I’m Heterosexual and that’s Not Okay

Christian And Muslim Friendship2
The title for this piece came to me after a focus group meeting on sexuality with some Incedo missionaries. This is not a research based paper. It is not a report on the statistics about sexual and relational atrocities. It is not an attempt to compare heterosexual behavior with the behavior of any other expression of sexuality. It is simply an expression of a realization that, because of the behavior of heterosexual males historically and currently, being heterosexual does not give me superiority over people who identify with an alternate expression of sexuality.

The debate on sexuality for much of modern history, particularly in the Abrahamic, monotheistic faiths, seems to have been framed largely in a dichotomous and polarizing discourse that says “I’m heterosexual and that’s okay.” The converse implied or blatantly stated is “You’re homosexual (or lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, transgender, inter-sex – LGBTI) and that’s not okay.” This means that the whole debate starts off with one group assuming a dominant position.

Foccault has written extensively about how language gives the group that says “I’m okay” the position of power in an argument because, if I am okay, I must be superior to those who are not okay. And, if you are feeling that you are not okay, as many LGBTI people do, especially in Christianity, then you feel disempowered.

I started thinking about what would happen if we changed the discourse of this debate. What if we started from a discourse of “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay.” How would this change the way we approach and debate this significant issue in society and in Christianity. This led me to think about why being a heterosexual male is not okay. So here is my thinking.

I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay because heterosexual males are still the perpetrators of far too much partner abuse – physical, mental, emotional and spiritual – that is sometimes blatant but all too often surreptitious. And, even worse, Christian heterosexual males are guilty of this abuse of their partners. As a result, women are suffering and, therefore I cannot help thinking that “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay.”

I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay because heterosexual males are responsible for far too much pedophilia – particularly in the Christian church. Children are abused emotionally, physically, spiritually and mentally because of this and that is why I feel compelled to say that “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay.”

Also by Mal: Church is Fantasy, but that’s Okay (as long as we don’t think it’s reality)

I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay because heterosexual men are the prime broadcasters of sexist jokes about women that take away their dignity.  Women are demeaned by these jokes and that is another reason why I have come to think that “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay.”

I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay because gender equality has not yet been fully achieved due to heterosexual males continuing to openly or subtly deny women certain roles in society, in general, and in the church, in particular. Women are being discriminated against which leaves me with no alternative but to think “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay.”

ADVERTISEMENT

-------------

I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay because the media that promotes women as sex objects is largely controlled by heterosexual males. This use of women, especially young women, as things for the visual, emotional and sexual gratification of heterosexual men, objectifies women and, because of this, I cannot escape the thought that “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay.”

I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay because statistics show that heterosexual males are as promiscuous as males of other sexual expressions and this unfaithfulness is undermining the sanctity of committed relationships, spreading infection, promoting casual sex, hurting wives, partners and girlfriends, and devaluing sex. Because heterosexual males are so promiscuous, I have begun thinking that “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay.”

I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay because heterosexual males are responsible for almost all the hate and prejudice crimes against people of different sexualities. This behavior of heterosexual males against these people damages the victims physically, emotionally, spiritually and mentally and leaves them fearful and stressed, So, I am left thinking that “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay.”

I am not trying to bring about an instant change in the church’s treatment of LGBTI people or a change in attitude or belief about the rightness or wrongness of certain sexualities. That is the subject of another debate, another discussion, another exploration. I am trying to bring a change in the way we conduct the debate about sexuality, especially in a Christian context.

“I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay,” is a plea, particularly to those of us in the monotheistic, Abrahamic religions – especially in the Christian expression of these religions – to drop this divisive, unhelpful and hurtful discourse. It is a call to embrace, instead, a discourse framed by honesty, humility and love which seems to me to be more the way of Jesus. When confronted with those whom society, and in particular, religious leaders, had declared not okay, Jesus chose to offer a different way and say that they were okay in a discourse with them that was honest about their situation, that was humble in its exposure of their condition, and was loving in its acceptance of them.

It is my hope and prayer that we stop the discourse framed on, “I’m heterosexual and that’s okay and you’re another expression of sexuality and that’s not okay.” That we embrace, instead, a discourse that says, “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay and I want to be honest and humble and loving as I now engage with what it means to be a sexual person and follow Jesus and to engage with the experience of those who are of an alternate sexual expression and, especially, with those who are LGBTI and are fully committed to following Jesus.”

—-
Mal Green is a member of Incedo, a mission order in New Zealand exploring what it means to follow Jesus with young people 24/7 outside of the structures of Christianity so that we can invite them to join us in our faith adventure. He has been hanging out with young people since 1969 while studying, lecturing, mentoring, pastoring.

Print Friendly

About the Author

Mal GreenMal Green is a member of Incedo, a mission order in New Zealand exploring what it means to follow Jesus with young people 24/7 outside of the structures of Christianity so that we can invite them to join us in our faith adventure. He has been hanging out with young people since 1969 while studying, lecturing, mentoring, pastoring.View all posts by Mal Green →

  • Anonymous

    I’m surprised you don’t know your stats on women vs men in regard to violence and pedophilia. You’d be surprised how close the percentages are. As men and women we are equally pathetic, and clergy are no more worse than any other walk in life, in fact teachers are the highest percentages. Only 10% of men report sexual or domestic violence and if a woman physically abuses a man in Australia, it isn’t even an offense!

    LGBTI have a repuation for a reason. They as a community, not unlike the church, have a past which defines the community, and they have for the large part defined who they are and how they live. Like all people regardless of their sexual choices, when you operate out of a place of disorder, negative consequences come, whether it be drinking, smoking, sleeping around, cross dressing, or whatever.

    If you follow what is written in the black letters of the Bible you will find that all behavioural disorders are tremedously bad for you, and your community, and especially if you bring kids into broken environments (ake single parent, gay, absent father) the results are the same. Why? because there is a blueprint for a great life, and while it’s something everyone is aiming for we all fall short, but alternative lifesyles (including vegitarianism, veganism, etc) all are miles short.

    You can tell a person who is gay from their face. It’s science, you change who you are to take on this lifestyle, whether it’s clothing, voice, the way you stand, walk – so you trade who you are for a community you want to be part of, and that is part of the attraction for some – they don’t like who they where (losers, fat, disabled, ugly), so people in the LGBTI change to become a generic, rather than an individual as payment for that.

    As for me, I’ve got nothing to answer for as a Christian. I don’t start wars, I don’t beat my wife, I don’t heckle gay people. I have no accountability to that stuff. The devil tells us we should, but I choose to live in freedom and many now hetrosexual people are coming for the ride.

    Love isn’t about acceptance. Heck love isn’t even a verb (desite the american monitization of the phrase). Love is in the spiritual realm, when it comes from God, to how you see you spose, siblings and friends. Emotions and actions stem from not only that but the strongmen (garbage) in your life filtering your thoughts and actions. When a LGBTI person understands love for what it is, I’m yet to find one who hasn’t walked away from it. That’s where Jesus is at, healing and restoration, not acceptance. Acceptance is temporary, God’s love is always.

    Mal,

    You don’t need to go outside Christianity to find love, as Christianity
    is defined by who you follow, Jesus. If you follow Christ you are a Christian, and you are the church. So not sure how you’re going outside the structures when YOU are
    the structure?

    • FJ

      “You can tell a person who is gay from their face …” That’s one of the most hateful things I’ve read in a long time.

    • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

      “I don’t heckle gay people”

      your utter lack of awareness…self and otherwise…is the funniest thing i’ve seen today.

      “When a LGBTI person understands love for what it is, I’m yet to find one who hasn’t walked away from it. That’s where Jesus is at, healing and restoration, not acceptance.”

      i have been with my husband for 19 years…17 years “living in sin” (we only got married almost 2 years ago in a CIVIL ceremony). the last 15 years, he has been disabled. the last 10 of which, he has been bed ridden for 18+ HOURS per day. i go 3 places alone: Church (and he comes with me when he can), the grocery store (because even on a good day he doesn’t have the stamina) and to my own doctor’s appointments. how DARE you or anyone else tell me (or anyone else) what “love” is and who, in your warped little NON CHRISTIAN MIND is capable of not only possessing it but deserving of possessing it.

      God bless you (really) and thank you for the giggle.

  • tarl_hutch

    Very thought provoking and an excellent start to honest amd even discission. While the argument does miss the point a bit, as some will probably think, “this isnt about hetro males being perfect, but about the bivle saying homosexuality is a sin”, but it does cause one to realize that being heterosexual does not make me better than anyone else. Which, as you state allows us to start from a position of humility. Most people who are labeled as against gay marriage, are not necessarily doing so from a perspective of i am better then them because of my sexuality, but from a nelief that homosexuality is a sin like any other amd should not be treated as non sinful. I of course, have a different view on the matter, but i think i understand where many Christians come from.

    Once we have established that sexuality does not equal superiority, we can begin to honestly address the sin question and what it means for the church to love and embrace all people, while looking to Jesus to continuously transform us. Great start here and kudos for mentioning Foccault.

    • Anonymous

      Well said tarl.

  • Foibled

    Doesn’t this post bring us back to the basics? All human expression is tainted by sin and that sin is more than what we do – it is an expression of a nature that needs redemption? Heterosexual preference is not excluded from that. Although I do admit that some talk like it somehow is.

  • http://www.facebook.com/doug.edwards.5201 Doug Edwards

    More correctly- I am by nature, in the deepest fiber of my being, a sinner. I need all the forgiveness and justification that the blood of Jesus provides for me. As a follower of Jesus, I am no longer bound by the Law of God in regard to judgement. As a follower of Jesus, it is my primary duty to share His love with others. If I lead with the Law that I am now freed from, instead of with His love, then I have gotten in all wrong. As a believer, I have to decide what to do with God’s Law. No one can live up to it. No one can be saved by it. We can all be shamed by it, but we all still need to work it out for ourselves with Jesus’ help.

  • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

    That is a God-mocking post. If you were trying to be clever in pointing out that we are all sinners then that might have been a noble goal, but you failed. If you can’t simply say that homosexual behavior is a sin then Christianity won’t be the religion for you. I agree that we shouldn’t grandstand on it, but then again who keeps bringing it up? Who is trying to change the culture, shut down businesses whose executives dare say what even atheist cultures have always said, and so on? Not the Bible believers.

    P.S. Jesus is divine and on board with all the letters, red or black.

    • FJ

      Honestly, I don’t get this whole “Gawd is not mocked!” thing. Jesus repeatedly mocked the religious traditions of his day, for the very reason that they hurt, divided, and belittled God’s people.

      The author’s assertion (“I am hetero and that’s not OK”) is a rhetorical device (worthy of Paul) meant to attack the assumption that heterosexuality = favored status with God = homosexuals are condemned.

      • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

        I don’t follow. My point was that this post does mock God. I didn’t say all mocking is wrong.

        “God’s people” are those who repent and trust in Jesus.

        To compare the author and Paul is beyond hyperbole. How about just quoting Paul — say, Romans 1?

        I’ve never met a Christian who thought that he was automatically favored with God just for not being gay. I’ve come across plenty of fakes who say that homosexual behavior is not sinful.

