the sexuality obsession
In this article by Ingrid, she links to this website.
Americans for Truth about Homosexuality
I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the website. I am trying really hard to figure out why Christians are so obsessed with letting the world know the truth behind homosexuality. If I felt like they were doing it because they cared deeply about the people who live the lifestyle, and want desperately for them to experience the life that God designed for them, I would not have a problem with all of it. However, that is certainly not the vibe I am getting from these sites. They are more concerned about winning their debate than facilitating life transformation in the hearts of homosexuals. It’s basically saying “we don’t care about you, but we want you to know that we completely disagree with your lifestyle.”
And why is it just homosexuality. They act as if that is the BIG sin in the scriptures, dismissing all other destructive behaviors and choices. So, I will faithfully be waiting for the following websites to emerge, if these people are really trying to get biblical truth out there
Americans for Truth about Lying
Americans for Truth about Gossip
Americans for Truth about Bitterness
Americans for Truth about Slander
Americans for Truth about Poverty
Americans for Truth about Widows
Or maybe these groups are not at all concerned about people who are far from God connecting to, and living out the life that God dreams for them, but simply condemning those they disagree with. unfortunately we are now warring over truth, and not warring for the hearts of people. I don’t think that’s what God was hoping we would become.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
It would be much easier if we could form a site called Americans for truth about SIN.
That way we could just mention EVERYTHING from homosexuality to lying.
Thus with all the talk about EVERY sin, then perhaps people would begin to see their need for a Savior.
Hey that’s a good idea. Hey Nathan, maybe we could put an end to CRN.info and just concentrate on making the public aware of the enormity of their sin so that they could feel the need to run to Christ for forgiveness.
That’s what we ALL should be concentrating on.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Inq,
Your theology is messed up if you really think it is a Christians job to make the public aware of their sin. The fact is that most people know they are sinners. The ones that have had interactions with the church know pretty well what we think about their sin. They already feel condemned, if not by people, then by Satan himself.
The Gospel isn’t about proclaiming what sinners we or others are, it’s about proclaiming how good, just, and loving God is. If we make sin a bigger issue than grace, we are actually making the Gospel more about us than God.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Phil,
I beg to differ. Let’s look at this logically. You claim that EVERYONE knows about their sin and feels condemned,
we also know that everyone knows that Jesus died for their sins (you’ll be hard pressed to find someone that hasn’t ever heard that)
So if everyone feels condemned and everyone knows that Jesus forgives, then why don’t people come to Him for the forgiveness that they “know” they need?
Answer:
because they don’t know about their sin.
NO ONE thinks that they are bad enough to require some great act of forgiveness.
The proof:
http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=dad0ea8b7a5c04eabebd
February 19th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
The article by Ingrid had to do with the theology of Wallis and really not homosexuality per se. If the words attributed to Wallis are true then his theology is unbiblical. I do, however, feel we need to preach the gospel to homosexuals and not condemn them.
But this particular article was about Wallis.
February 19th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
And as a helping hand, Nathan, it is obsession.
I do not condemn you though, unless you are gay.
February 19th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Rick,
that is why I did not mention the article. I agree with Ingrid. I don’t think it is her job to be the college nazi, but I agree.
inqu,
I agree with phil. Most people know they are really messed up and live with alot of guilt. I think this is where Kimball’s concept of “they love Jesus but hate the church” comes in. They need the Jesus found in the scriptures, not the Jesus that creates websites entitled “Americans for truth about Homosexuality”
February 19th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
Nathan,
“I think this is where Kimball’s concept of “they love Jesus but hate the church†comes in”
You know that they don’t have to come to a church to be saved. They just have to come to Christ. We are not the saviors. Christ is. If they know that they are sinners and they know that He forgives them they should be bowing before Him. That doesn’t mean that they have to attend a church.
The question still remains, you have made a case for why they don’t come to church, but why don’t they come to Christ for this forgiveness that they “know” they need.
February 19th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
For the record, I do have a lot of gay friends. All of with whom I have shared the truth.
I have stated to them that unless they repent then they shall end up in hell. They cannot continue to live in their sin and think that they are saved.
They ALL go to church. They have ‘asked Jesus into their hearts’ asked for forgiveness for their sins and they think that they can continue in the sin of homosexuality.
I have told them in no uncertain terms that they will end up in hell if they don’t repent. One even hugged me afterward and told me “thank you” for telling him the truth.
He still hasn’t repented. He still lives in his sin, but I’m still praying for him. We’re still friends. I still remind him that scripture states, “those who continue in sin have nothing but the fiery judgment of God to look forward to”
You CAN tell the truth in love and still remain friends.
And NO, he doesn’t love Jesus and hate the church. He loves his sin. (more than Jesus)
February 19th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Inq,
I still don’t buy it. I’ve been to too many events where people are made to feel terrible about their sin, asked to come to an alter to be made right, and told they are Christians. The next day, most of them are back right where they were. When we present the Gospel as some sort of sin management device, I believe it actually lessens the greatness of it.
I think if we tell the whole story of the cross, beginning with what God’s plan was from the beginning and how we can fellowship with him now, it becomes much more compelling. God doesn’t just want to save us from Hell, He wants to give us life now.
February 19th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
my bad… I didn’t read the whole conversation. I would say they they know they are sinners. I wouldn’t say they know they need Jesus.
February 19th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
I don’t see this in our culture. Don’t many people who feel that they have done or are doing something “wrong” believe that they have are doing so because they are “victims?” Victims of, for example,an abusive upbringing? Also don’t many of those who have some sense that something they are doing may be wrong treat the wrong as relatively okay compared to what other people do? And isn’t much of what is biblically wrong treated as acceptable in our society?
February 20th, 2008 at 12:48 am
Perhaps it’s because of the Genesis 19 story of Soddom and Gomorah, but it seems when a lot of Christians think of homosexuality, they think of fire and brimstone.
—————————————————
For some reason my internet content filter won’t let me on the Americans for Truth about Homosexuality website. It catergorizes it as “R-rated Opinion.”
—————————————————
Sin is all the same. I’ve never struggled with homosexuality, but I think I’ve pretty much committed every other sin, both physically and in my mind. I think everyone has. Who are we to point out the sins of others? I can’t. When I do, I feel awful.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:59 am
I have to respectfully disagree with the notion that unsaved people already know they are sinners.
