The Evangelical Reaction to Louie Giglio’s ‘Change of Plans’

Louie Giglio

Yesterday the internet exploded with Louie Giglio’s ‘change of plans‘ as he respectfully withdrew his acceptance to lead the benediction at the President’s Inauguration on January 21.

ThinkProgress and others demanded the withdrawal in days past, as a sermon surfaced from the 1990’s in which Giglio advocated for dangerous ‘reparative therapy’ for gay and lesbian people and impelled Christians to ‘firmly respond to the aggressive agenda’ to prevent the ‘homosexual lifestyle’ from becoming accepted in society.

(For those who want a detailed breakdown of the past 72 hours of controversy, click here.)

Addie Whisenant of the Presidential Inaugural Committee responded to Giglio’s bowing out in a statement, saying:

‘We were not aware of Pastor Giglio’s past comments at the time of his selection, and they don’t reflect our desire to celebrate the strength and diversity of our country at this inaugural… As we now work to select someone to deliver the benediction, we will ensure their beliefs reflect this administration’s vision of inclusion and acceptance for all Americans.’

Adding a helpful voice to the conversation, Andrew Marin rightly pointed out yesterday that rather than circling the wagons to protect our point of view, or ensuring that one must first be ‘on our side’ in order to create peaceful and productive dialogue,

‘We instead need to start focusing our full political and religious efforts on building bridges over building armies. This doesn’t mean that at the end of the day we all need to agree. This also doesn’t mean that folks do not have a strong conviction by what compels their work, actions, beliefs and faith practices. It does mean that we must be bold individuals of reconciliation, who live in the tension, and refuse to allow hate, disagreements or past experiences cause irrevocable division in any community. If such things do cause irrevocable divisions, that is squarely on us.’

Yet ‘irrevocable divisions’ seem to be precisely what is taking place.

Blogger/researcher Ed Stetzer highlighted these divisions with a pie chart to emphasize the nearly 50/50 split in our country on the closed-ended, yes or no question ‘Do you believe homosexuality is a sin?‘ and included more research later in the day saying the same thing.

Related: Ex-Gay No More…The End of Exodus International

SBC heavy-hitter Al Mohler quickly posted an article entitled – The Giglio Imbroglio :: The Public Inauguration of a New Moral McCarthyism.

Cute title.

<it means :: an extremely confused, complicated, or embarrassing situation: As in, ‘the Watergate imbroglio.’ I looked it up.>

There were a few other clever names floating around the inter webs ::Giglio gate, L’Affaire Giglio, or Deuce Bigalow, Male Giglio to name a few.

But I digress.

As one might expect, Mohler likened the ‘imbroglio’ as he called it (multiple times, in fact) to the infamous McCarthy hearings, in which witnesses were asked if they were or had ever been a member of the Communist Party, concluding ‘There is nowhere to hide.’

Declaring evolution on homosexuality is ‘precisely what biblical Christians cannot do,’ Mohler (and countless others) drove their wedges deeper, drawing an ever-increasingly-fierce line in the sand.

One blogger even called taking this stand against the normalization of gay relationships ‘the quintessential Christian Gospel.’

Words like ‘marginalized’ and ‘neandrathalized’ and ‘persecuted’ were peppered throughout social media.

Brave New Films

Again, I ask – are we insane?

As Andrew said yesterday,

there is a need for our leadership in both politics and religion to tirelessly work ‘to bring peace in spaces that cause so much division – as unfortunately now a precedent has been set to remove people amongst pressure from those who don’t agree.’

But for the Evangelical community to cry ‘foul!’ seems at best hypocritical.

RLC friend Jimmy Spencer, Jr. suggested via Facebook, ‘Can Evangelicals imagine they’re simply reaping what they’ve sown w/ #Giglio events? Shoe’s just on the other foot now.’

The shoe is on the other foot, indeed. As our culture changes to a post-modern, pluralistic and even post-evangelical divided United States of America, the accepted medium of engagement between opposing worldviews is to essentially excommunicate those with whom we disagree.