        • FJ

          Ok, I’ll bite. The author is calling for heterosexual Christians to act with more humility and love for our gay brothers and sisters. I don’t believe that this mocks God, although I suspect you’ll disagree. It’s OK … God is a big God, slow to anger, and He won’t throw lightning bolts over a little mocking.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            I’m all for humility and love to other people. I just oppose bad theology.

            And I’m on record for saying we shouldn’t grandstand on sins that aren’t temptations for us. But pro-lgbtq theology Christians are only being loving to themselves and trying to make the world love them when they say the behavior isn’t sinful. If you really love people you’ll speak the truth. The truth sounds like hate to those that hate the truth.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            let me try to show you some Christian love because you may have just spoken the truth (although, i’m afraid you didn’t do it intentionally…)

            “But pro-lgbtq theology Christians are only being loving to themselves and trying to make the world love them when they say the behavior isn’t sinful.”

            of course pro-glbtq theology christians are loving to themselves. shoot, they have to be with all the hatred being thrown their way by heterosexuals (christian and non-christian alike)…

            here’s the kicker that you don’t realize you made:
            when they say the behavior isn’t sinful… BEHAVIOR (action/intent) in all things is what makes sin. being God-created as hetero- or homosexual IS NOT SIN. it’s what we do with those orientations that is sinful. do we exploit others for sexual gratification? do we subjugate others for sexual pleasure and dominance? do we sexually abuse others to feel better about ourselves? do we cheat on our spouses/partners because we’ve become bored with the intimacy that God blesses (gay or straight intimacy, i might add)…

            i really love people and so i AM speaking the truth. my truth, shaped by my very personal and intimate relationship with my God and my Savior.

            “The truth sounds like hate to those that hate the truth.” sounds like a sign outside almost any fundamentalist/evangelical church in america… doesn’t, however, make the platitude true.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            “of course pro-glbtq theology christians are loving to themselves. shoot, they have to be with all the hatred being thrown their way by heterosexuals (christian and non-christian alike)”

            That doesn’t make sense. You also are playing the “you disagree with me so you are a hater” card. I know that has worked well for the LGBTQX lobby but authentic Christians should be above that.

            “BEHAVIOR (action/intent) in all things is what makes sin. ”

            Huh? You don’t realize that you can sin with your mind?!

            “being God-created as hetero- or homosexual IS NOT SIN. ”

            But it is a fallacy. There is no evidence that LGBTQ people are “born that way.” And even if they were you don’t get an “ought” from an “is.” Just because we have desires doesn’t mean they aren’t sinful. And it is self-refuting to claim that God “made” some people to want to switch to the opposite sex.

          • tarl_hutch

            Sometimes hate may sound like truth to those who have been taught the truth by others who hate the truth or don’t understand the truth.

            The point is when speaking the truth sounds lije hate, maybe we should think about how and why we ate saying it. After all, who comes to a God who they think hates them, we are to speak the truth in love and if it looks like hate then we have not used love.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            The problem is the fallacy that disagreeing with someone = hate. Using the rules of liberal theology then I could say you are a hater for disagreeing with me. But I prefer to reason like an adult.

            Sure, there are haters like Democrat Fred Phelps, but I don’t dismiss all Democrats as haters just because he is such a transparent hater. Neither should false teaching pro-gay theologians play the hate card.

          • tarl_hutch

            I agree that some confuse disagreement with hate, and by and large most people who disagree do not do so out of hate. The issue comes with how we disagree and how we treat one another. Reasoning is one thing, which we should strive for, but often we slip into argument that belittles those who disagree and ends up in name calling.

            The main point is that we are to be Jesus to the world, so it is our responsibility to be truthful, but also loving. Jesus was much harder on the religious than the sinners, because those are the ones who needed more love and less correction than the religious elite.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            I think we agree on that as well. I am incredibly sensitive when sharing the Gospel with non-believers. I am even glad to take LGBTQ sins off the table when sharing the Gospel with them, because it is still easy to show how they need Jesus even without those sins. And I trust the process that those who God has truly made spiritually alive will realize that those sins are indeed sins.

            But on blogs like this I do just like Jesus and the writers of scripture and pull no punches. I will label false teachers as false teachers without apology, whether they are gay or straight.

          • tarl_hutch

            I see you there, we can get a bit more challenging with our brothers and sisters, which can be a good thing. I think sometimes the false teacher thing gets thrown out a little too freely, but it is good to challenge the beliefs of other Christians. Let us make sure we do it out of love, instead of mirroring the hateful discourse of the world.

            You also touch on another big point of mine, that even if you believe all homosexual activity to be sin, it is not always necessary to harp on this when introducing others to christ. When others see this as hate, it can be a stumbling block to coming to Christ. Sometimes it is better to get them to Jesus and let him do the convicting and transforming. The main issue that could raise though, is what to do when a person comes to Jesus, but never feels like the spirit is convicting their homosexuality? Are they being duped or is it something else?

            Thanks for the continued, reasoning, and civil discussion. It may just be a message board, but I think we are doing good things by discussing these things in the family of God.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            Agreed. As I like to say, it wouldn’t have been very compelling if someone had said to me, “I’ll share the best news ever with you and what you need for eternal life, but not until you stop being lustful, greedy, etc.”. Or more simply, God catches his fish and then cleans them. But if they don’t start getting cleaner then they probably weren’t caught. And there is a remarkably high correlation between pro-lgbtq theology and other false teachings.
            Blessings to you and thanks for the charitable dialogue!

          • tarl_hutch

            It is a thing I wonder about, how many times a gay Christian will come to know Jesus and radically change in all aspects of life and spirit, but remain the same on feeling and experiencing homosexuality? If we see results in all other aspects ate we to then assume they ate not “true” Christians because they do not feel convicted about their homosexuality? While it may appear quite clear in many peoples reading of scripture, it is often quite messy and gray in experiential practice. Any thoughts on why this might be, other than not being actual Christians of course?

            BTW, I find your blog very interesting. Unsurprisingly, we only agree in about 40-50% of things you discuss in themost recent blogs, i am still very interested in what you are saying. The only thing i would say is be cautious of painting with such broad brushstrokes, I am an Obama supporter on many things, but do nit always agree or think some of the things you ascribe to left leaning individuals. As evidenced by my dislike of abortion, strict gun control, and lack of fiscal responsibility, but am still left center leaning. I know you know this, but just a bit of constructive criticism if you wish to actually reach political liberals. But as long as you are working to stay in Christ and pointing people that way, then keep it up.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            Re. your 1st question, the short answer would be Satan. He hates us and hates our souls, before and after conversion. He tries to keep us from converting then tries to destroy our witness, among other things, afterwards. The world hates this advice but I think that it is remarkably simple and logical in light of eternity: Abstain.

            Thanks for visiting and for the feedback. I used to try and avoid politics more, but seeing how it is about the ethical use of power it is hard to love your neighbor without actively trying to keep them from getting crushed and dismembered in the womb simply because they are unwanted (that’s just one example of many).

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            Re. your 1st question, the short answer would be Satan. He hates us and hates our souls, before and after conversion. He tries to keep us from converting then tries to destroy our witness, among other things, afterwards. The world hates this advice but I think that it is remarkably simple and logical in light of eternity: Abstain.

            Thanks for visiting and for the feedback. I used to try and avoid politics more, but seeing how it is about the ethical use of power it is hard to love your neighbor without actively trying to keep them from getting crushed and dismembered in the womb simply because they are unwanted (that’s just one example of many).

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            Re. the hate card — go search on Scott Lively and Dan Savage. Note what they say and how they say it. I could offer countless additional examples of how vicious people in the LGBTQX lobby are and how gracious Bible-believing Christians are in putting up with the hate.

          • tarl_hutch

            I won’t disagree there, but we are held to a higher standard. We should never say, “well they are hateful to us, so we’ll be just as bad back”. That shouldn’t even be an issue, we are to be gracious and forgiving. Many christians are great at this, but some loud mouths give a bad name to good people.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            Yes, we agree on that.

  • http://www.facebook.com/americanrosie Rosie Riveter

    A lot of “red” flags here, but let’s just look at your last line. “… those who are LGBTI and are fully committed to following Jesus”? I think you need to expound on that before you get into how to make yourself look accepted by the LBGT community, at your attempts of blending in and sending signals that you are just like them. Unless, you are one of them, meaning that you do not follow the WHOLE inerrant word of God and are leading a deceptively compromising life- justifying your life by your personal views of scripture.

    • Brian C

      Jesus had far far more to say on the subject of how to treat all people, how to act with compassion for all people, and how not to judge lest ye be judged yourself, than he ever said on the subject of homosexuality. And it is impossible for anyone to follow the complete word of the Bible – every last thing. Unless you don’t wear fabric made of mixed fibres….so all expression of Christianity involves some picking and choosing of what aspects of the Bible are important and which aren’t. Hence why there are so many denominations.

      • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

        “he ever said on the subject of homosexuality”

        That is one of the most fallacious sound bites used to justify sin. Arguing from silence is a logical fallacy, Jesus is God and part of the Trinity that inspired all scripture, He supported the Old Testament law to the last letter, the “red letters” weren’t silent on these topics in the sense that they reiterated what marriage and murder were, He emphasized many other important issues that these liberal theologians completely ignore (Hell, his divinity, his exclusivity, etc.), He was equally “silent” on issues that these folks treat as having the utmost importance (capital punishment, war, welfare, universal health care, etc.), He didn’t specifically mention child abuse and other obvious sins though that wouldn’t justify them, and abortion and homosexual behavior simply weren’t hot topics for 1st century Jews.

      • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

        “Unless you don’t wear fabric made of mixed fibres.”

        No, Christianity involves understanding what the Bible says, in context. Ceremonial laws for Jews living in a theocracy do not apply to Christians. Moral laws apply to all. Really, read the entire Bible and don’t just twist the “red letters.”

        • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

          take your own advice, please!!!

          “No, Christianity involves understanding what the Bible says, in context…Really, read the entire Bible and don’t just twist the “red letters.” ”

          really. read the entire Bible…CONTEXT. 3 verses in the new testament that don’t ACTUALLY condemn homosexuality if you understand the Koine Greek words.

          malakoi and arsenekoitai (especially the 2nd word…MADE UP by paul and nobody *really* knows what it MEANS…it’s a *compound word*, which we really have no firm idea what was intended).

          to wit:

          rainbow: is it raining bows? is it a bow made of rain? is it a bow (like “bow and arrow) for shooting rain from the sky?

          butterfly: a fly made of butter?

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            I noted this elsewhere but will copy it here as a courtesy.

            The Bible couldn’t be more clear. Even non-Christians and two out of the three types of pro-gay theologians* can see these truths:
            100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.
            It speaks volumes that you think the “butterfly” argument means something here.
            * 1. “The Bible says homosexuality is wrong but it isn’t the word of God” (obviously non-Christians) 2. “The Bible says it is wrong but God changed his mind” (only about 10 things wrong with that) 3. “The Bible is the word of God but you are just misunderstanding it”

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            copy it 1000 more times and it will still not contain a shred of Biblical truth.