Before I got saved I knew that I had done some stuff that was wrong, hey I might even have vaguely thought of it as sin, but I had no idea of what it (or I) truly was before a Holy God… and what the penalty of all that *wrong stuff* was.
He had to show me that, and He used people in that process, both directly and indirectly.
Dare I say it, people whom He gave the courage and the compassion to sometimes speak the *unspeakable*?
I’m so glad that He did, my life depended on it.
Can I just say too that when I still though I’d done the odd bit of wrong but was basically a decent human being I would have acknowledged Jesus as the Son of God, and said the Bible was true too?
But I never once knew of my true need for Him, not until I was literally shown how filthy I was.
Galatians 3:24. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
February 20th, 2008 at 5:55 am
Since homosexuality is not the normal sin it provides a wonderful platform for a self righteous flogging. Of course it is a sin which is spawned through the curse of the fallen nature, and people are sometimes born that way. That doesn’t mean God made them that way and approves, no, the curse of sin is to blame.
There is victory in Christ for that particular sin. However, it is a serious Scriptural departure to insist accepting that sin in the church. We must be prepared to love and minister to believers who struggle with that sin, but we cannot reinterpret the Scriptures to accommodate that lifestyle.
This has often been used as a convenient whipping boy in the church and as a chest pumping proof that one takes an uncompromising stand against sin. This is sometimes received as hate by homosexuals and many times their perception is reality. Although Fred Phelps is hate personified as it pertains to homosexuals, a form of that hate still lives safely under cover in many evangelical circles.
February 20th, 2008 at 8:08 am
Yes, fellow believers, that’s right. Never stand for or against anything (and I do mean “anything”), because you will be EATEN ALIVE by others who claim to be your brother and sister fellow believers, who without any proof will claim that you (choose all that apply) hypocritical, unloving, self-righteous, patriotic, psychotic, guilt-ridden, mean to puppies, hate puppies, have puppies for dinner.
Not that any of that can be proven, but hey, it’s the seriousness of the accusation, not its truth, that’s important.
(this term and condition does not apply if you go through the proper channels and find out from the non-leading leaders what things you may properly stand against so as not to be castigated by any but the un-post-enlightened, so for example you may speak to your heart’s content against people who drive SUV’s and have our blessing, but cannot speak against sexual perversion because you will be unloving uncharitbable and most of all non-politically-correct)
February 20th, 2008 at 8:11 am
Seriously, the best you can do is only ‘insinuate’ that the group linked to in the op doesn’t have some kind of proper attitude? Yikes, who’s falling head-long into judgmentalism now!
February 20th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Jazz you every struggle with anything?
February 20th, 2008 at 8:24 am
I do not think that we cannot teach that homosexuality is a sin, my only point was that it seems disproprtionate to many of the sins that abound in the church.
Divorce, greed, hedonism, idolatry, pride, gossip, murmuring, prayerlessness, adultery, evil speaking, and many others that really might rock the boat. Homosexuality is an easy “Amen” because most of us never struggle with that.
By the way, whose eating anyone alive? Well done, that avoids mad human disease!
February 20th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Oh Jazz,
I never said not to stand for anything. I take a stand against homosexuality with my gay friends…. imagine that. However, I do it in the context of a genuine loving relationship. I do not set up websites and broadcast to the world how evil homosexuality is. There is a HUGE difference.
I can pretty much guarantee that the guys who operate that site have no close friends that are gay. They don’t have to struggle with deeply loving a person, but deeply wanting them to experience the beauty of a life surrendered to Christ. It’s really easy then to talk about “them” and how “they” are the ones responsible for ruining marriage in America.
I am not against taking a stand. I just don’t see why it is always homosexuality, and it is always done in a very institutionalized, non-relational way. It really sickens me.
February 20th, 2008 at 10:15 am
Nathan,
You wrote:
“And why is it just homosexuality. They act as if that is the BIG sin in the scriptures, dismissing all other destructive behaviors and choices. ”
I think, for one, this is a false comparison. It’s not that homosexuality is *the* BIG sin. It is the one right now that is getting the most press. Back in Martin Luther’s day it was indulgences. In Alex Campbell’s day it was division and disunity. In Paul’s day it was ‘Judaizing.’ No one is dismissing other destructive behaviors. Let me explain my point before I’m dismissed as irrelevant.
I think the reason many in the church reacts against homosexuality is precisely because people, many people (even in the church) don’t think it is a sin. There is an entire theology being built around the idea that homosexuality is not a sin. One can see it in the papers, on the net, in the news, in local churches. Homosexuality is destroying congregations: Just look at the Anglican church. I have a good friend who is an Anglican priest and I see what this issue has done in the local Body of Christ. I see how difficult the struggle is for them (not that you don’t). There is an insidious nature to this particular sin because there is another false idea set up: ‘It’s all about love, how can anyone be against love.’ It’s not about love.
What we don’t see is a theology being built around, say, lying, gossip, or the other things you mentioned. There is no ‘Christians for Equal Rights of Gossips in the Church’ movement as there is for (that’s somewhat hyperbole) for unrepentant, promiscuous homosexuals. Slander isn’t having the impact that homosexuality is on the church. No one is arguing that murder all of a sudden not be a sin.
I am not a Christian who says: “There’s no place in the church for the repentant and forgiven homosexual.” If I said that, then I would have to say, “There’s no place in the church for the repentant and forgiven anybody.” The backlash is because some Christians are attempting, and in many cases have succeeded, in normalizing homosexual practice in the church. But tell me, friend, what room is there in the church for militant, unrepentant, in your face homosexuality? (And please don’t say, ‘well what about those homosexuals who are in loving, committed, monogamous relationships,’ because that is a false analogy. It is still sin. The reaction is against sin. I think homosexuality is a symptom of greater problems, but that’s another post altogether.