It seems a bit odd that both sides of this conversation are fighting for their own inclusion in the marketplace, while simultaneously fighting against  the acceptance of the Other.

Also by Michael: FBI Report – Hate Crimes Against Gays Outnumber those Against Religion

If our job as Christ followers is to be ambassadors of reconciliation then we must be willing to live in the tension of building bridges rather than armies; of entering peaceful and productive dialogue with those with whom we disagree rather than retreating to foxholes filled with the faithful to our own preferred perspective.

Particularly in a conversation most often characterized by polarizing, back-and-forth, win-lose || us-them || right-wrong || in-out rhetoric, we must commit to setting aside our secondary convictions about issues and get about the work of helping people see God’s unconditional love.

While the easier path would be to try to persuade people to convert to a particular worldview or way of thinking about the gay community, I am convinced the better way – the narrow path – the way of Jesus – is to treat all people with dignity and respect – no matter their theological position.

We can’t demand someone change what they believe – but we should expect change in how we behave toward one another.

Perhaps that begins with a posture of humility, and the possibility that God may be up to something greater than our firm positions on sexuality.

Perhaps this ‘imbroglio’ can serve as a catalyst to push each of us toward a better way of engaging – to building bridges rather than armies, to finding respectful language and a true desire for tolerance (toward more views than just our own) and a commitment to create safe and sacred spaces which passionately promote peaceful and productive dialogue rather than a pontification of our preferred perspectives.

What do you think?

Michael Kimpan is the author of the WayWard follower blog, a site designed to inspire thoughtful conversation and movement among followers of Jesus Christ. Michael works with The Marin Foundation in Chicago, a non-profit organization which works to build bridges between the LGBT community and the Church.

Print Friendly

About the Author

Michael Kimpan

Michael KimpanMichael Kimpan is the author of the WayWard follower blog, a site designed to inspire thoughtful conversation and movement among followers of Jesus Christ.View all posts by Michael Kimpan →

  • I know it’s not in the red letter part of the Scriptures, but Paul wrote, “Accept one another, just as Jesus accepted you, in order to bring praise to God.” In my mind, “accepting” means ever-increasing the circles of “Us” in hopes of one day eliminating the category of “Them.” God knows how screwed up I still am, and his gracious acceptance of me as I am is nigh-scandalous. Learning to love and remain friends in the middle of disagreement is part of the process of maturing as a follower. But I could be wrong.

  • 22044

    At the end of the day, this is pretty much a nonstory, if Christians have their priorities assessed correctly.

  • DavidQ

    While I certainly agree that right wing evangelicals are being overly incensed, you could say the same thing of the left (of which I am a member). We’re talking about comments the guy made 20 years ago and I believe he said somewhere that he hasn’t spoken on gay issues in around 10-15 years (I can’t verify where I read that, so I can’t be 100% sure it’s accurate but I do remember reading it in all of this). Can’t people on both sides accept that we aren’t all going to agree 100% of the time and there may be people involved in public events that don’t share our world views. If we ask the right to do it, don’t we have to ask the left to do the same thing?

    • Dennis L

      DavidQ — Thank you.

    • bluecenterlight

      I’m really glad there are not recordings of me 20 years ago. No one is the same person they were 20 years ago.

      • I’m 19 years old, so I’d probably just be gurgling and stuff in utero, talk about embarrassing.

        • bluecenterlight

          lol, hopefully you didn’t gurgle anything controversial.

    • SamHamilton

      I agree. Good points.

  • Chuck

    Big story today on NBC10 (Philly): woman arrested for having sex with a dog. About 80% of the comments verge on “ewww, I just threw up in my mouth”. But a few came out and said something radically different – what if the dog enjoyed it?
    Witness the genesis of another sexual revolution, the sharing of orgasms across species. Is it really that wrong?

