On her CanyonWalker blog, Kathy Baldock has written the first lengthy review of A Queer Thing Happened to America, and immediately after it was posted, others began to read and refer to it rather than interact with the book itself. Unfortunately, her review is riddled with serious omissions and misrepresentations, because of which I have taken the time to respond in detail
While Kathy and I have never met, both of us profess to be committed followers of Jesus and to love the GLBT community, yet we have markedly different perspectives on what the Bible says about homosexual practice and on what our response to homosexuality should be. That being said, I don’t doubt her sincerity any more than she doubts mine, and I appreciate her kind words in her introductory comments. As stated, however, despite her professed efforts to write a fair review, readers of her review will get a misleading and at times glaringly inaccurate picture of A Queer Thing Happened to America.
Kathy begins her review by stating, “‘There’s your truth, my truth and the truth.’ Christians should make it standard operating procedure to stick closer to the truth. Too often we tilt on over to the ‘my truth’ side if it bolsters our fears. The tilt, however, has more damaging effects when the ‘truth’, yours or mine, is manipulated.”
Ironically, that is the very thing she has done, although I honestly believe her misrepresentation of my book was unintentional. It was simply a matter of “her truth” getting in the way of “the truth,” in this case, a truthful assessment of the contents of the book. While it is tempting to point out every inaccurate statement in her review, I will simply illustrate where the reader of her review would get a totally false impression of A Queer Thing Happened to America.
She takes issue with the thesis of Chapter One, “A Stealth Agenda,” writing:
The statement by Dr. Brown that stunned me was : “Ironically, when it comes to denying the existence of a gay agenda, there is immense unity in the gay community. Why? It is because the denial of that agenda is part of the agenda (although for some, it might be a sincere, heartfelt denial.” (pg 43) What? I asked my gay friend Jeff if keeping the agenda a secret is indeed part of the agenda and he said, “I can let you borrow my copy. I keep it behind my ear on microfilm for secret meetings.” (Gotta love Jeff.)
You can ask one hundred gay people what the “gay agenda” is and you get an almost unanimous answer: “equality”.
Readers of Kathy’s review might be surprised to know that I begin this chapter by asking, “Is there really a homosexual agenda? Is there truly an insidious gay plot to undermine traditional values and subvert the American family? The very idea of it appears to be laughable – especially to the gay and lesbian community.”
In fact, the first seven pages of Chapter One explain why most GLBT’s deny there is such a thing as a gay agenda, with statements like this, “A gay agenda? What a joke! Simply stated, a ‘gay agenda’ does not exist anymore than a ‘Head Homosexual’ exists – at least, that’s what many gays and lesbians would surely (and sincerely) say.” And this: “Of course, most gays and lesbians do have an ‘agenda.’ They want to live productive, happy, fulfilling lives, just like everyone else. Beyond that, they probably want others to accept them as they are. That would be the ‘agenda’ of the majority of homosexual men and women worldwide.”
Yes, that is written in my book, and that is what I believe. What I also note (with detailed documentation) is that there are a plethora of gay activist organizations with clearly identified missions and goals – in other words, an agenda – yet it is common for these organizations, such as GLAAD, to urge that terms like “gay agenda” be avoided and to use terms like “gay rights” instead. Thus the “agenda” is a stealth agenda. It’s quite simple, and the facts are what they are: Facts.
On a more specific note (but once more, giving a good example of misleading information), Kathy writes:
“After the Ball: How America Will Conquer its Fears and Hatred of Gays in the 1990′s” is referred to dozens of times in AQTHTA. It has a six-fold plan for the “gay revolution”. Sounds terrifying. Again, a Google search has all the conservatives referring to the plan and not one GLBT organization. If it is part of the “gay agenda”, shouldn’t some gay group be using it or alluding to it?
Apparently she failed to read the lengthy discussion of this very question in endnote 29 – and Kathy has reiterated that she read every endnote – which ends by saying, “If Kirk and Madsen didn’t invent the strategies, they helped articulate already extant strategies for advancing a gay agenda.”
In summarizing Chapter Two, “Jewish Hitlers, Christian Jihadists, and the Magical Effects of Pushing the Hate Button,” Kathy fairly states:
So yes, we see in this chapter that people call each other nasty names in heated dialogues that disintegrate to yell-matches. That is going to happen on both sides when you keep telling someone that they are unacceptable. Dr. Brown suggests we “bring [ing] the real issues into the light [so ] that we can render the hate button obsolete. Isn’t it time?” I fully agree. But we widely disagree on the “real issues”.
What she fails to grasp, however, is the main point of the chapter: Those of us who graciously say that marriage should not be redefined or who hold to biblically based sexual morality or who do not celebrate homosexuality are branded bigoted, intolerant, haters – and much more – yet the hate speech and invective constantly flies our way from the so-called tolerant crowd. What a double standard! (And yes, I fully agree with Kathy’s assessment that lots of people claiming to be Christian express all kinds of hatred and venom.) My appeal, then, remains the same: Let’s quit pushing the “hate” button and let’s talk civilly about the issues. What is wrong with that?
Kathy’s review of Chapter Three, “Boys Will Be Girls Will Be Boys,” is extremely short, although she does try to justify gay-slanted children’s curricula. At the same time, she recognizes that some parents may choose to homeschool their kids and to keep them from unwanted influences. What about those parents who simply are not able to homeschool their kids or send them to private schools? She provides no answer. Readers of her review would do well to look carefully at the actual contents of this chapter and ask: Is this what schools should be doing? Do we really need lessons for elementary school students like, “Discovering Your Inner Trannie?” or, “What’s With the Dress Jack?” Is the policy of the Los Angeles United School district something commendable, when it states, “‘Gender identity’ refers to one’s understanding, interests, outlook, and feelings about whether one is female or male, or both, or neither, regardless of one’s biological sex”?
The review of Chapter Four, “Something Queer on Our Campuses,” is also very short, ending with, “College students have and always will push the edges of what parents would like them to. This is not exclusive to queer kids.” True, but the chapter is not only about what the kids are doing on campus but rather on what the professors are teaching and modeling. Not only so, but it is one thing for college kids to party and sleep around; it is another to boast about being a “21-year-old genderqueer lesbian” with multiple identities.
Turning to Chapter Five, “Hollywood’s Celebration of Queer,” Kathy once more misses the point of the chapter, first noting that, “All of media is not like it was in the Hollywood Moral Code days. The same chapter could be written on stupid sexual stuff straight people do. All the filth cannot be laid on the backs of gay people.” But that is not what the chapter is about, and there is not a single sentence that attempts to lay “all the filth . . . on the backs of gay people.” Once again, the “review” is not a review but rather a response.
Kathy asks, “Why are there so many gay people on TV? Maybe because they really are the most talented people musical note for musical note or performance per scene?” That’s possible, but again, it has nothing to do with the point of the chapter, nor does Kathy’s comment that, “Television and movies are more sexual than when I was younger; making gay people go away will not make media PG again.” Rather, the point of the chapter, which was once again missed or ignored, was simply that Hollywood has served as a convenient and very effective tool through which gay activists have helped shape American thinking, as proudly owned by gay leaders themselves. How could that point have been missed?
The review of Chapter Six, “Is Gay the New Black,” is also quite brief, and Kathy rightly recognizes that no “gay gene” has yet been found. She also understands my argument that scientists have claimed to have found a violent gene and an obesity gene and an adultery gene – among others. Thus, just as the argument that, “‘I was born that way’,” cannot be used as a justification for, say violence or adultery, so also it can be used as a justification for homosexuality. Her response, however, is a non-sequitir: “Well, until someone finds the gene that made me straight, I am just not willing to insist that GLBT people find the gay gene so that they can be validated as acceptable.” That is actually the opposite conclusion to draw, since it is GLBT people who are constantly seeking to validate their orientation by claiming “I was born that way,” whereas the whole point of the chapter is that even if they were born that way (which I see no scientific reason to accept), that would not validate their orientation.
It is as we turn to Kathy’s treatment of Chapter Seven, “Speaking the Unspeakable,” that we find the most egregious part of Kathy’s “review,” the part that is producing especially hostile reactions from gay activists and professing gay Christians. After noting that I begin the chapter with the emphatic statements, “MICHAEL BROWN IS NOT EQUATING HOMOSEXUAL PRACTICE WITH PEDOPHILIA. MICHAEL BROWN IS NOT CALLING ALL HOMOSEXUALS PEDOPHILES,” she writes, “However, the next FORTY pages are about pedophilia. So repulsive, it amazed me that Dr. Brown would include it. Why does he say he included it then? Pedophiles say they are born that way and the slippery slope to including homosexuals with equal status will open the doors to pedophiles wanting equality and acceptance too.”