Now please don’t misunderstand me. I’m not talking about the repentant homosexual who struggles. In a sense, he or she is no different from the repentant liar or theif who struggles. (I can show you a sermon I preached in November of last year that makes this very point.) I am a huge fan of the grace of God and I think His grace is sufficient enough to include the repentant *sinner*–that is, *all* repentant sinners. What I am talking about, is the generalized movement among churches to normalize behavior that God has called sin. This is where the reaction comes in. We can see how even now it is ravaging the church around the world. This is the reaction. And I for one would lead the charge if the same thing were happening with respect to swingers, liars, thieves, swindlers or what have you. Any attempt to recognize sinful behavior as normal (in the sense of acceptable) is just as sinful.
As Christians, we do not have the right to contradict His Word. You wouldn’t tell a gossip their behavior is right or that they can continue in such behavior after they have repented nor would you tell them they don’t have to repent in the first place. But even the apostle singles out sexual behavior in Corinthians as being especially insidious because it is a sin against the Body, against the body, the Temple of the Holy God. (And the thing with marriage, well read Ephesians 5-6 to grasp that.)
Paul says that we were called out of those lives of sin, he says that we once were that way: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers shall inherit the Kingdom fo God. And such were some of you; but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit of our God.” (1 Cor 6:9-11 NASB)
Were.
thanks for your time,
jerry
February 20th, 2008 at 10:43 am
“Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers shall inherit the Kingdom fo God. And such were some of you; but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit of our God.†(1 Cor 6:9-11 NASB)
A washed and sanctified sinner is no longer a homosexual, he is now a son of the living God who struggles with the residue of his sin. Let he who is without struggle cast the first stone. (I am writing in the sand…)
February 20th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Jerry,
Like I said, I am not against standing up against a sin. i just don’t think creating coalitions with a religious and political agenda is the best way to do so. We have neglected out RESPONSIBILITY to make friends with these people. The rebuke and correction needs to take place in a loving relationship. AFTAH shows little signs of actually caring for the people in the homosexual community. They are concerned about making sure their voice is louder than anyone else’s.
February 20th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Jerry,
I would also say that a small minority of churches think homosexuality is a sin. That is the exception, not the norm.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Jerry,
I doubt that homosexual sin outranks murder or rape or war or a rang of other “sin” reported on a daily basis. I think homosexuality is rarely talked about except that gays want rights like health care and tax breaks.
If we allowed those things which have nothing to do with “marriage” but basic privileges for Americans… I think the issue of “gay marriage” would disappear as it has in some European countries that have already legalized gay marriage.
So do we give rights like health care to individuals who live as family units?
Again, I think that this is not even the “big” issue or that it is getting the most press… I see that as not seeing that divorce is rampant as will a pornography and murder and so on are still in the daily news much more than gays promoting their lifestyle.
iggy
February 20th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Jerry,
I would beg to differ with your assertion that gossip (or any of the other sins you mentioned) haven’t damaged the church as much as the homosexual issue has.
It may be more in your face (homosexuality) than “other” sins but I think the most damaging sin ever to the church was/is unforgiveness.
Recently in a congregational meeting a member of our church stood up and with tears in his eyes and fierce language lambasted the church for something that happened 17 years ago to his daughter when she was in youth group. Which set off a firestorm within the meeting with all these hurtful, angry, memories of things that happened up to 20 years ago.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
The most damaging sin in the church is unbelief.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Jerry Hillyer,
You make far too much sense.
Welcome to being eaten alive.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
–Jazz you every struggle with anything?–
What, with my LUV for my SUV? Oh, wait… I don’t have an SUV.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Friends,
The great thing, is that all of us have a point of view and bring something different to the conversation. As the responses to my post demonstrate, each of us is dealing a different ‘big’ issue in our respective congregations. In my congregation, I’m dealing with lazy people who think the preacher should do all the work, and lazy men who won’t step up and assume leadership roles or participate in prayer meetings and the like.
What I’m arguing for is the preservation of the rule of Scripture. I don’t think any of us would deny that there are factions in the church that want to legitimize certain behaviors whether it is homosexuality, division, judgmentalism or whatever. My point is that forgiveness, no matter how free and abundant, is still bound to a repentant heart. All we have to go by is what Scripture says. I suppose this begs the question: Does God forgive unrepentant sinners? Or, maybe, Does God un-forgive repentant sinners?
On the other hand, I do believe that homosexuality (notice, I’m talking practice of not people; although, it is difficult to separate practice from people) is the issue of our day. I understand well the need and desire to be people of compassion, to be friends with the folk of this world (also in Corinthians) and to minister to their needs (what some call ‘doing justice’). Still, no one can deny that this is having a serious, serious impact on the Body of Christ.
There is a lot more to say about this subject. Sexual sin is a difficult thing to deal with in the Church. Again I’ll note that the apostle did make a beig deal out of sexual sin because it is against the body. There must be a disctinction made, I believe, between those unsaved sinners who are not trying to ruin the church by legitimizing sin in the Body and those saved sinners who are trying to legitimize sin in the Body. I’m all for compassion towards the former group, but the latter group, in my judgment, are just plain wrong and are, in fact, seriously damaging the Church.
Nathan, you wrote:
“I would also say that a small minority of churches think homosexuality is a sin. That is the exception, not the norm.”
I confess that I’m not certain what this means. I do apologize.
your friend in the faith of Christ,
jerry
February 20th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Inquisitor,
Is Luther in hell for being anti-semitic?
February 20th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Just because certain biblical ethics are true doesn’t mean that a victorian repressiveness about sexuality, the human body, etc. is godly and in order for a person to be good Christian.
Just because certain biblical ethics are true doesn’t mean that we have to adhere to a certain sub-set of a particular american sub-cultures understanding of middle class social respectability.
Just because we think a minority group of people are engaged in behaviors that are profoundly damaging to their soul does not mean we have the right to beat that drum to exclusion of other issues.
As a pastor, I’ve seen far more churches destroyed by “righteous” monogamous, straight lay men and lay women who were gossips, controlling, anger and fear filled and spiritually abusive.
I’ve never seen a church destroyed because a gay person was in it. (And please spare me the Ted Haggard issue…because it wasn’t about the gender, it was about the betrayal of trust as a spiritual leader…it could’ve been gambling, embezzlement, whatever.)
I just love how people get hyper about this and think they are sooooooo faithful to their god for “taking a stand” when they are principled about not letting a young unmarried cohabiting couple or gays or whatever become members…but if you’re self-righteous, nitpicky, in everyone’s back yard, controlling and show your devotion by your fear and anger to your fear mongering, angry god then…
you’re not just a great candidate for membership…hell! We want you on the elder board!!!!
what.
ever.