    • Chris

      Well Chuck, the Red Letters are silent on that one so we must tolerate it. If someone wants to have relations with a dog we should build a bridge to them rather than condemn the act and cause division…

      • David Quirk

        I’m certainly not speaking for everyone else-just me. The reason I was silent is because it is an absurd analogy….a dog (or any other animal or a minor human being) can’t give consent to be in the relationship so of course it would be wrong and shouldn’t be tolerated. I’m betting a large portion of the 20% were being silly on a website message board because that is what a lot of people do.

        • Chris

          Who says David… you? Why do I have to believe you? Are you an authority on a dog’s giving consent? Dogs are smart animals. How do you know? Where do you get your authority on the subject? The Red Letters are silent so I can assume whatever I want by my own opinion, When I deny the rest of Bible as the Word of God that is what happens. Leviticus clearly condemns beastiality as it does homosexual sex, but if I deny its authority then I am welcome to my opinion. What you call absurd is where we end up with your logic. Your opinion is no authority.

          • David Quirk

            And now I remember why I stay off of message boards on the internet….I’m gone. Have a good day everyone….

          • bluecenterlight

            Everyone knows dogs are sexually immoral, they hump anything. All dogs go to heaven my ass.

          • Doggy McDogson

            woof woof woof woof I protest!

          • bluecenterlight

            Just the sort of language I would expect from a reprobate :)

          • Julie Godwin

            Why do you read and comment at RLC, Chris? Is it just to try and stir dissension? Do you enjoy condemnation? If you can’t disagree in a respectful way, maybe you should just stick with blogs and message boards where everyone agrees and you can all rally around your interpretations of Scripture.

          • Chris

            To be honest, it is very sad that temporal opinion on social causes is MORE important than a man or women’s eternal destiny as the Bible clearly teaches. Man has sinned against a Holy God and needs to repent of that sin before our Holy God. If he doesn’t then he will be punished eternally for that sin. Soft peddling and sympathizing sin (like homosexuality) by building bridges to nowhere seems to be the approach here. Let’s love them, but never show them that they’re a sinner because that’s offensive and judgmental. The social gospel gives no hope past this planet and is a false gospel. True love is telling someone the truth and the truth is man needs to repent of sin and place faith in the Jesus that was punished for that sin in your place, that suffered and died on the cross for that sin and rose again victorious over that sin. That is love. If telling the truth is stirring dissension then my apologies. I do not enjoy condemnation. I was simply posing questions to prove that the logic was incorrect and that all of scripture is by inspiration of God, not just the Red Letters.

          • bluecenterlight

            Gluttony is a sin, on the same level as
            drunkenness, and sexual immorality. It is the inability to control
            ones flesh. Yet I bet you don’t go through Walmart preaching hellfire
            to all the fat people. If you did, do you really think that would be
            effective? So then, to your point, do we then act like gluttony is
            not a sin just to make people feel comfortable? of course not. Do we
            require that people have a certain body fat percentage before they
            can come to church? No that’s awful. But, what God says is a sin is a
            sin, we don’t get to muddle that. The problem is this my friend, the
            holy spirits job is to convict men of sin, our job is to point to the
            answer. The holy spirit does his job, there is not a man on this
            planet, who in the dark night of the soul, when they are alone, isn’t
            convicted of his wretchedness. They don’t need to hear it from you.
            They hear it everyday from themselves. And what you do not understand
            is man’s natural response with being bashed over the head is to be
            defensive, and you will win no one that way. What they need to hear
            is the solution. Our mission is to win the lost, but your evangelical
            skills are lacking. God will ask you when you stand before Him how
            many people are here because of you. It could be as easily asked, how
            many are not here because of you. That is a chilling question that I
            don’t think you take seriously. If you were concerned about the lost
            state of homosexuals you would do something about it. But finger
            pointing is a lot easier.

          • Chris

            How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? (Romans 10:14 ESV)

            The Holy Spirit illuminates the heart towards the things of God, but the preaching of the Word (by man) is what convicts the heart. We deliver the message sir.

            You keep bringing this back to me…I never said it was about me. It’s about Him. His Word condemns the sinner to repent. I’m just delivering the truth. I am concerned about the lost and that is why I preach it. That is love sir and that is what the Christian is commanded to do. Speak the truth in love.