She continues:
This section made me angry. Just because you say “I am not saying this . . . ” and then publish FORTY pages of trash in the midst of a book on the dangers/damage of/by homosexuals does not negate the impact of the natural association that people will make to homosexuality. This is one of the most disgusting ploys, intentional or not, of the entire book. Dr. Brown could have stated his concerns in one paragraph, yet, I was subjected to reading the NAMBLA boy-love trash???
. . . How many potential GLBT readers will you thoroughly offend by this most egregious, don’t-think-about-the-pink-elephant tactic? So offensive and incredibly subtly manipulative. Completely gratuitous porn. No wonder no publisher would touch this manuscript. This may have been one of the two major disqualifiers from options other than self publish.
It would appear then, that in her anger, she failed to understand the purpose of the chapter, a chapter that was carefully vetted by philosophers and lawyers and theologians, and a chapter that compares arguments and not acts. (This, of course, is explicitly and repeatedly stated.) In the chapter, I present eight principle arguments used by pedophiles (or pederasts), namely: 1) Pedophilia is innate and immutable. 2) Pederasty is richly attested in many different cultures throughout history. 3) The claim that adult-child sexual relationships cause harm is greatly overstated and often completely inaccurate. 4) Consensual adult-child sex can actually be beneficial to the child. 5) Pederasty should not be classified as a mental disorder, since it does not cause distress to the pederast to have these desires and since the pederast can function as a normal, contributing member of society. 6) Many of the illustrious homosexuals of the past were actually pedophiles. 7) People are against intergenerational intimacy because of antiquated social standards and puritanical sexual phobias. 8) This is all about love and equality and liberation. (Note that some of the same psychiatrists and psychologists who argued for the declassification of homosexuality as a mental disorder in the 1970’s are today arguing for the declassification of pedophilia, based especially on argument #5.)
What was the purpose of this chapter? It was to expose the weakness of these arguments, the very arguments used by gay activists to prove the rightness and acceptability of homosexual practice. My appeal was straightforward: “Whatever you do, just don’t use [these] same shelf-worn, ineffective arguments anymore [to prove the morality or acceptability of homosexual practice], since they just as easily make the case for pederasty (how dreadful), and, in reality, they do not prove the morality or rightness of homosexual practice, nor do they give us a single good reason to queer our educational system, redefine marriage, create special categories of protected peoples, or undermine gender.”
Not only was that missed in the midst of Kathy’s acknowledged anger, but those reading her “review” will surmise – totally falsely! – that the chapter contains “completely gratuitous porn.” God forbid! The wrong and misleading associations, which are sure to outrage GLBT readers, come from her pen, not mine, and rather than me being guilty of some kind of “disgusting ploy” (intentional or otherwise) I was actually raising points that do need to be addressed. But why address a point of substance when you can simply accuse someone of equating homosexuality with pedophilia? Why deal with a difficult message when you can shoot the messenger? As for the length of the chapter, it was important to document every argument, since GLBT’s I have interacted with have claimed that such arguments do not exist.
Kathy’s response to Chapter Eight, “Diversity of Perversity,” is to state that: 1) plenty of heterosexual events are marked by immoral and vulgar displays and, 2) if corporate America wants to make money, they need to get the gay dollar. She does not write one syllable interacting with the main point of the chapter, namely, that the word “diversity” has become a codeword for gay activism (often quite intolerant gay activism at that), and that it can include some of the most perverse imaginable displays. She also fails to interact with the widely acknowledged fact (in “conservative” gay literature as well) that gay pride events have historically been (in)famous for their sexual displays.
As for Chapter Nine, “Lavender Language,” Kathy offers only one line, encouraging readers to learn the new jargon. (This, once again, underscores why her “review” is not really a review.) Well, she can have Androgeny, Androgenous, Bigendered, Bi-Dyke, Boi, Boidyke (or, Boydyke), Bro-sis, Butch, ButchDyke, Camp, Cross Dresser (CD), Cross-Living, Drag (In Drag), Drag King, Drag Queen, Dyke, FTM or F->M or F2M (Female to Male), Femme, Femme Dyke, Female Bodied, Female Impersonator (FI), Fetishistic Transvestite, Gender Illusionist, Gender Neutral, Gender-Bender, Gender-Blender, Genderqueer, Genetic Boy, Genetic Male/Man (GM), Genetic Female/Woman (GF/GW), Genetic Girl (GG), Grrl, Half-dyke, Heteroflexible, Hir, Intersex, MTF or M->F or M2F (Male to Female), Male Impersonator, Metamorph, Monogendered, Multigendered, Neuter, No-gendered, Non-op, Omnisexual, Pansexual, Pre-operative Transsexual (Pre-op TS), Polygendered, Post-operative Transsexual, Queer, Queerboi, Shape Shifter, Stem (a feminine-identified lesbian), Stud (a masculine-identified lesbian), Trannyboi, Trannydyke, Trannyfag, Transboi, Transgendered, Transgenderist, Transitioning, Transmale, Transsexual (TS), Transvestite, Transidentified, Trisexual, Two-Spirit, Ze. I’ll stick with “male and female.”
Turning to Chapter Ten, “Queer Theology,” Kathy expresses outrage and shock at my alleged misrepresentation of what gay and lesbian “Christians” believe. She writes,
Almost everything Dr. Brown presented as “normal” belief/behavior for gay Christians, I have never heard. Who did he speak to? What kind of fringe spiritual people did Dr. Brown drag up? Prayers for cruising? Fantasizing about taking off the loincloth of a crucified Christ? Come on! This is presented as what gay Christians think about/do?
Where then did I get the material for this chapter? Straight from the major gay commentators, theologians, and leaders, both Jewish and “Christian.” The fact is, I didn’t go looking for this. Instead, when I bought the major books written by the major, respected leaders – some of the top names in the MCC churches – I was shocked and disgusted to read the material.
She writes,
Dr. Brown did not call Todd Ferrell, President of The Evangelical Network, a group of gay affirming churches. Or Yvette Flunders of City of Refuge Churches. Or personally speak with Rev. Troy Perry, who, by the way, aside from being the founder of MCC is an amazing man of God. Yes. Or Ralph Blair of Evangelicals Concerned. Or Ross Murray of Lutherans Concerned. Or even attend an affirming body of believers and get to personally know the pastors over a meal. Or go to any one of many GLBT Christian conferences . Ahhhhh! Or even talk to me personally or Andrew Marin, personally. This is unbelievably negligent.
Once again, her charges are totally misguided. First, she ignores the fact that I acknowledge that, “Of course, there are conservative ‘gay Christians’ who would be appalled by such sexual depictions,” while also pointing out that “‘gay Christians’ are not lining up to denounce the writings of [“gay Christian” leader Robert] Goss and to express their revulsion at his words. Instead, many are lining up to praise his moral courage and spiritual sensitivity.” It would appear, then, that Kathy associates with those “gay Christians” who would be appalled by these deplorable interpretations, but that only begs the question: Why aren’t they denouncing the writings of men like Robert Goss rather than celebrating him as a key “gay Christian” leader? It can also be asked whether the standard gay reading of the close friendship of David and Jonathan as a homosexual affair is any less ugly, or if her “gay Christian” friends follow the common “gay Christian” interpretation (which is really quite blasphemous) that the servant of the centurion healed by Jesus was his gay teen-lover, healed by Jesus so they could continue their illicit relationship. (How repulsive!)
As to her specific charges, I read Troy Perry’s story and watched a recent documentary on his life; I read the Ralph Blair material and watched some Justin Lee videos; and I went out of my way to make an appointment to have lunch with Kathy and a gay friend of hers while in California, but they cancelled at the last minute. As for Andrew Marin, I have tried to contact him at least four times, twice through associates of his and twice directly, inviting him to join me on my radio show and asking if I could meet with him personally while in Chicago, and I never received a single response. What is “unbelievably negligent” is that Kathy would make these charges without first checking on the facts.
I should also mention that Kathy completely ignores over sections of the chapter where I state:
To be sure, many gays and lesbians have not been treated with grace by the Church, as if, in Christian eyes, homosexual acts were worse than all other acts and as if homosexuals were lepers not to be touched. The common attitude of all too many Christians seems to be: “Don’t go near them or you’ll get the cooties, and don’t dare confess that you’re struggling with same-sex desires. If you do, you’ll be disqualified for life from any meaningful position or place of service in the Church. Stay away from those gays!”
Certainly, in many ways, the Church has failed to reach out to the homosexual community, and, speaking personally as a leader in the Church, I am ashamed at the way we have often treated LGBT men and women. Many times, when reading their stories, especially those who experienced rejection and shunning by the Church, my heart has broken for them. Their pain is palpable, and their hurt anything but silent.
Why leave this out unless the intent is to paint a certain picture that is far from accurate?
She closes her section on this chapter by writing:
This chapter and the pedophile chapter alone should completely disqualify anyone from publishing this book. Careless, deceptive. Sure, the shock value is wonderful, but, is it the truth? Is it a good view of the reality of the norm in the gay Christian arena? Simple answer, no.
