Real Live Preacher - Discussion Continued…
After posting my response to Real Live Preacher and his comments on homosexuality, I had the opportunity to continue the discussion with RLP via e-mail. I indicated I would post his e-mail with my response on our website. That discussion is posted below. His comments are indented with blue type and my responses are in black. His unedited e-mail (actually in two parts) follows the discussion.
You know, I really struggled in responding to your e-mail. I honestly
wanted to keep it short… but I failed miserably! Here’s the deal,
at least read down to the:
**********************
then you can decide if you want to read any further. I don’t expect a
response - but I have appreciated the discussion and your heart.
Should we have the opportunity to talk again, I welcome it.
Maybe I’ll even check out the book…
Darn it, I’m sucked in. Look, I’ll engage you briefly and read your
response to this email if you send one, but then I have to stop.
For my own sanity and peace. I’ve done this so many times now.
It wasn’t my intent to “suck you in” - I didn’t actually expect you to
read my post. But thanks for reading what I had to say and
considering it. I know what it’s like to be busy, so I’m certainly
not offended. Truth be told, I wouldn’t have written a response to
your blog posting except that it was forwarded to me and I felt it was
a good example of the feelings of others I’ve spoken with on the
subject.
re: “we’re not all pharisees.”
You misjudge me. I don’t know who you are refering to with “we’re.”
If you mean conservatives…Some of my best friends are… 
I may well have misjudged you and I apologize for it. I would like to
post this e-mail (unedited, with my response) on our site since it
gives a better view of your personality and heart in this matter. As
for “we”, it was in reference to those of us who believe the Bible
clearly says homosexuality is sin.
seriously, I consider myself to be a conservative. I know that’s a
laugh to you…
I don’t laugh. In fact, though you might find it laughable, many of
the conservatives I know would likely call me too liberal.
Look, I even took a glance at your site and your thorough
discussion of my writing on this issue.
Hmmm… “thorough”… I might have been tempted to choose the
words “long-winded” - though thorough was my intention. “Thorough”
certainly makes me feel better about myself! Thanks for being
diplomatic!
I’m responding slightly out of order, because I want to save you the
time of reading through all my arguments if you’re busy.
I am not the enemy. I don’t know if you can respect my honesty and
how my heart has been broken and how badly I want to be right on
this issue. Lives are at stake.
But that’s the truth of how I feel and think, whatever you think of
me.
I don’t see you as the enemy. I don’t think badly of you. I believe
you say what you say out of compassion and love for people. But if I
may be so bold - compassion and love are fruits of the Spirit, but so
are discernment, wisdom, purity and holiness. These all must exist in
balance and according to Scriptural principles and precepts. Without
which, even these virtues can be skewed and used against God by the
real enemy.
If I am hearing your heart correctly, I hear you making the following
statements:
1. Homosexuals are people - no worse than anyone else.
2. Many Christians treat homosexuals with unfair contempt.
3. Some people seem to have a genuine orientation to homosexuality.
4. It is difficult to explain all this within the will of God.
How do I reconcile all this with what Scripture appears to say?
I agree with all 4 of your main points. I simply maintain that we
cannot change what Scripture says clearly - whether we want to admit
it or not. God’s Word says homosexuality is sin. We cannot redefine
sin so that it makes us, or those we love, feel better about
ourselves. We can make the Bible say whatever we want - but if we’re
honest, it’s hard to get around this one. And if we are just “trying
to get around it”, we’re not being honest with Scripture. God never
said holiness was easy or that it was in agreement with our nature or
orientation. In fact, the Bible says quite the opposite.
Rom 7:15 I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I
want, but I do the very thing I hate.
So we love sinners and teach them the truth, accepting that we too are
sinners and hoping somehow to refine each other and grow into the
purity and holiness God desires of us - knowing that we will never
fully reach that goal this side of eternity.
But we can never teach people the truth if we skew and manipulate
Scripture trying to make it mean what we want it to mean. We must
follow the truth of Scripture no matter how painful it is, how it
affects those we love (Matthew 10:37) or how much we desire to be
right on an issue - even if our motivations seem pure.
