Marv Knox, editor of the Baptist Standard, has penned an editorial titled It’s time to talk about homosexuality which is certain to cause a little controversy with his constituency in Texas. Here’s a snippet from Marv’s editorial:
Baptists and other Christians must determine how we respond redemptively to homosexual church members. The SBC’s action does not seem to be redemptive, because it singles out one behavior for condemnation while turning a blind eye to the broad range of sins.
Many Christians fear homosexual activity—and perhaps homosexuality itself—and set it aside as a special category. This not only is unbiblical (since blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is named the unforgivable sin), but it also is irrational and disproportionate.
Gossips, back-biters and tattlers have divided many multitudes of congregations. Authoritarian, arrogant and hypocritical church leaders have run an infinite number of new Christians out of the church. Mean ministers and deacons have shoved untold thousands of children and youth so far away from Christ they never will draw near again. These sinners have done far more damage to the Kingdom of Christ than Baptist gays and lesbians. And yet we overlook these damaging and damnable sins. In fact, many of their practitioners are considered pillars of their congregations.
I write this with a heavy heart. I’m sure these words have angered many of you—to both the right and the left of me. And I know one editorial will not resolve one of the most sensitive, frightful and serious issues in the church today.
But we must talk about it. We cannot be afraid to talk.
Marv’s editorial is a response to the SBC’s decision to oust Broadway Baptist. But Marv’s editorial also comes on the heels of a Twitter-fueled controversy over the CBF’s decision not to accept Dr. Frank Tupper’s proposed General Assembly workshop on “Homosexuality and the Church.” Tupper was apparently told that such a divisive issue could best be addressed in the local church rather than at a CBF workshop.
This Twitter controversy affirmed the perception that the CBF is not interested in facilitating a conversation on homosexuality. So, Marv’s argument that It’s TIme To Talk About Homosexuality is quite timely.
I hope that Baptist leaders hear Marv’s call for dialogue, take action and help facilitate this needed public discussion. An authentic Baptist witness demands that we not avoid pressing issues merely because of their divisive nature. As Marv noted, we cannot be afraid to talk.
Related posts:
- The CBF Workshop That Never Was This story is getting a great deal of attention on...
- David Gushee & Path to Discernment on Homosexuality Baptist ethicist and Associated Baptist Press editorial-writer David Gushee recently...
- Texas Baptists, Baylor University and Homosexuality A few pieces of news that haven’t received much coverage:...
- Missour Baptist Editor Supports Confederate Flag Some stuff is hard to believe. This article about...
- A Letter to the Editor Concerning Bigotry I don’t make a habit of submitting “letters to the...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Of course, by dialogue mainstream “christians” mean “How can we get out of calling this a sin?”
Brother BDW,
I think there are several important issues that you have advanced here. First, as the editor of the Baptist Standard has described,…there is a certain misunderstanding of how to deal with the sin of “degrading passion” when compared to other sin such as “bigotry, lording over, hating your brother, hating the world, or not dividing the word of God correctly”.
The sin of degrading passion is no different, yet when identified it may appear in a more demonstrative fashion making both groups of sinners uncomfortable.
Homosexuals, the term used to corral individuals involved and committed to degrading passion, are upset with the “Christians” that speak against degrading passion and “Christians” that live a life of hypocrisy are upset and spew out “sinful” behavior in an attempt at a defense against the sin of degrading passion as if it is the “only” real sin. The bottom line is that no one likes their sin exposed; not the homosexual that is committed to degrading passion or the pastor/overseer who is lusting after the pianist that is not his wife.
In his article Marv is correct to say…..
“But the issue presents broader implications than the affiliation of one church. Homosexuality will not go back into the closet. Besides, most churches of any size likely include gay and lesbian members, in the open or not.”
He’s right,… in an American pop culture that is infatuated with the homosexual experience, the “closet” is no longer the only safe haven for acceptance of degrading passion any longer…. The safeness for sin has broadened in the American culture,…..which is not necessarily a freedom. In fact, the sin of adultery is no different than the sin of homosexuality; both are sins of degrading passion. It seems now this is where it specifically oozes into the church, where even the pastors and deacons now engage in sin without even a blink of the eye, as long as it is democratically accepted in their congregations. Leaders seem to be testing the credulity of the church these days at unprecedented levels.