Again, she indicts herself, not the book, with the charges of, “Careless, deceptive.” As for the material presented here being “the reality of the norm in the gay Christian arena,” it is certainly the reality of the norm in major works like The Queer Bible Commentary or Queer Commentary on the Hebrew Bible or Queering Christ or Torah Queeries and many other works, all of which are praised as seminal works by leading “gay Christians” (or, gay Jews). Let the “gay Christians” Kathy knows rise up with one voice and renounce such blasphemous trash.
Regarding Chapter Eleven, “So It’s Not About Sex,” Kathy once more misses the intent of the chapter, also ignoring the many qualifying statements that I make. She writes, “Dr. Brown tells us it is not really about equality, it is really about sexual behavior and gay people want to be affirmed in their sexual behavior.” Not so. As I wrote early in the chapter:
Now, to be quite clear, for the gay and lesbian community, this is perceived as a matter of civil rights and as a struggle for equality and justice. In other words, this is not merely a matter of rhetoric or good PR strategy. Gays would emphasize that they are regular people who live their lives like everyone else, going to school, working jobs, paying their taxes, falling in love, having families. Why stigmatize them because of their sexual orientation or sexual behavior?
I also stated clearly that,
. . . it’s also possible that the gay man or lesbian woman who lives next door to you is the best neighbor you’ve ever had, very kind, helpful, and courteous. It’s also possible that you have a lesbian coworker or boss or employee, or a gay teammate or colleague or fellow-student, and it’s possible that each of these people is hardworking, honest, and ethical. I have no doubt that in countless thousands of cases, this is true.
The argument of the chapter is simply that: 1) behavior cannot be separated totally from identity, and, 2) there are good reasons to draw attention to the problems of gay sexual behavior, especially male. But in a glaring example of quoting me only to misquote me, Kathy states,
This one sentence “Why should people be put into a special class of citizens equivalent, say, to race or ethnicity–based upon the way they have romantic and sexual relationships?” tells me volumes. Being gay or lesbian of bisexual is not about the way someone has sex. That one sentence tells me the shallowness of the knowledge and understanding of the gay community.
Compare her critique of what I wrote with what I actually wrote – defining sexual orientation as the way a person has romantic and sexual relationships – and you get a snapshot of the flawed nature of this review. And how else should sexual orientation be defined if not referring to one’s romantic and sexual attractions?
Kathy has an obvious ax to grind in her treatment of Chapter Twelve, “The Ex-Gay Movement,” stating,
It is a fact that the ex-gay movement does exist. It is a fact that some people find reconciliation of faith and sexuality in these groups. It is a fact that some people do get heterosexually married or remain celibate for the rest of their lives.
It is fiction however, that people change their orientation. When I see the footnotes and quotes citing Nicolosi, NARTH and Gagnon, I know Dr. Brown has gone to the extremes for his research.
First, it is not fiction that people change their orientation (or, in faith terms, God changes their orientation). My own late brother-in-law is a close to home example. Countless other former gays and lesbians whom I have known attest to this. I have also met many who are celibate and still same-sex attracted, along with those who have experienced a degree of change in their orientation. The fact is, there are decades of scientific and clinical reports documenting change in orientation, and, more importantly, the Bible specifically addresses this:
But you yourselves wrong and defraud- even your own brothers! Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God (1 Corinthians 6:8-11, ESV).
When we come to the Lord, He changes us to the very core of our beings – we are, in many ways, rotten to the core and in need of redemption – and that change can include (and for many, does include) change in one’s sexual orientation. Unfortunately, Kathy has listened to those who say change is impossible – where, by the way, does the power of God factor into that hopeless equation? – and ignored those who have experienced change.
As for those cited in the chapter, as in every chapter, I cite a wide range of evidence, and the sources I use from NARTH, for example, are sound and scholarly, while as a biblical scholar myself I can attest to the fact that Robert Gagnon is the foremost academic authority on the subject of the Bible and homosexual practice. But why deal with facts when it’s easier to fling mud?
As for the famous failures among former “ex-gay” leaders, they are just that: famous. Why do I need to repeat every story that is endlessly repeated on anti-ex-gay websites, when my purpose here is to give the other side of the story? (For the record, in the endnotes to this chapter I do make mention of some of the very people whom Kathy mentioned, but this was somehow glossed over as well.) And why does Kathy choose to ignore the many places where I talk about the terrible struggles many gays and lesbians have had – to the point of suicide – trying, without success, to change their orientation? Again, why leave this out?
As for her claim that, “Dr. Brown . . . focuses on Wayne Besen, Truth Wins Out, gay activist extraordinaire and recounts the tiffs he and Wayne have had” (my emphasis), that is completely misleading. I do quote Wayne a lot in the chapter since he is the most outspoken (and perhaps well-known) anti-ex-gay activist, but the quotes have nothing whatsoever to do with me or any “tiffs” we have had, the only mention of my interaction with Wayne coming in two lines in endnote 51. In other words, Kathy’s statement, yet again, presents a completely untrue picture, which is all the more unfortunate when it becomes quoted as if true by Evan Hurst, Wayne’s colleague on the Truth Wins Out website.
The comments on Chapter Thirteen, “The Stifling of Scientific Evidence,” again give the impression of a slanted use of sources to buttress a point, whereas the main lines of the story rely on accounts accepted, for the most part, by parties on both sides of the debate. Kathy does take issue with one specific account in the chapter, but her argument is true only if gay activist Episcopalian Bishop Eugene Robinson is not a gay activist. Enough said.
Kathy’s treatment of Chapter Fourteen, “Big Brother Is Watching,” is remarkable, since I cite scores of cases – sometimes from legal summaries themselves – from America and around the world, yet she claims, “I researched all the stories in this chapter. I could make a case for the opposite side of each story. When you read something completely ridiculous and say to yourself ‘no way’, be sure to check it out and not just believe it .” She researched all the stories? Really? It would take years of backbreaking work to research all the stories – I took many months to research many of the stories and then had to ask a senior attorney and his colleagues to vet the content of the chapter carefully – yet in a few days, Kathy researched all the stories and found another side to each of them?
What is more scary, however, is that Kathy would want to argue the other side of these cases, which include police investigations at the homes of elderly couples in Britain for alleged homophobia (in one case, when they took exception to the vulgar public displays at a gay pride event in their city) and the case of a Christian college student being discriminated against and barred from graduation because of the actions of one department in the school – actions which were so egregious that, upon the school’s own investigation, the whole department was shut down and the president of the school paid for the graduate school education of the aggrieved student. Kathy could argue the other side of these cases?
Regarding the last chapter, “GLBT and Beyond,” the comments are brief, but some are worth repeating: “Legalizing gay marriage will lead to incestuous marriage and polyamorous marriage. We are going to have to accept all kinds of people. Is this really so so scary?” Read that again and ask yourself, “Is this a professed evangelical Christian stating that incestuous ‘marriage’ and polyamorous ‘marriage’ are not ‘scary’ propositions for the future?” Candidly, I find it “scary” that such a position could come from the pen of an “evangelical Christian.”
In her concluding comments, Kathy is gracious enough to say, “I can say this to Dr. Brown’s credit; he did not say directly hateful things about GLBT people.” She adds, however, “I think it is a grievous flaw to write about a group of people from a distance. I know Dr. Brown’s brother in law ‘struggled’ and he has had meals with Matt Comer, but nothing will ever substitute comfortable, regular everyday relationships. The rules all change when you like someone.” In reality, there are plenty of gay people with whom I’ve interacted at length that I find friendly and kind and enjoyable human beings, quite likable in many, many respects. And I did not just have a meal with local gay activist Matt Comer. I have met with and had meals with a number of “gay Christians” and gay activists, not to mention the many conversations I’ve had with gays and lesbians on long flights, not to mention that my first organ teacher (when I was just five) was gay, or the fact that he and his partner had meals with my family on a good number of occasions. Again, a misleading picture must be presented so as to delegitimize my conclusions. More seriously, Kathy has the temerity to change the facts regarding my own, late brother-in-law – whom she obviously never knew – stating that he “struggled,” rather than accepting his own testimony and the testimony of his wife and family. Perhaps Kathy has to rewrite the facts in order to support her own views? And what of the fact that some of the readers of the manuscript before publication included same-sex attracted but celibate men who between them have countless thousands of gay friends and associates – and who confirmed every detail of what I wrote? Are they ignorant as well?
Kathy continues,
I think AQTHTA manipulates the facts, presents the worst of situations, travels to the fringes to find the extremes and interjects damaging oddball situations and thinking to horribly skew and demonize an entire class of people, the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community. And, the cover is wildly offensive.
To the contrary, I did not go to the fringes or cherry pick but rather gave a fair representation of the whole, as much as possible, with constant qualifying remarks so as to avoid any stereotyping. And there is not a single fact cited that has been manipulated. As for the cover, I understand that Kathy finds it wildly offensive, but we surveyed many people from all walks of life – including gays and lesbians – and the cover was quite popular with almost all of them. Had we consistently heard from people that it was wildly offensive – as opposed to eye-catching and inviting – we would have used a different cover.
