 |
| Image Credit |
So, on the 1st of August, on Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day hundreds of thousands of Americans bought sandwiches from the popular fast food chain. Chick-Fil-A made $30 million on that day, to be donated to anti-gay groups.
Dan Cathy and his chain were being appreciated because they were “guilty as charged” of donating a cumulative $5 million dollars of corporate money to anti-gay groups, including the Family Research Council, called a Hate Group by the Southern Poverty Law Centre.
And in my mind’s eye, I watch Jesus watch these snaking queues of Christians identify with him by buying these sandwiches, and I believe he is very sad.
Why do I believe this?
Because it makes me and so many other Christianscry. And Jesus when he sees us care—enough to give good gifts to our children, to look for a lost coin, or sheep or son–uses the same phrase, how much more would his father care.
5 million dollars for the project of changing people’s sexuality, a project with limited and dubious success, and to oppose gay marriage and gay rights!!
Oh, how has the overwhelmingly positive message of Jesus—love one another; trust God; don’t worry, the Father cares; there is true life only in God; forgive aught against any—got reduced to being against gay marriage, against abortion, against gun control, against immigration, against Barack Obama, against the democrats? Oh my fingers hurt just typing all this!
* * *
Five million dollars is both pocket change to God which he can give those who ask with a single good idea–and a significant sum of money.
It could sponsor 11,904 children for a year, providing them with food, education and clothing through World Vision at $35 a month. It can provide clean water to 250,000 people who might otherwise die young from preventable water-borne diseases, or spend many hours a day hauling water, exposing themselves to violence and sexual assault in the process. Nine year old Rachel Beckwith raised $1.2 million, providing clean water for 60,000 people in Ethiopa.
Because of early and unassisted childbirth, two million people suffer from fistulas. “Women and girls with fistulas become pariahs. Their husbands divorce them, and they are moved to a hut at the edge of the village. They lie there in pools of their waste, feeling deeply ashamed, trying to avoid food and water because of the shame of incontinence, and eventually they die of an infection or simple starvation,” according to The New York Times. Dr Steve Arrowsmith and volunteer doctors who work with the Fistula Foundation could heal 11,111 women for 5 million dollars
And if you believe, as I do, that man does not live by bread alone, but also by every word from the mouth of God, 5 millions dollars will pay for the translation of the entire Bible into 6.15 languages through Wycliffe Bible Translators’ The Seed Company (at $26 for a verse, painstakingly checked through a rigorous six step process). We’ve supported a small part of the Seed Company’s translations, and it’s very satisfying.
* * *
Which of these activities do you think is closer to the heart of Jesus?
Will funding anti-gay organizations make a gay person straight? Sexual desire stems from our unconscious limbic system and the autonomic nervous system. Attempting to change these is fraught with failure. Exodus International, (supported by Chik-fil-A) which attempts reparative, conversion therapy on gays, recently admitted that 99.9% of conversion therapy participants do not experience any change to their sexuality
And if they did? Is that what Jesus primarily came for? Called us to? To make gay people straight?
Or is his mandate that we follow him?
And, perhaps, in the process of following Christ some gay people might marry a heterosexual partner. And some might remain gay, but still love Christ.
Lonnie Frisbee who was instrumental in the founding and flourishing of the Calvary Chapel Movement, and instrumental in the founding of the Vineyard when the spirit fell on hundreds of young peopleas he prayed, Come Holy Spirit was gay, despite his struggles, and died of AIDS.
The remarkable and saintly William Stringfellow was gay, and memorably wroteCan a Homosexual be a Christian? One might as well ask, can an ecclesiastical bureaucrat be a Christian? Can a rich man be a Christian? Can anybody be a Christian? Can a human being be a Christian? All such questions are theologically absurd.
To be a Christian does not have anything essentially to do with conduct or station or repute. To be a Christian does not have anything to do with the common pietisms of ritual, dogma or morals in and of themselves. To be a Christian has, rather, to do with that peculiar state of being bestowed upon men by God….
Can a homosexual be a Christian? Yes: if his sexuality is not an idol.
* * *
And when did following Jesus become synonymous with defending “traditional marriage?” Or disapproving of gays?