Where Marv begins to miss the real debate though is this…..he said,
“Likewise, I do not feel their same-sex yearnings alone comprise sin. Humans are responsible for actions, not feelings. So, we must differentiate between homosexuality and homosexual activity.”
Somehow Marv and many others have missed Christ in this pursuit to expose sin. What we think is eventually what we feel. Feelings are never the originator, thinking is. So, sin is intrinsic to the human nature, whether you depict yourself as naturally homosexual or heterosexual. It is obvious that the scriptures address the created order as heterosexual alone in its discourse of presenting Glory to God. Yet, that seems to be the real challenge in our day. As more Christians,… the Christians that are obedient to expose sin, not the ones that are intent on covering up any sin……as these Christians love God and bring glory to Him alone, exposing sin then becomes a breath of fresh air for the church instead of a debate.
Unfortunately, we have a naïve church culture, infatuated with the homosexual story and the billboard sin of church leaders. Many are comfortable seeking those things instead of God’s Glory.
Simple repentance is the answer.
Blessings,
Chris
I think that CBF is taking a stand by not taking stand on the issue of homosexuality. While I strongly disagree with the resolutions passed by the SBC, at least they are stating what they believe about the issue and why. I think their resolutions are blatantly prejudice and homophobic, but at least they’ve chosen to discuss the issue. CBF, on the other, continues to define themselves for who they are NOT rather than who they ARE. They are not the SBC, yet they are unwilling to discuss this controversial issue.
And while I think that it’s great for Marv to highlight the need for dialogue (after all, dialogue never hurt anyone), I think that he inadvertently places homosexuality in the category of “sin” in his statements by referring to the church’s focus on excluding persons in the LGBTQ community as “disproportionate” with other sins. Many Christians rightly believe that homosexuality is not a sin; this opinion must be valued in the dialogue. In order for dialogue to occur from ALL positions on this issue, the starting point for conversation cannot be that homosexuality is a sin.
In a past blog Chris and I went back and forth about this for a long time, so I don’t think this is the forum to repeat that conversation. However, I will say that, unless all opinions are valued at the table, real dialogue cannot happen. CBF and all churches need to discuss the issue of homosexuality, but when they do so, a space for everyone must be made at the table.
Chris,
You nailed it.
Sister Angela,
We did have a good conversation sometime back dealing with this same subject matter. “Degrading Passion” is the description of the Greek term “atimia” that scripture uses for activity where sexual relations are between men and men, women and women,….along with men and women that are not married, and other lustful orientations that do not bring glory to God. So the scripture is clear and concise.
The issue though seems to arise when those in sin (the adulterer and the homosexual) oppose the truth revealed by the Apostle Paul, Jesus and other Prophets of scripture. The initial response of the church is never a debate, or seats at a table, or discussion of validity. That would be bizarre, and it seems that it is comfortably adjudicated outside the church though, but not representing the church. Sin is not a democratically determined object and it is not subjective by any means. Sin is revealed by scripture and the Word of God is not unclear concerning sin, …if it were, then there is no way to restore the church. Jesus’ command in Matthew 18 would be reduced to gibberish and only effective if a group of people can get enough votes to determine value of the activity; whether good (holy) or bad (sin) according to their circumstances. Those types of situations were very familiar to the religious groups in Jesus day…..and he speaks clearly to those who oppose His truth. It is no different today.
There are no seats at the table for the pastor/teacher engaging in adulterous sin, and there are no seats at the table for the homosexual for the same reason. It is a tragedy that the “pop culture” church has eliminated the joy of restoration and has exchanged it for a seat at the table.
As Jesus was teaching his disciples at Caesarea Phillippi…. His church is impervious to the prevailing gates of hell and we would do well to understand his commands in restoration for His bride once again.
Thank you for your patience with me….
Blessings,
Chris
Chris,
I think, once again, that we clearly have a very different starting point when it comes to reading and interpreting scripture. The Jesus that I encounter in scripture was a person that made room for EVERYONE at the table, even people deemed “sinners.” I don’t think that the “pop culture” church is the problem here; I think that the church ascribing to neoplatonic dualism that creates false binaries is part of the problem. When the “church” says you’re either good or bad, sinner or saint, gay or straight, hellbound or heavenbound, then it’s easy to simply place people into a category that we disagree with based on our personal experiences, backgrounds, and interpretations of scripture. But I think we could likely agree that life, like faith, isn’t that simple. Rarely is it “this OR that.” Rather, life and faith is more often a fluid spectrum between “this” and “that.” I don’t know very many people that fall into the neat binaries proposed earlier. A homosexual person, simply by nature of his or her sexual orientation, doesn’t neatly fall into the category of “sinner/bad/unholy.” I am convinced that God is much more complex than that…and so is scripture, for that matter.