Re: transgenders, Kathy wrote, “I was appalled by the many comments about transgender people. I have an unusual burden for this community and only God knows why. I never even knew a transperson a few years ago. Now I weep over the abuse of them and ignorance towards them.” This too surprises me, since I frequently talk about the struggles of those who identify as transgender, and I have an older male cousin who now legally identifies as a female. I also know former trans-identified people, and I firmly believe that the best case scenario remains for them to be changed from the inside out rather than endure sex-change surgery and hormones for life, among many other indignities. What is unloving about that position?
Kathy states in bold, “I do know that with every ounce of me, I am convicted that God is orientation and gender blind.” That, of course, is her conviction, but what is indisputable from an unbiased reading of the Bible is that God is not blind to sexual activity, and the only sexual activity sanctioned by God is that between a man and woman in the context of marriage (needless to say, the only marriage recognized by the Scriptures is that between a man and woman).
Kathy does take additional time to argue for the rightness of her position, and there is no need for me to interact with that here in the context of this response to her response to my book. I do concur with her closing words, though, namely, “We really need to move beyond fear to understanding and love. God help us.” That is one main reason I wrote the book.
Dr. Michael Brown is the author of A Queer Thing Happened to America and the host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire on the Salem Radio Network.
Possibly Related Posts:
Thank you for the review; I hope it send others to the full review on my site and to perhaps interact with me there. I always appreciate the traffic and pingbacks; it keeps the review itself in the public eye. We disagree on many issues, and that is okay. I am very comfortable in God with my theology, actions, behavior and work.
Canyonwalker Connections just became a 501 with a Board of Directors of integrity, depth, reach and service. We hope God uses it to bring healing, repair, understanding and encouragement to His glbt children and to widen the reach of understanding and love for them.
I do hope to meet Brown one day. And yes, the lunch was canceled in the past because the one who initiated it, Mark, was not strong enough to be ‘beaten up” again. I deferred to his wishes. I would never want a person I love to feel even more dismissed. He is more important to me than lunch with Mr. Brown. I will not pass this book on to him either. The church Brown was to speak at was founded by Mark’s Dad. A whole movement of the Spirit forty years ago grew out of that church. Great and godly upbringing and they had a gay son. A gay son who is my friend and I gladly deferred to protect his heart. Please do add this to the retelling of the story, thank you.
And to those who choose to address my review, you are most welcome to come to my blog and perhaps you will read other posts there. Please read the post on transgenders in particular. Titled “size 14 heels”. Brown is particularly out of touch with this group of people. I made sure to ask a transwoman to join my board. God is already using her in great ways and I am excited to see the extent of it.
So come on over and read the other side of this issue. Thank you!
Kathy,
Thanks, as always, for the interaction, and I do hope we can meet together face to face one day. It’s unfortunate that Mark was reluctant to talk with me, since we opened the door wide to his requests for a meeting and he was not going to get “beaten up.” (There are many other parts of the story to tell, but this is not the place for that.)
I do pray for you that, ultimately, you will base your beliefs on the clear testimony of Scripture and not on experiences and that the Lord will use you to bring repentance and life to those whom you so dearly love.
Grace to you!
As a gay Christian I have never heard of Robert Goss prior to reading this review of a review… and looking him up I have no desire to read what he has written. I will continue to read the works of the late Peter Gomes, or Phillip Yancey, for my Spiritual inspiration. And I certainly wouldn’t call him a “gay Christian leader”. I shall leave it to others to make their own determinations.
In reading my Bible as translated into English, and certainly the Hebrew or Greek the English was translated from, it is entirely possible for David and Jonthan’s relationship to be more than platonic. It’s written in the verses. Same with the Roman Centurion. At this moment in time, all we can do is speculate based on the words used to describe both relationships. The truth is none of us will know for certain until the last day and all is revealed to us. Your words “how repulsive” show that you have closed yourself to the possiblity that there is more there than you have been taught. You have closed yourself off to the debate, and hence learning from another prespective. I’m not saying they were homosexual in nature, and I’m not saying they weren’t. I’m saying I don’t know, but the possiblity is there in the verses. I will continue to trust God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to continue to reveal the Word to me in a way that I can understand it… for I am open to learning what may be taught… and using what I learn to continue to bring others to Him, especially those who have been pushed away from the church for not being “acceptable”.
I will pray for you, but I honestly have no desire to read your book. Just based on this review of a review it seems you are closed to truly getting to know LGBT people and who they really are.
Not only have I not read anything by Goss, I have never even heard of anyone refer to him in the ten years my ears have been open to this issue. This phrase alone is very telling “you will base your beliefs on the clear testimony of Scripture and not on experiences” –interesting to me. I interpret translations differently than you do and KNOW that you do not base your revelation of God/Jesus/Spirit on Word alone. Brownsville. I have studied the Scriptures too and do not agree with how you interpret the verses used to assess same sex behavior today. What I see clearly is not what you see clearly. Not only do I see God using my testimony in the gblt community, I see Him using it to bring repentance to people that once held your views. This can be spun around over and over. There is fruit in my life and work; I therefore must conclude God is in it. Pray for me surely, but do not be so arrogant as to assume that I am so far from the heart of the Father on this one. Disagreeing with you does not translate to wrong. Thank you.
Tim, I am constantly seeking to get to know LGBT people for who they are, but that doesn’t change what the Scriptures plainly teach in the Hebrew and Greek. So, I strongly encourage you to continue to seek God earnestly, to follow His Word at any cost, and to heed Paul’s admonitions to let no one deceive you with empty words. As for my words, “how repulsive,” I stand behind them 100% , based on God’s holiness and purity. There is no room for speculation here Tim — and I say this with love — only self-deception that would try to justify something God Himself opposes.
Kathy, your argument is not with me but with God’s Word, and the testimony of Scripture is absolutely clear in terms of homosexual practice. You need to get to know committed Christians who have been delivered from homosexuality — there are plenty of them, Kathy — since they in particular know and understand the deception your friends are living under.
It is not arrogant for me to pray that God will grant you repentance. It is submission to God’s Word and love for your soul. I do not judge your motives or the whole of your life, but the Word judges your teachings, and based on God’s wonderful and beautiful and holy order, it is right before Him that I pray that He will grant you repentance.
There is fruit in my life and work as people are delivered from homosexual practice and deception and find wholeness and peace and rich blessing in their relationship with the Lord, but that does not make me right, anymore than your fruit makes you right. The Word of God, in the original languages and its straightforward, grammatical, historical, contextual, and Jesus-centered meaning, cannot be changed, and it is the Word of God that testifies against your teachings.
Out of love for God and love for you, shouldn’t I pray that He will grant you repentance?
we just disagree Michael. And that is really okay. let others respond here. If anyone wants me, I am findable on my blog. Thank you for the time.
I just want to add that I have not yet met one person who claimed to be delivered from “homosexual practice and deception” that would not admit, eventually, that they still had attractions to the same gender. What they have learned is how to bury those feelings. They do not truly have “wholeness and peace and rich blessing in their relationship with the Lord” because they are denying part of themselves that God gave them. The mask you see in public settings is not the real person hurting in brief private moments. These are the people I pray for the most… that they can see how God loves them as He created them, and they don’t need to keep the mask on. I know this… I was one of them.
Kathy, grace to you!
Tim, I know committed Christians who still struggle with same-sex attraction, but they love Jesus, are living holy lives, and do not yield to those temptations — and they are blessed and at peace. I know other committed Christians who once were practicing homosexuals but were delivered by the power of God and no longer have same-sex attractions. You should get to know some of them too! My late brother-in-law, David, was one such man, and I’ve had the joy of meeting many others over the years.
The bottom line is this: God’s Word categorically and consistently speaks against same-sex relationships and sets out only one pattern for sexual and romantic unions, namely, heterosexual, in the context of marriage. That being the case, we must refuse to yield any sexual or romantic attraction or desire that violates God’s standards, no matter how powerful and compelling it might be. It is when we deny ourselves that we truly find life.
Tim, God didn’t give you same-sex attractions, and He didn’t design you for same-sex attractions. He does have a better way for you.
This is where we will have to agree to disagree. I was not a complete person when I was “cured” and living a heterosexual life. It was after my divorce (for unrelated issues) that I fell to my knees and asked God to lead me in how I was supposed to bring Glory to His name… Through a series of miracles (in my opinion) He opened those innate attractions that I had so long buried and led me on a journey of discovery… not only of Scripture but also of myself. Homosexuality is a gift from God given to few people. Yes, it is abused by some… just like any other gift can be. God helped me unlearn what I had be taught by men… men like you. God did indeed have a better way for me, and by embracing myself as God created me I was able to discover it. I will continue to pray that God shows you the beauty in His LGBT children and stop seeing them as broken. As for me, I will continue to trust the Lord.
