will always be with us? Are you privy to some special information He didn't have?
People have the right to make moral judgements for themselves. We as a society reject homosexuality for our own personal reasons, be it religious or it simply is disgusting to us. What has me bothered is that regardless of why we have chosen our views, we have them and are entitled to them, yet, the homosexuals want us to accept their behaviors without question. They want to remove our freedom of choice, which does violate our rights to religous freedom.
There is evil in a man who, knowing he is a man, and knowing what is expected of him in this life, stands there and says he is gay. He is given all the body parts of a man. He was given all the mental parts of a man. For him to say he is gay is a perversion of nature, nothing else. All that is necessary for normalcy is for him to be what nature intended for him to be. Making up your mind to do otherwise is a choice, a choice that he should pay for.
That's a valid point some choose to ignore.
What he gets wrong is the same thing every liberal gets wrong. His default position is that heterosexuals are hateful and disrespectful toward homosexuals. The homosexual act deserves no respect, the Pastor himself says it is sinful. Do we now respect sin? What kind of inane crap is that? And why shou;d I respect anybody, hetero or homo, who insists on telling me how they get their jollies?
More to the point same gender people can not engage in sexual acts since the sexual act implies the possibilty of sexual reproduction.
I don’t hate or disrespect gay folks. I don’t care what they do in their bedroom until they bring their bedroom into my living room. When they do that they will get disdain, not respect.
“”What if all the money and manpower available to Chick-Fil-A on August 1, 2012 were directed by Chrisitans toward eradicating the water crisis in Africa or poverty in the inner-cities of America?””
What the Pastor fails to understand is that those are issues for the people that are affected to solve. No one can do that for them. He is saying that there are those without water or living in poverty because someone else didn’t give something to them.
I agree with you.
While I believe that marriage should remain one man/one woman and thus am against same sex marriage, I do sometimes find it hypocritical that there is not more said (as the author of the piece duly noted) about heterosexual behaviors, such as cohabitation, promiscuous dating, pornography, deliberate single motherhood, and all sundry that have become a craze among hip heteros.
These things break down society as much. I think I am opposed to gay marriage also because I strongly suspect it would mean an increase of the above.
“I think the homosexualist movement would probably never have gained the power it has now if it werent for the acceptance of the birth control pill and abortions earlier in the 20th century. Both Rome and the major Protestant denominations had the same view about these issues until the Anglicans endorsed usage of contraception around 1930. The whole divorce of procreation from the act of sex paved the road for the mind-numbing idiocy of same-sex marriage today.”
Bravo. Absolutely. And same sex marriage in the end is really symptom, cosequence, incident of the ideologies of recreational sex, feminism, abortion, no-fault divorce which took hold decades ago. We are in the last consequence of all of this. Same sex marriage is not cause but effect.
“People have the right to make moral judgements for themselves. We as a society reject homosexuality for our own personal reasons, be it religious or it simply is disgusting to us. What has me bothered is that regardless of why we have chosen our views, we have them and are entitled to them, yet, the homosexuals want us to accept their behaviors without question. They want to remove our freedom of choice, which does violate our rights to religous freedom.”
True, and as RF pointed out we as a society once rejected birth control and heterosex out side of marriage.
Somehow the devil (One being named Margaret Sanger) got inside our churches and changed all that.
Although some of use still believe that way it would appear we are in the minority.
Yes RF I too somehow suspect birth control and abortion has lead to homosexuality but am unsure of exactly how. Homosexuals have always been with us just in the closet. So why after BC and abortion came about did they come out of the closet?
Yes they thrust it in our face and want us to accept them. I can’t help but wonder if we did not go after all the hetero sexual immorality (sex out of wedlock, porn, et cetera) that is around is and clean it up maybe we could rid ourselves of the rest?
To paraphrase Reformed pastor Douglas Wilson, the call for “same-sex marriage” happens at the end, not the beginning, of the fall into depravity. However, it’s sadly not the end. The polyamorists, incestuous, pedophiles and incestuous will soon be demanding their “rights” to criminalize disagreement and disapproval of their sexual practices on the grounds of “fighting hate” as well.
Men aren’t born that way, they get hurt or molested as children and fall into habits that are hard to break. See
Dr.Jeffrey Satinover’s book, “Homosexuality and the Politics
of Truth”. They can get well. There are Christian Missions that are quite successful in helping men to be healed. The homosexual activists want you to think they are born that way. You are making a mistake in believing
Could you be reading him wrong? Perhaps I am wrong, but the way I read the article was a bit like what I was taught growing up...that sinful behavior, whether homosexual or heterosexual, is condemned by God.