What did Jesus say for–or against gays? Nothing!!
His message was love. His message was Himself. Come to me. Eat me. Drink me. Abide in me.
And what happens when we do so? That’s his business. He will take each of us through different paths.
And so there will be rich Christians and poor Christians.
Republican Christians and Democratic Christians.
Christians who are pro-life, and Christians like Ann Lamott who believe, to quote “there are two lives involved in an abortion — one born (the pregnant woman) and one not (the fetus) — but that the born person must be allowed to decide what is right.”
Christians who cheered on George Bush as he bombed Afghanistan and Iraq, and people like our family who were so distressed by it that we immediately started applying for jobs in other countries.
Gay Christians perhaps, and straight Christians.
Christ is too wonderful a treasure, too rich a feast to limit himself or be limited to straight people.
Christianity is a relationship, not a cultural statement. God will call Christians to be salt and light and sweetness in every area of society, among the rich and among the poor; among the highly educated intelligentsia, and those who follow the crowd; among conservatives and among liberals; among the gay and among the straight.
* * *
So what stand would Jesus take on gay marriage, and gay ordination, these schismatic issues? We don’t know, but we can surmise from the four loving detailed biographies we have of him.
Above all things, he hated hypocrisy. He hated self-righteousness and holier-than-thouness. He opposed the unthinking group mind. When the Pharisees of his day all clung together, clucking their tongues, Jesus was on the outside with the least and the last.
And these were the people he sided with, reached out to, spent his time with: Zacchaeus, who was notoriously dishonest. A woman caught in adultery. A woman who had led a sinful life. A woman who had been serially married and now lived “in sin”. A hot-tempered, violent Peter. A friend of prostitutes and sinners, he was called.
And if he met a gay man or woman? He would have preached the gospel to him, as he would to anyone else. He would have loved them, overwhelmingly. And they might in response have adopted traditional marriage. Or perhaps, might not have. That is between them, Jesus, and his Spirit.
Being is a Christians is not about making gay people straight or picketing abortion clinics or defending the intent of the American Founding Fathers or American values.
It is about a relationship with a person. A relationship which turned the world upside down in the first century (Acts 17:6) and will, infallibly turn our world upside down if we let it have its way with us.
Read my new memoir: Rosaries, Reading, Secrets: A Catholic Childhood in India (US) or UK.
Connect on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/anitamathiaswriter/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/anita.mathias/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AnitaMathias1
My book of essays: Wandering Between Two Worlds (US) or UK
Thanks, Frank and Bryan. A complex issue, certainly!
The Southern Poverty Law Center is one of the last groups I would as an, American and a believer in Jesus, give any credibility to.So if they call the Family Research council , a hate group please do not believe it. Go check them out both closely.Like I said before the Chick FillA day was not about being oppositional. It was about standing up for free speech and the right of people to believe in marriage between a man and a woman as the New Testament makes clear. Jesus loves gays,gossips ,adulterers,. He has paid the price for every sin committed,but we can’t stay in our sin and need his grace to really live
You miss the point of the chick fillA dayThe people who bought from chickfillA were responding to the bullying tactics of3or4 mayors of major cities who said chickfillA would not be welcome in their city The owner said he believed in marriage between a man and a woman .. The apostle Paul makes it pretty clear that practicing homosexuality is wrong. That is part of God’s word. There are a lot of other things that are sin including adultery,etc. As a christian I certainly do not look down on such people but I pray for them to have a real relationship with Jesus .
Oof! Thank YOU Anita and LA for your gracious responses. So with you about Christians being defined by what they're against!
Interestingly enough another part of our table discussion last night as a family was the turn out for the Chick-fil-A protest.
One of my daughters thought it was possibly a wrong reaction for Christians to do this IF they were just trying to attack LGBT people. I imagine there were many homosexual bashers were in the queues for chicken that day. And not all Christian.
The focus of your blog title is SO RIGHT. I see believers in Jesus reacting in fear (of losing influence nationally or locally), of seemingly self-righteous behaviour or holding out the theology, without listening, to the ones they criticise, etc., and it makes me upset. Oh my goodness! You are so right about that oppositional stuff!
