Posted on 03/16/2014 3:03:11 PM PDT by CHRISTIAN DIARIST
Chris has a gay son. He neglected to mention that when I met him at a business event the week before last, when we talked a little politics, when he invited me to join him and his buds for their weekly golf game.
All was amicable on the golf course. As it turned out, two of the guys were fellow conservatives. And two others happened to be members of my church.
But things got twisted when our two foursomes sat down for post-round libations and conversation. That’s because Chris, a social liberal, an Obama-loving Democrat, insisted on talking politics.
And particularly about homosexual “rights.”
He made the pseudo-scientific claim that homosexuality was an “immutable” trait, like race or gender. And the church-going Presbyterian claimed there is no Biblical basis for declaring homosexuality a sin.
So I challenged him on both claims. And my fellow conservatives, my fellow church members backed me.
Having lost the debate he started, my golf host stood up and angrily stalked out of the clubhouse, leaving the other seven of us sitting there. That’s when one of the guys confided to me that Chris has a gay son.
His was the typical reaction by social liberals who have a family member or friend or business associate or even acquaintance who is gay.
The social libs not only delude themselves that homosexuality is perfectly “normal,” not only deceive themselves that homosexuality is perfectly acceptable to God, they also insist that those of us who are social conservatives, who are Bible-believing Christ followers, agree with them.
Otherwise, they slander us as “homophobes.”
But the word of God declares, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”
Indeed, those of us who oppose homosexuality on Biblical grounds are very much like Lot, who lived in the ancient city of Sodom, who was visited by two angels of the Lord, whose home was surrounded by the men of the city who wanted to have to have their way, sexually, with his visitors.
“Please, my brethren,” Lot pleaded, “do not do so wickedly! See now, I have two daughters who have not known a man; please, let me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you wish.”
Lot’s gay neighbors were offended. “He keeps acting as a judge,” they murmured among themselves.
They deluded themselves that evil was good, that darkness was light. Just like Chris, who hosted me for golf, who insisted his gay son is “normal;” that his son’s sexual preference for men was okay by God.
Well, I’ve never met Chris’ boy. But I think I actually love him more than his dad does. Because I don’t want him to befall the fate of the homosexuals of Sodom, on whom God rained brimstone and fire. They all died in their unrepentant sin and will spend eternity separated from God.
Indeed, even if I accepted the dubious, politically-motivated science that there is a supposed “gay gene,” that homosexuality is a supposed “immutable” human trait, I would continue to believe homosexuality a sin.
And to those attracted to men, like Chris’ son, I would urge them to “crucify the flesh” with its passions and lusts; to present their bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God. And I would encourage that they pray that God lead them not into temptation, but deliver them from their desire for “strange flesh.”
Those of us who are social conservatives, who are Christ followers, are not “homophobes.” We do not hate gays.
We speak the truth to them – in love – that homosexuality was and is and always will be a sin. And that the Bible warns that homosexuals shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
We also encourage them that the Lord desires that none would perish, but that all should come to repentance. And that if those who are gay confess their sins – rather than denying that homosexuality in a sin in the eyes of God – He is faithful and just to forgive them and cleanse them of all unrighteousness.
Paul in 1 Cor made a distinction between sexual sin and all other sins because sexual sins are sins against our own body. But I don’t believe God views my selfishness, or pride or judgementalism - sins I commit day in and day out as “better” than homosexual sin. Find me a sinner that Jesus was cruel to or condemning of - the tax collectors were viewed in that day as lower than homosexuals of today. The Good Samaritan parable if told to the audience posting on this story would have been the Good Homosexual! (stealing that from Dallas Willard - The Divine Conspiracy). The only audience he wagged his finger at were the religious leaders who seemed to be obsessed with making people feel crappy about their relationship with God. Jesus’ example challenges us to balance grace and truth the way he did. He never promised it would be easy. Or popular.
The same thing happened at our idiotic lib parish 2 years ago. The sermon was about homos and the priest sat down while the “guest lecturer” was a parent with a gay child during the sermon.
Basically...it was a lecture. A lecture that we, the parish members were monsters’ for not accepting the homo lifestyle. A couple of members just stood up and went out for a bit to cool down. I had a smoke. When he finally shut up, we went back in. I think he got the message. We weren’t going to listen to a lecture, we wanted a sermon about the God’s word and not some parent telling us to accept some abomination lifestyle.
I view the folks who would tar & feather Chris as being the “unchristian.” I seem to remember a phrase, “I can hate the sin, but love the sinner.”
Oh, that’s okay. I understand there are different definitions of the word. You only have to look at the various sodomy laws around the world, all prohibiting slightly different things.