Tim and Kathy,
You are seriously in need of deliverance. I won’t be as diplomatic as Dr Brown has been. You are living in sin! No where in the Bible is homosexuality listed as a gift from God. God created female and male so that they would be joined together and become one flesh. This is not possible in a same sex relationship, hence Leviticus’ description of such a relationship as an abomination.
The Scripture is clear as day:
Leviticus 18:22
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.
Romans 1:26-27
For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
You are in error and have exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature. The only ordained sexual relationship given by God is heterosexual marriage. This is not about heterosexuals judging homosexuals, its not about political activism by conservatives. This is about what God expects of confessing Christians- period.
You need to repent from your sins as do all of us, the first step is always to confess that you are living in sin otherwise you’re deceiving yourself. Don’t let the deceitfulness of sin trip you up. Its easy for anyone to get tripped by sin and all of us need to be diligent to watch that we are
Tim, your disagreement is not with me but with God’s Word, and any journey you have been on that tells you that His Word affirms homosexual practice — in any setting, between any people — is a journey into deception. And remember: Deception is very powerful, often coming with false feelings and false miracles and false revelations, and that’s why we must go back to the clear and indisputable testimony of Scripture: Homosexual practice, in any setting for any reason, is always sin in God’s sight, something that Jesus died for.
I see much beauty in many GLBT people — after all, we are all created in God’s image — but that beauty doesn’t negate for a moment that ugliness of sexual sin, and the fullness of His image is only expressed through a male-female union.
I certainly appreciate you opening your heart to me here, which gives me all the more incentive to pray that the Lord will grant you repentance and deliverance and true freedom and wholeness before it’s too late.
And this is where you fail. You assume that because I am gay man that am engaging in homosexual sex with no evidence. It may surprise you that I lead a celibate life by choice. I see plenty of “ugliness of sexual sin” in heterosexual relationships… even in heterosexual marriages, yet I don’t see you commenting on those relationships. You’d rather tell me to repent of something I do not do. Is the “fullness of His image” expressed in a married couple where the husband beats his wife and rapes her daily? Of course it’s not. Sex between two people, regardless of gender, can be a beautiful expression of their love for each other… it can also, again regardless of gender, be a vile and disgusting thing full of abuse. You tell me I need to repent of my “homosexual practice”, but what practice am I engaging in that needs repentance. I do need repentance for my sins, as we all do, but you seem to know something specific I do that needs extra forgiveness. Please inform me of what that is. I am not trying to rile you, I truly am not. I constantly get told that I “must” repent of “homosexual practice” or a “homosexual lifestyle”, but cannot get specifics as to what about my life fits those descriptions.
I am truly saddened by the thought of how many people you have pushed away from God by your hardened heart. I trust the Holy Spirit to lead me where God wants me to be. It’s sad that you do not seem to trust the Holy Spirit to do God’s work in the lives of LGBT people.
Tim, aren’t you judging me when you speak of my “hardened heart”? Could it be that you don’t know about the many times I have laid on my face in agony of my spirit out of love for LGBT people? Cried with them when I heard their stories? Joined other believers in days of fasting and prayer for the love of God to be poured in their midst?
Yes, based on your posts, claiming that the Word of God sanctioned homosexual practice and speaking of it as a gift from God, I assumed that you were engaged in homosexual practice. Forgive me for making that assumption. As I told you, I have friends who still are same-sex attracted but renounce those attractions and do not act on them and are living celibate, blessed lives. If you are in that same category, my hat is off to you. Unfortunately, your statement that “Sex between two people, regardless of gender, can be a beautiful expression of their for each other,” would be stating that something that God calls sinful, without exception (that is, sex between people of the same gender) is beautiful. There may be love involved, but it is ugly in God’s sight, not beautiful. How I wish you would be in harmony with the Lord!
As for your criticism that I’m not addressing sexual sin in other areas — again, you falsely and wrongly judge me. To the contrary, for several decades, teaching on sexual purity has been a major part of my ministry (I can refer you to numerous messages on holiness and even whole books on the subject), and it is only in the last seven years that the Lord began to burden me to address and confront gay activism, while reaching out to individuals with the compassion of the Lord. And it is that compassion that compels to speak the truth to you in love.
Regarding the fullness of God’s image being expressed, it is NEVER expressed in the union of two people of the same sex; it is frequently expressed in the union of a married man and woman who love Him and love one another.
I fully trust the Holy Spirit to lead His people where He wants them to be, but the moment they claim the Holy Spirit is leading them to violate and/or twist His Word, I realize it is no longer the Spirit leading but rather the flesh. May the Holy Spirit bring you into wholeness and fullness and, wherever needed, repentance before Him, and may Jesus be glorified in your life.
Dr. Micheal Brown, I am thankful to our Messiah that I had the privilege of hugging you once. You are such an encouragement to me!I just had an unfortunate encounter with a militant homosexual cousin. I was judgmental about photos that I saw as encouraging idol worship but he turned my comments into what he perceived as homophobia. Saddest of all, his father and sisters attacked me for challenging his photos. I did seek counseling from a wonderful Spirit filled Messianic rabbi who reminded me that the Law kills but the Spirit gives Life. I see your great love for this man as you patiently address his deceived mind. Let us agree that this Tim and my cousin David will both experience miraculous deliverances. Shalom and blessings to a wonderful man of Truth.
Pingback: More Positive & Negative Feedback on ‘A Queer Thing Happened to America’ - Voice of Revolution
*If I may sneak in here quietly*
Hi Dr Brown. Hi Ms Kathy. & same to everybody else. I’m a christian, young adult, and un/fortunately gay. & I’ll say that I already a lucky friend of Ms Kathy, so there may be some bias in me. Just random fyi.
I haven’t read Dr Brown’s book yet, and I don’t know if I will, but mostly because my shelf already has a dozen other works of equal spiritual importance. Congrats to being able to go through all mass of work to get published. I know it’s a huge undertaking, and not something done lightly. It won’t be my place to criticize or praise any of it though, because all I have read is her review, your review of her review, etc, plus a bunch of comments from all over. But I would like to add a few things to the conversation if I may. & yeah, I’m just gonna comment on the parts that I felt the need to, but please don’t be put off.
First, I’ll speak for myself, and the conversations I’ve had with other gay christians that I’ve encountered. I had no clue who Goss was & after a bit of google-ing, I know that I have heard a bit of his theology of queering the scriptures. Honestly, though, only twice have I heard it. I’m more with Tim though, that I don’t have enough of a depth of scriptural understanding to make a stance either way. I’ll wait for Christ to clarify. Perhaps through some intensive studies :D I do know that the vast majority of my gay brothers & sisters are more concerned with other spiritual matters. One is 24 and teaching English in Laos while quietly bringing the gospel. Another is going through grad school and questioning how to craft his testimony as a conservative christian. There’s struggles over the being content with christ while single, including God in relationships, loving non-christian parents, how to live in ministry, what to do with poverty, whether to be authentic to fellowships, how to show up in church and not be afraid, how to show up and not be offensive, how to just not be offensive and rude, and how to not be a pushover. Just to list a few. Much like any other christian trying to figure out how to give your whole life to Christ. You’ve likely heard this, in different ways. My point is that my fellow (gay) believers and I may not be denouncing Goss, but that does not equate to me supporting him. I also don’t denounce the Fred Phelps. I have better things to do, and personally am called to living out love in other ways. It does come off a bit harsh to imply that his teachings are my teachings or something I respect. I am considering them, and I am considering that they may just as well be misfounded. But it is waaaay in the back of my mind.
Regarding the clarity of scriptures, I think I disagree with several of you. The Scriptures are not my sole source of understanding, as The Word is still alive and well and walking amidst all our lives. Yes, I defer to Christ. It is the Spirit as well that uncovers the meaning of scriptures. And the studying of those scriptures that brings us closer to God overall. A wonderful little loop. But I do not see scriptures as being plainly clear about sexual orientation or relationships. Any discussion of Godly ethics involves much study, which you all seem to have done, and somehow arrived at differing conclusions. Nope, scriptures don’t seem plainly clear to me yet. I’ve spent retreats where we studied the gospels 8 hours a day for a full week, and scriptures were not plainly clear. There had to be digging and researching, questioning and struggling. I like seeing some of that struggling here too. I’m sorry that some of it has to be struggling & wrestling with other believers. But in the end, we must (on both sides) be open to the radical God who loved children that didn’t follow a (seeming) prescription for monogamous heterosexual, unrepulsive relationships (I’m still in the OT, & wow did they make soap operas look tame. …& why weren’t they ever called out for multiple wives and concubines?).
I do know a couple things. The type of knowing that goes deep and comes very slowly from seeing something long enough.