          • bluecenterlight

            The word does not “condemn the sinner to repent”, it implores men to repent. The gospel is not about wrath, how could it be called the good news? The good news is that Christ took Gods wrath on himself so that we would not incur it, if we put our faith in Him. When the church admits that it is as sexually immoral as homosexuals, then you would be speaking the truth in love. Till then, we are just casting stones.

          • Tex

            The church should never condone sin. The church should never encourage sin.

            I say that because we have normalized sin to the point that people publish their sin on Facebook for the world to see for Pete’s sake. In fact the Episcopal church called the National Cathedral is going to be officiating gay marriages. Many so called Christian churches are not Christian at all.

            My church has an openly lesbian couple. No one tells them to not come to church until they stop their relationship but at the same time our preacher preaches about the sin of homosexuality and the need to repent with them sitting right there.

            If a preacher is unqualified to lead a benediction by this administration due to his preaching the truth then we are a doomed society for sure.

            Lord, I pray for your speedy return. Amen.

          • Marc Kivel

            The Episcopal Church is not of one mind on blessing much less marrying same gender couples…it is up to the local bishop. In Washington, DC, where same gender marriages are legal, the Bishop has decided to facilitate those marriages in a Christian setting and context – all of the usual pre-marital counseling requirements must be met and the Congregation is called to support the relationship as it grows over time.

          • Jonathan Starkey

            “how many are not here because of you.” That’s a good daily reflection question.

          • bluecenterlight

            To be honest, I never thought of it that way before today. Kinda gives me a cold chill.

          • Daniel Olson

            I’m curious, Chris… what do you struggle with? I hear you proclaiming the standard, but I don’t hear any compassion as would come from one who struggles himself. Did you know that Christ told the woman caught in adultery to “go and sin no more”, realizing that that really wasn’t possible? How His heart must have ached knowing that was God’s standard, knowing He could say no less, but also knowing she couldn’t do it. And this from the One who could have demanded perfection. Did you know that when Christ restored Peter, when peter could not confess perfect AGAPE love for Him, He said “Peter do you have great affection for me?” He came down to Peter’s level instead of insisting Peter rise to His. He let Peter know that his Imperfection was sufficient. He didn’t say “Well if you don’t have AGAPE for me.. I guess we’re done”.

            Do you have that same compassion or are you satisfied thinking that you did your duty to expose sin and that if they don’t repent well it is their problem? Do you understand the spiritual idea of always knocking, always calling, always pleading? Yes the spirit always calls, always pleads, always inspires. Only the LAW points the finger and says “You don’t measure up”

          • Sadly, I find thought provoking and civil dialogue on the RLC comment section impossible lately.

          • bluecenterlight

            Ah RLC, microcosm of the American church, the Lord must be proud.

    • bluecenterlight

      That dog most certainly is going to hell.

  • Dennis L

    Nice! It’s no wonder our country is so screwed up. Now we have to filter every stupid phrase uttered for the last 25 years to make sure we agree with everything anyone says. Louie wasn’t going there to preach a sermon on sexuality. These politicians are driving all of us farther and farther apart. I have a friend who owns a small RV resort. A lady called last week and asked if he was a member of the Chamber of Commerce. My friend said, “Why yes, all of the businesses in our town belong. They do a lot of great things to help promote business in our town.” The lady then proceeded to tell him she was a “popular progressive blogger” and if she was caught staying at a place that was a member of the Chamber of Commerce her readers would divorce her because Chamber of Commerce are predominately conservative. Churches do the same thing. God forbid someone has a set of convictions and a world view that differs from whatever group is in charge… No wonder people are leaving politics and church by the thousands every month.

    • Marc Kivel

      First, I doubt she knows all her readers. Second, I’d be willing to guess that as in most local Chambers of Commerce you have a fair number of social liberals-economic conservatives and vice versa. Third, we might benefit from taking a chance and getting past words and look at works…I may disgree with ole Joe on a whole bunch of things, but he is a child of God, he is a decent human being, and like the rest of us he’s trying to live into his baptism imperfectly at best. I can slander him, ignore him, vilify him, and all I’ve done is sin. Or I can shake hands, have a cup of coffee, ask him how he came to believe as he does, and about his life and family and church…willing to bet I get further this way and will learn quite a bit as well….