February 20th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
BTW,
how is a church “facing” the issue of homosexuality?
Is it because they listen to the dreck of “christian radio” or tv and have gotten riled up?
or is there are real struggling with how to pastorally care for people within that lifestyle?
I think that should be the only “struggle” (wah-wah-waaah) a church should have with this issue.
If God has spoken, then the only thing a church needs to do is figure out how to pastorally reach out to these people, along with everyone else whose sins sent Christ to the cross.
But…I suspect some people’s god has spoken and because it’s just about being right and beating people into submission about how bad they are then that deficient “god” needs followers to defend him, and be angry for him and to spread the fear needed to create religious gatherings that communicate the “good news” of your own righteousness to yourself.
again.
what.
ever.
February 20th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
The ironic thing is that what Michael Brown’s article on that site is talking about is based on a strawman for the most part. Jim Wallis himself doesn’t support legalizing gay marriage. He does support legislation that includes homosexuality in the same category as race when it comes to hiring, housing, etc.
The sad thing is that I totally understand where Brown is coming from. I remember actually getting in arguments with people about this very thing, saying that sexual orientation shouldn’t be treated the same as race. I actually believed that people somehow just chose to be gay. So, I can see where a lot of these arguments are coming from.
As far as the whole sin thing, I was actually reading an article by Jim Wallis last night, and he gave an example of something that happened in his parents church. Apparently there were a couple of teenagers who were dating, and the girl got pregnant. Of course some of the elders in the church started saying, “we need to take a stand against this” and “they need to know what they did was wrong”, etc. Wallis’ father was also an elder, and he was angry at the wat the other elders were treating this. His statement was, “don’t you think they know what they did was wrong and regret their decision? If you want to expose sin why don’t you get up front and start confessing?” Of course no one volunteered.
My whole point is this. I’ve heard too many church people maon and wail about homosexuals, and act as if “the gay agenda” was destroying America, but I’ve seen few people actually step up to the plate and acknowledge sin in their own camp. Frankly, that’s why I won’t give any time to arguments about the danger of homosexuality until I see people up in arms about the danger of pride, selfishness, consumerism, etc. Homosexuality is an easy target because it doesn’t directly affect most of us.
February 20th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
“Jim Wallis himself doesn’t support legalizing gay marriage. He does support legislation that includes homosexuality in the same category as race when it comes to hiring, housing, etc.”
That supports my point completely. When we mix politics with spirituality we lose our way. If Wallis believes that homosexuality is sin he should leave it at that, because saying it should be treated legislatively the same way we treat race he’s opened himself up to criticism.
Who cares what the secular, depraved government does about homosexuals. Are they going to offer them redemption? We are the church, period.
February 20th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Rick,
It’s not just a matter of letting government do what it wants. I believe that Christians do have a responsibility to protect people from discrimination when necessary. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with taking stands against unjust laws. I think the problem become when people think that political action alone can bring about real change.
The fact is that much of the language Jesus and Paul both used was politically subversive. In a culture that proclaimed “Ceasar is Lord!” Christians proclaimed to the Roman Empire that “Jesus is Lord!”, and many of them died for it. The problem today isn’t that Christians are standing up to government, it’s that they’re trying to wield it’s power to bring about change from both the right and left. In a way I agree with a lot of what you say, I just don’t think Christians can be completely detached from politics altogether. Just by serving Christ, we should be making a political statement of sorts, and there is a time when it is acceptable and necessary for Christians to speak prophetically to the powers that be.
February 20th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
“I just don’t think Christians can be completely detached from politics altogether.”
Caves, my friend, caves.
February 20th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
I’m probably going to get beat up over this…Part of me doesn’t understand why the whole homosexuality issue is anyone’s business. My guess is that the core demographic for Slice, or Ingrid’s radio show, or any of the other ODMs, contain very few gays. And since that demo are committed heteros, they probably don’t plan on getting gay anytime in the foreseeable future, so what’s the point of constantly ranting about it.
Do you really think that at some point, someone listening to Ingrid, or Janet Folger, or perusing websites would think to themselves, “You know, I’ve been thinking about giving that gay thing a try, but on second thought, maybe later…got a busy week ahead. Maybe i can get gay when I have some free time on my hands”.
They talk about it as though its a flu bug. Something you might somehow catch if you’re not careful. Or a choice you might make, like stepping up to the window at Wendy’s and trying the chicken sandwich instead of the burger.
I hear the promos on VCY whipping up the faithful with rhetoric about how civil unions will threaten my marriage. Believe me, I’ve been happily married for many years, and of all the things that pose a threat to my marriage, that’s not even on the radar. Needing to play golf every weekend poses a far greater threat.
I don’t even want to tackle the sin issue. If it is, so be it. So I guess, what it comes down to is this…people that aren’t gay aren’t going to wake up some morning and get gay, so stop treating it like something that is going to seize me if I let my guard down. Focus on the people that are, and try to figure out why they are. I can’t imagine it’s an easy path to embark on. Which makes me wonder why, and how, is that path taken, and if you could choose not to be, wouldn’t you?
February 20th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
“so stop treating it like something that is going to seize me if I let my guard down.”
Interesting comment, Kenn. You said, “I don’t even want to tackle the sin issue. If it is, so be it.” Yes, homosexuality is a sin. It falls under the sexual immorality catagory, which many, many people struggle with.
Sin, in general, is something that will seize everyone if they let their guard down. It seizes everyone anyway.
“I can’t imagine it’s an easy path to embark on.”
I can’t imagine that stealing, or murdering, or drug dealing is an easy path to embark on. Why do people do it? Perhaps because they’re sinners.
“and if you could choose not to be, wouldn’t you?”
Think of one sin you constantly struggle with and ask yourself why you choose to do it even though you don’t want to. It’s only by the grace of God that we are able to quit our sinful lifestyles, and even with His help, we will still struggle.
Not beating you up, just trying to figure out your last paragraph.
February 21st, 2008 at 2:45 am
Merry, thanks or the thoughtful post, but what part of the last paragraph is hard to figure out? You bring up a really good point about struggling with sin, in whatever form it may take. But the core of my question was the issue of sexual preference.