Sister Angela,
There is a different faith, which is not the faith once delivered to the Saints. Faith is not “this and that”. Faith is.. substance and evidence as the Hebrew writer has said in Hebrews chapter 11. The substance of faith is Christ. We do not determine faith.
If you or I teach that faith is “this and that”,…then you and I would simply be speaking falsely. We both, if we subscribe to that type of description of faith would be anti-Christ….because that description of faith is opposed to Word that was made flesh and dwelt among us….simple because He (Christ) is the substance and evidence and He is not “this and that”…He is God. There is no duplicity with God.
You are right though,…we do come at this subject from two different starting points.
Faith is simple….and it is certain because of Christ alone.
Blessings,
Chris
Sister Angela,
One thing that I failed to address from your previous comment is important…. When you said…. “The Jesus that I encounter in scripture was a person that made room for EVERYONE at the table, even people deemed “sinners.” I don’t think that the “pop culture” church is the problem here; I think that the church ascribing to neoplatonic dualism that creates false binaries is part of the problem.” It is important to understand the table and the world. Jesus gives us the best view of this when he approaches the woman at the well….which is precisely the subject matter we are dealing with here and it is by Christ’s own definition.
John 8:5-18 “Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?” (6) They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground. (7) But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” (8) Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. (9) When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court. (10) Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?” (11) She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.” (12) Then Jesus again spoke to them, saying, “I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life.” (13) So the Pharisees said to Him, “You are testifying about Yourself; Your testimony is not true.” (14) Jesus answered and said to them, “Even if I testify about Myself, My testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going; but you do not know where I come from or where I am going. (15) “You judge according to the flesh; I am not judging anyone. (16) “But even if I do judge, My judgment is true; for I am not alone in it, but I and the Father who sent Me. (17) “Even in your law it has been written that the testimony of two men is true. (18) “I am He who testifies about Myself, and the Father who sent Me testifies about Me.”
The world (the Pharisees and the woman at the well) meet for a lesson from the Lord. All the men and the woman had reputations engaged in sin. Christ tested their understanding of the law while he taught the woman about unmerited favor. The world has no answer and is absent from any debate leaving Christ’s Word alone as the authority with the woman. He makes an important statement… “From now on sin no more”. The clincher is later though….in verse 16 to 18…. It is God that testifies to the truth of faith, a higher law than the law of men. As it seems our conversation does always come back to a beginning point. Either the Word of God is a you term it “this and that” or as Christ demands it is objective truth in Him alone that pierces to the very heart of man exposing sin and calling His church and rescuing her from sin through love and restoration. “This and That” is simply a fancy way to return to the laws established by man (men and women) not God.
Blessings,
Chris
I think Christ is the word of God, not the bible. The bible is a book that contains many stories that are incredibly valuable for life and faith. It is not the be all and end all for faith. I am convinced that God is much bigger than a book written by men in power during a patriarchal time that is now bound in leather with your name embossed on the front. We can find Christ in the bible, in our reason, in the history of the church, and in the compassion of humanity.
I think you may be taking a slippery slope in basically calling me the anti-Christ, though. Just because someone disagrees with YOUR particular interpretation of scripture or of a controversial issue doesn’t make them the anti-Christ. I’m not trying to convince you to believe the same way I do. While I strongly disagree with you, I can acknowledge that your faith and understanding of the text is valid for you. It is not the only interpretation, though.
I do not think the Christian faith is simple; I think it complexly beautiful and messy. Perhaps this is why there are so many different kinds of Christians in the world. Asking questions that don’t necessarily have answers is part of the beauty of faith for faith and inquiry are inseparable.
There is a difference in being homosexual (recognizing that one is attracted to others of the same gender) and acting on that attraction sexually. The latter is akin to adultery, the former is like being a heterosexual who does not engage in sex.
Where difficulty arises is what we define and the proper expression of the attraction. Traditionally, the only proper venue for sexual activity for Christians has been in a marriage of one man and one woman, for life. Obviously, people fall far short, what with a very high divorce rate among evangelical Christians, including members of the clergy, and the reports of adultery and child abuse by church leaders. Whether we should treat those who fall short in one way differently than we treat those who fall short another way is the difficult question.