            1.) no, the bible doesn’t say “homosexuality” is wrong. it. just. doesn’t. no matter how you want to twist the inaccurate translation. this is called “bearing false witness”. continuing to harbor the belief that the Bible cannot be translated to ACCURATELY reflect the greek on this subject is akin to using the Bible for idol worship.
            2.) Do you know how pissed off Jonah was when God changed his mind and didn’t destroy Nineveh? …although, in this case, it’s not even a valid argument. God hasn’t changed his mind about gays and straights. He made us all and He has loved us and will love us until the end of time.
            3.) why, something we can agree on. you do have a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue at hand. you also have a fundamental misunderstanding of the subject’s importance to living the Christian life. the Bible is the *inspired* word of God…written by MEN, 2000 years and longer ago.

            a wise theology professor once said: “there are things in the Bible that are timeless and there are things in the Bible that are timely. God gave us the knowledge and guidance of the Holy Spirit to discern between the two.”

          • Drew

            The Bible does say homosexual acts are wrong explicitly in Leviticus, so you are the one that is not telling the truth, Liberal Democrat Apostate Dave. By the way, I did not know that “translate accurately” means “reinterpreting 2000 years of Biblical understanding on an issue so that my lifestyle is celebrated and affirmed and that I don’t have to change.”

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            “no, the bible doesn’t say “homosexuality” is wrong. it. just. doesn’t.”

            Gee, hard to argue with that.

      • Drew

        There are different types of laws in the OT – moral, sacrificial, civil.
        Jesus fulfilled and thus abolished the sacrificial and civil laws. We
        don’t have to offer sacrifices, nor do Gentiles have to follow Israel’s
        civil code. However, the moral code is universal, for all times and
        all peoples. Jesus fulfilled this law too, but it doesn’t mean that we
        don’t have to follow it.

        It’s not picking and choosing – it’s just reading the Bible and having a basic comprehension of what is in it.

      • http://www.facebook.com/americanrosie Rosie Riveter

        Jesus also spoke more of hell than heaven, does that mean hell is more important?

        • tarl_hutch

          Well he actually spoke of gehenna and tartarus, and occasionally darkness and fire. Usually as a negative to accentuate the positive behavior or belief he was teaching. Hell was actually a mis translation of the KJV that has taken root in Christian theology and culture.

          I would also wonder if homosexuality was not a “hot topic”, why then would Paul write about it? I am not saying silence equals acceptance, but it certainly raises meaning questions. Also, as has been pointed out, many scholars believe the Roman centurian whose “man servant” Jesus heals was actually gay and this servant was actually his lover, which was fairly common practice. I wonder why Jesus made no mention of their sin, but praised his faith. Just an interesting question.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            “I wonder why Jesus made no mention of their sin, but praised his faith. Just an interesting question.”

            Maybe it is because you use the vague “many scholars believe” line then treat it as fact, then wonder why Jesus didn’t address it. That’s sloppy theology.

          • tarl_hutch

            First off, there are many whose life work is the study of scripture, these folk write books and articles to help us fully understand biblical context, I read many of these examples from multiple sources, which I then label as “many theologians”, because there are so many it would be annoying to type or read them all here. This is not “sloppy” as i read a multitude of theologians from both sides of the spectrum, to decide for myself what to believe, instead if lazily believing what others tell me.

            We can learn much through our individual reading of scrioture and the guidance of the spirit, but miss much of the nuance without the historical work of theologians. While my example is not definitive proof, I brought it up to further thought and discussion, both of which you seem to have ignored because you disagree with the idea. I don’t think you are hateful or a false teacher, i only want to bring these issues uo to help us work together and think about why we believe what we do and how our actions to defend said beliefs affect others.

            Saying i am sloppy or lazy, sidesteps the issue and attempts to discredit me out of hand. I am more interested in your thought process that disagrees with that reading. Thanks for the comments, but I hooe to hear a little deeper into your belief.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            “Thanks for the comments, but I hooe to hear a little deeper into your belief.”
            If you want to know anything in particular, just ask, or visit my blog at 4simpsons.wordpress.com

          • tarl_hutch

            Thanks for the link, I will check it out.

          • Drew

            It’s not “many scholars;” just a few liberal scholars that are generally not Christian and/or severely apostate on a wide range of issues. This view was not even invented until 1978 and is only held by people trying to justify homosexuality by rewriting multiple Biblical passage to fit their preexisting viewpoint.

          • tarl_hutch

            While that may be true of certain scholars, one reason it cones up so late is the work of historians learning more and more, plus the fact that no one was interested in that dynamic prior to the modern time.

            Of course, it would be more liberal theologians to address this point, as they are the ones to ask the harf questions and reconsider ideas that conservatives work to defend. That is the nature of the beast, liberals pushing ahead, getting some things right and some wrong and conservatives defending established tradition, keeping christianity from going to far out on certain issues, while holding too far back on others. This is needed to keep Christianity growing and evolving. Ours is a faith if growth and dynamics, not a wooden set of rules entrenched in one period of time. Look at all the revivals and periods in church history and you will see this in play. Some holding to old beliefs, while others push onward and then some pushing too far, who are then anchored by tradition.

            We must be open to where the spirit leads. If the bible were a dead, set of rules, then we would have no need of the spirit, as it would be simple to understand. But it is alive and ever revealing new insight to grow with the story of humanity and God, thus the spirit is needed to inspire our understanding and push us to grow. This is a belief echoed by even the fathers of the reformation and continuing in our church today. It is messy and dangerous, but it is good.

          • Questioning

            Very well said Tarl….

          • Drew

            Because he agrees with you, yes, it is well said I suppose.

          • Questioning

            Yep, sorta like you and Deborah above. Scripture can inspire different things, different emotions, different insights to each reader. There are many points of view and about as many interpretations. Also, our interpretations can be flawed, our understanding can be flawed, perhaps even the translations can be flawed. Note the problem is always a human one not a scriptural one. The point being, scripture is meant to be read, reread, searched, and considered by every generation. Naturally we read it in the context of the day we are living and the knowledge we have gained. Human nature does not change, but our understanding of the world we live in has changed. The world is not flat, nor is it the center of the universe. Thinking that way, not that long ago, just might have got you burned at the stake as a heretic. We have to continually test our knowledge and understanding of scripture, as well the impact of that knowledge (or fruit if you prefer) it has. If we do not, at best we will never grow, at worst we may do real harm to others of God’s children. It wasn’t that long ago I held to more conservative beliefs. I understand it, which I feel at least, gives me just a bit more authority to be able to discuss it. I think you know why. It’s much easier to see the other side when you are suddenly uprooted and find yourself living in it. Still I would consider myself more moderate than either Liberal or Conservative, since we like to sling labels on other people so much.
            Finally here’s a quote I like about all the hoohah about levitical law:
            “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” Matthew 5:17 NIV
            What did Jesus mean by the above statement? Specifically, that Levitical law required the offering of an unblemished, or perfect, blood sacrifice as an atonement for iniquity and sin. And, that He was to serve as that offering in the establishment of a New Covenant as “the Lamb of God” (John 1:29,36) and, in that way, fulfill the entirety of Levitical law. In his perfect obedience to God, Jesus fulfilled all the Law’s requirements. To be sure, he ended up canceling the whole written code (i.e., releasing people from bondage to Levitical law), as stated in Colossians 2:14:
            [God] forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code [the Law], with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.” NIV [brackets mine]
            According to the Bible, the sacrifice of Jesus canceled the rules, regulations and ordinances of Levitical Law, having nailed them to the cross!
            And finally: Christians should be careful about trying to live in accordance with the Law or trying to impose on others what they themselves will not fulfill. Concerning hypocritical adherents to the Law, Christ Jesus said many times, “Woe to you teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites.” (Matthew 23:1-39 NIV) He called them, “You blind guides!” And said, “You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.” (Matthew 23:24 NIV) He chided them with, “You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?” (Matthew 23:33 NIV) Who or what is a hypocrite? An unfaithful servant, or someone who, in the name of God, requires someone else to do what he or she cannot do.
            Christians should be careful about trying to live in accordance with the Law or trying to impose on others what they themselves will not fulfill. Concerning hypocritical adherents to the Law, Christ Jesus said many times, “Woe to you teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites.” (Matthew 23:1-39 NIV) He called them, “You blind guides!” And said, “You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.” (Matthew 23:24 NIV) He chided them with, “You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?” (Matthew 23:33 NIV) Who or what is a hypocrite? An unfaithful servant, or someone who, in the name of God, requires someone else to do what he or she cannot do.

          • Drew

            I completely disagree with your interpretations, but I appreciate you actually using the Bible to make your argument; that is a step in the right direction.

          • Questioning

            And I appreciate you validating, precisely, the point I was trying to make. Interpretations can vary, we see through a glass darkly, which can lead to disagreements, or denominations, or a whole host of other situations. It does not mean I am right and you are wrong or vice versa, and most importantly we should flee from any proud assumptions that it does. Love is the test we need to pass, and it is the standard we should use: to “test every spirit”, and every word we say or type. I have failed before and been wrong before, and I most certainly will again. I know fully well what I am, and that I have been rescued from that wretched state. The worldly man still lives within me though, and sometimes his nature comes out. I believe that is what “spritual war” really is. It’s not a war around us, but within us.

          • Drew

            This is a classic dyed-in-the-wool liberal line that is found nowhere in Scripture and is not supported by the Bible, that the Holy Spirit is revealing new insight to us. Can you produce any Scripture to back that up?

            The Reformers were not receiving “new revelations.” They were men that studied Scripture and realized the Catholic Church was adding to Scripture or not following Scripture and sought to bring Christianity back to Scripture and Scripture alone. This is wholly different than new revelations or interpreting a Scripture in a way that nobody has ever interpreted it before.

          • tarl_hutch

            So you are telling me there has never been a time where you reread a part of scripture and all of a sudden something new jumps out at you?

            I am not saying we are making up “new” extra-biblical revelations here, just that we are discovering new things that influence our understanding of context. As well as, reading scripture through the lens of our current culture and time. Certain things don’t fully apply, yet we can see them in “new” ways that make sense with God’s mission in our current world.

            Your take on sola scriptura would discount and render obsolete all of Christian history and authorship. It would even do away with the need for pastors, as we just need to read the bible. I am purposely over simplifying your point, to show you how it sounds.

            The funny thing about it is that the very example of sola scriptura, was a radical example of theology of the reformation. When you look back and pretend it was not, you are missing the lesson of history. Saying that Luther’s theology were conservative is using the lens if current doctrine to recolor the past. After all this doctrine and the idea that common man could read scripture, were ideas so radical they broke the church.

            You may not agree with liberal theologians, but I suggest branching out and readibg a few, if for nothing else you can argue against it even better. But I find, reading people that you disagree with, can still open your eyes to new ideas. If Piper and Driscoll can do it for me on occasion, who knows what you might find. Maybe that we arent quite as different as we pretend.

          • Drew

            Actually, Luther railed mostly against the extra-Biblical teaching that I had mentioned. The Catholic Church believes in tradition plus Scripture, and Luther was mainly railing against tradition that was added in addition to the Bible.

          • tarl_hutch

            Which was the “liberal” teaching of the time, as the catholic church was the “giver and maker” of faith at the time, their position would be the defacto “conservative” stance. What is liberal and what is conservative is largely dependent on time frame and power. They change, trade, and mix throughout history based on culture and historical changes. Which is a big reason we are more alike than we want to admit, because we will all be at very places along our life, todays liberal is tomorrows conservative, without even changing beliefs.