I think it has to considerably more complex than tossing it off with “because we are all sinners”. That sounds too much like Flip Wilson’s old gag line, “The devil made me do it”. No, he didn’t…it (whatever “it” is) was a conscious decision made by the individual. Ultimately, the individual needs to take some responsibility.
Again, I’m just puzzled by the whole issue. How do I best sum this up… I guess it comes back around to my last sentence, “if you could choose not to be, wouldn’t you?” I don’t think you can compare it to other sins in the same way, which takes us back to my original point.
Let me put it this way…If we’re going to calibrate the sin-o-meter. Would I be just a bit uneasy about my family’s safety with a drug dealing murder living down the street? Yes. Could I muster up the same concerns if a couple of the same gender have found in one another, a relationship that makes their lives whole, and happy? Probably not. While it sort of grosses me out, its still none of my business. Besides, I bet the place would be well maintained. (Ok, that was a stereotypical cheap shot)
February 21st, 2008 at 2:50 am
merry,
that is basically the argument of St. Augustine…
“People sin, because they are sinners”….
iggy
February 21st, 2008 at 7:07 am
Sin is a multi-faceted, multi-pronged, incredibly insidious, and universally pervasive effect with accompanying experience. It is very mercurial, sometimes even representing itself as indignation about itself. Although we seem to rely fully on external evidence, sin lives inside each person complete with all the necessary building blocks to construct any and all varieties of behavioral sin. Jesus of course pulled the carpet out from under the “I don’t do that sin” facade.
The debate over is homosexuality a sin started as a debate concerning the nature of Scripture. But in recent years it has morphed into using the issue as a proof of orthodoxy, and sometimes the stronger the rhetoric the greater the proof of righteous orthodoxy. Everyone is born as a sinner and sometimes people are born with this sin as a stronghold in their lives.
Six year olds sometimes exhibit a same sex attraction, not because they choose it, but because they have a sinful desire. Redeemed sinners, those who have been illuminated more fully to the depth of their own sin and the infinite depth of their gracious forgiveness, should be expected to both empathize with unredeemed sinners and excitedly share the message of redemption and freedom with those still captured by their sin.
Everyone, every heterosexual, has the sin of homosexuality existing in latent form within the clandstine core of internal sin inherant in our old natures. That nature and its entourage of sin affects and influences almost everything we do, including speaking out against other sins with a self righteous tone and that same sin many times disguises itself as the Holy Spirit.
One of the greatest deceptions of sin is its ability to provide us with a magnifying glass for others while successfully removing the inconvenience of any mirrors.
February 21st, 2008 at 11:19 am
–I can pretty much guarantee that the guys who operate that site have no close friends that are gay. They don’t have to struggle with deeply loving a person, but deeply wanting them to experience the beauty of a life surrendered to Christ. It’s really easy then to talk about “them†and how “they†are the ones responsible for ruining marriage in America.–
I’m struck by how you have no proof for your claim (which even if proven or not would be meaningless anyway), only your assertions, which seem to show more about you then about them–the extent to which you will ‘assume’ the worst about them in order to shunt them aside, one may think so that you don’t have to deal with them.
Curious, you’re doing exactly what you claim they are doing. You’re talking about “them” and “they” being the problem, and that “their” way of doing things sickens you.
February 21st, 2008 at 11:33 am
jazz,
You act as if fundamentalists are some sort of endangered species and are as rare as an albino squirrel or something. Many of us have grown up around them and have spent a lot of time interacting with them. Some of us actually were fundamentalists before, so we aren’t just making these things up.
It’s very easy to see how fundamentalists think and feel about different issues, and one doesn’t have to really operate on assumptions when talking about them.
February 21st, 2008 at 11:47 am
Phil - Your observation should be limited to the site. I am a fundamentalist and those desriptions do not reflect how I feel or interact with the gay community. (reference my previous comment)
February 21st, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Rick,
So it sounds like fundamentalists don’t want to defined by the actions of a small group of people either. That is exactly what we’ve been saying about the EC. You can’t take the expressions of a few to represent the whole.
I will say, though, in my experience, I’ve met a lot more mean-spirited fundamentalists than heretical emergents. Of course not all fundies are mean-spirited. Some of them are just misguided.
February 21st, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Remember, Phil, fundamentalists are a loosly organized group of believers with no written creed or membership and with no policy of discipline.
Uh-oh.
February 21st, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Dear Ingrid (and Nathan), to turn your words around, I wonder if you are concerned at all about us (Americans For Truth and those who share our viewpoint). Perhaps you might have asked us directly why we do what we do — or accurately reported the many articles evincing our Christian care for the homosexual struggler — rather than merely offer your own (distorted) speculations as to our motives.
Yes, we are deeply concerned about people practicing homosexuality, which is why we offer people the loving Gospel of Jesus Christ, Who, we sincerely believe, has helped thousands of people overcome entrenched homosexual sin, just as He has helped people overcome — and be forgiven for — those other besetting sins you mention.
(Incidentally, I believe Christian “born again” conversions, despite being ridiculed by many gay activist and media cynics, are responsible for many more people leaving the homosexual lifestyle than ex-gay “reparative therapy”; however, the latter also has helped many change: see http://www.narth.com)
As to merely castigating gays, I have no basis for pride or a sense of superiority in that I — as one who struggles with my owns sins — am in need of the same grace of Christ as they are. Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Mark 2:17)
As to why WE focus on homosexuality, the simplest answer is that we are trying to counter (albeit with considerably less resources) the huge pro-homosexual movement, which seeks to normalize and build acceptance for homosexuality in the culture. Here are a few of the gay activist groups, each of which focuses solely on promoting GLBT (gay, lesbian, bi, trans) issues:
Human Rights Campaign
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
Lambda Legal
Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network
GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation)
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network
PFLAG (Parents, Family and Friends of Lesbians and Gays)
The list goes on and on. Now I doubt you would deny that in a democracy, if these groups have a right to promote the acceptance of homosexuality — which we as Christians and adherents of other religious groups, and even many nonreligious people, believe is immoral — then we also have a right to organize and stand up for our point of view. Its called the battle of ideas.
Yes, we put out lots of articles defending historic Judeo-Christian norms on homosexuality, etc., but it pales in comparison to the information — we would call it misinformation — expounded by the overall GLBT movement.