Chris, do you advocate a permanent ban from the pulpit for adulterous pastors? Or disfellowshipping their church if they are returned to the pulpit?
BTW, there is a pastor of a large mega church in a major Texas city who was kicked out of one church staff for adultery with another staff person. He later married her and she and he are often shown in marketing for Pastor/Pastor Wife conferences. Should we tolerate this?
“There is a difference in being homosexual (recognizing that one is attracted to others of the same gender) and acting on that attraction sexually. The latter is akin to adultery, the former is like being a heterosexual who does not engage in sex.”
This perspective is common among many conservatives including Southern Baptists. Distinguishing between same-sex attraction and same-sex eroticism is not new; it is just another way of expressing the less-than-inclusive welcoming but not affirming position of theological conservatives.
“Chris, do you advocate a permanent ban from the pulpit for adulterous pastors? Or disfellowshipping their church if they are returned to the pulpit?”
Homosexuals correctly would find a comparison between their sexuality and adultery to be offensive. Conservatives argue that homosexuals are living in unrepentant sin. This is true if you believe same-sex eroticism in the context of a monogamous relationship is sinful. No conservative would affirm an unrepentant adulterer. The cheating pastor knows that the affair is wrong. The homosexual does not view his or her sexual behavior to be wrong. The comparison does not work.
Brother R.E.,
I don’t disagree with you that it is better not to act upon sinful thoughts. My goodness…if everyone did, including me….oh my! What I am speaking to though is a clear teaching from scripture on the distinction of “holy” passion and “degrading” passion. Clearly the Apostle and Christ have marked out the difference… men with men (real acts) and women with women (real acts), and a man with a woman not in marriage (real acts) all qualify as “degrading” passion. Christ also takes the thoughts of men and women to a new level, but for a better reason as well. He has set all believers (those that confess Jesus as Lord) apart and for an amazing purpose,…. which is to edify the church….to build her up in unity of the Spirit. So then…when Christ says…
Mattew 5:27-28 “You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY’; (28) but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”
Christ is teaching the disciples that the heart is deceitfully wicked and “degrading” passion is even as severe in the mind, even without the act. A sober reminder of the access to pornography that is so devastating to men and women in our culture. Yet, Christ has a rescue plan, not only to provide peace, but to provide freedom by the renewing of the mind through the work of the abiding Holy Spirit. The work of the Spirit is not duplicitous in sexuality…which is echoed throughout all of scripture.
Adulterous Pastors is kind of an oxymoron. A Pastor that has engaged in adultery is obviously disqualified and is not overseeing the church. The problem is that the church sometimes will allow a disqualified man to oversee the church…which really is a blatant denial of unity on behalf of the entire congregation. The church should not allow a man to oversee the church if he does not meet the qualifications given by the Apostle Paul to Timothy (1 Timothy 3). That is pretty simple. So,…to answer your question any man is disqualified from overseeing the church in this case. As far as the couple living in adultery,….It would be silly of any church to invite them to teach.
Blessings,
……………………………………………………..
Sister Angela,
I just want to say,…I am not calling you an anti-Christ, any more than I would call myself an anti-Christ if I were not teaching the doctrines of scripture. The Apostle John provides for us in his first epistle the marks of anti-Christian teaching. So, we must be careful to understand what the spirit of the anti-Christ looks and smells like in order to identify the teachings.
John warns us,…
1 John 3:7-14 Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous; (8) the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. (9) No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. (10) By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother. (11) For this is the message which you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another; (12) not as Cain, who was of the evil one and slew his brother. And for what reason did he slay him? Because his deeds were evil, and his brother’s were righteous. (13) Do not be surprised, brethren, if the world hates you. (14) We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death.”
But, if the truth is what you make it, as you have intimated….then anyone is going to have problems with the Apostle….since he is just one of the guys that has written us a good story.
You don’t have to believe me…..but you may someday find these writings a bit higher than your average story. These scriptures lead the bride of Christ to truth and unity. I’m not talking about the translations or the ink on the page with the embossed name on the cover. I’m speaking of the Word that God has preserved for us, His children.
Blessings,
Chris
Thank you, Joe B!
And Chris, I do not think that I (or anyone else who affirms full inclusion of LGBTQ persons in church membership, leadership, ordination, and marriage) look or smell like the anti-Christ.