I’m telling you that I have met Spirit filled homosexual
Christians. Gentle, lovers of God, people who clearly have the
fruit of the Spirit and continue to love the church and the work of
Christ in spite of being rejected.
I’ve known many a person - including myself - who have evidenced
fruits of the Spirit and lived hideously sinful lives. I’m not here
to judge their salvation. God knows, I wrestle with my own - still
today - on a daily basis (and I’m a Baptist for Heaven’s sake, we’re
all supposed to believe in “once-saved-always-saved”). But I’ve
walked that road, and I believe that we cannot truly please God unless
we repent of our sin, take up our cross (be it homosexuality,
alcoholism, addiction, pornography, materialism… whatever) and try to
live for Jesus. How can we repent unless we’re willing to admit of
our sin? How can we lead others to repent unless we are honest with
them about their sin? How can we become what God wants us to be, if
we’re not willing to admit that we have some serious work to do?
I’m telling you that I have not known what to do with that reality.
So I’ve prayed and made my best choice.
God help me. God help us all.
Indeed, God help us all. Particularly you and I - and all teachers -
since we will be held accountable even more strictly (James 3:1)
because people often take their beliefs from us. God help us to be
honest with Him, with ourselves and with Scripture. I hope you will
consider the issue seriously based on my remarks and those of others.
I tell you honestly that I have genuinely considered the issue in
light of your comments.
But we must each make our own choice.
I’ve addressed your statements/arguments below in detail. I hope you
will read them. Either way, may God lead us both into all truth,
understanding and love. Thanks for being honest - I mean that, and I
hope you will accept my own honesty in return. And since I may not
have the opportunity to speak with you again, God be with you.
Love God. Live God.
Scott
**********************
What I mean is that the idea of sexual orientation is relatively
new. Paul did not know that some people identify or are oriented
toward homosexuality. Careful, I’m not saying that God made people
that way. Who knows how it happens, but I have dear homosexual
friends, dedicated Christians, whom I trust with my lifea and with
whom I’ve had gut Wrenching conversations. They only know that
they’ve always been this way, at least since early childhood.
I do understand what you’re saying. I’m familiar with the argument
that “homosexuality in the ancient world was more about pederasty than
the current idea of committed homosexuality.” Here’s what I’m saying:
1. The Old Testament moral laws existed long before ancient Greece
and Rome and its use of pederasty in the “education” of young male
students, and Scripture is clear that it is the act of “laying with a
man as with a woman” that is forbidden. There is no exception given
in any Scripture passage at all. And to claim that pederasty -
because it was prominent - was the only form of homosexuality
evidenced in that time period is absurd considering evidence to the
contrary. Homosexuality has existed in some form or degree in nearly
every major civilization in history - the only difference is the
degree of openness about it in our modern society in recent years.
2. Most of those homosexual relationships in ancient Rome classified
as pederasty were “consenting” and were of mutual benefit. There is
no difference here between the ancient view of homosexuality and the
modern view except the age factor and the mutual benefit - which were
common elements even among most heterosexual marriages up until
relatively recent Western culture.
3. According to this reasoning, it would be morally wrong for a woman
to marry a man because he can provide for her. Because the [homosexual]
relationships forged between the two men (usually a young man and a
younger student) were akin to actual marriage -
http://www.truthtree.com/pederasty.shtml. It would also be wrong for
a young woman to be married to an older man - as was the case in most
of the ancient world. Likewise, arranged marriages would be morally
wrong because it was not based on romantic love and sometimes not even
on mutual consent.
4. According to this reasoning, heterosexual relationships outside of
marriage would also be acceptable (though it is defined
as “fornication” in the Bible) because it is a consensual loving
relationship - even though it is outside the bonds of the Biblical
concept of marriage.
5. If we apply the concept of “fornication” found in the Bible, we
see that any sexual relationship outside the bonds of the Biblical
concept of marriage is morally wrong. Marriage is always - without
exception - understood in the context of male and female in the
Bible. There is no sudden “evolution” in humanity over the past 25
years - not even the sexual revolution - that can make something that
has been forbidden throughout history suddenly okay. The only
exception to this would be direct revelation from God, but we know the
next time Jesus returns it will be to take us home.