  • Chris

    Your building bridges philosophy works great temporally, but eternally damns those who do not repent of their sins to hell. How long do you build these bridges before you confront the sinner that is under God’s wrath? Is it loving to not tell a person who doesn’t follow Christ that they’re under God’s wrath due to the sin they haven’t repented? Homosexuals need to know that their choice to engage in homosexual sex is defined as sin in the Bible and needs to be repented of by faith in Christ’s atonement for them. Denying everything except the “red letters” is a convenient way avoid these issues. You logic damns many to hell and is of the devil.

    • chuck

      “But, Chris, we really don’t care about their eternal souls as long as we live in peace with everyone, especially since we cannot prove that there is anything morally wrong with homosexuality. ”

      Well, they won’t come out and say it like that but essentially that’s the summary.

    • bluecenterlight

      To condemn others to hell because of their sexual immorality, and yet your sexual immorality is cute and forgivable, is hypocritical. The point is not that homosexuals are sexually immoral, the point is we are all sexually immoral according to God’s standard. If you want to apply a different standard, you might have an argument. It seems ” Just as I am, without one plea, but that your blood was shed for me” applies to you, the rest must clean themselves up first.

      • Chris

        I’m not condemning anyone. God’s Word condemns all sexual sin. I gave no comparison. If you do not define homosexuality as sin then you stay condemned. Not by me, by God because His Word defines it as sin. The Gospel is free to all, but sin has to be repented of or it is not faith at all.

        • Frank

          Well said! I will add that there is a difference between struggling with sexual sin and simply accepting it and surrendering to it.

        • bluecenterlight

          That is my point. God condemns all sexual sin, including yours. When you elevate another persons sin, and attempt sweep yours under the rug, and hope no one is paying attention, that is wrong. Why does God condemn sexual sin? Not because it’s gross, or he thinks we are animals, but it is because it damages us, in a very real way. Not only us, but homosexuals as well. God loves us and is trying to prevent us from hurting ourselves. That is the point. I have been in men’s groups for 30 years, I haven’t met a man yet that didn’t struggle with lust, we are wired that way, part of the fall. But it is no excuse for lust. It is something we must reign in and not succumb to, but it will always be a struggle. I hear no one say, go resolve your lust problem then you can accept Jesus. And yet we always have a stone handy.

    • I think they know very well because the evangelicals have made it VERY CLEAR about how sinful homosexuality is according to the Bible. The point of the article is that each side has held on SO FIRMLY to what they think is right to the point where, we can no longer expect them to agree with us. Given this problem, the author is trying to say that we need to be able to be more civil with each other. Let me give you an analogy: Christians disagree with Muslims, who CLEARLY deny Jesus’ deity and their holy book calls us blasphemous b/c we worship what they consider to be merely a prophet and a man (Jesus) to be God. Yet, in spite of the tensions that still exist b/w the two faiths, we’ve made progress in our interfaith dialogue with the Muslims.

      • bluecenterlight

        The only problem I see with your analogy is that you can’t be a Muslim and a Christian, they are mutually exclusive. You can however be a homosexual and a Christian.

