[CS-FSLUG] God Didn't Say That (long)

[Leon Brooks]

On Friday 07 January 2005 02:22, Ralph De Witt wrote:
> To me and perhaps the larger majority of Christians "The Bible
> teaches us to love God and neighbor (Matthew 22:36-40), and to allow
> the Holy Spirit to develop within us the qualities of love, joy,
> peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness and
> self-control (Galatians 5:22-23).

> When children, youth and adults embody these values, regardless of
> sexual orientation, we are growing into the whole people God hopes we
> will become. You or I may hyperfocus on a person's sexual
> orientation, but God loves the sum of all of our parts."

When Christians embody the values of financial integrity, except 
possibly embezzlement and stealing as a servant, we are growing into a 
whole person?

> In my mind simply put God's son came to earth to love, heal, and
> forgive.

Yes. Regard homosexuality as a social kind of disease to be healed like 
any other and it all clicks.

> The bible does not condemn homosexual's but does condemn 
> homosexual sex and other sexual practices as part of the religious
> service.

Or any other activity.

> Remember that homosexual and heterosexual sex was a part of 
> most of the predominate religions at the time Christianity was
> starting and Christians wished to distants themselves from the other
> religions of the time. With One God and no sex.

No. With one God and a generous helping of sex, but not fornication. The 
original plan is laid out in many places, including directly and 
plainly by Jesus as the Son of Man, as one man, one woman.

Some slippage has been allowed ("winked at") from time to time to 
include more than one woman but as a long-term plan it has a number of 
disadvantages, of which any student of Islamic or Mormon history could 
provide a slew of examples to illustrate, but nowhere in the Bible is 
the curse on homosexuality or any other form of fornication ever 
removed. As in *never*, not now, and not in Heaven.

> In our Judeo-Christian society, the documents known as the Bible
> serve as the primary guide on most issues. It is interesting that
> many Christians take literally the references to homosexual acts
> while interpreting other text with great flexibility.

Interesting, but not as you imply questionable. It represents stable and 
rational hermeneutics and has been carefully and prayerfully developed 
and tested over a long period of time.

> And I some times grow weary of the flood of FUD on this subject
> and others that is produced by a single person and simply wish
> on occasion to remind the list and the world that this FUD is
> not the majority christian view.

And? Since when did Christianity become a democracy?

> Causing fear, hatred, and division is not the christian ethic 
> or way.

Absolutely true.

However, while it can be done tactfully, calling out sin trumps 
generalised pleasantries. It is a mandated responsibility, just like 
the onus for care. You are not being "nice" in blessing homosexuality, 
you are being weak, and refusing to confront that responsibility. Not 
that we don't miss the mark in other areas, but this is so grossly 
simple as to be within the grasp of children. God destroyed entire 
cities and regions primarily over this sin, and here you are saying 
it's OK if done in a moderate and friendly way.

I want you to understand where I'm coming from. I've lived and worked 
with a number of homosexuals over the years. I get on with them fine, 
interact rationally and in a friendly manner, don't get up their nose 
about it, but I never, never accept it.

A number of these men have died of AIDS, which is what you might call an 
unsubtle reminder of how completely insane the practice is from a 
health perspective. AIDS is the least of the medical problems which 
arise.

On top of this, _all_ of them have been socially troubled. Some were 
very good at putting up a brave, confident, winning face but _all_ of 
them were troubled, and I'm not talking about their interaction with 
"straights" or any condemnation from this or that segment of society, 
I'm talking about intrinsically troubled.

Many of them have suicided, and yes, some of those were primarily due to 
social pressure - but some of them were manifestly not. Some of those 
suicides came not long (months) after the man had confronted various 
friends and family members and "come out of the closet" and got a 
generally positive response. They didn't need a generally positive 
response and acceptance, they needed what they were doing to be right: 
and it can't ever _be_ right, no matter how much assurance they get 
from the people around them.

Let me single out a specific example. The man in question actually got 
married to a relative of mine. She was devastated when she discovered 
that he was bent, but he got over that, and so more or less did she, 
and they get on with relatively normal, separate lives. However, every 
time he runs into me, he constantly makes a point of alluding to his 
homosexuality as if trying to provoke a reaction from me (and he does 
this with everyone else, too). It also constantly falls flat, and there 
is an ever present edge of desperation to him, his voice, his posture, 
everything.

He needs salvation *from* his sin, not *in* it. He knows what he's doing 
wrong, he came from a conservative Protestant family, every other 
member of which, so far as I am able to tell, is 100% heterosexual and 
happy with it (which would fit with the real stats for Western 
population of about 1% homosexuals, rather than the inflated 10% or 
more routinely shoved in peoples' faces by the gay pride brigade). But 
natural perversity drives him back to it "as a dog to his own vomit". 
He is distressed, constantly distressed, because his choice is wrong 
and he knows it. Intrinsically knows it, too: his habits are not 
brought up or harped on by anyone else that I know of.

Christ came to _destroy_ perversity, not to _embrace_ it. Have a look at 
his actions with the "woman taken in adultery". Did he condemn her 
action? Yes! But not in front of the hypocrites who originally accused 
her. He exposed, faced down and destroyed their own perversity as well.

And he did it tactfully. If he'd pushed his point, Jesus the Christ 
would have left the Sanhedrin no choice but to try and execute those 
men under the same set of laws which they accused the woman through.

Yes, we should condemn homosexuality just as we should condemn idolatry 
or lying. Not out of any fantastic self-righteousness, but simply 
because it's wrong: God said so. And we should be careful to condemn it 
in the same way that Jesus condemned idolatry in that woman, lest we 
wind up in the same place as the men he shamed.

Cheers; Leon

--
For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched
with the feeling of our infirmities;
but was in all points tempted like as we are,
yet without sin. -- Hebrews 4:15, KJV