I'm from N Ireland. We have a history of knee-jerk politics and community tit for tat that dates back centuries! Believers getting into politics with attitudes and vitriol that does not speak of the Jesus quoted.
God IS bigger, and whereas He calls us to be proclaimers of His Message in life, deed and speech, I don't think He needs our help fighting for His reputation!
However, what got me about this Chick-fil-A business was when I started putting myself in the shoes of Dan Cathy. Although I have not scrutinised the transcript of the famous Baptist church interview with Cathy, I wondered if the man was being maligned? What if he had good motives himself?
Why? Because I know members of the family. Because just under two years ago I was in Cathy's WinShape for a conference (on “orality”, not marriage). I was stunned by the amazing, biblical principles expressed so powerfully in a business arena.
While there I was hooked by the family story, their humility, godliness and model for Jesus in business, and what I saw as a God-honouring, winsome approach to the market place, and heard first hand stories of lives literally rescued from the gutter by the Cathy family's principles and their work among the marginalised. The gorgeous facility in Georgia is used to champion the outcast and train them to be “winners” in integrity and influence. It really is quite an amazing story.
Knowing this, what I was hearing and reading just didn't ring true with me. Articles such as one in Washington Times on 5th August – sorry blog comments not letting me post URL! – called “Same Sex Marriage? Dan Cathy never mentioned it”, seemed to be what I believe really happened.
OK … Now take the response many church people, and traditional marriage supporters, came up with – the Appreciation Day. People, like Billy Graham, who could not believe that this was being turned into an issue about LGBT issues and same-sex marriage, and wanted to stand with his personal friend.
The day was not Chick-fil-A's or Cathy's idea. They just served sandwiches, and yes, made a lot of money.
Some believers rallied to Dan Cathy's side, as a man whom they saw as misrepresented and also as someone who so lives for the underdog and the maligned as well as a great Christian presence in business. So people came out in support of him, risking being tainted by what he was supposed to represent!
(I am not so sure I would not support my brother in the same way. I tweeted to that effect on the day).
Is it wrong to stand with someone working so consistently for the good of others, who is being wrongly accused of a stance he never took?
Apologies for my long comments. Unless someone ropes me in again, I too will retire from the conversation.
Thanks for raising the discussion, and thanks for so honourably listening.
Excellent discussion! Thanks for the posting. Given that it sounds like Bryan (bt) is someone of the cloth or at some version of professional ministry, I totally see where he needs to make the determination not only for himself, but for his outward expression. For someone who just sits in the pews and may minister as a lay person to friends, I find that I am not called on to coach individuals on what is right and wrong, so I prefer to just accept what I think is right for me and not declare my beliefs to others. I'm not qualified as y'all are.
Dear Bryan,
Yes, it is has been quite a day. I have read your blog, by the way, and like and agree with your posts, and believe you and I are on the same side.
What upset me is how Christians are allowing themselves to be perceived as anti-gay and waste our energies on this issue when there is so much life and nourishment for ourselves and others in Jesus.
Anyway, I feel a bit silly for posting on this because it is not really an issue which affects me directly, since none of my family or close friends are gay, though we do have a gay employee, and have been helped much through the counsel of a local gay Anglican priest, a canon, no less, who lives with his lover, and does not believe civil partnerships are sin.
I think I am going to retire from this conversation, and think and pray about it some more. As perhaps I should have done before.
I prayed some, of course, and honestly believed that Jesus was sad to see the hundreds of thousands of people outside chick-fil-A supporting their president who was under fire for his views on gays. Thus allowing themselves to be defined by what they were against, rather than what they were for. And that he would prefer the money to be used for those in desperate need.
I don't have anything else that's useful or wise or new or worth saying on the subject, so, if it's okay I won't say any more, but think and pray some more.
Blessings, Anita
It's been quite a day. I have just had quite a time with my family discussing the blog post. Some comments made on the blog and what you wrote last:
Why does she call those groups 'anti-gay' if they are trying to help homosexuals who want to be freed from their lifestyles when they believe it to be sin? Is that really being anti-them when they are being helped? (A young girl asked that!).