1. Ms Kathy may or may not be right or even righteous in her review, but the GLBT people she interacts with are drawn closer to God. Spending time with her around glbt folks is like spending time with my mission-oriented friend downtown. God works in the lives of those who have given up on Church and Christ when they meet and relationship with Ms Kathy. The fruit of her life is unmistakable. The love that overflows cannot be anything other than from God. I’ll apologize for her (& probably get an earful for it, hehe), for being overprotective and hyper motherly-figure-who’ll-put-the-smack-down-on-anyone-who-dares-hurt-her-darlings to an extreme, but I can vouch that it comes from a place of deep, radical love towards a group. And there is no way that it’s anything but God’s fault. (The love part that is. The smack down part I leave for debate :P)
2. I need the prayers for repentance. 100%. But I have seen the results of hundreds of christians affirming their sexuality (whether choosing to act on it or not), and have seen much more healing than among those who believe it sinful. My life’s a mess, and I’m constantly having to turn around and run back to God & His path, but I don’t grasp how I should repent of my orientation. Tried it for a decade, and nearly left God for not making me part of “such were some of you.” He’s revised my understanding of scriptures countless times, and will likely continue doing so, but let’s all (both pro & non gay affirming) pray to glimpse more of his heart on the matter of sexuality and orientation. I know full well that it isn’t easy to be willing to consider having been wrong for a looong time. But Jesus is pretty good at throwing a kingdom upside down, and we have to decide if we’re willing to go regardless of the result.
3.I do read books that I’m given (hint, hint). & am genuinely curious to meet more ex-gay christians, and hear their stories and learn from them. so if anybody would like to pay for a nice young man to go to a Love Won Out, I know how to be immensely grateful. GCN conference tickets accepted too.
Paz i agape,
Josh
Oh, one more bit! I noticed that a lot of this conversation (here & as posted elsewhere) tends to be defensive and responding to particular statements (I’m probably guilty in my mini-essay too) rather than seeing the heart and love that motivates each other. So I propose (as a reckless young guy can get away with proposing) rescheduling that meetup. I’ll cook dinner (I’m a private cook & Ms Kathy’ll attest it’s usually decent) and play reconciler/moderater. Small little shindig. Beats online interaction, and all the readers of Dr Brown and Ms Kathy can be shocked to hear of how civil it goes and how each side leaves understanding the other more personally.
Though I love humor, I don’t mean to be poking fun here. I genuinely extend the invitation to both parties, because you both seemed to be disgruntled at the previously canceled meeting. Can you really turn down the aspiring chef/bridge-builder?
I’ll throw in puppy dog eyes if needed
Josh
Josh,
Thanks for your lengthy post and for your openness and gentle spirit. A few replies from my heart:
1) I don’t doubt that there are thousands of fine Christians with unwanted same-sex attractions. I applaud them for their commitment to Jesus and His ways, which means not engaging in same-sex romantic or sexual relationships. The Lord will bless them for their commitment! And perhaps He will also change their sexual orientation, as He has done for many others. But if not, then the gift they have is not that of homosexuality but rather of celibacy. I stand in admiration of them!
2) Kathy is the one who made a major issue of Robert Goss. I simply quote him several times, along with other “gay Christian” leaders, in the chapter on Queer Theology. Unfortunately, Goss has been a frequent speaker at MCC conferences and is an editor of the Queer Bible Commentary, so he is hardly a marginal figure, and when I called on Harry Knox of the Human Rights Campaign — Harry professes to be a “gay Christian” in an active sexual relationship with his long-time partner — to denounce the writings of men like Dr. Ken Stone (a “gay Christian” who writes for the HRC) — he refused, despite my asking him to do three times in our debate. Even more sad is the fact that, even on this blog, “gay Christians” have tried to defend repulsive readings of Scripture (see above). That says a lot, unfortunately.
3) As to the Scriptures not being clear, on some issues they are quite clear, and the prohibition against homosexual practice is one of those. How can I say this? It is not just that I write as a biblical scholar; I’m sure you can find other scholars with all kinds of other views. Rather, it is this: Without a doubt, there are passages in the Bible that have been debated by scholars from all backgrounds for centuries, but the passages about homosexuality are not among them. In other words, it is only with the rise of gay activism that people have tried to rewrite these texts, and that’s also why all the major lexicons of Hebrew and Greek never questioned the overall meaning of the key words involved.
4) Regarding the Scriptures not being your final authority, by all means, everything we have in God is a matter of personal relationship, but His Word is the unchangeable standard of truth and light, and if we think that Jesus (or the Spirit) is saying something different to us than what is written, then we are clearly listening to another spirit.
5) I’m glad that you’ve found a friend in Kathy, and I don’t doubt her sincerity. But if she affirms homosexual practice, she is ultimately hurting people more than helping them. That’s why deception is so dangerous: Many nice people, with all kinds of apparent fruit, and even with miracles backing them, can walk and live in serious error if they depart from the foundations of God’s Word. I can point to wonderful fruit on our end, and miraculous backing too, but ultimately, we must submit with humility to God’s truth.
6) I wouldn’t tell anyone to “repent” of their sexual orientation, as if they could simply snap their fingers and make it happen. Instead, with God’s grace and help, I would urge them to repent of all sexual sin, to recognize that same-sex attractions are contrary to God’s best for their lives (in other words, that they cease to affirm a “gay identity”), and to give their whole being to the Lord. Then, they can stand alongside the rest of us in whatever state of repair or wholeness we are in, moving forward together in the Lord. The key thing is to be in harmony with the Lord and not to justify what He condemns (and I speak here of homosexual practice in particular).
7) I’d be happy to send you a copy of my book if you would take the time to read it, along with some other relevant books. I’m assuming that you’ve already read Joe Dallas’s The Gay Gospel and Jeff Konrad’s You Don’t Have to Be Gay, right? As for getting you in touch with ex-gays, write to me privately through the AskDrBrown website and we’ll do our best to get you connected.
8) Re: getting together with Kathy, it would be my delight to sit with her face to face anytime the opportunity presented itself, with you present as well, if possible. And I’d be happy to talk with her privately by phone if a face to face opportunity doesn’t present itself soon. (I’ve given her that invitation several times in the past, so this is nothing new.) Kathy was not an issue to me when I wrote my book (she and her work are not mentioned in it once), and when she asked me for a free copy of the book to review, I agreed to send it to her. It is only because some websites (like the oddly named “Truth Wins Out”) relied on her review rather than actually reading the book that I felt it was worthwhile to correct the serious misrepresentations in her review, and even then, I didn’t release it to the public until the editor of our magazine requested it here.
Again, I deeply appreciate your heart and I pray that you will find true wholeness and full restoration in Jesus. Let us know how we can help.
In Tulsa Oklahoma with about 150 Holy Spirit filled gay, lesbian and bisexual mostly Pentecostal Christians. Sure do wish you naysayers could get over your fears and step away from your right to be right for just a bit and be open to the fact that you could actually be wrong with interpretation of Scripture. We Christians have been wrong before. The Bible is accurate, it is the people of God who have badly messed up. Honored to see what so many people ignore, are fearful of, deny and remain in ignorance about. Contact me on my blog, tell me tha area of the country you live in and let me direct you to a body of glbt believers. And, if I am wrong, you will have a whole congregation to correct/pray for/tell they are wrong. If you are so convinced they cannot be equal to heterosexuals in God, let me help you find a target audience to go confront directly. Someone may well come away changed. Come on, be brave and take the challenge. Send me a note and let me connect you. Off to a Saturday morning worship session and teaching. There are some GREAT preachers here and the prophetic words are awesome. I have been blessed to be the recipient of God’s words several times–accurate to my Spirit (yes, the Holy Spirit). Whoa–appears I am not disappearing in this dialogue for quite awhile.
Kathy, your words are filled with judgmentalism (“naysayers . . . your fears . . . your right to be right”). Don’t you realize that out of great love for God, great reverence for His Word, and great love for GLBT people that I and many others have agonized over these questions and sought the Lord earnestly with tears? The fact is that His Word is totally clear on the issue of homosexual practice: in all cases, in all situations, it is sinful.
In post after post (on Facebook and on your blog and elsewhere) you base everything on experience (since the Word of God is absolutely against your position), without realizing the terrible danger of doing so. Jesus warns us against this very thing: “Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'” (Mat 7:22-23)
You also forget that I and others have had dramatic experiences (confirmed by all kinds of prophetic words and signs) calling us to call these very people to repentance and to resist gay activism. I had supernatural experiences and prophetic words and miraculous supplies to write and publish A Queer Thing Happened to America! And I know former LGBT people who have been transformed by Jesus and His Spirit, and they would be the first to tell you and your friends that you are deceived. But you and I can’t base our beliefs primarily on experiences. Ultimately, it is the Word of God that is the standard, and the re- interpretations you put forth on your website are hopelessly wrong. Can you admit the possibility that your experiences have biased your study of Scripture? Can you admit the possibility that God through His Word forbids all homosexual acts?