I think he made good points about no fault divorce, so-called lesbian porn, and orientation vs. behavior.
My grandfather, gone for more than 20 years now, was a pastor of a Protestant church. He was a conservative man and he counseled people who were struggling with all areas of life...financial, spiritual, sexual...and while he urged them to stop SINNING lest they die, he also let them know Jesus Christ was REAL and redeem them from their ways.
Yes, I believe fully that all of this will follow. That is of course unless something can be done to reverse the tide before it’s too late. If the curret trajectory is followed then yes that will be the result.
Slight correction to my previous statement:
To paraphrase Reformed pastor Douglas Wilson, the call for same-sex marriage happens at the end, not the beginning, of the fall into depravity. However, its sadly not the end. The polyamorists, incestuous, pedophiles and zoophiles will soon be demanding their rights to criminalize disagreement and disapproval of their sexual practices on the grounds of fighting hate as well.
“but the way I read the article was a bit like what I was taught growing up...that sinful behavior, whether homosexual or heterosexual, is condemned by God.”
That is how I read it and why I posted the article in the first place!
“I think he made good points about no fault divorce, so-called lesbian porn, and orientation vs. behavior.”
You’re not just whistling Dixie!!!!
Yes, we were just discussing the beastiality promotion in the new Skittles ad. It is expected but nonetheless alarming.
Well said. See #27
The what on the skittles ad????
Look at mlizzy’s post to me on the Skittles ad and the article about it.
Sorry, different thread ——
#82 on Outcry after Bishop’s Jibe at Gay Marriage
As a regular church attender, I can never recall a sermon about divorce, abortion, or homesexuality. These are topics that ministers never tackle in public.
Looking into the Old Testament, how many wives did David “the beloved” have. YHWH looked into his heart (and liked what he saw). How about Solomon “the wisest man in the world”. How many wives did he have? As I recall 700. When did the allowed number of wives become one?
The thing we must always remember:
Sexual relations outside of Holy Matrimony are mortal sin.
Holy Matrimony are between one man and one woman.
Everyone is called to chastity, outside of marriage, both spirit and body.
To pretend that because there are hypocrites in the world that someone else deserves some kind of acceptance for their sinfulness is ridiculous.
Romans 1: Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.
“Yes RF I too somehow suspect birth control and abortion has lead to homosexuality but am unsure of exactly how. Homosexuals have always been with us just in the closet. So why after BC and abortion came about did they come out of the closet?”
Remember that male homosexuality was quite rampant in the pagan Greco-Roman world and the Christian church always looked down upon it. It closed off the sex gift from its use for promoting the gift of life and the creation of more human beings who could become Christians and serve God. This is a good argument against abortion as well.
Once the Margaret Sanger/Alfred Kinsey/Hugh Hefner view of sexuality took hold of the culture along with the feministic view that “men and women are absolutely the same and interchangeable in all areas), modern day homosexualism was just one of the numerous consequences of that line of thinking.
“”I wonder how many heterosexual married men sitting in our pews voice disdain for homosexuality but go home and quietly turn to the Internet to watch lesbian porn.” “
I oppose this, but it’s irrelevant to the topic.
If 100% of all men sinned in this way, it still wouldn’t make homosexuality less sinful.
Yep. Couldn’t agree more with the Pastor on those points but he seems to be saying that if heteros do it homos should be able too. Then we’re all sinners in the hands of an angry G-d. Then there are sins of commission and sins of ommision.
Is he gay, as in he has an attraction to the same sex, but doesn’t act on it....or is it that not only does he act on it, but doesn’t even think it should be considered a sin?
Those are two completely different things.
In case number one, it is an acknowledgement that he has a cross to bear, but is willing to deal with it.
“Looking into the Old Testament, how many wives did David the beloved have. YHWH looked into his heart (and liked what he saw). How about Solomon the wisest man in the world. How many wives did he have? As I recall 700. When did the allowed number of wives become one?”
The allowed number was one at creation.
Mankind, after the fall, started corrupting that standard. Some, like you mentioned, went with multiple wives. This behavior was sinful and God’s word on it has not changed.
In the New Testament, Jesus gives marriage examples with one husband and one wife, and argues biblical doctrine based on that presupposition.