          • Drew

            If you start with any end game in mind, such as affirming
            homosexuality, you can then scour and interpret and invent ideas from
            Scripture and ignore thousands of years of teaching to make that happen. I would just call you to use discernment, that is all. Not all movements are created equal, not all movements are designed to get closer/truer to the Bible. Everyone thinks they are Martin Luther, but how many people/movements in Christianity actually are?

            My original point was that a few radically liberal scholars invented the “gay Centurian” story some 2000 years later out of thin air (no precedent or similar thought in all of Church history) at the exact same time that it coincided with the LGBT movement and the need to give it credibility. Furthermore, the story does not make sense in light of the rest of the Bible, where Jesus affirms Genesis and marriage between one man and one woman, ect. What you see as courageous, deep scholarship, I see wholly differently, using discernment.

          • tarl_hutch

            I totally agree that discernment should always be used and advocate listening to the spirit. I bring up many points from various theologians to inspire thought and discussion. Do I believe everything i read because they are supposed to be experts? No, but I do consider and investigate. The centurian example may be malarky, but to say it is irrelevant because no one has previously addressed it, is irresponsible. We learn new things everyday through archaeology and should apply new knowledge when applicable. I just don’t buy the whole, if it isn’t already then it is false idea.

          • Drew

            I do think precedent is important. When you argue that something in the Bible needs to be reinterpreted, the fundamental argument you are making is this – the original belief was held, it was lost between then and now, and we need to go back to that belief.

            Therefore, if there is no evidence of anyone ever having that belief, then how can you say you are going back to the “original” belief? You have a responsibility to prove that at some point it was the “original” belief. Even if you argue “pais” could have had a certain definition at that time, you would need to prove that somewhere in Church history that people also had that belief.

            Therefore, you would need to say that Jesus affirmed homosexuality, that the apostles affirmed homosexuality, and that the early Church affirmed homosexuality. You would also have to argue that Jesus abolished Leviticus 18:22 and completely reversed it, in opposition to what Jesus says in Matthew 5 about not abolishing the law and in opposition to what he says about marriage being one man and woman, affirming Genesis. You need to also reinterpret what Paul said.

            So, when the Church has not even brought up the topic in 2000 years, and now all of a sudden it comes out of left field, it is a problem. You have to prove it was an original belief, not among the people of the time, but among the Christians of the time – Jesus, Paul, apostles, early Church, ect.

      • Frankr

        There is nothing loving about encouraging or affirming sinful behavior.

  • Garrett

    While these stats may or may not be true, heterosexual males are not “worse” than people of different sexualities. Maybe they just sin in different ways than other people. In essence, you say that heterosexual males are the “perpetrators,” “prime broadcasters,” and the ones “responsible for far too much” sin (According to the article, those sins include partner abuse, pedophilia, sexism, gender inequality, promiscuity, etc.). These statements imply that heterosexual men are worse than people who do not commit as many of these sins. However, more than just heterosexual men commit sins such as partner abuse, pedophilia, sexism, gender inequality, and promiscuity – other people do these things too. You CANNOT compare sins and say that one sin is worse than another. Thus a heterosexual man’s sin is not worse than a homosexual man’s sin, or anyone else’s sin for that matter.

    Also, stating that “I’m heterosexual and that’s not okay” tells me that a heterosexual man is not allowed to be comfortable with his sexuality. Why do LGBTI people get to be comfortable with their sexuality but heterosexual people aren’t allowed to? And who are you to decide that? Doesn’t that completely contradict the main point of this article?? Aren’t you for equality? If so, then why “air out” the sins of heterosexual men and not even mention sins that people of different sexualities commit? That only makes the divide greater.

    P.S. I am not a heterosexual male, but am just trying to put myself in their shoes and get people thinking.

    • tarl_hutch

      You have a much different reading of this post than I do. As a white, heterosexual, Christian male I took no offense to this post at all. To me the point was mire about humility and realizing that just being heterosexual does not make anyone superior to anyone else. Historically, we have been the powerful and many times the oppressors, and to me this post acknowledges that and dispels any notion that it should be so. As opposed to dividing, this post should inspire humility and reconciliation. Sometimes when we come frim a place we feel/know is right, we can come across as being morally superior and put everyone else in a place of submissiin, this is about coming to the table as equals.

      To me, the author says that we don’t need to be ashamed of who we are, but be conscious of how we interact with others.

      As some have, you can take offense to not calling homosexuality a sin, but that kind of misses the point. If that’s how you feel a christian should believe, fine, but do it from a place of mutual respect, humility and love. It is about not looking down on others and starting from a level playing field. I think if we remember that, and stop hounding the issue quite so hard, if we can just state our beliefs in respect and love, and focus more on getting people to see Christ and less on making sure they know what there sins are, then we will be in a Godly place. What do you think?

  • keith

    LOL is all I can say about this one. I thought I had heard it all but nope…..you have topped it again. My God in Heaven when will you people realize that it is a sin and geI the heck over it. Focus your efforts on teaching that sin will keep you from God period…..I believe there are many more people that need your help than those who are UNWILLING TO TURN FROM WHAT YOU SHOULD BE CONDEMNING WHEN ASKED.

  • http://readingevangelical.blogspot.com/ Bruce Armstrong

    I can’t recall the last time I read such a hateful piece of utter twaddle. There is no such thing as “alternate sexual expression” – there is Biblical sexuality and non-Biblical sexuality. I will not apologize for being a white evangelical American (which is probably the trifecta of evil anymore).

    • Julie

      I am not clear how this article is hateful? Nor did I experience him asking any heterosexual male to apologize. He is talking about the conversation and beginning it in humility.

      Here’s another way of looking at it that you may find helpful…
      http://www.jacobswellchurch.org/player/815

      Imagine how a homosexual would experience your words written above… Are you able to see what they see?

      • http://readingevangelical.blogspot.com/ Bruce Armstrong

        What I see is that I made a comment split between opinion (1st and 3rd sentences) and demonstrable fact (2nd sentence). If you are uncomfortable with my opinion, fine – good people can agree to disagree on matters of opinion (and quite often do!). Trying to argue that GLBTQ (or LGBTI or whatever the latest PC acronym is) is Biblically sound behavior is like arguing that 2 plus 2 equals 5. It just doesn’t add up.

        • Julie

          I am not clear on why you are responding the way that you have. I have no difficulty with you sharing your opinion. I am specifically asking for more of it – that you clarify or explain more of why you view this article as hateful. I am sincerely seeking understanding. I made no mention of being uncomfortable, nor am I.

          I can assume from your response that you did not listen to the link…

          And again, how I interpret the article is that it is not about ‘arguing’ your point. It is about approaching someone in love and humility and sharing your perspectives (facts/opinions) with that posture. That’s biblical too. Otherwise, aren’t we just gongs and symbols?

    • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

      uncomfortable with your *self*, much?

      • http://readingevangelical.blogspot.com/ Bruce Armstrong

        A helpful reply, to be certain – FWIW, though you won’t believe a non-liberal, I am comfortable with myself. I am uncomfortable with PC doubletalk taking the place of solid Scriptural teaching.

  • http://www.facebook.com/kvestal Kathy Vestal

    Great post, Mal. Welcome to RLC.

  • geoff

    What if you’re not heterosexual? What if you’re just human and you are sexual? What if heterosexual is a term that was made up in the early 1900′s about 20 years after a term like homosexual was made up? What if sexual identity is not who you are? What if human beings do damage to other human beings – young, old, female, male – and that all damage is inappropriate? What if the classification, definition, delineating of life is not actually life but an expression of arrogance designed by people who thought they could do things like build an ocean liner that “even God couldn’t sink?” What if came from the kind of people who thought that they were superior because they simply understood, finally, what all those ignorant ancestors had no clue about because they weren’t scientific, enlightened, modern, practiced, educated, conceptual?
    What if you’re making a point that has nothing to do with what is actually going on?

    • Annie

      Amen, Brother!

    • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

      Categories for sexuality are not “real” (meaning: there is no essence to them…they were socially constructed), but they are real in their consequences. Not mentioning them now (after their social construction) prevents us from understanding which groups are privileged and in what ways…..It is the same with race. Race is not “real” biologically, but it is real in ist consequences. If we didnt use and study the categories we wouldnt know just how disadvantaged people who don’t fit into the dominate category are and how to go about fixing those injustices.

  • Dan

    Sexual sin…in all of it’s forms is the number 1 cause of heresy, and the number one separater of the holy spirit. No sexual sin is worse than another. The Bible is laid out quite clearly…no matter the interpretation. God designed sex for within marriage between a man and a woman. If you within that context then know that you have God’s blessing on your relationship because it is exactly how he intended. Outside of that context…you are living in sexual sin. To tell someone that is having any sort of sexual relationship outside of that context…you do not love them because you are condoning a relationship that is not blessed of God an there fore that person cannot live a life of joy that God intended. Salvation walks hand in hand with sanctification. If you are truly following hard after Jesus then you will not seek to justify a way to bring the desires of your old unsanctified self with you.

    • Annie

      Why are fundamentalists so rabid about the sex lives of others?

      • Drew Klees

        You might find from the Bible it is that we believe what it says Annie not what we necessarily want but what is right according to the Word Of God. If we can simply change what we do not like in the Bible we might as well consider ourselves god and do write our own bible……that leads to spiritual anarchy.

      • Dan

        We are rabid about the freedom of others! You dont get freedom from sin by justifying it. But by repenting of it! Heterosexual marital relationships aren’t the building of suburbia…but the building of society as God intended. Lets take a look throughout history…how many of the great empires fell after they became a society of sexual deviance? Why do we seek to endorse the results of a societies sexual deviancy by trying tomake scripture line up with culture. If that is the case…we do not fear God at all..we fear man!

      • Drew

        Annie,

        Open and read your Bible.

        • Drew

          7 dislikes from liberals that don’t like the admonition to open and read a Bible.

      • Anonymous

        Annie,
        Disordered sexuality (and I’m not singling out homosexual behavior here) is a huge problem in our society. You might as well ask why are Christians so concerned about pride, justice or selfishness. Because they’re huge problems and the Bible spends much time talking about them!

        PS: please look up the definition of a fundamentalist in the Christian context before using as a smear.

    • Drew Klees

      Dan, I appreciate a truly Biblical perspective. I am unfortunately not as good with the words as you but you have hit the nail on the head.
      Thanks for your thoughts
      Drew

    • http://twitter.com/MAGuyton Morgan Guyton

      Sexuality the number one cause of heresy? Really? I think pride is. The reason sexuality has come to encompass the whole of modern morality is to draw attention away from all of the sins of the sexual puritans. American Christianity has become another word for patriotic, suburban, nuclear-family centered culture, rather than a movement in which the concept of family is completely redefined by Jesus: “Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother” (Mark 3:35). The heresy in Christianity today is its reshaping into a suburbanite self-congratulation party. The way that heterosexuality got to be the most important virtue is because it’s the building block of suburban culture.

      • Drew

        Morgan,

        Everything you said is demonstrably false.