Please remember that the gay liberation movement came out of the sexual revolution (marked by promiscuity and rebellion), and that it continues on a trajectory that is absolutely destructive to male-female, God-ordained foundations. I do hope and pray that you see the truth before it’s too late. (To be clear: If these people you are with have same-sex attractions but recognize that this is a trial and test for them and that they must be celibate unless God delivers them from those attractions and gives them a heterosexual partner, that is an entirely different matter. But if you are with men who have sex with men and women who have sex with women, and they are prophesying and preaching, you simply underscore the warning that Jesus gave.)
By all means, I would sit down with those who claim to be practicing LGBT Christians and spend a day together. My schedule is incredibly tight, but if you can find a group in the greater Charlotte area (or out of the area, if they’re willing to spend the time with me here), then we’ll set it up and share our hearts openly with one another. You will be more than welcome to attend the meeting as well.
So, don’t disappear from this dialogue, but do reflect on the fact that with all your sincerity and devotion, you have been deceived.
Thank you very much Michael, we disagree on many issues. If I do get to Charlotte, I will make time for you.
oh, I don’t think I was clear on a sentence –I meant that I was not disappearing from this dialogue UNIVERSAL, not here in particular. I use the Word of God MB, please stop saying I do not. We just interpret it differently. My stance is not forged in experience alone, it is Word and Spirit. I believe just as yours is. Crazy thing is, I can same the same for you—“with all your sincerity and devotion, you have been deceived.” So, we really do disagree. I will not discount what my Spirit bears witness to. Do I go with how I interpret, what the Spirit says to me, the fruits I see before me, the witness of Jesus in the lives I know and see OR your interpretation and the conventional one. As I said, we have been wrong before. I go with what God and the Spirit show me in His Word, my Spirit and the the lives I see. Please do stop saying my theology is all experience; it discounts me and anyone who reads my words, knows my life would NEVER say that. Thank you for honoring that request in future. I needed to correct that assessment again. Thanks.
Kathy, I’ve reached out to professing “gay Christians” in Charlotte before but will gladly sit down with friends or associates of yours in the area, even if you can’t make it. Why not help make that happen?
As for the issue of experience, this is where you are your own worst enemy. In the story of your own journey, you talk about how discussions with a lesbian, non-Christian opened your eyes, then you frequently send notes from “gay Christian” meetings you’re involved in, talking about how wonderful the people are and how the Spirit is moving — as if that proves your point. (You’ve done it here in this very blog.) That’s what I’m responding to, Kathy: Your own words, and you are the only one who can change that perception in the future. It was also your experiences that caused you to go back to Scripture and reinterpret, and you now buy into the standard “gay Christian” polemics to explain away the obvious. That is painful and grievous to see, and I write this with love not with anger.
One last question for you: The Spirit of God has deeply burdened me to expose the false “gay Christian” teaching and to open up the Scriptures to show God’s best plan for humanity. Should I step back from His burden — and commission — because it offends you, or should I obey the Lord, regardless of what you or others think? (You can demean the clear understanding of the Scriptures by calling it “conventional,” but remember, it’s also “conventional” to say that there is only one God, that the Bible is God’s Word, and that Jesus is the only Savior and Redeemer. Perhaps “conventional” is not so bad after all!)
You keep doing what God leads you to do and I will keep doing what God leads me to do. That we can agree on. So long as God and the Spirit lead me , I will follow. Off to listen to some great preaching, awesome worship, get washed in the gifts around me and go to the baptism of 8 people. I am not trying to stop you from doing anything. I can parrot your words: “The Spirit of God has deeply burdened me to expose the false {ANTI} “gay Christian” teaching and to open up the Scriptures to show God’s best plan for humanity { in acceptance of all people who come to Him regardless of orientation}. Should I step back from His burden — and commission — because it offends you, or should I obey the Lord, regardless of what you or others think?”
And yes, I believe in one God, and Jesus as Savior and Redeemer and the Bible as God’s Word.
Kathy, of course I will keep doing what He leads me to do. Obviously! And that means if you post here or interact with me in other places, I will remind readers of your serious mishandling of God’s Word, just as you continue to do what you feel is right. That is part of what He wants me to do.
And note that once again, you have pointed to EXPERIENCE as if it proved something (in the very next post after you requested that I no longer say you are relying on experience!).
I’m glad that you hold to conventional biblical truths (which, unfortunately for your position, works against your demeaning of my understanding of biblical sexuality as “conventional”).
FIne.
I’m curious if you have read what the Rev. Bruce Lowe or Dr. Jack Rogers or the Rev. Dr. Daniel Helminiak have written about the Bible and homosexuality?
Tim, thanks for asking. I’ve read Helmeniak and Rogers; Lowe only briefly. Helmeniak’s exegesis is very weak; Rogers seems to rely more on the power of emotion and a re-reading of the Bible as opposed to what it actually says.
As a biblical scholar myself, I can tell you honestly that Dr. Robert Gagnon’s material is extraordinarily insightful and accurate, and it seems the best weapon his critics have is to vilify him more than engage him.
I would encourage you to take the time to watch these two video lectures I did in 2007 and 2008. The truth may not tickle our ears, but in the end, it is medicine to our souls:
http://coalitionofconscience.askdrbrown.org/resources/2007_lecture_monday.html
http://coalitionofconscience.askdrbrown.org/resources/2008_lecture_monday.html
New post on my blog Dear Church, | Ten Insights on the glbt Christian Dialogue
http://canyonwalkerconnections.com/2011/06/dear-church-ten-insights-on-the-glbt-christian-dialogue/
Kathy, thanks for your post, which further underscores the theological errors on which you are basing your beliefs and practices. It’s good to have them so clearly laid out so they can be so easily refuted. Thankfully, when you write, “The Bible we read is a translation.,” for many of us doing serious study of the issues, we don’t have to rely on a translation, and the overall testimony of Scripture, from beginning to end, is clear in terms of God’s intent for sexual intimacy being the union of a man and woman together in lifelong union. The Bible is categorically against any deviation from that and categorically for that pattern alone. So, rather than reading a few isolated verses, it’s important to read the entire Bible.
We know that deception is very powerful, which is why Paul warned against it again and again, and the temptation of the flesh can easily deceive. May God those who have been misled into homosexual practice into repentance and freedom. God does have a better way, the way of love and wholeness and freedom and purity.
mint
anise
cumin
Kathy, honoring God with our bodies and minds, living in sexual purity, reverencing His standards, embracing the beauty of God-ordained marriage as the union of male and female, as depicted by Messiah and His bride — this to you is a trivializing legalism? To the contrary, these are some of the weightier matters, issues of justice and mercy and truth and faithfulness. How sad that you mock them, to the detriment of those you want to help.
You are a master at twisting things. I think your law keeping is keeping people from the throne. Read points 4, 5 , 7 and 8. Had a person write to me from a chapel service you did at a TV station today. That person left furious. The person found me while searching the review for your book. Thank you. That person’s best friend is gay.
oh–go to bed Michael–it’s late. I just got back from Bible study. yes, I do study it and more importantly try to live it. This post has gotten massive reads–about 2.5K by now. The responses coming in from straight Christians are ” well someone is FINALLY saying it. We disagree and God has given us each a voice. I will have to ask Him about that one day. . . .
Kathy, if you recognize that God has given me a voice, then you’d best drop all the silly attacks. And if you believe God has given you a voice, then there’s no reason for you to try to prove that God is using you all the time.
I’m praying for you!
Michael-“if you recognize that God has given me a voice, then you’d best drop all the silly attacks. And if you believe God has given you a voice, then there’s no reason for you to try to prove that God is using you all the time. I’m praying for you!” and I actually do, daily.
Quite a correspondence! I might introduce myself, and express gratitude for the book, sympathy for the “agreement to disagree” I find here.
I’m an American from Boston, of Scotch-Irish background, so still amazed to find myself a successful publisher in a language very much not my own, here in Poznan, Poland. http://www.MediaRodzina.com.pl. I publish (mostly translation) parenting, solid psychology, recovery from addiction, good reading for young people and children. We’re best known for publishing C.S.Lewis “Narnia” and Harry Potter in Polish translation. I’m a conservative Episcopalian, not happy about what’s happening in my denomination in America.
After publishing Dr. Patrick Carnes on recovery from sexual addiction, I moved to the topic of homosexuality. I always use the analogy of “smoking”. I have no problem tolerating and enjoying people who smoke, especially if they observe when to and not to. But can say I think it’s not healthy and support programs that help people who want to stop. Most smokers remember when they began, and recognize an element of choice. Almost no one with Same Sex Attraction (SSA) remembers when they first felt it, no choice, except how to deal with it.
