April 6, 2016
How can the church have a posture of love toward those who are gay while also holding to the historic position on sexuality?
I would hope that all churches discuss this issue from the point of God's grace . But one can't deny what the word of God teaches. Disagreeing with a certain bible behavior is okay but you must hold to a true Christian demeanor.
My feelings towards Gay women & men with in the Christian Church has basically always been the Same...Gods love is Infinate & that cannot be changed He may not like the sin but always loves the Sinner, the Gay women/an have All the sam abilitities to be "forgiven from any/every sin no matter how grave, my relationship with God is as strong as any other Cperson in fact I am equal with ll other Christians, not Better;but certainly not worse..
The bottom line is that sin is sin. Whether it be homosexuality or lying, God sees it as sin. As the author pointed out in his article, it is easier to have these conversations in a classroom then a church. The reason for this is that the body of the church has defined parameters that are called church doctrine, the classroom does not. The problem with bringing this "discussion" into the church is that it's only purpose would be to bring compromise to the established church doctrines. There are plenty of so called open minded churches that would welcome this dialog, but for those of us who follow the precepts of biblical morality, this conversation has no place or need within the church. Conversion is the goal, as Paul said, "All things become new", and this would include the new Christians view concerning sexual promiscuity. So the goal is reaching the sinner through compassionate God inspired love, and this love does not make room for embracing or intillectually understanding the sin.
Some my thinks this is narrow minded, but one would be hard presses to show me an instance in the Bible where God tolerated sin.
Interestingly, the pericope that most comes to mind for me after reading this piece is Jesus' encounter with the rich young ruler. I think of that man's obvious discontent, some burning feeling deep within that, despite his outward wealth, social affirmation, and sense of being a "good churchgoer," he lacked something vital in his life and wanted to know what it was. He hoped Jesus would simply affirm him and dispel his fears, but when Jesus challenged him to leave his wealth behind, he went away sad. Jesus saw his real need and loved him enough to uncompromisingly tell him what he lacked, but for the wealthy young man, it would mean surrendering an area of his life where, frankly, the world made things a lot more comfortable for him than Jesus would.
It's not a perfect analogy, to be sure, but I do wonder whether a lot of homosexuals who come to our churches today are like that rich young man: increasingly affirmed by the world--and often even praised for their courage--but still feeling some void they suspect the church can help them fill.
If that's the case, then the biggest question we ought to be asking is whether they're meeting an authentic Jesus who showed compassion without compromise. Is the Jesus who compassionately dined with sinners and tax collectors yet uncompromisingly transformed them and empowered them to repent of their sinful ways the Jesus whose Body we're trying to be?
I'm from the CRC, not RCA, and so I can't speak for the RCA. In the CRC, at least from my vantage point, members are pretty aware of the perspective taken by their Synod in 1973, which perspective was pretty on target then and still is now.
I don't really know what more discussion there is to be had on the subject. It seems to me that those who ask for more "gay conversation" usually really want different conclusions, not conversation, and that their wanting more conversation will not end until there are different conclusions.
Certainly, a conversation about individual particulars should be had with anyone who is in fact gay and has an interest, of any kind, in a local church, but to just "have a gay conversation'"? -- I'm not seeing what that would particularly achieve.
I did listen to the linked podcast and thought I was listening to conversations already had.
In Reply to Doug Vande Griend (comment #28050)
Well put, Doug.
Homosexuality is not a sin, let me say this right off. Those who are LGBTQ have as much right to God's love as anyone else. Those who've wanted to have the "gay talks" have mostly only wanted to find out who wasn't straight and persecute them. This is wrong in every way. God can accept those who aren't straight just as easily as He can those who are. This topic is only ever one that will bring about controversy and so all I can do is keep my own opinions alive and hope that others will eventually come to accept that I may never agree with their own philosophy.
Add your comment to join the discussion!