I struggle with that one too. I know many people who have been helped by Desert Streams (linked to Exodus Int'l, I understand) and other ministries, and delivered from homosexual tendencies and are now happily married with children.
Can that label 'anti-gay' stem from a belief that God doesn't plan nor want to “heal homosexuals” and thus those groups who say they minister to homosexuals are anti-gay? Another young teen asked that one.
Your questions and comments:
Why do we need to decide about whether such a lifestyle is sinful or not? Because if we don't know what we believe how can we counsel others seeking help? As a minister of God's Word I need to know what the Word says about this and other issues in life? It cannot be ignored. To offer a bland, unclear response to people is not love but is unloving.
What other lifestyles ought we not to speak about? Are you saying we ignore sin when we are sharing the truth? Do we not present the truth, what Jesus has commanded us to teach and let His Holy Spirit convict? Does He not work with us? If He could reach the lost with His love, why are we told to make disciples? Does that not involve asking the hard questions, presenting people with the call to change, to be more like Jesus, to leave sinful ways?
As a married man I need to choose to deny sexual fantasies and flings with other women. My single children seek to preserve themselves for future spouses. We all go against strong desires that (sometimes) rage inside. It's called self-control as God gives grace, strength and as we choose not to follow our 'natural' desires to gratify ourselves, but to do what His word says. Is the homosexual exonerated from this somehow? He gets to set aside self-control because he cannot help himself? This thinking troubles me.
I agree we don't need to obsess about this issue. I don't. But I do need to decide. Like you seem to have done, as you said above.
Are there really only six verses about this issue? Are you referring to all the Bible verses on love, marriage and God's intent for men and women from the Garden of Eden forward to the Marriage Supper of the Lamb and what that pictures? This issue is not about 6 verses. It's bigger than that. It's about the picture of Jesus with His Bride, the Church. It's about God's intention for male and female. The Bible is full of that and where is it ever same sex?
An essential question about those 6 verses though … If you limit yourself to six verses on this subject, will you turn around and say that what the Anglican churches (my denomination too), and what all the others also say, is more important than what God says about it in the Word?
All my life I have sought to have God's Word mould me and not the other way round. You say that there are six verses calling it sin and then tell me people in the Church are making a seismic change of thinking? So who is moulding who?
If the Bible calls it sin, all the united opinion of the people in the world will not change that. If it is sin then God has healing, deliverance and a way for the homosexual, but, like the drug addict, the greedy person, the compulsivive gambler or any one of our bondages, it starts with repentance and asking for His touch and restoration. I seek to walk this out when I face my issues. By the power of the cross it is the only way to victory, but it begins with knowing your sin and calling it that. Am I wrong?
Bryan, the 6-7 verses of Scripture which deal with homosexuality say it is a sin. It is mentioned in the same verse as greed, which is pervasive.
On the other hand, the many ordained gay people in many Christian denominations, including Anglicans I know, do not believe homosexuality is a sin. But that that is how God made them.
John Piper writes how he and other people honestly believed that inter-racial marriage was a sin and against God's will. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/septemberweb-only/john-piper-racism-bloodlines-excerpt.html
They have now changed their minds.
The Christian church is going through a seismic shift in its thinking on the issue of homosexuality.
I honestly don't believe that I, or other Christian lay people, who are not active in counselling or church leadership need obsess over whether homosexuality is a sin, or not.
It is the Spirit who convicts men and women of sin, and guilt and righteousness, and we should leave the judgement of whether they are living in sin or not up to Christian gays to make. While we struggle with our own sin.
Why need we decide if the orientation or lifestyle choices of Christian gays are sinful or not? Shouldn't that be up to them and God?
Thanks for the other comment. Ooh! I hope I am not being the sin police! 😉
How does one obey Jesus' last words to us without also “teaching them to observe all I have commanded you”? (Matt 28)
I have been in many places in this world where the godly lifestyle of the “wordless” messengers was seen by the locals as them being good _________ (fill in the gap with the name of the local religion, which oftentimes was a religion of hate, exclusion, works, and opposite to the ways Jesus taught us, such as 'love your enemy').