Clearly I don’t think the bible is “just” an average story. Otherwise I wouldn’t have dedicated my life to studying it, as I’ve mentioned before. It is a book filled with stories about life and faith that are meaningful and sometimes instructive. But it is not without flaws; some of it is oppressive and prejudiced.
Sister Angela,
There is a distinctive authority of perfection on which the Word of God is formed. This perfection called forward giving us Christ at just right time. Christ confirmed this through the Apostles and all that He fulfilled…..
Luke 24:44 Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”
It is not enough to doubt that God has set aside His Word as very good stories or even believable stories (since many do not believe), revealing it to us through Moses and the Prophets, and the Apostles.
The Hebrew writer reveals the perfections of God….
Hebrews 4:6-7 Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience, (7) He again fixes a certain day, “Today,” saying through David after so long a time just as has been said before, “TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE, DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS.”
The righteous lives by a faith that is substantive, evidential and perfect. The power of the gospel is revealed through that substantive faith. Not a faith informed by other qualities.
Romans 1:16-17 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. (17) For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.”
If God had not revealed His Word to us without error, no faith would be available.
Blessings,
Chris
Again, I think that Christ is the word of God, not the bible. So, using proof texts from the bible isn’t really very convincing. I’m certainly not a righteous man; rather I’m a woman and I live by faith. So, I don’t really see a problem. Faith isn’t a term or a concept limited to Christians; a lot of people have faith regardless of whether or not they believe in an inerrant bible.
I cannot read texts that condone raping and dismembering women, murder, beating or owning slaves, or pillaging people that are not “chosen” and believe they are without error. To do so would not be “perfect” or “righteous.”
THe CBF has already made a statement of organizational value which says the biblical sexual ethic is marriage between a man and a woman. All other sexual activity outside the relationship is sin. I think that position is pretty clear and needs to be maintained.
We’ve trumpeted the autonomy of the local church, and this is one area where we need to trust the churches on how they want or not want to handle it.
Sister Angela,
Using proof texts from holy scripture is as good as it gets, unless as you have and continue to confess that those scriptures are not holy and that the written Word is tainted by scribes or contain things that upset you. The faith that was once for all delivered to the Saints is revealed in Holy Scripture very clearly as truth.
Our differences are becoming more distinct and clearer as we post. What I hear you saying to far it that you believe the source of the faith once delivered to the Saints is human. Truth reveals that the source of faith is God alone. Some people, as you have stated above, claim to have faith, yet their faith is not the same as the faith delivered by God. I know this is not specifically a post concerning the quality of faith. But you are right to bring this up in the conversation, simply because it is essential to understand the faith once delivered in order to know God and understand His ways.
I’ll use another proof text which I believe is true.
Romans 12:3-5 For through the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith. (4) For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function, (5) so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.
God has allotted faith. We don’t muster up faith on our own. Now some would like to take credit for their faith, but a faith that I muster up is really no faith at all. Yet the faith that is delivered to the Saint “is” really their faith, albeit a peculiar one. That is why the faith that is delivered to the Saints is distinctive, finds its source in God, and is delivered by God to His adopted children. All Christians know this….this is the foundational, class 101 if you will.
Thank you for being patient with me as we explain how truth, faith, and holiness are not of us, but all of God.
Blessings,
Chris
“Our differences are becoming more distinct and clearer as we post.”
And that is the result of dialogue on this topic — a binary, if you will. Episcopalians/Anglicans, Lutherans and Presbyterians have already conducted the dialogue for years, resulting in schism, separation, or other parting of ways.
Baptists should not avoid difficult topics. Neither should we expect that Baptists will find some common ground or unity that has eluded other denominations. Reliance on church autonomy doesn’t solve the underlying issues, which center on one’s view of Scripture and God Himself.
Chris and Angela have conducted a gracious, honest, respectful and gentle dialogue. So have many fine theologians and scholars.
The binary remains.
The dialogue/conversation that I proposed had CBFers specifically in mind. It is doubtful that there are many people as theologically conservative as Chris who are active in the CBF. There are indeed real differences among Fellowship Baptists on this particular issue. No doubt. But the theological divide among CBFers is not as wide as the theological divide that apparently exists between Angela and Chris.
Thanks Karen and Weave.