The core of my argument is that there is “no fundamental difference”
between the ancient concept of homosexuality and the modern concept.
The only difference is the attitude of our particular Western culture
towards that concept.
To say that someone is “oriented” to homosexuality is no different
than saying that someone is “oriented” toward alcoholism. Surely you
wouldn’t encourage the alcoholic to continue in that lifestyle… even
if he were loving and gentle and bore some fruits of the Spirit.
And what about those who, by the very location of their birth and the
culture in which they are raised, are “oriented” to believe against
Christ? Do we dismiss the word of God that says “no man comes to the
Father except by me”?
No one knew about orientation back then. homosexuality was just a
perverse sex act that some people engaged it, usually in the middle
of some pagan act of worship or in some other promiscuous context.
When Paul speaks of homosexuality, it is always some specific
homosexual act or action. The NIV, for goodness sakes even specified
behavior in the Corinthian passage. I mean, you and I can quibble
over the details of the translation but it is not addressing the
orientation of homosexuality and gentle people living in peace and
engaging in it. Paul knew nothing of this.
You are assuming that the modern concept of “orientation” is somehow
different than in the past. This is just not so. Do you really think
that people were so ignorant in Paul’s day that they couldn’t identify
feminine tendencies in young men and understand the same concept
of “orientation” that we do today? Are we really going to be that
arrogant? The difference is that throughout most of history, society
has taught these young men that such behavior was morally wrong. Why
do people insist that suddenly there has been some change in morality?
BTW, the scholars I spoke of were on the NIV translation committee
who translated the corinthian passage.C’mon, I was quoting the NIV
so you can’t exactly call me sloppy there, though it is an idea for
idea translation.)
We both know the NIV committee was a pretty diverse group - including
some that would be considered at best “marginally” Christian.
Same with the Romans passage. When I said, “I don’t know exactly
what Paul is talking about, I was being honest. Paul says that
homosexuality is a judgment laid down on people who have rejected
God utterly and worshipped creation instead. He’s seeing crazed acts
by people burning with lust and engagin in God knows what kind of
behavior and he sees all of it as a judgment from God.
I suggest re-reading the [third] sentence of your paragraph. If that’s
true, then your whole case just went up in smoke.
I simply mean that my homosexual Christian friends don’t fit that
picture. Not at all. So I just can’t make it line up in my mind. I
wish I could. My life would be so much easier if I saw it your way.
I will likely never work in another Baptist church because of what I
said. Do you think I’m happy about that? It scares the hell out of
me.
I would argue to the contrary - that life in our current culture would
be much easier if we could all see it your way. But I understand your
point.
But honestly consider the arguments of those who say that that
homosexuality is wrong. If Scripture says one thing and your heart
and mind say another… which do you choose? I live to this day with
the intense feeling of fear that God might not forgive me for my
past. But I have to take God’s word from Scripture that he forgives
me, regardless of what my heart and sometimes even my mind says.
Final thought:
Do you believe that Christians should be able to own slaves? The New
Testament clearly says we may. I’m not saying we are commanded to,
but it says that it’s okay.
…
There are more New Testament and bible passages supporting slavery
than speaking against specific homosexual acts. Heck, there’s a
whole book of the bible that exists because Paul understood
Philemon’s right to own slaves.
…
My point is, if you think that it is no longer acceptable for
Christians to own slaves - and I hope you do not - I am only reading
the New Testament in the same way with this issue, making the same
cultural allowances, and seeking the leadership of the Spirit in
light of new understanding of a complex issue.
As you say, not to go onto a side issue, but I do believe that slavery
is wrong. I believe the Bible teaches implicitly that slavery is
wrong. Nonetheless, allowances are made in both Old and New
Testaments for slavery. However, to the contrary, homosexuality is
condemned in both Old and New Testaments.
Of course, the Biblical definition of slavery (at least in the
understanding and laws of the Jews) was not the same as the slavery
shamefully evidenced in our American history.