        The number one cause of heresy is following our own desire and not the desire of God. However, the number one area in which we follow our desires and not God is clearly, without a doubt, in regards to sexual immorality. In Exodus 32:6, the first thing that people do when they worship the Golden Calf is to engage in sexual immorality. Leviticus has an entire chapter on sexual morality. In almost all of Paul’s epistles he mentions sexual immorality. In Revelation, when Jesus talks about the Church, I do not see pride mentioned, but I see sexual immorality mentioned twice, possibly three times if you count Ephesus being commended for not liking Nicolatian doctrine (which many think included approving of sexual immorality).

        Mark 3:35, which you have abused and twisted for your own personal gain and glory, is speaking about the Christian family, that whoever does God’s will (Jew or Gentile) is in the family of God. This is a wholly different concept – who is a member of God’s family – from what constitutes a family and sexual morality. Jesus talks specifically about the traditional family – one man and one woman uniting to become one flesh, not divorcing except in very rare cases.

        I agree with you that some use the issue of homosexuality inappropriately to make themselves superior. However, you are wholly blind, lost, and clueless to the other side of the fence – that most people affirm homosexuality in order to affirm the behavior of themselves or of close friends or family members. Pretty convenient, huh?

        • Julie

          I interpret pride is “…following our own desire and not the desire of God” – because I trust my way more than God’s. ‘I want what I want’ is a form of arrogance, that I know best, and often we don’t see it in ourselves. Pride is not as ‘overt’ and as tangible as sexual immorality, but surely you can see that everyone struggles with pride and it effects ALL areas.

          Proverbs 16:18 Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

          • Drew

            Hi Julie,

            Yes, there are a few meanings of “pride.” There is pride, in which we seek to give credit to ourselves and thus take satisfaction, and there is pride, in which we have an inordinate opinion regarding our own importance or superiority.

            In a sense, all sin is due to the second definition of pride, putting ourselves as superior to God. However, pride is often mentioned in the Bible as the first definition, taking credit for what only God deserves credit for. I think in that light, pride is a problem, but not as big of a problem as sexual immorality.

            Good point, Julie, I should have been more clear.

      • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

        AMEN!!!

        nationalism is a frighteningly sinful thing and that’s what you just described. draping God in a nation’s flag must really p*ss the deity off something fierce.

        we are not “one nation” under God, we are one planet under God.

        the only nation God ever favored was Israel, and that was the *people*, not some man-made border.

      • Anonymous

        Morgan – I don’t think you can deny that sexuality immortality is threatening the foundation of our society. Lust, adultery/infidelity, divorce, sex outside of marriage, children being born out of wedlock, the spread of pornography and its reduction of the human body (usually the female body) to a sexual object, etc. all have serious negative ramifications for our culture and society. This is why sexuality immorality is drawing so much attention – because it’s doing great harm!

        I don’t know that it’s the number one heresy (I think pride is a pretty good example of a greater heresy), but it’s certainly up there when it comes to sinful behavior that negatively effects our society. I can’t understand how you can say the focus on it distracts from the sins of suburban families when they have as much a problem with this sin as any other group of people.

  • matt

    Because homosexuals don’t do any of things that are listed. Sarcasm intended

    • keith

      You people have STILL missed the point. The POINT is that homosexuality this a sin just like the other sins this author mentiioned. The problem is not with heterosexuals KNOWING what sin they committ. It is quite the opposite. It is YOU people affirming and protecting a SIN. If you worded your argument such that you tell the gay community that you can not stand with them on their platforms just like you cant on drug abuse, alchohol abuse, stealing etc…then you would not be their friend. You couldnt be their friend because unless you affirm the sin they will reject you and your teaching. You are enabling them to feel good about continuing in something that God wants them out of just because you are not strong enough in your faith to stand for what you believe or either you have caved in to the devil and compromised your beliefs.

  • Brendon Pennington

    Let me just start off by stating that I respect your thoughts expressed in this post … but I disagree with you’re premise.

    It really seems to me that Christians nowadays are afraid to label sin for what it truly is: SIN.

    If the Bible says “adultery is sin” … then we must accept it as sin. Period. End of story. We shouldn’t call it “alternative adultery expression” or any other nonsense. And the same goes for the homosexual lifestyle. We MUST call it “sin.” Why? Because God calls it sin.

    If the world calls me “intolerant” because I hold firm to what the Bible says to be true … so be it. It’s more important for me to honor and please a holy God than appeal to the surrounding culture.

    • Drew Klees

      All true Brendon but the Bible tells us to love them in spite of their sin because we too are sinners. This the difficult part because we are not superior to the homosexuals. We have be given sight they have not. Yet they may have sight about us that we do not know.

      • Brendon Pennington

        Yes. We are all sinners. No one is superior to another.

      • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

        homosexuality is no more sinful than being left-handed.

        being prideful (or condescending) about not being “one of them”? now, that, is sinful…as sin is something that separates one from God. it is impossible, just by being who God created me to be (gay, nearsighted, green eyed), to be separated from God without some action.

        heterosexuality AND homosexuality are God-created and blessed states of being…when the heterosexual has sex outside of marriage, s/he sins. when the homosexual has sex outside of a committed relationship, s/he sins. (i draw a distinction because, as everyone knows, only certain denominations an only a few states grant the right (and/or RITE) to marriage to glbt people.

        • Drew Klees

          It is sad you do not have any understanding of the True God.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            Drew,

            What *I* find sad is that so many people, like yourself, believe…truly believe…that they have a lock on what is or isn’t the “true” God…and that any dissent from your “truth” is the only truth.

            _____

          • Drew Klees

            I am able to believe that I don’t know it all but God does. There are many other gods they just have no power. Even if you don’t believe the bible is the word of God you might want to look at its historical accuracy according to non God lovers of that age. You might learn a few things and it would be worth a discussion with you. If I enter into a discussion with someone so arrogant that they believe they have all the answers with no backing; I am throwing pearls to swine. In other words where is the backing for your thoughts. I do not rely on myself but on the scriptures to find out what is true and not. I will certainly not listen to someone that wants to determine right and wrong with in his own mind. Oh and by the way your statement makes no sense you might want to re-write it for those of us with so much less intelligence than yourself. I didn’t say it was my understanding who the true God is. He reveals himself to everyone even you. I just believe he is who he has said he is.

    • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

      It also says eating shellfish is an abomination….and getting tattoos….and wearing mixed fabric clothing…and that stoning your daughter to death because she didnt scream loud enough when she was rapped is a just form of punishment for her “promiscuity”. According to Paul abolitionists and slaves who ran away or revolted sinned…they were suppose to remain slaves and honor their master.

      Pick and choose which verses you want to listen to much?

      • Drew

        Erin,

        It’s too bad you don’t even have a basic understanding of the Bible, as is common in our Bible-illiterate culture of today. You are speaking out of ignorance.

        There are different types of laws in the OT – moral, sacrificial, civil. Jesus fulfilled and thus abolished the sacrificial and civil laws. We don’t have to offer sacrifices, nor do Gentiles have to follow Israel’s civil code. However, the moral code is universal, for all times and all peoples. Jesus fulfilled this law too, but it doesn’t mean that we don’t have to follow it.

        Also, the NT definition of “slave” is different than what Americans associate it with. Please study what it meant to be a slave in Paul’s context, not apply your American perspective to the culture of that time.

        Ignorance is a terrible thing. Read the Bible.

        • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

          Drew,

          It’s too bad you have a conditional and at the same time fundamentalist view of the Bible. show me your scriptural basis for paragraph 2.

          paragraph three sounds like so much justification. slavery is slavery and has had one thing in common from the dawn of mankind: one person/government OWNING another person/people and requiring them to do things whether they want to do them or not.

          judgment and justification are also terrible things. read the Gospels.

          • Drew

            It is clear you are an apostate with no understanding of the Bible and no respect for God. I’ll pray for your salvation.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            thanks for the prayers, drew. seriously. …and i’m sending them up for you too.

          • Drew

            Apostate prayers are not pleasing to God. I would repent first, and then pray.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            Thank you, please don’t swing your shovel at my head, friend
            No, I truly won’t appreciate that sound
            When you tell me I surely should atone for my sin
            I hope you know the fate of the proud

          • Drew

            You are an apostate, and a heretic, and probably not a Christian based on your stated beliefs. However, I pray for everyone regardless.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            apostate:

            you keep using this word…

            http://youtu.be/G2y8Sx4B2Sk

          • Drew

            I’m glad I’ve convicted you and have gotten you to think about the word.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            YOU? you’re actually going to take credit for something that a.) hasn’t happened and b) if it had wouldn’t have anything to do with YOU. let me re-iterate the lyric from that song by The Choir:
            Thank you, please don’t swing your shovel at my head, friend
            No, I truly won’t appreciate that sound
            When you tell me I surely should atone for my sin
            I hope you know the fate of the proud

          • Drew

            The fate of the proud with Christ can still be heaven; the fate of apostate heretics without salvation that put their faith in liberalism and politics and false teaching and false doctrine is surely a hotter place.

          • Michelle

            liberaldemdave, we *do* read the Bible and we also analyze it:

            Galatians 3:28

            New International Version (NIV)
            28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
            “Does the Bible Condone Slavery?”
            http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            …and IF there had been concept of the 2, the bible could have would have, should have included “gay or straight” in those polar opposites.

            ANALYZE THIS FOR ME:

            I tell you, in that night, there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left. (Luke 17:34-35, KJV)

            leviticus has already determined for us that 2 men in 1 bed is a euphemism for gay sex!!! the euphemism of “two women grinding” (is also VERY clear, in context)…

          • Michelle

            Stop perverting the Bible.

            Luke 17:34-35New International Version (NIV)
            34 I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35 Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.”

          • Michelle

            Only a liberal would distort “grinding grain” into “women grinding.” Right, that’s the exact poetic language they used 2,000 years ago.

          • Michelle

            Oh…and btw…liberals can be saved too. The only issue that differentiates me from the masses of liberal bullies is the fact that I do not support gay marriage. But that’s not good enough, right? Oh no, the liberal thought police/pro-homosexuality caucus won’t stand for that.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            because my screen name contains the word “liberal”, i see that you have hopped on that…very mature. JESUS was a “liberal”. read the gospels, honey.

          • Drew

            Jesus was not a liberal, but I could see how a secular non-Christian would think that. Fair point.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            read the sermon and get back to me. there wasn’t a fee structure/price list associated with it, particularly the beatitudes.

            oh, and did you get the part where the free will offering for the fishes and loaves was left out?!? A-MAZING.

          • Drew

            If you proof-text the parts that you find to be liberal, and then radically reinterpret the rest based on atheist and agnostic extremist liberal scholars, then yes, you might be able to stretch and make that claim.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            that’s exactly the kind of language they used. sheesh. “no man shall lie with another”… REALLY? and you’re going to quibble.

            ummm, i just took your sandwich with the greek analysis of v. 34… that sammy wasn’t good for you anyway.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            ANCIENT GREEK, baby, it’s what’s for breakfast lunch and dinner in this NT house.

            stop bearing false witness. PERIOD. FULL STOP.

            what you clearly have here, is the NIV and a few other translations trying to remove any possible POSITIVE reference to GLBT people that are CLEARLY in the bible because it doesn’t fit the exclusion narrative of fundamentalism/evangelicalilsm.

            let’s go back to the broadly accepted THEOLOGICAL analysis, shall we? : http://biblos.com/luke/17-34.htm

            below i an excerpt of just the “two men” portion. the above link takes you to the full dissection/translation of the scripture.

            strongs
            1417 [e]

            http://concordances.org/greek/1417.htm

            transliteration
            dyo

            http://concordances.org/greek/duo_1417.htm

            GREEK
            δύο

            English
            two [men]

            how’s that sammich? ya’ know, before i knew that a portion chick-fil-a’s corporate donations went to a known hate group that supports legislation to EXECUTE GAYS, i liked the sammy with the pickles on it.