So are you saying it is OK to love through a Christ-like life when the 'audience' don't even know about Him? I have the cure for cancer, and they're supposed to guess 1) that they have a life-threatening disease called cancer; 2) and that I carry the cure? I am not allowed to discuss symptoms and to tell them I have the cure (which Jesus gave me to share with them) just in case they get upset with me mentioning cancer?
And where do signs and wonders come into this, if they follow the Word/Message (being proclaimed)? No story about forgiveness = no idea sins can be forgiven!
Thanks for your thoughts LA. Would love to hear from you too, Anita.
LA, you say 'sin' is a man-made term. Is not all language “man-made”? What do you mean?
So the original text says 'hamartano', translated as 'sin', which can also mean “to be without a share in” or “to miss the mark” or “to err, be mistaken” or “to miss or wander from the path” or “to do or go wrong” or “to wander from the law of God, violate God's law”.
A rose by any other name, if there is a Law, and there is a Law Giver, can we not know when someone commits adultery, as with this woman, that they/we have violated God's law?
In your para B where does “Jesus (time and time again) tell us to look to ourselves … before opening our mouths about someone else”? My understanding is that as redeemed sinners we are to share the message of reconciliation with others who need to be reconciled with God. Right after coming to know that reconciliation ourselves.
If I have to reach a certain level of perfection, when do I know that it is time to speak to others? As one called to be an ambassador, I hope that it is soon, because I am not getting any younger and need to obey my Lord's commission! 😉
If Jesus did not come to make bad men good, but dead men alive, am I not commissioned as His disciple to pass on the teaching right after becoming His disciple (Matt. 28)? Didn't Jesus send out 70+ disciples to declare the Message (REPENT for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand = there was something to repent of), heal the sick, etc.? We know at least one of the disciples betrayed Him and another denied Him? Were they ready to go at that time or could there be some other qualification to be a messenger for Jesus … calling people to repent?
I am concerned that you separate Paul as if what he says is not Scripture? Are we talking about the Word of God here or some Bible commentator? Is this the Word of God or man's opinions and best wishes? If the latter, please tell me what basis for Truth you have, so I can better understand where you are coming from?
About the Pharisee and 'publican' story, do you not think that the 'publican' recognised he had violated God's law and was unworthy? Is it not the unworthy attitude that Jesus is looking for and is that which He 'praises' rather than the “looking inward”? Where is the work of the Holy Spirit in finding where we miss the mark? Is it Him who tell us or a result of our own investigation? Who is it that Jesus said convicts the world of “missing the mark”, righteousness and the judgment to come?
Did this 'publican' not know he was separate from God, needed forgiveness for his deeds/words/thoughts/ways (is 'sin' not easier to describe this?)? In this story who of the two would be able to know if his sin would be forgiven? Could that show us anything about Jesus? Is that 'publican' going to “go down to his house” without knowing himself forgiven or knowing he is forgiven? Wouldn't Love convict and pinpoint the mark missed, law violated and then forgiveness granted upon repentance? Forgiven for what? For violating God's law? What story has he to tell now he is forgiven? How can he help others find that forgiveness?
I fail to see why sin – OK, violating God's law or missing the mark of God's standard – is such problem to talk about when we are talking about someone's eternal security and forgiveness?
If the standard is God's Word we both have a measure to go by, because Love gave it to us. If the standard is something else or rooted in better arguments and persuasion then will there not always be someone more clever than us two, someone who could have everything in the right place but be very deceived and exceptionally misleading of others?
@bt…I didn't answer your other question. I think that our call to bring all into Christ is best accomplished through a Christ-like life of following the one commandment -to love others. Period. No exceptions. No pointing out sins. No “loving the sinner but hating the sin” (which I find to be a dangerous saying). No admonishments. Love one another as I have loved you. No qualifications. From that, all are drawn to God. Think about the people who have drawn people to God globally and what distinguished them. More deep Christians are gained through this very simple, unqualified love than through any preaching of sin and how to find it.
We must, in my humble opinion, trust more in God to work in someone's sinful lives (including our own) and rely less on our own judgements and preaching about sin. God's job is to reconcile all to himself, our job is to love one another. Trust in God's ability to do the reconciling. It's hard not being in control, not being the sin police, but that's God's job :).
