homosexuality is not "gay" responses

I wanted to give some time for responses in order to see how to proceed. In all, two responses showed up; both giving different angles on the issue. It's my thought that both provide us with good places to dialogue, so here goes...

Respondent #1 was to the point, saying something along the lines of, "I think [homosexuals] would just prefer you to leave them alone." The unstated point was leave them alone as opposed to my position, which I believe my first respondent might (I say might because he/she did not say) label as me "attacking", "challenging", or "harrassing" them? For the sake of discussion, I would have preferred they had made known to me what exactly they interpreted as my point, but be that as it may, it's okay. They were civil, and for that I thank respondent #1. But here's my rebuttal to this comment of homosexuals wanting to be left alone. I am not one for witch trials by any measure. However, when a particular group chooses to push both their life style and the sense of priviledge for special rights upon our culture at large, I find there to be a need to stand up and challenge such assumptions. And for any of us, God's Word is the only place we can stand. Anything else, inspite of what extreme deconstructionists might demand, is purely subjective. While we may read God's Word and come away with different opinions, it is the erroneous reading that states that God is okay with homosexuality as a lifestyle choice. It is from God's Word that we find homosexuality to be in opposition to both God's ideal (as stated in Gen. 1, for starters), as well as incompatible with God's call upon humanity in Jesus Christ (as revealed in Jesus Christ, and further commented upon by the apostle Paul). While I would agree with anyone who stated that homosexuals have been unfairly marked as the worst of all sinners, and have been unfairly mistreated (the point of the pendulum having been so far to one extreme for so long), I would say at best it is poor logic to state that this therefore makes it okay for our culture to seek penance in the form of traveling to the other extreme, whereby we accept homosexuality out of some warped sense of guilt. We are doing no one, not the least of whom are the homosexuals, in culturally embracing homosexuality than were we to condone and okay pedophilia. My fear here is that just as have already done for divorce (making it highly accessible and culturally "okay"), we are doing for homosexuality, and will do with the likes of sexual child abuse. I think the slippery slope principle is accurate in this case, and I believe the likes of Ockham's Razor supports such a point. So to respondent #1, I say that were the homosexual agenda not so in our cultural face, I would not make it such a point to challenge it.

Respondent #2 was equally to the point, expressing some concern that we are, in a sense going after homosexuality because it is a sin that we ourselves don't happen to struggle with. At the same time he states, quoting a piece from Donald Miller's Blue Like Jazz (an excellent book, if you've not read it), that we should be more concerned with overeating, or the sin of gluttony, which seems to be the problem for most American Christians in the United States. Because respondent #2 is a friend, and therefore left their email for me to respond back to them, I was able to say that whole-heartedly agree with part of Miller's point. As Christians, we should be seeking to pull the plank out of our own eye (or at least ask for some help), even as we seek to address the splinter in our neighbor's eye. When Jesus spoke those words, he was addressing the person who is so full of self-righteousness that they are ignorant of, or just plain ignore their own sin. Where I am guilty of that, I do apologize. I do have my own struggles with sin, and I can honestly say that gluttony to some extent is one of my sins. However, I think it again poor logic to say that until I have self-control over my own sins, I have no right to challenge anyone else's sin. In fact, I was not addressing any particular person in my previous article. Purposefully, I challenged a particular lifestyle, a specific sin. I sought, however imperfectly, to keep the spot light on the sin, and not blind the eyes of any particular sinner; after all, but for the grace of God go I. What would Donald Miller's take on the sin of homosexuality be had Jesus uttered a few statements in clear opposition to it? Many people, Christians and non-Christians, take such silence to be in the least Jesus' lack of judgment, and at most His silent but tacit approval for that choice. But that's just the problem with such logic, it is an argument from silence. This is where we need to read Jesus within the context of his being Jewish, and therefore, we have to understand Judaism's disapproval of homosexuality [inspite of the exegetical attempts of people like Mel White to prove the contrary]. There are many things that Jesus doesn't come out and spell out or say directly. Why? Because His followers and hearers were from the same religio-cultural background. Homosexuality was not an issue for the Jews of Jesus' day because it was plainly understood to be wrong. Were there men and/or women who practiced homosexuality? Honestly, I don't know. But I can very much tell you that they would very much be in the minority, and would have understood that their behavior was against what they knew and were taught from Tanak. My point to respondent #2 is that we must challenge the advocation of any sin in our culture. Last I saw or heard, no one is pushing over-eating as a justifiable life-style choice. Do people suffer from it, or gladly give into it? Yes. It is certainly one sign of a culture that is over-indulgent and too self-focused.

All in all, I think we as Christians need to approach and oppose homosexuality wisely. Too much recent history shows so-called Bible believing Christians falling into extremes of either demonizing homosexuals on one hand, or denying the godlessness of the practice, or even trying to advocate its propriety in the case of those homosexual relationships which show fidelity and are monogomous at the other end. Both of these extremes show a number of problems in the Church today. First, we overall a very biblically illiterate Church. We read only those passages we like, and we ignore those passages we either don't understand, or that we don't agree with. Second, we are poor biblical exegetes, both in the pulpit and in the pew. We don't do the background and contextual homework that we should we read and seek to interpret and apply God's Word to our context and day. Third, we disdain the importance of doctrine, confusing it with demonizing dogmatism. There is a point to doctrine. Whether we understand it or not, every Christian holds to some form of doctrine or another. Unfortunately, too many hold to a doctrine that is formulated in the "Iacademy" - sounds like something from Apple - where "I" decided on what is right, good, and godly. The problem of each of these is that each of these three problems results when we both assert ourselves overagainst God's Word, and when we put greater stock in our own humanly abilities to tease out and/or discern what God's Word says or doesn't say. We ignore both the leadings and witness of the Holy Spirit, and the Church Univseral, both historic and beyond our borders.

We are called, first and foremost, to live as Witnesses of Jesus Christ. Jesus challenged those issues which served as obstacles between humanity and God. We are called to do nothing less, and all of that through the power of the Holy Spirit, all to the glory of the Father.

Any thought? Leave me a response.