Re: "I preached against homosexuality, but I was wrong"
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:46 am
I think that the genetic argument is overstated, in the sense that there's a "gay" gene. There's no evidence that I'm aware of, that suggests that there is a 1 to 1 corellation with any particular gene that predicts with clarity what a person's sexual behavior or orientation will be.
That said, I think there can be physical, psychological and environmental factors that contribute towards a person's sexual orientation.
Too, I don't believe that it's necessarily "wrong" for someone to have a orientation toward the same sex if they do not act out on that orientation, and has been noticed, if they have then it's as forgivable a sin as any other and isn't a stigma that should continue with them forever. Paul speaks of singleness in different contexts as a gift. It's not necessarily wrong either for two people of the same sex to love each other (in the purest sense of the word) and to live as roommates or partners in life where there is not a sin component present. That will raise flags for some and I understand the flags that can be raised. I believe that however, and I think there are scriptural examples of deep love for others of the same sex that doesn't cross over into sin.
Most of all, I believe we as Christians need to first emulate Christ above all things. Christ was consistently criticized by the political/religious leaders of his day (and they were the same people in that culture) for reaching out, accepting and spending too much time with the "wrong" sort of people. This included lepers, adulterers, tax collectors (traitors to the Jewish people collaborating with the Romans), drunks, and the list could go on. I do not believe for a moment that Jesus would be involved, let alone lead the type of social movements that go on in His name in some churches today and I believe he would be just as strongly criticized today as He was then because of it. When I hear or see the level of hate directed at the gay community in the name of Christ by not just extreme factions, such as Fred Phelps and the Westboro Church, (and yes that's an extreme, but only in terms of the openness and degree of their animosity and hatred) I do not see Jesus reflected at all. When I see and hear of more "mainstream" and "acceptable" elements who give lip service to loving the "sinner" while mounting public campaigns against the sin that blur that line, I look to see what they're doing beyond that lip service. Are they opening the doors to their churches and willing to personally reach out and interact or do they put a small line in their budget to a parachurch organization to whom they delegate this ministry which allows them to claim that they're loving others while not having to personally get their "hands dirty" actually building relationships and caring personally for persons who are different than themselves or somehow less lovable? This isn't just a "gay issue" but are they reaching out to those suffering from aids and caring for the families and children devistated by the loss of loved ones and parents and getting personally involved?
I've discussed this in other threads and to be clear, I don't discount the admonitions within the church body to holiness and loving discipline. I just really think our evangelical church culture doesnt' have a strong clue as to what that is supposed to look like. Much of our entire culture is based upon a level of actual fellowship and intimacy that is so shallow and modelled upon hierarchical organizations and institutions that look nothing like what I understand a local body of believers to be called to be in terms of their relationships and love for one another. It's one of the primary reasons why I've left, not the church, but the institutional mentality that drives them and am moving toward an organic/simple church practice in my own life.
Discipline and working things of this nature out looks very different, in my opinion, within a healthy body of believers where all are free to drop the masks and be honest before God and one another with who they are and what they are struggling with, without having to be concerned that love and support are going to be withdrawn or withheld from those they love and those who love them as anything but a last resort and even then with the goal of restoration and inclusion back into the community even if they're still wrestling with things, but the difference is a change in attitude or heart to where they want to align with what God wants and desires for them.
That goes to a lot deeper issues than this one and they're issues some of us have discussed at other times so I won't go further with them now.
In short, I don't discount the standards of God or attempt to declare wrong to be right. I believe however as NT believers we start with Grace and Love and I really am less concerned about structures and systems we try to establish to regulate these issues and am more concerned with seeing genuine community and love as Christ modelled and as He said would distinguish His body, lived out in a very practical and grass roots level.
That said, I think there can be physical, psychological and environmental factors that contribute towards a person's sexual orientation.
Too, I don't believe that it's necessarily "wrong" for someone to have a orientation toward the same sex if they do not act out on that orientation, and has been noticed, if they have then it's as forgivable a sin as any other and isn't a stigma that should continue with them forever. Paul speaks of singleness in different contexts as a gift. It's not necessarily wrong either for two people of the same sex to love each other (in the purest sense of the word) and to live as roommates or partners in life where there is not a sin component present. That will raise flags for some and I understand the flags that can be raised. I believe that however, and I think there are scriptural examples of deep love for others of the same sex that doesn't cross over into sin.
Most of all, I believe we as Christians need to first emulate Christ above all things. Christ was consistently criticized by the political/religious leaders of his day (and they were the same people in that culture) for reaching out, accepting and spending too much time with the "wrong" sort of people. This included lepers, adulterers, tax collectors (traitors to the Jewish people collaborating with the Romans), drunks, and the list could go on. I do not believe for a moment that Jesus would be involved, let alone lead the type of social movements that go on in His name in some churches today and I believe he would be just as strongly criticized today as He was then because of it. When I hear or see the level of hate directed at the gay community in the name of Christ by not just extreme factions, such as Fred Phelps and the Westboro Church, (and yes that's an extreme, but only in terms of the openness and degree of their animosity and hatred) I do not see Jesus reflected at all. When I see and hear of more "mainstream" and "acceptable" elements who give lip service to loving the "sinner" while mounting public campaigns against the sin that blur that line, I look to see what they're doing beyond that lip service. Are they opening the doors to their churches and willing to personally reach out and interact or do they put a small line in their budget to a parachurch organization to whom they delegate this ministry which allows them to claim that they're loving others while not having to personally get their "hands dirty" actually building relationships and caring personally for persons who are different than themselves or somehow less lovable? This isn't just a "gay issue" but are they reaching out to those suffering from aids and caring for the families and children devistated by the loss of loved ones and parents and getting personally involved?
I've discussed this in other threads and to be clear, I don't discount the admonitions within the church body to holiness and loving discipline. I just really think our evangelical church culture doesnt' have a strong clue as to what that is supposed to look like. Much of our entire culture is based upon a level of actual fellowship and intimacy that is so shallow and modelled upon hierarchical organizations and institutions that look nothing like what I understand a local body of believers to be called to be in terms of their relationships and love for one another. It's one of the primary reasons why I've left, not the church, but the institutional mentality that drives them and am moving toward an organic/simple church practice in my own life.
Discipline and working things of this nature out looks very different, in my opinion, within a healthy body of believers where all are free to drop the masks and be honest before God and one another with who they are and what they are struggling with, without having to be concerned that love and support are going to be withdrawn or withheld from those they love and those who love them as anything but a last resort and even then with the goal of restoration and inclusion back into the community even if they're still wrestling with things, but the difference is a change in attitude or heart to where they want to align with what God wants and desires for them.
That goes to a lot deeper issues than this one and they're issues some of us have discussed at other times so I won't go further with them now.
In short, I don't discount the standards of God or attempt to declare wrong to be right. I believe however as NT believers we start with Grace and Love and I really am less concerned about structures and systems we try to establish to regulate these issues and am more concerned with seeing genuine community and love as Christ modelled and as He said would distinguish His body, lived out in a very practical and grass roots level.