“the prize” is a deep and abiding love of all as h commanded us was above all other commandments (including all those “sins”). Remember too that “sin” is a wholly man-made term. If you look to the original texts, the word “sin” in the phrase “go and sin no more” does not mean what we have generally been taught it means. I am very very careful to not use the word at all because
A. A broken relationship with God is something we, as mere humans, cannot ever diagnose. It requires us to be in the thoughts of another, which we cannot be unless we equat ourselves with God. People's words are unreliable in this case since only God can know our true heart.
B. Jesus time and time again reminds us to look to ourselves to ensure perfection before even opening our mouths about someone else. Only legalistic Paul tells some early churches how to deal with folks who are not living lovingly within the communities. The hardest thing about Paul is that we generally have no idea what the precipitating factors were in these early church communities. We have no letters from them, only Paul's reply. Context, even in modern day English is everything. And unfortunately we are missing half of he conversation. Imagine all those overheard phone calls in your life…can you see how you could accurately record the one side but be able to “invent” a whole plethora of ideas about the other side you didn't hear. Paul must, in my opinion be read very carefully especially when he appears to be addressing a particular issue within a particular community.
All in all, I believe it is a natural tendency of humans to constantly look outwards and point out others' “sins”. Jesus reminds us to instead use that energy to look inward and get ALL our ducks in a row before messing around with other people's. Remember the Pharisee praying about not being like that man over there…Jesus heaped the praise on the man looking inward, and admonished the man looking outward at others.
Sorry, LA. Genuine question. What is “the prize” you mention?
In our calling as reconciling men to God how do we keep out of mentioning or confronting the sin issue where it comes up?
Thanks Anita for the response.
I think you might be misunderstanding me. I thought I was careful to point out homosexuality in a list of things (like greed and road rage!) in my reply. I absolutely agree with you that anger, lustful thinking, etc., are wrong and sin “as bad as murder … (and) adultery”.
My question is to do with identifying something as in the sin category or not – to help us know how we are to deal with it and help others stuck in it.
If it is NOT in the sin category then I must be able to be fine with it glorifying God. Because if it is not sin then, biblically, I must in everything glorify God (thoughts, words, actions). But if it is sin how can I glorify God with it? Scripture would even warn us about doubting when it comes to not doing something in faith, right?
This is NOT just homosexuality. It is all areas of life.
I wonder though if we can really keep these things private? If we believe something is sin we need to be teaching that in the Church, exposing sin, pointing people to the way of forgiveness, healing, restoration to God's intent (as revealed in His Word).
The lack of teaching about sex in the Church in the past has led to a lot of unbiblical stuff and lifestyle out there. And confusion.
You see, here's the issue about sin … If someone comes to us or our church and wonders if prostitution is wrong, what are we going to tell them if we don't know or if we believe that we need to be private about these things and not make judgments?
I love the way Jesus interacted with those trying to trick him into stating the party (denominational) line. Take that marvellous story about the woman caught in adultery. He 'showed up' the religious spirit. Then he showed mercy to the woman, but he also told her “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more”! He still called it sin. She knew she had done wrong. But she was freed. He ministered from a clear understanding (and declaration) if her sin, but no one doubts whether this woman felt loved or not.
How can we do that too? That's my goal!
(Personally I feel there is a power here that Christians can do for sinners to love them by declaring forgiveness over those who know their sin and want free from it. Homosexuals too?).
Now our prostitute. What if she is genuinely convicted of sin and comes to us – with no tricks – with genuine hunger for truth? Will we tell her plainly the way of forgiveness and show her the way to freedom from prostitution or hold back from declaring the truth we have come to believe from God's Word?
And so with the homosexual? He/she comes to us and wants to know whether it's sin and if he can find freedom from homosexuality. What will we do? The ramifications for where we come down on this are huge … people who might be in sin taking leadership in the local church, etc., etc.
Do we not need to know and teach whether something is sin or not? If it is not sin we will counsel him/her accordingly and help them with their struggles in other ways to glorify God.