We are simply trying to RESPOND to the other side’s crusade on this issue, just as pro-life groups are responding to Planned Parenthood, NOW, etc. In other words, if we are “obsessed,” then our “gay” and “trans” opponents are all the more so, in that they spend far more time and money — specifically on the homosexual/transgender issue –promoting their ideology than the collective pro-family movement does opposing them. There are many, many more “pro-gay” activists than “anti-gay” activists — although I use that term advisedly in that we are “anti-gay” only with regard to behavior. (We do not believe in “gay” personhood, i.e., as an inborn, natural or intrinsic identity.)
I personally believe that every homosexual “coming out” is a tragedy because it embraces a lie that “being gay” is “who I am.” Conversely, every “ex-gay” testimony is a wonderful sign of God’s goodness, His forgiveness, and His power. The growing “gay christian” movement denies the power of Jesus Christ to change lives, which is tragic in that we all know of people who have overcome terrible sins and addiction through Christ.
Funny how the same “gay” movement that gained such power and cultural acceptance through people communicating personal stories to others of their “gayness” now spends so much time and effort questioning the existence of ex-gays.
To paraphrase Queer Nation (a very aggressive gay group in the 90’s), former homosexuals are “here, they’re no longer ‘queer,’ get used to it.”
As to your comment about “warring over truth, and not warring for the hearts of people. I don’t think that’s what God was hoping we would become” — what does this mean? We battle for truth in America and across the world. Christians seek to convert Muslims to the Truth of Christ’s Gospel, while Muslims seek to convert others to “their” truth. Both religions cannot be true; I believe Christianity and the Bible are true but, sadly, it seems many Muslims are more offended by sexual immorality than “christians.” Our witness is tarnished.
In the same way, both the “gay” side and our side are in a struggle over truth, and how to define it. With the media mostly on the “gay” side these days, groups like ours are in an uphill struggle, to be sure, but we are as convinced of our position as the gay activists are of theirs. And we shouldn’t be condemned for defending truth — God’s truth — in the public square.
The battle for Truth and the battle for men’s and women’s hearts is one and the same. We can do it in a spirit of the love of Christ — and that is what we try to do at Americans For Truth. Are we perfect? Far from it. But we’re trying to get some information out there in a culture where the media glamorizes sexual behaviors (homosexuality, sex outside marriage) that our Lord opposes as sinful. Perhaps we will step aside when the Human Rights Campaign, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, and the other “gay” organizations fold up shop. Best — pl
Peter LaBarbera
President, Americans For Truth about Homosexuality
http://www.americansfortruth.org
February 21st, 2008 at 1:29 pm
My note should have begun: “Dear Nathan” as Ingrid only cited our website (Dr. Michael Brown’s response to Jim Wallis on homosexuality) rather than challenge us as an organization. Thanks, pl
Peter LaBarbera
February 21st, 2008 at 1:59 pm
See, that’s the problem. I don’t really see how Jesus calls us to worry about what the other people do. Spread the gospel and God changing hearts will win. LOVE WINS. As far as you having “rights” in a democratic society. Go back and re-read your Bible, you’re not called to live in your rights. Just my 2 cents.
February 21st, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Drum roll please. I am in agreement with Joe here. I believe some sections of the church obsesses about homosexuality disproportionately to the dictates of the New Testament. I am encouraged however with Peter’s words and heart, I think there are much greater sins rampant both in the church and in the world.
Of course I believe that attempting to affect America politically or even legislatively is just kicking the can down the road while humming “Aqualung”.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Well, that doesn’t really surprise me really. I do believe that God can and does deliver some out of the homosexual lifestyle, but I also think it will be a temptation some people will struggle with it their whole life.
I think the problem is that even if our message isn’t intended to be mean-spirited toward homosexuals, it many times is. I think most people who are openly gay simply would not feel comfortable walking into most evangelical churches. For the most part, we have sent them the message that we don’t want their kind around.
Now we can argue that we love them despite their sin, and that we would accept them, but the fact is we don’t. We are much kinder to drug users and alcoholics, and we are generally willing to work through issues with these people. We don’t expect them to just get zapped and changed instantly, and we have done things to come and walk beside them.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:12 pm
At the Brooklyn Tabernacle they had been praying for a particular man who lived as a transvestite and homosexual. When he finally came to the church he sat for weeks and was welcomed in love. One Sunday he believed on Christ and was saved, however he continued to come dressed as a woman.
Everyone still loved him and for several months he worked with the pastor to overcome his problem. In a few months, he began dressing as a man. He now is married, has children, and sings in the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir. That is the gospel!
February 21st, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Joe,
couldn’t have said it better myself. We are not called to “counter” organizations in the world. We are called to love people and share the gospel.
Here’s an interesting figure for you. In the last US census, only 2-3% of the population identified themselves as Gay, Lesbian, Transgender or bisexual. Yet, they have been able to create a movement that is pushing against a population that says it is 80% of the population. How exactly is that? Either they are just more vocal, or the church has become incredibly lethargic, self-centered and irrelvant to the changing world around it. So much so, that a population of 2-3% can threaten its core.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Nathan - we are not called to an anti-anything agenda. Our systematic theologies are for the church, not the world. The epistles were written to us, the gospel of Jesus Christ is our only message. The humanitarian works are to showcase the gospel and they are tangible acts that sinners understand.
Homosexuality is an easy target. We should not allow liberal theologians to teach that God accepts it or made them like that, but those are our issues. We should reach out to the gay community in any way we can while we share the good news that Christ has already reached out to them.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Mr. LaBarbera,
Thank you for your posts. Your group seems to be doing things worth doing, and your time is appreciated.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Kenn,
“But the core of my question was the issue of sexual preference.”
All right, I’ll address sin of the sexual nature.
Homosexuality may not be comparable to stealing or murdering, but I really think it is comparable to other sexual immorality.
“if you could choose not to be, wouldn’t you?†I actually think this is a good point, and I also think it applies to all sexual sins. People always say that homosexuals are born the way they are, and Christians always argue against this. I actually somewhat agree with the statement. I’ll be completely honest; I have an extremely good memory. I can remember my life as far back as 8 months old. And I have always, always struggled with sexual sins. I won’t go into too much detail, except that there are particular sins that I was “born with” and that I will always struggle with, even as a Christian.