        • Is there such thing as a perfect analogy anyway?
          For the record, there are people who think you can be both a Muslim and a Christian…there is this thing called Chrislam.
          My belief is that Jesus accepts us where we are. Jesus spoke to the woman at the well even when she had not repented yet and he ate with tax collectors and prostitutes though, who knew if they had not stopped their sinful ways when Jesus reached out to them. Jesus meets us no matter how lost and how far gone we are because He knows we need His grace and we cannot wash ourselves off our sins on our own.
          When we are in Him, He gives us strength to stay on course in our spiritual growth even when we stumble in the sins that we struggle with…we will not be abandoned.
          He wants us to be in a state of ongoing repentance so our character can be more and more like God.
          I agree with Tony Campolo that the attraction to the same sex is not sinful, but it is only sinful when gays and lesbians choose to entertain homosexual thoughts, have homosexual relationship and sex. This is the interpretation that I’ve come to agree with when I read and study the clobber passages…I do not hate homosexuals and I don’t believe it to be a bigger sin than any other sins. I understand that we do not choose or control our sexual orientation, be it straight or gay, so it’s totally possible to be gay and Christian in this sense. Gays and lesbians can believe that Jesus is Lord and Savior, but some think it’s okay to have monogamous, loving, and committed relationships while the conservative side believe that they should be celibate because marriage in the eyes of God is between a man and a woman only. I believe in the latter. Gays and lesbians who believe that the Bible approves of monogamous, loving, and committed relationships are entitled to their belief, but I disagree with them and they should join a church that affirms their relationship. Why would they want to put up with a church whose leadership thinks they are sinning by their gay relationships anyway?

          Both sides will not compromise on their respective beliefs no matter what, blue. Peggy and Tony Campolo also disagree with each other on this matter, but they’re a happily married couple. There is the issue of what we believe about homosexuality (it’s either a sin or not…and no…I’m not talking about the orientation) and then there is the issue of how we should engage those we disagree with. We do not have to agree to be loving and I do agree that evangelical/conservative Christians can do better in the way we treat them (e.g.,I think it’s a stretch for that mom group to boycott JC Penny b/c Ellen is its spokesperson, and I don’t believe that Neil P Harris mocks Christianity or Tim Tebow in that Super Bowl ad). I also believe that the lgbt community overreacts whenever they label anyone with the SLIGHTEST disagreement with their lifestyle to be hateful bigots. I am not giving up my religious belief about what the Bible say just to please them, just as I don’t have to be an atheist to get along with my STAUNCH atheist friends.

          I am not being hateful if I think premarital sex is wrong, what matter is how I treat those Christians and non-Christians who engage in such sin, be it the “occasional spiritual stumble” or deliberate, continual, disobedience. That is why I use the Muslim and Christian analogy. The “anti-gay” and “pro-gay” crowds should engage in a relationship and in a dialogue ANALOGOUSLY similar to the interfaith dialogue between Islam and Christianity or between any other religions. I think being civil, respectful, and cordial with each other is something we can strive for.

          • bluecenterlight

            I stand corrected, I had no idea there was such a thing as Chrislam. You learn something new everyday :) I suppose if there are messianic Jews. I agree with you ( although I am more on the Peggy Campolo side) my beef is that the church has made an enemy out of homosexuals elevating homosexual sins over heterosexual sins, which we seem to be on the same page. I think we all have to admit that we grew up with a lot of unfair cultural stereotypes of homosexuality and that has clouded the way we think. Communication and friendships are sorely needed. I long for the day Christians and Muslims can laugh and serve together, sadly I think that will happen before Christians and homosexuals can get together, there has been a lot of unnecessary damage. But with God all things are possible.

          • Amen!

  • This is spectacular. Thank you.

  • Frank

    Looks like Giglios sermon from back then was prophetic indeed.

  • if you’re a big fan of tolerance you must tolerate the intollerant

    i’m not a big fan of tolerance

  • SamHamilton

    Boy am I glad I’m not in a high-profile position so that muck-rakers aren’t trawling through my history to dig up something I might have said or did years ago!

    Most of all, I’m saddened by the standards we are setting for people to be involved in public life. How many good and decent people decide to keep to themselves because of something relatively minor in their past?

  • Brendon

    What is sin? To answer that question, we must look to the Bible. What does the bible say about homosexual behavior? If the Bibles labels it a sin . . . then we have to accept it as sin. No if’s, and’s, or but’s.

    It is never “intolerant” to profess what the Bible says to be true – as long as we profess it with a heart of compassion. And to assume that Giglio’s words 20 years ago were spoken out of hate and “intolerance” is, well, judgmental on our part. Let’s give the man the benefit of the doubt, and show love and grace. Ya know, all that Jesus, Red Letter stuff you authors talk about on this website.