As I see it, I have Christian brothers and sisters who tell me that
they live in peace and in love. I read the New Testament and find
two specific prohibitions against specific homosexual acts that I
can’t quite pin down because the context is difficult at best.
I’ve met lots of atheists who live in peace and love, as well as lots
of Buddhists and pagans. I mean, the whole “free love” hippie thing
was started by people who wanted to live in peace and love. Do you
believe that God is pleased with them? I think not.
The Bible, as a whole, is clear that homosexuality is wrong. To say
otherwise - I say this in love - is trying to justify what we want to
believe.
So I trust them enough to say, “Okay, I’m unclear on this issue and
am willing to be in fellowship with you in my uncertainty.”
I’m going to step out on a limb here. If it weren’t for the fact that
there are people that you know and care for who *are* homosexual,
would you still think the Bible is unclear on the issue? If it
weren’t such a big cultural issue right now, would you still question
what the Bible says clearly? Consider the questions honestly.
I do not suggest that we should ostracize homosexuals from society.
Neither do I suggest that we refuse to love, converse with or reach
out to homosexuals - even homosexual believers. But Scripture is very
clear that we are not to have homosexuals who claim to be believers as
part of our close fellowship - and particularly not as intimate
members of the church (intimate membership, as I see it, means more
than simple church attendance). And even if an individual decides, in
compassion and with undeniable leading of God, to violate that rule -
we absolutely must not take the liberty to say that what the Bible
calls sinful behavior is somehow ok. Dare we argue with God?
It is the same dynamic, in my opinion, that was at work in Acts 10-
15. Their bible told them to stay away from gentiles and not to mix
with them, especially not these wild gentiles influenced so deeply
by greek culture. Their bible was clear on this.
…
And then they were presented with the greatest dilemma of their
lives. Gentiles receiving the Holy Spirit of God. They had to choose
between what they thought the bible had taught them all along and
what the Spirit was clearly doing in their midst.
There is a fundamental difference you are neglecting here - Scripture
clearly prophesied that the Gentiles would eventually be brought into
God’s Kingdom…
Isa 11:10 And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall
stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and
his rest shall be glorious.
In some translations the word “Gentiles” is translated as nations,
but it carried the meaning gentiles to those who read it since all
other nations were gentiles to the Jews. Here are some additional OT
references: Isaiah 42:6, 49:6; Malachi 1:11. Please also note that
Isaiah 11:10 is even referenced of Jesus in Matthew 12:21.
And it was not just a conflict about “what the bible had taught them
all along and what the Spirit was clearly doing in their midst”.
Quite the opposite, it was a conflict about what their teachers and
tradition taught them (ie. that gentiles were outside God’s redemptive
work) versus what Scripture clearly and explicitly stated in their own
prophecy about the Messiah - in conjunction with what the Spirit was
doing.
There is no prophecy specifically regarding homosexuals or
homosexuality. But there are many references regarding sexual
morality in the NT and how it applies to believers, all of which - if
taken logically, historically, and culturally - work against the idea
that homosexuality is morally right.
I guess that’s it. I don’t claim to have all the answers. I just
don’t think we should dodge the ones God has clearly given us.
————————————————————————————
Real Live Preacher - Unedited original e-mail
sanity and peace. I've done this so many times now.
re: "we're not all pharisees."
You misjudge me. I don't know who you are refering to with "we're." If you
mean conservatives...Some of my best friends are... ;-)
seriously, I consider myself to be a conservative. I know that's a laugh to
you, but in the broad theological spectrum... I read the scriptures and
particiapte in a church for whom proclamation of scripture is the center of
our worship. I don't take this stuff lightly.
Look, I even took a glance at your site and your thorough discussion of my
writing on this issue. It popped up on technorati and I followed the link.
It was SO tempting to send you a long email and reply to each point. I
think you misunderstood me on a few of them. For example, my thoughts on
the bible not addressing homosexuality. I didn't mean that homosexuality or
homosexual sex didn't exist in the ancient world. That would be an asanine
thing to say.