Men with more than one wife can’t be ordained into the ministry, according to our instructions in Titus.
Solomon and David are presented as sinners, not as saviors. Where they do well and keep God’s word, we can emulate them. But we can hardly copy them exactly. David, was an adulterer and a murderer; Solomon worshiped foreign gods.
The Catholic church fought the easy divorce laws, and the Protestants stood back silently because the elites told them this was the evil Catholic church trying to foist their beliefs on America.
And when abortion was made a "choice" up to the time of birth, the protestants also were told that the evil Catholics wanted to foist their beliefs on America, so most were silent (I say most, because Dr. Koop back then did oppose abortion, but I can't remember any other prominent Protestant doctor or church leader who did the same).
When Catholics opposed euthanasia in Oregon, again the media went by the meme that the evil Catholics were trying to foist their out of date beliefs on society.
Now with "gay marriage" the Bible churches are the target, but actually it is the Catholics and LDS churches who have been most active in opposing these laws.
David and Solomon lived about 1000 BCE. And reading the Old Testament, you can see the trouble that multiple wives brought to a man: misery and jealousy between the women, strife between the children of different mothers, and having a bunch of wives didn’t stop David from committing adultery with Bathsheba...
the idea of one wife came as the Jewish people slowly came to realize that women were equal to men in dignity, and that polygamy lowered the dignity of women.
So by the time of Malachy, monogamy was accepted, and he insisted that divorce was hated by God.
By the time of Christ, monogamy was the Jewish custom, and at his time there was a big argument among the rabbis about divorce, if it should only be for adultery of the woman, or could it be allowed for lesser reasons. Christ said no divorce, although Paul did allow divorce for a Christian if the non Christian spouse would not allow the practice of religion.
Actually. the beginnings of the nation’s acceptance of homosexuality as an acceptable practice came about with the AIDS epidemic. It was initially called GRID (gay related immune deficiency). The horrible and swift deaths of so many young men stirred sympathy in many segments of our society. The conundrum was that it was difficult to maintain that sympathy and condemn the behavior. Many people of influence in the media and show business made the disease a banner for their own purposes. It goes against good people’s nature to be “mean” to the dying so if you were a “good” person you certainly couldn’t say anything against these folks whose lifestyle actions endangered themselves. They were depicted as brave sensitive intelligent young men who found themselves sick dying and rejected. They were shown as loving and gentle in their relationships, not unlike you and I. All this so we couldn’t handle the epidemic as it should have been handled by quarantine and abstinance. How many of the lives of those talented young men could have been saved if such “mean and drastic “ measures had been employed? I lived through this epidemic here in SF during the 80’s. Many friends died in a matter of months while the board of supreme argued about whether or not to close down the bathhouses. They didn’t die of AIDS, they died of political correctness and the cowardness of a society to address its problems using proper but unpopular responses to its problems. Now it’s s “stop and frisk” being decried. How many more deaths will occur on our streets so that we can avoid being guilty of “racial profiling”? Thanks “progressives”, you have once again moved to avoid overpopulation.
I can’t account for where you’ve gone to church...though I do say divorce has not been addressed very well by the evangelical community...in fact, the push to “love and accept” people who are divorced (which was probably something that was needed) fast became a way for divorce to become “no big deal”...
which is exactly what is the problem with sodomy now.
Yes, we are called to love the sinner but hate the sin.
OTOH, abortion and homosexuality have been addressed by some brave pastors and leaders.
David had many wives, yes....and Solomon did, too. But the lesson of the Tanakh or Old Testament *isn’t* that their familial behavior was exemplary. Indeed, Solomon himself is widely thought to have written an entire book regarding the problems he encountered by his behavior. And one of the two biggest failures of David involved his pursuit of another woman.
The line you reference was perhaps one of the worst in an overall pretty good article.
I agree with you that just because there is one problem in Africa or the inner cities doesn’t mean we needn’t address another cultural problem.
Samaritan’s Purse is doing a great job finding water for the thirsty in Africa. And the poor in the inner city is a RESULT of liberal ideology...not a lack of compassion by evangelical Christians. :)
So I think you make very good points. The bulk of the article, though, was pretty good imo.
I apologize. When I wrote "you", I had in mind plural you, the whole group of posters on this thread. I should have addressed my reply differently and picked a different item to click to reply. It is dissappointing to observe so many people accepting the assumption without thinking that some men are born that way. This assumption makes it difficult for our society to understand the truth and especially difficult for men struggling to recover.