    • Marc Kivel

      Well Brendon, the OT is very specific about the issue: a man shall not lie with a man as with another man it is to’evah…you might also check out Proverbs 6:16-19 where a variant of to’evah is also used – seems one can sin with one’s mouth (as Our Lord said it is not what goes into the mouth but that which proceeeds from it…) as well as one’s choice of “sleeping companions”…the question I believe we should ask is, “Is it homosexuality which is the issue or a specific sex act between two males – the Bible doesn’t speak to lesbianism.” Thoughts?

  • Twenty or even 15 years ago the vast majority of putative Christians here would have answered unequivocally, “Proactive Homosexuality has been for over 5,000 years, is, and shall forever remain a sin just as every other Biblical sin has been, is, and shall forever remain a sin.”

    Why we would change our minds when God is NOT a “process” evolutionary God who changes His mind like the Politically Correct Cultural Christians of our day is beyond Biblical Comprehension.

    The Correct thing for the Obama regime to have done is to have stated unequivocally,

    “Barack Hussein Obama confessed to having converted to Christianity from Islam years ago. BOTH monotheistic faiths recognize that engaging in homosexuality behavior is sin. We don’t judge unto eternal damnation all those outside the faith who choose to practice this sin but NEITHER do we hypocritically find fault with men and women of God who faithfully preach God’s Word that it is. Therefore, because we do not want the Commander-in-Chief to become the Hypocrite-in-Chief we will, despite the opposition and criticism from the homosexual and faithless communities, continue to welcome Rev. Giglio to the inauguration to perform the sacerdotal duties we originally invited him to.”

    To the extent that the putative Christian communities do NOT support our own in favor of those well outside the community of faith and obedience in Christ do we join the army of Satan and oppose the Army of Angels that God makes available to us to combat sinful satan and his legion of devils.

    • bluecenterlight

      Clearly the church has never fostered wrong beliefs 😉 Nice to see you back William it’s been a minute.

      • When has God ever been wrong about sin?

        • bluecenterlight

          Oh William, you are too smart to use
          oversimplified arguments. This is not an argument about what is sin
          and what is not. This is the age old argument about grace vs. the
          law. Romans 1 calls homosexual promiscuity a sin, in the same list as
          envy and disobeying your parents ( admittedly sexual sins are
          weightier because they cause real damage). But Romans 2 says if you
          condemn those “sinners” you bring condemnation on yourself
          because you have forgotten God’s mercy and loving kindness that lead
          you to repentance. If God were to shine His light on your sexuality,
          would you stand with boldness calling down hellfire for all the lowly
          sinners, or would run and hide yourself in shame? That is the point.

          Here’s a story for you. In the mid 90’s
          I went to Russia on a missions trip. The group we traveled with were
          very anti alcohol, anti smoking, our church was not, but we had to
          abide by their rules. The Russians we were ministering to knew that
          we were “carnal” Christians, so late at night they would invite
          us to go hide behind the building where they could smoke, away from
          the eyes of the more pious Christians. We laughed and bonded. They
          would attempt to tell us dirty jokes in broken English. We would talk
          about spiritual matters and the hardship of their lives. We broke the
          “rules”, and in the process made Christ accessible to people who
          really needed Him. A holy Christ, guilded and hung on the wall is no
          use to broken and hurting people. We have to be like Him, willing to
          get in the muck and mire of of human existence. I have a huge problem
          with Christian legalism. Can drinking and smoking be evil, yes, I
          have seen the effects first hand. But if you front end load accepting
          Christ with not drinking or smoking in Russia, you have made the
          first step towards Christ an impossible step. Jesus meets us where we
          are at, then he works on our sin. We have to be the same.

  • There is NO RECONCILIATION of Light with darkness; only an invitation OUT OF DARKNESS INTO THE LIGHT in order to reconcile with the Father of Light and the Christian Community walking in the Light.

