The Church: May Reach Out To The Homosexual, But Cannot Embrace Homosexuality
To me, it appears that Peggy Campolo wishes to move the church into acceptance of homosexuality, not simply witnessing to the homosexual. The church cannot and should not embrace homosexuality, especially those that practice such, just like Paul rebuke the Corinthians for the fornication they had in their church. In fact, he tells them ‘to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh’ which sounds pretty tough judgment to me.
She writes, ‘Dr. Gushee is right on the mark when he states that the problems of gay Christians cannot be properly addressed without the church clearly defining the meaning of sex and marriage, and I think he would agree with me that those who reduce marriage to "plumbing and baby-making" are the ones who demean marriage’ but ‘sex and marriage’ is already clearly defined in Scripture and surely in most churches. It appears she is actually calling for a redefining of such, which would be unbiblical and unchristian.
She further states, ‘The current problems of *straight* people, as well as those facing God's gaychildren, cannot be solved until the church of Jesus Christ clearly defines for its people the meaning of celibacy, sex, marriage and what constitutes a family’ and although sin is sin, homosexuality is a sin that Scripture claims God turns ones over to a reprobate mind, and again ‘the meaning of celibacy, sex, marriage and what constitutes a family’ is pretty clear in Scripture already. We need no redefining. Notice the use of [*straight* people] versus [God’s gay children].
She notes, ‘Those children of God, those who do not happen to be straight, are the reason that I, and so many others who love Jesus and believe in the Bible's message of grace, demand justice for them NOW,’ but does she really want ‘justice’? Do any of us want righteous justice for our sin? And ‘who do not happen to be straight’, how about choose not to be straight. Sure we can argue all day whether some are born with homosexual tendencies, but this writing seems to be speaking of practicing homosexuals, which is a choice just like every other sin.
I hate to hear that there are those which are committing suicide because they feel rejected while living in homosexuality, but we are commanded to repent, believe on Christ, and live.
Yes, I have heard the claims that we hate some sins and ‘accept’ others, but this does not mean we ‘accept’ the other sins also, we merely need to repent of ‘accepting’ the some.
Just my thoughts and I am sure some may disagree.
She writes, ‘Dr. Gushee is right on the mark when he states that the problems of gay Christians cannot be properly addressed without the church clearly defining the meaning of sex and marriage, and I think he would agree with me that those who reduce marriage to "plumbing and baby-making" are the ones who demean marriage’ but ‘sex and marriage’ is already clearly defined in Scripture and surely in most churches. It appears she is actually calling for a redefining of such, which would be unbiblical and unchristian.
She further states, ‘The current problems of *straight* people, as well as those facing God's gaychildren, cannot be solved until the church of Jesus Christ clearly defines for its people the meaning of celibacy, sex, marriage and what constitutes a family’ and although sin is sin, homosexuality is a sin that Scripture claims God turns ones over to a reprobate mind, and again ‘the meaning of celibacy, sex, marriage and what constitutes a family’ is pretty clear in Scripture already. We need no redefining. Notice the use of [*straight* people] versus [God’s gay children].
She notes, ‘Those children of God, those who do not happen to be straight, are the reason that I, and so many others who love Jesus and believe in the Bible's message of grace, demand justice for them NOW,’ but does she really want ‘justice’? Do any of us want righteous justice for our sin? And ‘who do not happen to be straight’, how about choose not to be straight. Sure we can argue all day whether some are born with homosexual tendencies, but this writing seems to be speaking of practicing homosexuals, which is a choice just like every other sin.
I hate to hear that there are those which are committing suicide because they feel rejected while living in homosexuality, but we are commanded to repent, believe on Christ, and live.
Yes, I have heard the claims that we hate some sins and ‘accept’ others, but this does not mean we ‘accept’ the other sins also, we merely need to repent of ‘accepting’ the some.
Just my thoughts and I am sure some may disagree.
Note: This is not saying that I believe we should hate homosexuals or not allow them to visit our churches. I am saying that practicing homosexuality is a sin, and should be viewed and treated as sin within the church just as we should other sins. Sin needs to be repented of, and faith needs to be put in the finished work of Christ that He will continue to help us grow away from sin and closer to righteousness.