I think homosexuals will always struggle, even after giving up their lifestyles to follow Christ. God is so gracious. We will never fully recover, but it’s something to strive for. With His help, we can do all things.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Good comment, Merry. Who says “I think I’ll cultivate a sexual desire for the dead”? Who chooses to be attracted to animals? We seeverly underestimate to power of inherant sin. All of us have voluntarily built upon these sins, but we are born with some sinful manifestations.
Thanks for sharing.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:43 pm
BTW - You can remebre being 8 months old? I cannot remember 8 minutes ago.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Joe, yes, abolutely we are to love (and I’m constantly having to repent for not loving more), but you all are saying that we are to leave the public policy debate to the enemies of truth? How far do we take this? Should all pro-life groups disband? What about groups fighting pornography, or easy divorce or tougher rape laws? Should conservative groups that advocate for judges that interpret — rather than make — the law close down (while ACLU goes on unimpeded)? Where does it end?
Sorry, your position is neither Biblical nor reasonable.
Who was it who said “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty?” What I didn’t mention in my letter is that the same gay activist groups I cited above are fighting for “sexual orientation” “nondiscrimination” laws which, if enacted, will work to constrict the religious rights of Christians and others on this issue. In other countries like Canada and Britain, Christianity is literally becoming criminalized in that it is becoming illegal to speak out against homosexuality. (A Brit pastor was arrested for peacefully passing out Christian tracts at a gay Mardi Gras event; in Sweden, a minister was thrown in jail for giving a sermon on homosexuality.) So the Gospel itself becomes restricted which — I suppose you could argue — might finally get the Church off its duff..,
In Massachusetts, where “gay marriage” was legalized, there is now greater pro-homosexuality instruction in the schools. Sure, Christians can home school or put their kids in private schools, but many parents can’t afford that. So is it a sin for Mass. pro-family groups to oppose such pro-gay lessons (which are now given even to 1st graders) in public schools?
Lastly, why must responsible public policy advocacy and preaching the Gospel be mutually exclusive? Nathan, are you saying we can’t counter evil and show Christian love at the same time? God hates evil. Can’t God use the person who witnesses daily to homosexual strugglers, but also use those who stand for truth in the public square?
Guys, our God is a big God. He can use a lot of different approaches, and nobody has the corner on THE right and ONLY way to address this issue. It would be poor stewardship of the great freedoms He has given us in this blessed nation (which is now abandoning Him…) for us NOT to use our freedoms to defend truth and justice against ungodly forces.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:55 pm
” It would be poor stewardship of the great freedoms He has given us in this blessed nation (which is now abandoning Him…) for us NOT to use our freedoms to defend truth and justice against ungodly forces.”
See guys? Behold, the American deception.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Joe,
Interestingly these people who scream for their “rights” are the same people that “scream” when NT Wright or McLaren state Jesus had a political agenda… The Kingdom of God.
They call Brian a heretic over this and twist his teaching to be some “dominion” theology as opposed to see it as Jesus setting the captives free and bringing justice to the world by giving the world His Church.
Now I do not see that we are to align with right wing let alone left wing and that is why I see some groups out there looking for the “biblical” view that is about the Kingdom of God and sharing Love and the message of Christ to others rather than attacking a certain group politically and in the process making them less “human”.
Just my 2 cent worth also
iggy
February 21st, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Rick,
Amen to that!
BTW: This is not saying one is pro sin… but Pro Christ Jesus who overcame sin for us.
iggy
February 21st, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Dear Sir,
You said,
Actually, I am the one who is sorry, I believe it is both. It may be more libertarian than yours but it is still practical. The other laws you referenced are all harming people who are non-willing participants minus the easy divorce one. Here’s something to consider; I don’t care if they make homosexual marriage legal. How much of the sex police do we want to be. The Bible seems to say masturbation is sin, perhaps we could “fight” for laws to make that illegal. Think of what we’d do for the economy, all those new jobs. It’d be great. I’m not called to make America look like my values, we need to be careful to not confuse the Bible with the constitution.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Henry, please explain: “Homosexuality is an easy target.” Seems for some on this list, the “religious right” (a term I do not like) is an easy target. I challenge each of you to answer my question re: whether pro-family public policy groups should shut down… And by the way, I would be ecstatic if all on this list engaged in peaceful Gospel outreach outside gay bars, clubs, etc. We’re doing Christian outreaches at gay bathhouses in Chicago, and I welcome anyone to join: God will heal many more people trapped in homosexuality than any man-made program.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:09 pm
All these issues, except probably the rape and judges issues which are a different issue altogether, are moral and spiritual issues. We can pass laws making it harder for people to see porn, get divorced, and get abortions, but they won’t change people’s hearts. This is essentially what the Pharisees were chastised for. They wanted to cure the disease by addressing the symptoms rather than the underlying issues.
There is no law or set of laws that can be passed that will improve the spiritual state of the US. It’s like giving an aspirin to someone who has a broken leg that needs set. It might make them feel better for a few hours, but unless their leg is set straight, they’ll continue to get worse.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Too late.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Peter - I commend your outreach. I just believe that separating a certain sin and attempt to eradicate it or at least its symptoms in society by political means is using the weapons of the flesh. Homosexuality is easy because most do not struggle with it and it is an easy punching bag.
You want a couple of larger fields? Set up organizations that attack prayerlessness and pride in the church. God isn’t concerned with America, he is concerned with His church.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:23 pm
“I challenge each of you to answer my question re: whether pro-family public policy groups should shut down… ”
I will accept your challenge.
Yes, they should shut down and use the money overseas.