If it is sin, the calling it out to him/her (lovingly) will be the first step in breaking with it. (Have you never had someone confront you in love and it has led to freedom? I know I have!). To hold back is to compound a problem and create confusion in the church. Or worse, to spread a lie.
I want to stay on issue with my point about sin. I would believe we agree with the beams in the eye issue. And, of course, about dealing with our own sins. How can we help anyone with a genuine Gospel (GOOD news/story) message if we are not clear about something being sin or not?
This is why I feel knowing whether something is sin or not – no matter how hotly the culture would dictate a certain topic otherwise! – is so important for the Church and for its ministry of reconciling men to God.
Anita, precisely…let's keep our eyes on the prize. Debating over someone else's relationship with God is placing ourselves in the middle of a 100% private conversation and creating a barrier between someone and a private relationship with God.
BT: You ask, Is homosexuality sin? I have my own opinion on the matter, based on a careful reading of Scripture.
But the point it, since I am not gay myself, it is not my sin. Whether it is sin or not, is an issue for the gay person and Christ, not for me to decide. I have to repent of my own sins.
We see sin on a continuum, with homosexuality worse than meanness or gossip. Christ does not. He says anger is as bad as murder (or abortion, by extension) and eying a woman lustfully is as bad as adultery.
I am wondering if our Christian churches would be so powerful and light-filled if instead of focussing on the actions of the gay community etc. we ourselves took the beams out of our own eyes, and repented of our own sins?
I didn't read the 'sin' word in your post.
I think this is fundamental in your questioning of homosexuality, abortion, as well as any other issues like euthanasia, assisted suicide, greed, road rage, you name it, etc.
I also think its all about Jesus.
Does He have the power to change sinners? Can He deliver us from our sin (as well as forgive us)? If He cannot, why do we believe in Him? Then He is not all-powerful! Then He suddenly becomes judgmental, ineffective, because He shows me my sin but leaves me subject to it. I cannot be changed.
I believe so much what Susan says. He comes to change us. He has the power. He loves us but not in some sort of diluted, accept-all 'tolerance' that does not require submission to His changing us. He doesn't tolerate sin. We are sinners who need to be forgiven, but we also need 'fixed' from our past (habits, addictions, sin abandonment as well as the abuse committed against us). He loves me so intensely that He doesn't leave me where I am.
The question about homosexuality that I do not hear you asking is 'Is it sin?'. If it is, then we can be forgiven AND healed/delivered/fixed from that just as much as from any other (sexual) sin!
If we truly love the sinner, we don't love their sin (and “tolerate” it), we show them what the Bible says and how they can be healed/delivered/fixed, and patiently help them discover their freedom in Jesus. Failure can be and must be forgiven, but Jesus changes us and the goal of that must be before us and our motivation. He does not leave us where we are. I have many practical stories of how He has changed me.
If ____ ('it' – fill in the blank) is not sin, then we do not need to be healed/delivered/fixed or worried, only that we do 'it' for His glory (like all of life).
Surely it is NOT loving to embrace all and yet leave it unchanged. Sometimes we must hear the Word of God speak AGANIST us for us to begin the path to healing/deliverance/being fixed. Or for us to even KNOW that we need to be 'fixed' in that area. How many people need to know in today's world that fornication is wrong and contrary to God's plan to our lives to begin the road to recovery …? The Bible has to speak against us to show us the wrong so we can accept the road to healing, etc.
If the homosexual is not in sin, then He can live his lifestyle to the glory of Jesus, unchanged, but growing in grace. If he is in sin, the picture is very different.
The question foundationally must be, 'Is it sin?'. To NOT ask that is not loving (and frankly, exceptionally careless about what Jesus came to do). To not ask that also will make all our discussion inconclusive.
3 questions:
Is it sin?
Is Jesus all-powerful? (Can He fix this?)
What does the Bible say (about it/Him)?
To all our sin, this is where the healing begins. If you believe in Jesus.
Anita, it's kind of my own term to describe systems of theology where ethical decisions are made within a community atmosphere and the individual's ethics are guided by the thoughts of the group rather than the private discernment of the individual. I believe that communal ethics is responsible for much of these kinds of radically polarizing leanings that your post talks about.
Thanks, MARGARET!