Unfortunately, when many “Christians” hear my point of view on this, they immediately damn me to hell and resort to homophobic slurs that are malicious and offensive. There are some Christians who may have a personal problem/struggle with affirming LGBTQ persons, but they are willing to fight for their rights for civil and justice reasons. Some Christians are fine with ordaining a homosexual, but not with allowing them the right to marry. The list within the spectrum goes on and on.
I don’t think that simply a binary remains from this conversation, though. I would contend that there really may be some within CBF that hold views very similar to Chris. And there are some in CBF that hold the same view as I do. But the majority would likely find themselves somewhere in between, thus negating the binary. I think that part of the problem in discussing homosexuality is that people assume that there are only 2 points of view. Rather there is a wide spectrum of belief on this issue.
While I strongly disagree with Chris, he has talked about this with me nicely–I’ll forget the anti-Christ statement
In the welcoming & affirming Baptist congregation where I serve as Associate Pastor, we even have a spectrum of belief on this topic…and we’re a welcoming and affirming church!
I think when real dialogue occurs, people will realize that this isn’t just a “this” or “that” issue, but is a diverse spectrum.
Brother BDW,
Well said… I think I have some understanding of the CBF philosophy on the issue. Daniel Vestal was my mentor almost 30 years ago and I still consider him a real friend.
Homosexuality is not a lifestyle to be feared, yet if the bible is of any value to anyone (meaning – if it can be trusted to be accurate) then the passion of homosexuality is easily exposed in the light of truth as degrading. This does not negate the responsibility of any believer to love his brother though. In fact, it is an opportunity. So, I believe it is important to understand how degrading passion is against Christ,…. and it is worth discussing that understanding in a gentle manner with those that may be deceived with its allure and with those that may fear its existence.
Blessings,
Chris
People of all denominations are struggling with these same issues, when there wouldn’t be a problem at all if they still subscribed to Sola Scriptura, the Bible and the Bible Alone.
The Bible is very clear about this. In 1 John 3:4, it is written “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.”
Proverbs 6:16-19 says, “These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.” Let’s not ignore these abominations. Some people who push the homosexuality issue are guilty of sowing discord, are they not?
As Christians, we need to be honest and not be afraid to say homosexuality is a sin. However, to single out homosexuality while ignoring other sins is wrong.
In 1 Corinthians 6:17-19, it says “But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. (18) Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. (19) What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?”
There are unmarried heterosexual people who commit fornication, married people who commit adultery, and homosexuals who commit fornication. God disapproves of all of these behaviors.
It’s easy for some people to take a strong stance against homosexuality because they don’t suffer from those temptations. Do they also take that same strong stance against divorce, adultery, alcoholism, and gluttony? No, in fact, many of them are hypocritical, attempting to pull the mote out of their brothers’ eyes while ignoring the beams in theirs.
Jesus said, “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:32).
Before we can repent, We need to identify sin as sin. “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.” We must acknowledge that we’re sinners, whether we’re guilty of lying, stealing, homosexuality, fornication, or idolatry. “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” We must repent our sins. “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Repentance doesn’t stop once we’re baptized. We need to submit our lives to Jesus and become the new creations he wants us to be. We are only able to make these changes by allowing the Holy Spirit to work inside of us. “If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.”
We can’t resist our temptations by our own power. If homosexuality or fornication happens to be the particular temptation we have to overcome, we must submit to Jesus. repent, allow the Holy Spirit to work through us. If the discussion about homosexuality doesn’t include the mention of sin and repentance, it’s not worth having.
Angela states very well the dual-authority philosophy that is common to “orthodox” Catholicism, Mormonism and Jehovah’s Witness-ism–i.e, the Bible is not above some thoughts and writings of post-first century men.
That philosophy is very uncommon to Baptist faith. In fact, it is so non-Baptistic and non-Christian that splinter churches still calling themselves “Baptist” are around. If Angela represents the teaching of her church–and as Associate Pastor, I would think she does–it is Baptist in name only.
No further dialogue necessary.
Lots of BINOs these days in the Southern Baptist Convention, huh?
Rule of thumb: Any comment made by a Southern Baptist that lumps together Catholics, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons is to be rightly ignored. I’m truly surprised the word CULT was not invoked.
BDW,
The point is: extra-biblical authority is common to Angela and all three non-Baptist groups cited. To ignore it would be ignorant.
“Cult” would be accurately applied to JW’s and Mormons since the eternal deity of Christ is denied by them.