The word obviously has its origins in the city of Sodom, and though it has taken on many definitions since its inception, I think we can simply define it as ‘the sins of Sodom’, which are commonly recognized as arrogance, inhospitality, selfishness, and sexual immorality (referred to as “abominations”). Now, from there, I think we can come to the conclusion that sodomy could apply to any number of sexually immoral activities, with homosexual sex being the most obvious, as it is listed in Leviticus and is referenced when the mob turns up at Lot’s house.
When it comes to what heterosexual married couples are allowed to do within the bonds of marriage, I think that’s a much more murky debate between theologians and I don’t want to get into which sexual acts are frowned upon by God as I am not a particular expert in that field, though in general I think some Christians do have a habit of making up restrictions that are not biblical to justify misplaced guilt.
But we are talking about the city of Sodom, and the illicit sexual activity we see referenced is indeed homosexual, so I think it is okay to refer to sodomy as a general rule, being defined as sex between members of the same gender. Though I would not argue if someone accused a miserly person of committing sodomy, since that was one of the sins of Sodom, disregard for the poor.
why would he?
Amen
Nope
Yes, his son is a sinner according to the Bible. My sons are sinners too, as are my daughters.
And the church-going Presbyterian claimed there is no Biblical basis for declaring homosexuality a sin.
The minister responsible for this failure needs to read the Bible and teach from it. I would consider myself a failure as a parent if my kids didn't understand the Bible better, and I'm not even a minister.
Absolutely ridiculous. None of you damn business one bit.
One incident like that would be enough for me to leave that church for good. In my church, such a thing would be such a violation of both the Bible and the Westminster Confession of Faith which all teaching elders are required to uphold I don’t think would happen.
“So I challenged him on both claims. And my fellow conservatives, my fellow church members backed me.”
It’s nice when fellow Bible-believing Christians back you up in those situations. Personally speaking, I don’t know how much of a friendship I could have with a Maobama-voting democrat. Only one of my friends and his wife are democrats and we usually discuss things other than politics when we do actually spend time together and that’s not very often.
I’m guessing he’s probably in the PCUSA not PCA or OPC.
That “minister” had to have been in the PCUSA, not the PCA or OPC where all church officers are required in their membership vows to affirm the inerrancy of the Bible.
What an unimaginable intrusion. I worked in the arts for decades, and did business with many persons whose orientation, politics or religion was simply not a matter for discussion. If anyone brought such topics up, I changed the subject. If they persisted, and it was a long-term or contracted relationship, I pointed to the clause in my work contract that I had put in there that said those topics were off-limits for discussion.
It’s interesting to me that we can declare the Biblical teachings against adultery, fornication, drunkenness, lying, etc., and get few - if any - arguments and push-back from the liars, addicts, and philanderers. You might get called holier than thou or a prude. But state the sinfulness of homosexuality and you start a war. You’re a bigot, a hater. It’s all sinful behavior, yet the pressure to - not just tolerate, but accept as normal and healthy - this one behavior is incredible.
“If they persisted, and it was a long-term or contracted relationship, I pointed to the clause in my work contract that I had put in there that said those topics were off-limits for discussion.”
That’s good if they will agree to those clauses. I worked at one place where one of the managers(a female who looked, dressed and sounded like a junior high school boy) and her female “partner” were “having a baby”. There was all sorts of insidious pressure put upon us to celebrate this. My reaction was that this is work, not a social club, and was inappropriate for them to expect such behavior from people who are there to earn a paycheck and nothing else. It showed an amazing lack of proper boundaries for a work environment.
I had a contract drawn up with a lot of fine print. Most people don’t read fine print.
I’m a Christian woman whom the Lord delivered from living in homosexuality, and to make a long story short here since I don’t have much more time tonight, something that does trouble me is how so much of the church is in rebellion but then still condemns homosexuality. The troubling thing isn’t homosexuality being condemned, but the church (and I should add, the church in rich, free countires, that is) rationalizing disobedience to God’s Word and embracing the world. So many Christians think nothing of dressing immodestly or watching entertainment that isn’t of God, but His enemy, and the fruits of it are all around us. I happen to run into Bible-believing Christians all the time who are around my age who see nothing wrong with Michael Jackson’s music. Yet he grabbed himself as part of his performances and his albums were called “Bad” and “Dangerous.” And for all he had, he destroyed himself, and no doubt others. In the end, all he and every other “star”/”idol”/”god” is is a human being that (Cont’d)
It’s not an intrusion as our morals and our faith must be congruent with our business practices.
Suppose for example, you were a commercial landlord and an abortionist wanted to rent your building to house an abortion mill or your accountant not only advocated gay rights, but was active in a pro homosexual organization.
Would you do business with these people?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.