Thanks, SUSAN, and welcome to my blog! I agree, Jesus hung out with the people you and I mention while calling them to a new, purer, holier life. I should have mentioned that.
Thanks for the book recommendation, MOLLIE.
Thanks LA. Afraid the term “communal ethics” is new to me, so obviously haven't done any thinking about it. Will put it on my radar screen of things to learn about and think about.
Amen to you for saying this. In another blog that I frequent, there was a huge and overly pious discussion about gays, gay marriage, etc. and through all the noise, I just kept saying “Jesus calls us to love one another, period.” I was flamed with evangelical piety. I think that the inhabitants of this world of ANY faith have such incredibly bigger fish to fry and that the incredible amount of money wasted on “protecting God” from all this stuff could better be spent on all the things you mentioned and more. God is far, far too big to need us to protect Him from anything.
On another note, I'd like to request a special entry in your blog whenever you feel inspired to do so. I'd like to hear your thoughts on “communal ethics”. I recently took an online class from a seminary where the professor strongly espoused a communal ethics concept. That we live in community and our moral identity should be communally based. He poo-poo'd the more American tradition of moral independence. You had mentioned it briefly in this blog post…about Jesus' preaching against the Pharisaical tradition of the “un-thinking group mind”. I find this un-thinking group mind to be a particularly dangerous yet prevalent side-effect of communal ethics. I'm interested in knowing more about what you think on that.
I recommend the book Out of a Far Country. Chris Yuang says we are called to holy sexuality.
Jesus also said Go and Sin no more. As Susan put so well. He calls us all but does not want to remain in our sin. We are not to keep on sinning.
And since Jesus is the Word of God, is not the whole Bible His words?
I agree with your call for Christians to quit being hypocritical. I think the whole Chick-Fil-A debacle was incredibly stupid and to call it a stand for Christianity or for God is moronic at best. It was mostly a stand for people to be allowed to have personal viewpoints and be allowed to funnel their money to whatever charity or foundation they choose. Nothing to do with Christianity whatsoever.
But I do think there is a need for “conversion therapy” or its like. Not everyone who has homosexual attractions necessarily wants to fulfill them. Finding help to change this fact about themselves is very difficult nowadays as the push is to “embrace your homosexuality”. Mr. Cathy is certainly entitled to give to such charities as he chooses and I hope that he also gives to the charities you mention as well. I agree with you, they are certainly important and their needs are more widespread.
I find atheists to be at least as oppositional as Christians. So it cuts both ways.
Yes, Jesus lived with and spread His message to sinners and the church hierarchy criticized Him for it. However, to say that Jesus simply accepted these people without calling them to change is misguided. He called Zacchaeus to change his ways. He rebuked those who would stone the adulterous woman, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” Is the woman seeking an abortion without sin? Should she cast the first “stone” against her unborn child?
Jesus called on the serially married woman to go and “sin no more”. He rebuked Peter for his outbursts many times, and He praised him for his devotion to Jesus.
I agree wholeheartedly for calling for an end to these petty disagreements between Christians and non-Christians. I think Christians have done their own part in destroying the definition of marriage. I think that these petty disagreements and “holier-than-thou” stances of many Christians, particularly on the internet, does a lot harm to the Christian faith overall.
I hope that I'm making some sense. I'm not good with words. Jesus is more than happy to accept all of us, sinner or saintlike and we are all called to the same. But Jesus also demanded change. He called us to seek to do God's will in the full, not to simply follow the rules and look for loopholes. And he called many to follow Him on His path to the cross. It's not a popular belief and many Christians seem to overlook this. Many will turn away from it. I hope that I will have the courage that Peter and all the apostles had. And I hope to emulate Jesus' love for everyone, from that annoying kid down the street, the atheist who hates me for having five children, and the loving friends who point me towards God's love and grace on a regular basis.
Blessings to you and yours…
“Christianity is a relationship, not a cultural statement.” It seems American Christians have forgotten that as we try to legislate the lost to Jesus. Our way will never work. We need to turn back to Him.
Great post.
Margaret
Thank you, Baroness. And I didn't know you blogged. You've been so quiet about it!
Amen! This is beautiful!
Thank you!