          • Drew

            Michelle,

            Liberal Democrat Dave (not Christian Dave, or just “Dave”) is very proud that he can copy and paste prominent extremist liberal scholars (most of whom are not Christian but interpreting Christian documents) in such a way that they fit his pre-existing beliefs.

          • Michelle

            Thanks, Drew. It’s comforting to know that I have a Brother in Christ on this page. In my former life when I was a union organizer, I supported gay marriage (and the entire gamut of GLBT issues), as I have stated. The issue here is spiritual blindness. I see no difference between Liberal Christians who are claiming Christianity and their so-called non-Christian liberal counterparts: they are identical; and they are introducing false teaching into the Church. I do not think the Christian Right is perfect either. They have flawed reasoning as well. I support Dan Cathy’s right to freedom of speech and for his family’s foundation to use their money to support causes they believe in. I don’t agree that America will be judged on gay marriage in and of itself. America has plenty of sins to contend with, that predominantly white, upper class, conservative Christians never mention and seem to have no awareness of (unjust wars, prison industrial complex, treatment of the poor in public policy). Anyway, Drew…it’s just nice to know you are out there. This is the only thing that i will address liberal Dave with:

            “Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.” Roman 1:24

          • Michelle

            From Gotquestions.org:

            “both the Old and New Testaments condemn the practice of “man-stealing” which is what happened in Africa in the 19th century. Africans were rounded up by slave-hunters, who sold them to slave-traders, who brought them to the New World to work on plantations and farms. This practice is abhorrent to God. In fact, the penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16). Similarly, in the New Testament, slave-traders are listed among those who are “ungodly and sinful” and are in the same category as those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, adulterers and perverts, and liars and perjurers (1 Timothy 1:8-10). “

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html

            funny, same website. the bible condemns slavery…when it isn’t condoning it and telling folks how to treat their slaves. this isn’t an indictment against the bible, judaism or christianity…by any stretch of the imagination. it is simply to point out that when we start assuming the bible makes absolute, unequivocal stands on issues it’s quite likely it’s going to contradict itself.

          • Drew

            This is a typical liberal response – since the Bible appears on the surface to have a contradiction and you are either not smart enough to figure it out or too lazy to put the time in to figure it out, you think it must be a contradiction. I suggest you keep studying and reading and maybe all these “contradictions”that confuse you will start to make sense. We need more people reading the actual Bible.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            drew, what is sadly typical is a dialogue more interested in scoring points and rudeness than trying to either find common ground or educate. to wit:

            ***”typical liberal response” (ah, you get this from my screen name…gotcha)
            ***since the bible appears on the surface to have contraditions (no “appearance” and it goes much deeper than “on the surface”)…as christians, we are tasked to either resolve those contradictions, figure out why they are there, OR (gasp!) admit that, although DIVINELY INSPIRED (no argument from me here) the book *were* written by men. human men. who aren’t infallible only the trinity falls in that category.
            ***”you are either not smart enough to figure it out or too lazy”. (REALLY? is this your concept of christian LOVE?)
            ***”I suggest”… do ya’ now. then allow me to make a suggestion of my own. you might get something from this song (my Jesus by the Chor):

            O How The Mighty Have Fallen lyrics

            Like the snake who calls the lizard a reptile
            Like the chimp who calls the jester a clown
            When I tell you, “You oughta be ashamed or yourself”
            I’ve gotta set my knees on the ground

            O how the mighty have fallen
            O how the reckless are crawling now
            O how the mighty have fallen
            Such a long way down

            Thank you, please don’t swing your shovel at my head, friend
            No, I truly won’t appreciate that sound
            When you tell me I surely should atone for my sin
            I hope you know the fate of the proud

            O how the mighty have fallen…

          • Drew

            Projection. You talk about being rude and scoring points, yet that is all you have done in every single post on this thread since the beginning. I’m glad you know the lyrics to a song, but I’m more interested that Jesus saves you and that your life is radically changed.

          • Michelle

            liberaldave…look, the Bible doesn’t make a stand on every issue explicitly. We read the text and we draw conclusions. Did God tell us that recycling is good? No. But He did say that man was made as steward over His Creation. However, God did *explicitly* say through prophets, disciples, and apostles that homosexual acts are not in line with Godly living. This all boils down to whether or not you believe the Bible to be His Word. If you don’t, don’t worry about. The Bible speaks to God’s followers who are born again. The Bible is our directive on how to live. I do not expect non-Believers to subscribe to the teachings of the Bible because they either do not believe in God; or do not believe in the text that He used to reveal His thoughts to us. People who say they are “Christians” and then reject the actual words that are the BASIS for Christianity…well…that is a contradiction. The Scripture, the Bible…is how we have learned of who Jesus was, what He did and what God has done through time. Liberals, including the liberals who are now claiming to be Christians, cannot pick and choose which sections of the Bible you like. It *all* goes together. Jesus was not a hippie wearing berkenstocks and smoking pot. Jesus was/is God. Not everything he has to say is warm and fuzzy. Liberals need to understand that we are made in His image and stop trying to make God into your image. This is spoken to you from someone who is *extremely* familiar with Leftist/Liberal thought. I once supported gay marriage and the whole “GLBT” agenda before I was saved.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            becoming saved didn’t require you to lose your moral compass…quite the contrary…it means that WWJD takes on a WHOLE NEW MEANING…if, indeed, you are trying to follow CHRIST and not people who would tell you what you are to believe.

            “This is spoken to you from someone who is *extremely* familiar with Leftist/Liberal thought. I once supported gay marriage and the whole “GLBT” agenda before I was saved.”

            are you saying that only rightists/conservative thinkers are capable of salvation? sure sounds like it if i read between the lines… something i do believe i was told i needed to do by you earlier in this comment.

          • Drew

            What Michelle is saying is that after salvation, a person is radically different, since the Holy Spirit indwells them. What you are saying is that you are not radically different, nothing changed, you were just able to now use Scripture to justify your behavior.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            i will ask you one last time to stop saying what i am saying, drew.

            i have experienced salvation. i walk with Christ in everything that i do…even in my attempts to get you and michelle to see outside these little boxes in which we are typing.

            you have NO idea the transformation i have been through. you would likely fall to your face and beg forgiveness if you *knew* where i came from to where i am today. i am *TRULY* a gift and miracle from God. (as are we all, frankly)…

            i use the scripture because they are important to me…not to “justify” anything…but to show how quickly and how dramatically others will fall from the message of LOVE AND GRACE in order to condemn and belittle those not like themselves.

            now, peace be with you. this conversation is exhausting and exhausted.

          • Drew

            If you have considered yourself a Christian for some time, it is clear that you have deceived yourself.

            If you are new to Christianity, I hope that you begin to learn and mature in the faith and begin to discern between the most extreme of extremist liberal scholars (many of whom are not Christian or openly apostate) and the rest of Christians as far as whom you listen to and whom you are taught by.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            God did *explicitly* say through prophets, disciples, and apostles that homosexual acts are not in line with Godly living.

            which prophet?
            which disciple?

            the only apostle to speak, even though what was said in THREE WHOLE VERSES, has been mistranslated and the misunderstanding perpetuated (because it fits the narrative), was paul. now, michelle, according to PAUL, YOU are not to be “teaching”. so it’s time you left the internet on issues of faith to men? SEE? i don’t tell you that…a.) it’s not my place and b) it’s RIDICULOUS 2000 years later to continue to cling to such a ridiculous distortion of paul’s intent.

            you and drew have a blessed existence. i’ve really enjoyed the discussion. i hope you’ve both learned something…or at least been made to feel EXTREMELY uncomfortable. it is when we get out of our comfort zones that the Holy Spirit is among us; working, transforming, transcending.

          • Michelle

            Also, Christians *ended* the slave trade.


            Another crucial point is that the purpose of the Bible is to point the way to salvation, not to reform society. The Bible often approaches issues from the inside out. If a person experiences the love, mercy, and grace of God by receiving His salvation, God will reform his soul, changing the way he thinks and acts. A person who has experienced God’s gift of salvation and freedom from the slavery of sin, as God reforms his soul, will realize that enslaving another human being is wrong. A person who has truly experienced God’s grace will in turn be gracious towards others. That would be the Bible’s prescription for ending slavery. “

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            slavery continues to this day, michelle. human trafficking is a GROWING not diminishing problem…even IN AMERICA. what are you doing to stop it? anything? having chicken sandwiches?

          • Michelle

            Now that you mention it, a chicken sandwich from Chick Fil A sounds AWESOME. liberaldave, my degree is in African and African American Studies, I know *a lot* about the Atlantic Slave Trade and I am aware of human trafficking. So, is your argument that I have to solve ever injustice in the world before I can speak in opposition to gay marriage? Right. Just what I thought. Well, unfortunately I have to go now so that I can get to Chick Fil A for my yummy, fat carb-filled fries.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            no, my point is that you certainly don’t seem to be acting very “Christian”. far more concerned with making points, feeding yourself unhealthy (spiritually and physically) food and condescension. enjoy your sammy and bless up! :)

          • Michelle

            liberaldave…um..first become born again…then we can talk. I never said I was Jesus and perfect and sinless, I said I was saved. Big difference. Yes, I am sarcastic in response to rudeness and snarkiness. And what is this whole argument about? Oh yeah, because i won’t submit to accepting gay marriage. Oooh, bad, bad Christian, aren’t I?

          • Michelle

            I love the way liberal non believers think that it is okay for them to say whatever they please to us…even planning a “kiss in” at Chick fil A…and then when we respond…we are called “un-Christian.” But what is the basis for their idea of what a Christian is or is supposed to be? Oh, what was that? the Bible? Right. The same Bible they cite to tell us we are acting “unChristian” is the same Bible they constantly try to tell us is fake when we point out what it says about homosexuality.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            you need to seriously check yourself before you completely wreck yourself.

            “ummm…first become born again”??? you’re telling this to someone on a blog that you’ve never met? you know absolutely NOTHING about me. if nothing else, i have NOT questioned YOUR intentions or YOUR faith.

            we both have a propensity for sarcasm and snarkiness. i can get past that…do NOT, however, put words in my mouth or tell me i am or am not something. you…do…not…know…me…

            this has nothing to do with whether or not you accept marriage equality, either… for me, it has more to do with you taking a crow bar and prying open that closed mind of yours. you MIGHT be able to learn a thing or ten million.

            i’m not going to resort to age….BUT…i am. how old are you? i would venture i’m 2/x your youth. i appreciate that youth and passion but with age comes the ability to see things from multiple views and an earned right to be treated with respect…at least that’s what i learned being brought up (my entire LIFE) in a fundamentalists denomination…so fundamentalist that we rejected even the term “denomination”.

            so do me a favor, please: go lecture someone that will sit still for your condescension.