We already have a pro-family policy group - the church.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:29 pm
I tend to agree with Rick on this one. We have so many para-church groups in the US with the the apparent goal of keeping America great, that in many ways they have actually sidetracked the Church from it’s mission. Our mission is not to worry about our health primarily, it’s to bless the world and suffer for the world even to the point of dying for our enemies.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Joe, I think the problem with libertarianism is that it’s all about ME. It glorifies self above God. Some here have talked about Americanism over Christianity — there it is in spades!…: MY right to an abortion; MY right to buy porn; MY right to same-sex “marriage,” etc. I don’t know about how practical or compassionate that is in the short or long term. There is a place for laws — however imperfect — to protect life and restrain sin but also to draw people to think about God. Pro-life reforms would lesson abortions, to be sure, but the whole (political/cultural) discussion also draws us to reflect on the sanctity of life. The Marriage Protection laws lead to a reflection on WHAT IS marriage. Having said that, I agree that political work FOR ITS OWN SAKE misses the mark.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Mr. LaBarbera,
I’m not sure you understand libertarianism. At the very least you and I understand it in vastly different terms. I’m against abortion because it kills someone. You seem to be attempting to assemble a straw man and imply that I don not believe in law and order. I do (besides being a rocking show) I believe that laws are necessary. I believe that laws should stop us from hurting other people. So if two gay people wish to engage in a relationship, that is (constitutionally speaking) their business. If they force someone else to join them that is another issue, the same as it would be if a heterosexual couple forced someone else to join th.em. It’s pretty simple, if you are hurting someone else it should be illegal. I think that is very practical and compassionate. There are many things that I believe are Biblically wrong but I don’t want to see a law passed about them. What about the issue of heterosexual intercourse outside of marriage, the Bible clearly calls this sin, do you believe we should make laws against that?
February 21st, 2008 at 5:30 pm
First of all, Joe, how can you say this when the same men who founded our nation and its Constitution supported sodomy laws?
>
Call it what you want, but you are wrong to say that this is “constitutional.” Until recently, sodomy laws were illegal. Lawrence v. Texas is bad law.
I don’t know: the law is a teacher: I understand that anti-narcotics laws are not always rigidly enforced, but I don’t want them taken off the books. I don’t want “anti-adultery” laws taken off the books — even if they’re not enforced because that adds to the further trivialization of adultery.
February 21st, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Sorry, here’s Joe’s quote:
So if two gay people wish to engage in a relationship, that is (constitutionally speaking) their business.
February 21st, 2008 at 5:46 pm
And of course I meant to say: sodomy laws were legal.
February 21st, 2008 at 5:53 pm
The church should pray for the secular leaders and leave it at that. Our calling is not legislative, our calling is redemptive.
“So if two gay people wish to engage in a relationship, that is (constitutionally speaking) their business. ”
Techincally Joe is correct. If the American democracy as set forth by the constitution votes to allow it, then it becomes constitutional. (i.e. abortion). Now we could choose to spend God’s money and His time to change the law, but to what end? In case no one has noticed, this view has some of the same characteristics as the emergent church.
Both groups want to change the social ambiance in the culture, albeit they are on different ends of the spectrum. Wow, emergent #1 and emergent #2. Let’s do lunch!
February 21st, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Actually, that sodomy law applied to all people.
Under that statute oral sex between straight people falls under the technical legal definition of sodomy.
Sorry….
February 21st, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Also,
I don’t see a popular trend of thinking adultery is trivial. It doesn’t need a law for people to see how hurtful it is.
Also, divorce proceedings still take this into consideration without criminalizing the behavior.
February 21st, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Rick,
“BTW - You can remebre being 8 months old? I cannot remember 8 minutes ago.”
Keeping a journal helps, lol! But yes, I can.
February 21st, 2008 at 8:08 pm
I think Peter has proved the point by commenting here on this and working so hard to convince others on this site that he right. He is more interested in proving to the world he is right about the debate than he is helping anyone.
I have been following Peter’s site for a long time now and I have to say each post he writes about GLBT folks saddens me. GLBT folks have a need to be represented accurately, to be seen in our humanity, not discussed like the hot button issue or the newest threat to society.
Peter has called gays and lesbians a threat to society, diseased and painted us as a threat to children. We all know how people respond when to something they view as a threat. If something is a threat, it is seen as something to fight, fear and loathe. Exactly the way GLBT folks are seen in most of the world. Wonder where people get such pictures?
Peter’s intentions may be true to his heart, but he is doing great harm to folks who are gay. He is helping to feed the picture that young folks would rather be dead than gay. Look how horrible Peter paints those Gay people.
I hope Peter someday sees that he is harming far more people than he is helping. I challenge him to do better, do more and stop creating enemy images of gays and lesbians. We are not a “thing” to fight but people. Please learn to respect out humanity.
February 21st, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Mr. LaBarbera? I don’t understand why you used your ministry, Americans for Truth, to campaign against Gov. Romney on the MassResistance website, signing a letter there, and then actively campaignd against him in another primary. How is this level of political activity against a particular candidate part of your personal ministry against gays and lesbians?
February 21st, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Lastly, if Peter is really serious about his mission being based in love, compassion and empathy. I would urge him to get trained in Nonviolent Communication as developed by Marshal Rosenberg. I would urge him to learn the tactics of King, Gandhi and Chavez. If your mission is to succeed then it must be done without the enemy images or it is nothing but violence of the heart.
When your message is one of empathy, you will be surprised how many will listen to you. When your message is one of moral judgment and moral evaluation of others, you will shut off more than you will open up.
February 21st, 2008 at 8:57 pm
Peter,
I am not saying what they are doing is WRONG. I am just saying that it is not the most effective (and at times destructive) means to both combating evil and preaching the gospel.
Do you really believe that these websites are the most effective ways to help people come out of homosexuality? Who is going to read about laws that are banning their lifestyle and think… gee, I should change because God is so good. We are not called to change laws, but lives. Sometimes we forget that.
Also, there is LITTLE gospel that is preached at these websites. If I was gay or a non-believer, and went to this site, there is nothing that shows me how to find a relationship with God.
Honestly, I think these sites are more interested in making sure that Christians will always have their “Christian nation” and live comfortably than helping people find Christ (allowing HIM to change them). The real problem: we don’t believe that God can really change people, so we create websites to do it.
February 21st, 2008 at 9:00 pm
There were also laws that said Black men weren’t actually men and women didn’t have the right to vote so I’m not sure you’re point is all that valid. I also noticed you didn’t answer my question which was
I will not move another step in this conversation until you answer this question.
February 21st, 2008 at 9:02 pm
“The Bible clearly calls sex outside of marriage sin, do you believe that we should have laws forbidding it?”
No, I believe it should be illegal to talk about it!