6 comments:
Jesus bases and defines ALL sin as lack of love (Matthew 22:36-40). Such obvious sins as theft, murder and adultery are unloving because each has a victim, someone not receiving love.
Please tell me, who is the unloved victim in a homosexual relationship? Neither is a victim, neither is unloved. Where is the hurt? Who could bring suit against the “sinner”? What Gospel writer or Bible prophet claimed homosexuality is sinful? (Jesus didn't.) These are not rhetorical questions; they are unanswered by those who refuse God's grace and live by working the law.
It is noteworthy that Gay people employ themselves in loving professions like medicine, education and the ministry. However, some Christians evidently work in the Biblical judicial system.
Certainly if God didn't want men to have sex with other men, He would have said “Man shall not lie with man PERIOD (Leviticus 18:22, 21:13). God wanted Moses to eradicate rampant idolatry in the Jewish nation. That whole “ . . . as with a woman” thing condemns straight men pretending to make it with a woman, such as during idol worship. Paul explains it further when putting down the straight Romans (1:26-28 ) for “leaving their natural relations” (i.e.... as with a woman) and having idolatrous sex with men. Gay men are attracted to other men by definition and by God. They can only imagine what sex
“ . . . as with a woman” would be like.
“Homosexual” was coined about 1865, so any Bible translation since then that uses a form of that word is a lie that needs to be emended. ( The King James version is honest.) It premiered in a1946 English Bible and continues to condemn loving Gays.
For someone so homophobic, you might be another Ted Haggard on the loose:
Closet gay and homophobic by day, but a flirting, meth abusing gay by night.
Could this be........Tim?
Beast
Mexjewel,
I appreciate the visit, and will attempt to reply to what you have written.
You are correct in saying ‘ALL sin as lack of love’, but not just in regards to our neighbor. ‘The first and great commandment’ is ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind,’ which basically means our entire being. So, first our love should be to God, then unto man.
You ask, ‘Please tell me, who is the unloved victim in a homosexual relationship?’ My initial response is God, for He is preeminent before man. God decreed at creation, ‘Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.’ [Genesis 2:24]
As concerning relationships, Scripture defines marriage and the home as an example of Christ and the church [Ephesians 5], which is a husband and a wife defined as male and female. There is not a single place in Scripture that even remotely assumes a sexual relationship (or marriage) between two men or two women is permissible or promoted as regards to the husband and wife twain becoming one flesh by the joining of God. [Matthew 19:6]
Simply claiming ‘Certainly if God didn't want men to have sex with other men, He would have said “Man shall not lie with man PERIOD”’ is no different than me saying ‘If God was okay with men having sex with men and/or marrying, He would have said – Man shall not lie with man for idol worship.’
The King James Bible (which you claim is trustworthy) declares homosexuality as an abomination, even in the verses you quote. I mean, if you wish to distort Leviticus 18:22 where it says ‘Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination’ to mean only ‘having idolatrous sex with men,’ then what do you do with verse 20 which declares ‘thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour's wife?’ Are you suggesting one can have ‘non-carnal’ sex with their neighbor’s wife?
Letviticus 18:22 and 20:13 declare man is not to have a sexual relationship with another man as they would a woman. It is clear as to what this means, as it also states the same about a beast. Romans 1 further declares homosexuality as a sin by it showing the abomination of ‘men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.’
As for as your statement, ‘Gay men are attracted to other men by definition and by God’ you will be hard pressed to find Scriptural and non-argumentative scientific facts that supports God creates (makes) some men homosexuals.
No one is suggesting homosexuals cannot hold good jobs or be good people, the problem comes when one suggest God created them that way or when one tries to justify such lifestyle with a Bible that is completely contrary to any sexual relationship other than a man and a woman joined by God.
Tim
"You ask, ‘Please tell me, who is the unloved victim in a homosexual relationship?’ My initial response is God, for He is preeminent before man."
My question: If God is indeed omnipotent, how then, can he be a victim?
Beast
In the words of Mexjewel, of whom was my response given, 'victim, someone not receiving love.'
Tim
Lol...
If the gay christian professes to love God, and his gay partner, there's love all around........who's not having the love?
Besides, that's not the definition of a victim.
Try harder, Tim
Beast
Post a Comment