          • Drew

            Projection is terrible, liberal Democrat Dave (not Christian Dave, not Love Jesus Dave, but liberal Democrat Dave).

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            drew, would it make you feel better if i created a new screen name? i mean, really, don’t you have enough to worry about condemning me to apostasy and all sorts of other heinous sin without throwing the fact that i also identify as a liberal and democrat?

            it won’t make you feel any better, but here’s the explanation…the internets are a really big thing now. global even. those tubes go far and wide…there are a bazillion different blogs on those internets. most of the blogs i visit are political in nature (i just rarely find this a valued medium for religious discussion… the silly, vapid conversation attempted here validates that…) SO, for what it’s worth, “disqus” is a HUGE means of posting comments.

            little did i know that i would need a topic specific screen name wherever i go.

          • Drew

            It does not surprise me that you identify as a liberal and a Democrat rather than as a Christian, and that you primarily visit political websites rather than visit religious ones or spend your time in a wholly different way.

          • Michelle

            btw, liberaldave, you are totally clueless about the history of slavery in the Americas, including it’s abolition.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            EL. OH. EL.

            let me just clue you in that i am a member of the denomination that was formed through the merging of the evangelical, christian, reformed and congregational churches… we are responsible for harvard, (largely responsible for) abolition, were THE MOST prominent denomination helping southern slaves to freedom and one of our early fathers penned amazing grace.

            don’t play and make accusations and assumptions about folks and their backgrounds unless you like having to eat the consequences with your hatewich.

        • Michelle

          Wow. :)

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            curious…was it the list of abominations from leviticus that gives you the “wow”‘s?

          • Drew

            Condescension is fitting of an apostate.

          • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

            curious…was it the list of abominations from leviticus that gives you the “wow”‘s?

      • Brendon Pennington

        Context. Context. Context.

    • Kieron Foster

      Yet let him without sin cast the first stone, are you hating the sin within or the sinful person who Jesus came and so willingly and lovingly died for so that we too can have everlasting life. Hold firm on God’s word but live in Love the Agape type of love let it be unconditional. For if you find yourself hating the person as opposed to the sin you’ve just made yourself, as sinful as they are. Love changes all but without it everything falls and crumbles.

      • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

        You sure are casting stones there. I take it you are sinless?

    • bitbanger

      I have heard that adultery was a capital offense because it fouled up the inheritance of land, which was important in the days between Joshua and Babylon (Who’s your daddy?), and also because of its practice within pagan worship. Homosexuality was a capital offense because of its association with pagan worship. So was human sacrifice. After Babylon, following other gods was never a problem for the Jews. So the reason for adultery and homosexual activity being capital crimes went away – it just dropped them off the capital list.

    • bitbanger

      I have heard that adultery was a capital offense because it fouled up the inheritance of land, which was important in the days between Joshua and Babylon (Who’s your daddy?), and also because of its practice within pagan worship. Homosexuality was a capital offense because of its association with pagan worship. So was human sacrifice. After Babylon, following other gods was never a problem for the Jews. So the reason for adultery and homosexual activity being capital crimes went away – it just dropped them off the capital list.

      • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

        LOGIC being applied to issues of faith and so-called “moral” codes that had more to do with greed (inheritance) than purity (Godliness)!!!

        BLESS YOU, bitbanger!!!

      • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

        LOGIC being applied to issues of faith and so-called “moral” codes that had more to do with greed (inheritance) than purity (Godliness)!!!

        BLESS YOU, bitbanger!!!

    • Michelle

      Amen!

  • Drew Klees

    I believe this is a bit silly in that the same things can be said of Homosexuals….ie. I am a homosexual and that’s not ok because:
    I make sexist jokes, I am a pediphile, I abuse my partner..you get the point.
    It is not ok to embrace a homosexual as fully committed to following Jesus because that is to say that it is ok to do all the other things you have talked about and be a committed follower of Jesus. I think you need to get you words filtered by what the Bible actually says. It says that if we do not confess our sins and admit we are sinners than we are liars and full of deceipt. I am a sinner. I am not lbgt nor am I lgbt friendly. I do however love those that are lgbt albeit not with perfect love as Jesus has for them. I do not and will not accept their lifestyle as acceptable. I do accept them as sinners and in need of the grace of God. They may be saved but certainly not committed followers of Jesus till they admit their sexual sin. Frankly Mal your type of watered down theology is quite scary.

    Sincerely
    Andrew Klees

    • Michelle

      Love what you wrote.

  • Yup

    Treat other people decently and don’t revolve your arguments around guilt trips.

  • guest

    I’m Heterosexual and that’s Not Okay

    I’m a Lumberjack and I’m OK

    Thank you, I’ll be here all week!

    • Michelle

      LMBO!!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/joe.richards.313 Joe Richards

    I’m NOT aware that God refers to some behavior as “Okay,” and other behaviors as “NOT Okay.” I am aware that he refers to behaviors that he forbids as SIN and behaviors he commands and encourages as righteous, just, charitable, loving, compassionate, blessed, gracious, merciful and obedient, among similar others.

    Removing the Words of God from the debate and substituting somewhat innocuous but PC-imputed power words, such as “Okay,” and “NOT Okay” obfuscates and deflects from a Theopocentric righteous doctrine to an anthropocentric ideology that elevates the finite creation above the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence of the Creator, and to echo the great Christian Businessman, Dan Cathy of Godly Chik Fil A fame,

    “I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage. I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think we can try to define what marriage is all about.”

    As President Barack Hussein Obama has repeatedly taught us, high and mighty rhetoric — which like Marx’s rhetoric often soars higher and tickles more ears than righteous Christian dogma — is no substitute for the Truth of God spoken plainly in the Koine language of the commoners, the “hoi poloi,” the plainspoken folk, and the knowledgeable but not necessarily linguistically savant God-fearers.

    Let’s name every sin a sin and every sinner a candidate for repentance and salvation. Love dem sinners but hate our sins!

    http://www.facebook.com/events/266281243473841/

    • Michelle

      Joe…I agree with you…and then you went “there.” Barack “Hussein” Obama?? Yeah. That’s why I recoil from the Left and the Right.

  • http://www.facebook.com/joe.richards.313 Joe Richards

    There HAVE BEEN and continue to be Christians who feel an attraction toward the same sex, and just like unmarried HETEROSEXUALS, remain celibate. And then die. Is it sad that repentant homosexuals choose to obey God rather than give in to the lusts of their flesh? No more so than the HETEROSEXUAL who does the same. Perhaps this is the greatest joy for a select few. Perhaps not. No matter. IF heterosexuals can learn to modulate their lusts so can homosexuals. There is a right expression for heterosexuals and so, too, for homosexuals. And, the Good News is, homosexuals can learn to love and become committed to the opposite gender, even if they occasionally experience lust for someone else, the same as married heterosexuals usually do. Most Godly heterosexual happily married males I’ve spoken to (I’m a celibate heterosexual single male) admit that the lust does NOT diminish upon marriage but in some instances flames hotter because, “You know what’s under that skirt.”

    • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

      who says that homosexuals don’t “modulate” (LOL) their lusts. i was “engaged” 17 years before marrying (2 years ago). monogamy and stable relationships are something that more than a few of my heterosexual counterparts could learn from loving committed couples that happen to be same gender… ya’ know, joe, how hard it is to get gay married? if “you people” had to go through so many hoops to get married, then perhaps “your kind” wouldn’t have made such a mockery of marriage.

      correct me if i’m wrong but it sounds like you are speaking about heterosexuals who choose a life of celibacy (priests, nuns, etc.)…

      “And, the Good News is, homosexuals can learn to love and become committed to the opposite gender, even if they occasionally experience lust for someone else, the same as married heterosexuals usually do.”

      now, sir, a couple of problems. the “Good News”, when capitalized, isn’t about something as supercilious to a life of faith as marriage or even sexuality. Save the caps for when you are referring to the Bible or Christ’s message, the Gospel. second problem is that it is *completely* irresponsible to make a claim about gays becoming straight. the Bible is VERY explicit about denying one’s true nature…that’s why he was admonishing men who left their wives to have sex with child (mostly male) prostitutes. they were leaving their “natural” selves for “unnatural”. the SAME is true every time some poor glbt person is brainwashed and psychologically abused into thinking they’re straight. they aren’t. they never will be. the desire NEVER goes away. eventually, they fall…or kill themselves.

      LET GO, LET GOD.

      i see a lot of attempts at playing God in this thread.

      • Michelle

        liberaldemdave…No, you are incorrect. Celibacy is *not* just for priests and nuns. You have just proven that you have very little, if any, knowledge of Scripture. God calls Christians to abstain from sexual sin: homosexuality, fornication (outside of marriage), adultery, bestiality. Therefore, for Christians who are not married, in order to be in God’s Will regarding our bodies, we are called to not engage in sex unless we are married. Many of us comply with that and we are not priests or nuns, just regular born again people who live by the guiding of the Holy Spirit that resides in us upon salvation and according to the Word of God.

    • Michelle

      Joe Richards, amen bro’. You said it very well. I tried explaining that in response to another article…but not as eloquently as you. You are correct. I am a single Christian woman following what the Bible says re: the avoidance of sexual sin outside of marriage.

  • http://www.facebook.com/joe.richards.313 Joe Richards

    There HAVE BEEN and continue to be Christians who feel an attraction toward the same sex, and just like unmarried HETEROSEXUALS, remain celibate. And then die. Is it sad that repentant homosexuals choose to obey God rather than give in to the lusts of their flesh? No more so than the HETEROSEXUAL who does the same. Perhaps this is the greatest joy for a select few. Perhaps not. No matter. IF heterosexuals can learn to modulate their lusts so can homosexuals. There is a right expression for heterosexuals and so, too, for homosexuals. And, the Good News is, homosexuals can learn to love and become committed to the opposite gender, even if they occasionally experience lust for someone else, the same as married heterosexuals usually do. Most Godly heterosexual happily married males I’ve spoken to (I’m a celibate heterosexual single male) admit that the lust does NOT diminish upon marriage but in some instances flames hotter because, “You know what’s under that skirt.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=682223485 Deborah Patterson

    While I respect what I believe to be your heart’s intent, I disagree with this premise. What you’re saying is like saying that all 24-year-old white guys are “not okay” because of James Holmes’ (alleged) slaughter-fest in Colorado. None of us are okay, truth be told, unless we accept Jesus as our Savior and Lord. Any goodness in us comes only from him.

    So I agree that we should not think of ourselves as superior to homosexuals because “their sin is worse than ours”…it’s not. But the difference is that many people refuse to call it sin at all anymore, which the Bible clearly states that it is, along with lying, stealing, gluttony, etc. As my father is fond of saying, you don’t see adulterers holding pride parades. Why? Because most everyone still acknowledges that adultery is wrong, that it is sinful. Not so with homosexuality these days.

    I very much appreciate your compassion and sensitivity…I just think it may be a little overboard here.

    Respectfully,
    A heterosexual woman

    • Drew

      I agree 100% with what you have said, and I think you have written it better than I could have. Thanks for the contribution.

    • Brendon Pennington

      Excellent response, Deborah! You hit the nail right on the head. You articulated my very thoughts.

    • http://rants-ravings-and-nerfherders.blogspot.com/ DrthGeek

      I understand your position.