What I mean is that the idea of sexual orientation is relatively new. Paul
did not know that some people identify or are oriented toward
homosexuality. Careful, I'm not saying that God made people that way. Who
knows how it happens, but I have dear homosexual friends, dedicated
Christians, whom I trust with my lifea and with whom I've had gut wrenching
conversations. They only know that they've always been this way, at least
since early childhood.
No one knew about orientation back then. homosexuality was just a perverse
sex act that some people engaged it, usually in the middle of some pagan
act of worship or in some other promiscuous context. When Paul speaks of
homosexuality, it is always some specific homosexual act or action. The
NIV, for goodness sakes even specified behavior in the Corinthian passage.
I mean, you and I can quibble over the details of the translation but it is
not addressing the orientation of homosexuality and gentle people living in
peace and engaging in it. Paul knew nothing of this.
BTW, the scholars I spoke of were on the NIV translation committee who
translated the corinthian passage.C'mon, I was quoting the NIV so you can't
exactly call me sloppy there, though it is an idea for idea translation.)
Same with the Romans passage. When I said, "I don't know exactly what Paul
is talking about, I was being honest. Paul says that homosexuality is a
judgment laid down on people who have rejected God utterly and worshipped
creation instead. He's seeing crazed acts by people burning with lust and
engagin in God knows what kind of behavior and he sees all of it as a
judgment from God.
I simply mean that my homosexual Christian friends don't fit that picture.
Not at all. So I just can't make it line up in my mind. I wish I could. My
life would be so much easier if I saw it your way.
I will likely never work in another Baptist church because of what I said.
Do you think I'm happy about that? It scares the hell out of me.
Final thought:
Do you believe that Christians should be able to own slaves? The New
Testament clearly says we may. I'm not saying we are commanded to, but it
says that it's okay. Paul may have been urging Philemon to cut Onesimus a
break because he was a Christian, but he sent him back because he thought
Philemon had that right. He clearly commanded slaves to be faithful to
their masters in numerous places.
There are more New Testament and bible passages supporting slavery than
speaking against specific homosexual acts. Heck, there's a whole book of
the bible that exists because Paul understood Philemon's right to own slaves.
This is not an "if you can I can" argument. My point is, if you think that
it is no longer acceptable for Christians to own slaves - and I hope you do
not - I am only reading the New Testament in the same way with this issue,
making the same cultural allowances, and seeking the leadership of the
Spirit in light of new understanding of a complex issue.
As I see it, I have Christian brothers and sisters who tell me that they
live in peace and in love. I read the New Testament and find two specific
prohibitions against specific homosexual acts that I can't quite pin down
because the context is difficult at best.
So I trust them enough to say, "Okay, I'm unclear on this issue and am
willing to be in fellowship with you in my uncertainty."
I am not the enemy. I don't know if you can respect my honesty and how my
heart has been broken and how badly I want to be right on this issue. Lives
are at stake.
But that's the truth of how I feel and think, whatever you think of me.
peace,
gordon
– Part 2 –
Listen, just so that we don’t get caught on a side issue - I’m not saying
that homosexuality and slavery are the same kind of issue in the New
Testament or anything like that.
I am saying that the same kind of scriptural dymanic is at play as we deal
with how to live ethically in this century, guided by a book that lives in
the very flesh of the first century.
It is the same dynamic, in my opinion, that was at work in Acts 10-15.
Their bible told them to stay away from gentiles and not to mix with them,
especially not these wild gentiles influenced so deeply by greek culture.
Their bible was clear on this. And yeah, there was Ruth, but there was
plenty of places where they were told NOT to mix. Plenty of places.
Genesis
Joshua
Ezra, Nehemiah.
And then they were presented with the greatest dilemma of their lives.
Gentiles receiving the Holy Spirit of God. They had to choose between what
they thought the bible had taught them all along and what the Spirit was
clearly doing in their midst.
I’m telling you that I have met Spirit filled homosexual Christians.
Gentle, lovers of God, people who clearly have the fruit of the Spirit and
continue to love the church and the work of Christ in spite of being rejected.
I’m telling you that I have not known what to do with that reality. So I’ve
prayed and made my best choice.
God help me. God help us all.
rlp