  • Does GOD forgive the homosexual for his/her homosexual sins? Does forgiveness have an Holy, rational and wise meaning apart from sin? IN short, can non-sin be forgiven? Of course NOT!

  • Only illustrates yet again the hypocrisy that is congenital to evangelical Christianity

    • Jesus reminded us that those who are NOT opposed to Him are WITH HIM. Evangelicals are NOT opposed to Jesus thus they are with HIM!

    • Daniel Olson

      We are all hypocrites to one degree or another. its only in understanding and confessing that we cannot live up to the standard set for us that we can accept others aren’t able to meet it either. Now when I speak of God’s standard, I am full aware that I don’t meet it either, which gives me perfect segway for the real message of Christ!

  • Daithai Duly

    Whoa great unity, spend they whole article trashing other believers in a sarky tone. I literally pop on this website every so often and have yet to read an article that isn’t a simple recycling of another.

  • Daniel Olson

    I would like to remind our brothers and sisters that while I think the THINKPROGRESS folks and others who voiced objections are out of line, I’m reminded that if we claim to be enlightened by the cross, we must be patient with those who aren’t. If we claim to know Him, we must hold ourselves to a standard that most of the world has no interest in. While they may cry foul and scream and rant…. The Spirit doesn’t give me that option. I am set on reconciliation…. not a pissing contest.
    As one who deals with same gender attraction with a perplexed and often anguished and confused heart, I don’t shut out those in my spiritual family who hold a differing view… at least when they speak respectfully. Should I not expect more of my brethren than I do those who are blinded?

  • Marc Kivel

    If the most important litmus test for being a real Evangelical is how one comes down on the various issues surrounding homosexuality today then we are pretty much lost in the wilderness. Of the 613 commandments in the Old Testament folks chose THAT as our shibboleth?! How about all the language in Leviticus 19:16-19? How about Micah 6:8? How about judging not lest ye be judged? And at the risk of being stoned, how about we stop trying to make Paul the primary filter for understanding Christ in the first century or the twenty first century? Thoughts?

  • Tim Jones

    One question I have for you. What do you mean by “our own preferred perspective”? Are you saying that the “perspective” that homosexuality is a sin is simply that person’s “preferred perspective”? As Christians we are called to DEFEND the GOSPEL. The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin. What do you propose that we Christians do? Refuse to call sin what it is because we may offend someone and they think that we’re building an army instead of a bridge? Just keep quiet and hope it all goes away? Accept it because ‘at the end God will accept anything’? NO! It’s time that the Church starts being the Church! We don’t need to be ambiguous about sin! Stop being afraid to call sin, sin! How will a person come to repentance if they don’t realize that they have sinned? If they haven’t heard the thunderings of Mt. Sinai there’s no use taking them by Mt. Calvary. To smile and nod at sin is to mock the severity of it and trample on the sacrifice that was made for us! Not only is it a display of the love of God but it is more a display of how horrible sin really is and how depraved humanity really is – that it took the death (burial and resurrection) of the Son of God to pay our penalty for our sin!

    We are called to love. But how can you really ‘love’ the sinner if you aren’t telling him/her the truth? That there is coming a day in which they will be judged according to God’s truth – and that’s not “our own preferred perspective” – that’s HIS! What good is a doctor who refuses to tell a patient that there’s something wrong because it may make it seem that they’re insensitive or just trying to find fault? What good is a Christian if they’re not willing to stand for the things of God and against the things of Satan?

  • “While the easier path would be to try
    to persuade people to convert to a particular worldview or way of
    thinking about the gay community, I am convinced the better way – the
    narrow path – the way of Jesus – is to treat all people with dignity and respect – no matter their theological position.”

    I know Louie Giglio and he would agree with this statement. I have never heard or seen him behave disrespectfully toward anyone.

    Jesus accepted tax collectors and “sinners” but he never accepted their sinful behavior.

Read previous post:
Nationalism Idolatry
Daring to Call it Idolatry: Nationalism in Worship

BY: CRAIG M. WATTS -- Because of the nature of the church's identity and mission, patriotic or nationalist expressions have...