      However, we, as people, regularly quantify everything as a means to understanding. Unfortunately, that practice leads us into making judgments about others, regardless of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, color… what have you. While not everyone is “shoving their opinion down (others) throats” – a quote i have heard MANY times – and I do not believe you are doing the same, we should embrace the tenets suggested at the end of this article and approach these folks as someone who acknowledges their own faults, not as one willing to point out someone else’s flaws based on our personal understanding.
      Yes. That is what religion is. Personal understanding. That is where faith comes from. You and I can read the exact same passage from the exact same text, and get two drastically different understandings. While there are some basic truths to be gleaned, how we get to those truths are different paths, simply because we are different people, living different lives. It is not my place to tell you that what you are doing, right now, is wrong. It is, however, my place to accept you as a person sharing this world with me and that I have a responsibility to you in the fact that our interactions will affect what you do after those interactions have passed. To me, that is more in line with being a disciple of Jesus.

      I hope I have given you more food for thought. :0)

      • Twl

        Like your heart

    • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

      “which the Bible clearly states that it is”

      ummm, NO, it doesn’t. only heterosexist homophobes are this absolutist about 3 widely misinterpreted scriptures written by the man, paul.

      respectfully,
      a Christian

      • Drew

        There is nothing respectful or Christian about your incendiary, apostate rhetoric, that only serves to justify yourself.

        • keith

          Drew, I hope you were referring to the author. Homer hit a “homer” The truth hurts and its about time to stand firm and quit pandering to people whos only objective is to distort scripture to appease a segment of people. The time is coming when you wont be able to be ‘civil’ about this matter. The gay community will force you on one side or the other.

          • Drew

            Keith, I was responding to Liberal Dem Dave. It’s hard to follow along with the new comment system sometimes; it looks like I replied to Homer but if I would have replied to Homer it would have said @Homer in front of it.

          • Michelle

            Keith, they already have. I have been a staunch Democrat since forever. I am subscribed to a million liberal pages on fb. My *one* issue (gay marriage) that I depart from the liberals on, I have been vilified as a hater and almost a KKK cousin although I am a woman of color and former union organizer. This one issue that I tell them that I disagree with based on my belief in the Bible has received the “intolerance” they say we have. Because of the vulgarity I have seen liberals, of which I identify with on many political stances, aim at Chick Fil A and the people who eat there, I have had to “unlike” their pages. On Friday they are planning a “kiss in” at Chick Fil A’s. Totally disrespectful. I am tired of being bullied, and note: I am a Democrat who is a born again Christian. That’s the other thing: anyone can say they are a “Christian.” What is that really? My question is, are you a born again believer in Jesus the Messiah?

      • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

        The Bible couldn’t be more clear. Even non-Christians and two out of the three types of pro-gay theologians* can see these truths:
        100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.
        You tipped your hand by trying to dismiss the Bible by saying it was written by “the man, Paul.” All scripture is God-breathed. The original writings turned out just as God and the human writers wanted them to and have been transmitted to us in a highly accurate manner.

        * 1. “The Bible says homosexuality is wrong but it isn’t the word of God” (obviously non-Christians) 2. “The Bible says it is wrong but God changed his mind” (only about 10 things wrong with that) 3. “The Bible is the word of God but you are just misunderstanding it”

        • Michelle

          Homer J…wow. Wow. You said that perfectly. Thanks.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            Thanks! Feel free to borrow that without attribution :-).

        • Drew Klees

          Homer, I am not gay, but I like you….Right on

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=682223485 Deborah Patterson

        Thanks for your input, despite the name-calling. Agree to disagree…

    • Anonymous

      I was going to say something similar, but you’ve said it well Deborah. As a heterosexual man, I’m not okay. But it’s not because other heterosexual men have physically abused women or discriminated against women or engaged in pedophilia. My not being “okay” has nothing to do with my heterosexuality. It has to with me being a sinful human being. Praise the Lord for his love of sinful me!

      • Bitbanger

        Recently I sent a transcript of a speech by a homosexual Christian to one of my homosexual friends who had asked for this particular item. He wrote back and said he recognized himself as a sinner because of this but not any worse sinner than anyone else. I agreed. I say ask the Dumb Question: What did Jesus say about it? Jesus never encountered a homosexual that we know about, but His encounter with the woman caught in adultery is close. He didn’t condemn her, he didn’t excuse the behavior, he called it a sin and forgave her.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=682223485 Deborah Patterson

          Yes! I love your example of the woman caught in adultery, and I happened to use the same example in a discussion yesterday. Some people want to paint Jesus as someone who was all about “love” and never took a stance otherwise. Well, we know he took a stance with the religious leaders of the day, but as you point out, he also called sin what it was. He didn’t condemn the adulterous woman to death, but he also told her to leave her life of sin. Why? Because sin has consequences, and he loved her enough to want to tell her that truth…if we stay on a path of sin, it leads to destruction, every time.

          • Michelle

            Deborah, you go girl. Preach it!

        • Nance

          I had read online somewhere that in Luke 7:2, the “servant” of the centurion was probably actually more like a sexual slave to him, and that Jesus would have been aware of that when He healed that servant.

          • Drew

            “I had read online somewhere”… well, now I’m convinced!

          • Michelle

            Drew, you’re too much…

        • Drew Klees

          He also said “go and sin no more”

    • tim hess

      Well said Deborah, except for the “little overboard” undrstatement. I’m sorry Mr. Green, but your have bought into, and convinced yourself of, some really bad rationale and theology.

    • Michelle

      Deborah, thank you! Perfectly said.

    • Drew Klees

      Deborah, in general I think you are right, however I do not think Mal is being compassionate and sensitive. He is simply trying to rewrite the obvious truths of the Bible.

  • Green Torch

    I don’t think King David could be classified as heterosexual….

    • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

      or jonathan (possibly his father, saul…they sound like a really twisted love triangle of jealousy)
      or ruth and naomi
      or the roman centurion and his lover
      or the ethiopian eunuch (actually a gay male, not a castrated male)
      daniel and asphanaz

      even noted theologian, rev. dr. john shelby spong, makes a VERY compelling case that paul was a self-loathing gay man.

      • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

        Spong is noted as a theologian, all right — a spectacularly fake Christian one. I respect his religious freedom and right to say what he thinks. He just shouldn’t have put on that collar and claimed to be a Christian.

        • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

          was today God’s day off? i ask because you seem to be really vested in saying who is and isn’t a Christian… That you disagree with Spong speaks a great deal. peace.

          • http://www.4simpsons.wordpress.com/ Homer J

            “was today God’s day off? i ask because you seem to be really vested in saying who is and isn’t a Christian… That you disagree with Spong speaks a great deal.”

            Your irony and hypocrisy for judging me for judging seems to be lost on you.

            And yes, one’s opinion on Spong speaks volumes. Agree with him and you are nearly certain to be a false believer.

          • Michelle

            Homer, I googled Spong and found this: “He rejects the historical truth claims of some Christian doctrines, such as the Virgin Birth (Spong, 1992) and the bodily resurrection of Jesus(Spong, 1994).” I concur, Spong is a false teacher. These are basic truths of Christianity. His website states he is in “exile” from Christianity. Interesting false teachings.

        • Twl

          Judge on

          • Drew

            If it is judgmental to speak out about false teachers, then Jesus and Paul were also judgmental.

      • Frank

        It’s incredible, how much ignorance and fallacies are perpetuated about what is in scripture. You should be embrassed to put that forth given that it’s been debunked ad nauseum.

        • http://dailydumpbydave.blogspot.com/ liberaldemdave

          It’s incredible, how much ignorance and fallacies are perpetuated about what is in scripture.

          just wanted to be really sure you read your own words.

          what is embarrassing is continuing to cling so assuredly to 3 NT scriptures (none of them uttered by Christ or backed up by ANY, zero/zilch/nada/none of His teachings) that are obtuse at best to DENY GOD’S LOVE and the GRACE THAT COMES FROM CHRIST because a segment of God’s creation…*gasp*!…isn’t like you. have you know compassion???

          • Michelle

            “none of them uttered by Christ”? Actually, born again Christians believe that ALL words in the Bible are inspired from God, whom we believe is three persons in one: the Father, the Holy Spirit and Jesus. Therefore, if Paul the Apostle wrote the words, or if the words were found in the Old Testament, they all have the same origin and architect: God. Again, to re-state: All words from the Bible are derived from God/Jesus; therefore you are incorrect. Jesus *did* utter words re: homosexuality via the men he used as vehicles to write His thoughts down in what is termed the Holy Scriptures, which people who are born again, believe.

          • Daithi Duly

            Yeah, most people seem to forget that Christ said that Paul was His specifically chosen instrument, frequently revealed His will to Paul, gave him visions and his relationship with Paul was so strong that Peter recognized his writings as Scripture.

        • Drew

          It’s not incredible. The Bible talks about false doctrine and false prophets in the Church almost immediately after Christ. Paul is clear that it stems from man wanting to follow man’s own desires rather than the desires of God. People don’t want to change, so they reinterpret old doctrine or introduce new doctrine to justify what they are already doing. False doctrine is most often found in the area of sexual morality; just look at the seven Churches of Revelation.

          • Michelle

            Thanks, Drew.

  • http://www.facebook.com/brettfisha Brett Fish Anderson

    what a ridiculous premise. i am [insert group] and that’s not okay because some portion of the group act in this way – while i agree with some of the heart of what i think you are trying to say i think your argument is a non starter much like “a huge number of deaths happen by car accident and i drive a car therefore i am a murderer” or… i think you should get my point… it doesn’t matter if your idea/heart/intended message is good, the premise of your argument is completely flawed which has the effect of cancelling the argument and any good points you might be trying to make about open dialogue and story-telling and love over judgement and so on…

  • 2GreatCommandementPreschooler

    “The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn’t mean that God doesn’t love heterosexuals. It’s just that they need more supervision.
    -
    Lynn Lavner” LOL

  • chris haw

    So many people who eat food are pedophiles; I eat food and that’s not okay. (Get the stats right on the pedophilia stuff: at least among priests the rate is less than the average. It is speaking wrongly to say “particularly among Christian heterosexual males…”) I get the attempt at provocation here, but this essay falls flat by all sorts of confusion between causation and correspondence.

  • chris haw

    So many people who eat food are pedophiles; I eat food and that’s not okay. (Get the stats right on the pedophilia stuff: at least among priests the rate is less than the average. It is speaking wrongly to say “particularly among Christian heterosexual males…”) I get the attempt at provocation here, but this essay falls flat by all sorts of confusion between causation and correspondence.

  • Judy M.

    Powerful! Preach it!

  • Michelle

    I am just astounded that these articles are what is passing for “Christian” articles. Not one quote from Scripture. I happen to think, as a heterosexual born again women, that *actually*, heterosexual men *are* okay. If the line of thinking in this article is reflective of the new path of what is being called “Christianity”… then Christianity is indeed in crisis.

    • Daithi Duly

      Amen Michelle, this site can be very depressing. This article looks more like it was cobbled together by a sociology student.

×

TRENDING: Noah: Who are the Watchers and Why the Panic? >>

Read previous post:
Change? Who? Me?

Photo: David Reese I love grammar. I preach grammar. I grieve when I see the public schools largely ignoring grammar....

Close