I’ve sponsored translation of Alan Medinger’s “Growth into Manhood: Resuming the Journey” and Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, and am involved in a program written by Alan Medinger that offers help to men with unwanted SSA. In discussions, I’ve learned to explain that I don’t think there’s a “switch” from homosexual to heterosexual, but (with Medinger and Nicolosi) that building a stronger internal gender identity, learning to have intimate but non-erotic relationships with our own gender, the homosexual compulsion is reduced (maybe never completely eliminated) and the body’s natural heterosexuality is available. I’ve learned to minimize talk about “sin” and to stress “health”. As the above correspondence shows, we tend to deal with the Bible as WE want to, and quoting it usually doesn’t help, although it is the authority for me. (Well, most Leviticus laws don’t apply after Jesus and St. Paul, but St. Paul is clear about the un-health of homosexual passion.)
My response to the book was, Oh my goodness! I’m glad I’ve missed the last decades in America. (I get back to Boston about twice a year, but for very brief visits.) Already I’ve been upset by the intolerance of gay activists. (But am aware of the huge amount of intolerance there has been from the anti-gay side.) I am grateful to have the issues set forth very clearly. So thank you, Dr. Brown.
I have tried to read Robert Gagnon, but could not get through it due to the constant leaps he makes in his logic. More emotion, not enough facts. As a mathematician I like logical conclusions. Even my faith and trust in Christ is logical. John 3:16-18 states that Christ did not come into the world to condemn it, but to save it, and ALL who believe will be saved and are not condemned. Romans 2:1 states that those who condemn others are really condemning themselves. Titus 3:9 tells us to avoid arguments and quarrels about the law, because they are unprofitable and useless. Even Christ said there are some things that not everyone will be able to accept, but those who can accept it should. I question if there are things you cannot understand and therefore do not accept.
Tim, thanks for making the effort to read, and I’m sorry to hear about your experience. From my perspective, as a trained biblical scholar and philologian, Gagnon’s logic is impeccable. Perhaps it deserves further study? Perhaps you’re missing some of his logic? (Not an accusation; just a question.)
As for the mission of Jesus, yes, he came to save us — which means salvation from sin so we lead a new life in him (see, among many verses, Matt 1:21; all of Romans 6). He reaches out to us in our sin and brokenness and lostness and forgives us and transforms us. That’s the power of the gospel!
From cover to cover, God’s Word establishes heterosexual relationships (sexually and romantically, in marriage), as the one and only norm and standard, so there’s no controversy about that if we’re honest with Him and His Word.
Grace to you, Tim!
R.G, wrties,
I publish (mostly translation) parenting, solid psychology, recovery from addiction, good reading for young people and children. We’re best known for publishing C.S.Lewis “Narnia” and Harry Potter in Polish translation.
Harry Potter side by side with C.S. Lewis??? Confusion abounds.
Jabaz H. quotes that R.G, wrties,
I publish (mostly translation) parenting, solid psychology, recovery from addiction, good reading for young people and children. We’re best known for publishing C.S.Lewis “Narnia” and Harry Potter in Polish translation.
and then Jabez H. comments:
Harry Potter side by side with C.S. Lewis??? Confusion abounds.
So R.G. adds:
No confusion. Careful thought from a conservative Christian publisher. But you’re in good company to be surprised.
Both series are honest fantasies. Both include magic.
C.S.Lewis “Narnia” can be read simply as fantasy with happy endings, but for Christian readers it’s obvious: Aslan the Lion, Son of the Emperor Over The Sea, is, in that fantasy universe, Jesus Christ in ours. The first book gives us a parallel to the death of Jesus on the cross and His resurrection.
My son went to university in Edinburgh, and through visits there I got to know people who know J.K.Rowling through her Christian parish. She is a Christian, one interview says “My faith is very important to me, although it’s not as certain as I would like.”
Harry never wins by his abilities in magic, only by his courage and willingness to face death. In the first book, it’s his mother’s love that saves him. In the final book, he has to allow Lord Voldemort/Tom Riddle to kill him for the sake of his friends. After a conversation with the [already through-death] Dumbledore, he has a choice, “go on” or go back. Not exactly a Resurrection, but near.
A conservative Christian, John Granger, has written several books about how he first read Harry Potter. His daughter’s pediatrician gave her a copy, and he had to read it first to explain why “We don’t read such books.” He was amazed to discover, and has written several books as the series advanced, that like C.S.Lewis, but less explicit, with more subtlety, there is a lot of Christian symbolism and lessons.
I always say, honest fantasy lets us return to reality, but with healthy use of the imagination behind us. Serious attempts at magic, like voodoo, to impose one’s will on the world or another person, I always say is “unhealthy, dangerous, even demonic”, the magic ends up controlling the person. Lewis and Rowling have written honest fantasies with spiritual lessons that can be applied to our reality. Try reading Rowling with the same spirit that you read Lewis.
Robert Gamble
“Honest fantasies”??? Both are entertaining, but are fundamentally based
o
n
Radically different assumptions for their own characters pursuit of heart and mind.
Though Harry is ever the “innocent hearted wizard”, there is no such assumption in banning the pursit of such by the God of scripture, and how such will ultimately effect the heart. Human beings can justivy anything–expecially the bottom line of profits–where wool is worn by the priest in the place of sacrifice of lambs.
My son, who attends Queens University after five years of missionary work for the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, and is in fellowship in Belfast, after those years of reconciliation work, has no such doubt as
the author you describe.
And, I should add, Aslan uses no magic whatsoever, being the source of all power in the Lewis allegory.
LORD, Save us and the world from Your followers. Gnats, mint, cumin, anise. I could just not see Jesus having this conversation. Off to SF Gay Pride to apologize for our trashy behavior towards the glbt community. God does have a better way and it is not found in AWTHTA. Get off your bottoms and go love someone you do not like. BTW, they get to define if it is loving.
Jesus preached love and the world hated Him for it, and He is the one who defines what love is. God’s very best way is transformation of sinful human beings through repentance and faith, and I will not be guilty of withholding the fullness of God’s message of love, salvation, and transformation from all people — including those who identify as GLBT. What a joy it is to see them meet with God’s transforming love!
Jabez and Robert, just a word of encouragement to stay on topic with this thread here. Thanks!
Perhaps our discussion unveiled Kathy’s actual source and substance of her own uttered prayers? Such may be viewed as topical and declarative.
From Dr. Brown,
Jabez and Robert, just a word of encouragement to stay on topic with this thread here. Thanks!
From Robert: I realized we’re getting “off topic”. Jabez H. (and anyone else interested in the C.S.Lewis/J.K.Rowling topic) I’d be interested in continuing our conversation. My direct e-mail is rdgamble@sylaba.poznan.pl. There’s a relevance, – what gifts and what problems God gives us, – no one chooses Same Sex Attraction, how do we deal with it in ourselves, in others? But getting into Narnia and Harry Potter isn’t “on topic” here.
@Jabez–WHAT? You may have to uncover the intent for even me. I am pretty honest about what I believe and type. I am missing you point. It is a declaration or a genuine question? Off to SF Pride this am to go do damage control/repair. And very happy about marriage equality in my home state.
Kathy, with every post you make, you further indicate just how far you have departed from God’s plan and ideal — for sexual and romantic relationships and marriage and gender distinctions — rejecting God’s loving Word and replacing it with gay activist ideology. Thankfully, the Lord continues to move powerfully, and I just heard another stirring testimony of a lesbian activist who in 2008 had a Saul of Tarsus, Acts 9 experience and is now a changed woman boldly proclaiming the Good News. Praise God!
Kathy,
“LORD, Save us and the world from Your followers. Gnats, mint, cumin, anise.” Flesh begats flesh, and the spirit begats spirit. Come to Jesus Christ, the Lord. –Jabez
A careful study of what God himself decrees in his revelation to Moses, given for that particular community, reveals that the spirit behind departation from the blessing of God in marriage is the spirit of witchcraft. See Levt. 18 as to why got chose a posture of intent to “vomit the occupants out of the [chosen] land”.
got=God, please forgive my typos.
I am amazed seeing how many people call themselves “Christians” today. We see this with our government as well as some of the posters here. The Word of God is specific in outlining who is a Christian. Read it! and if you accept the Word of God and follow it regardless of your own agenda, then you can call yourself a Christian.
We believers are all sinners. We have to come to our Messiah all the time and repent for this sin or another. We receive forgiveness because of Messiah’s redemptive work on the Cross at Calvary and also because of our faith in Him. If we start making excuses and misusing the Word of God to excuse our sins (e.g. homosexuality) the same thing can happen for the other sins which God condemns (e.g. adultery, fornication, stealing, etc.).
7 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. Galatians 6:7.
The world now dwells in DEEP spiritual darkness. … confirmed, reprobate homosexuality and “gay rights” and “gay marriages” are ONLY PART of that deep deception. See: Romans 1:18-32. – it’s all there, … and the warnings have been there *for anyone to read very plainly* for all these many centuries.
Ordinarily: when the ‘god of this world’ blinds someone spiritually: THEY STAY blinded.
Just spent another weekend at a gay Christian conference. Over a hundred gay Christians at this one and four of the people I suggested you interview for your book and in particular your chapter on gay theology. All experts and well respected leaders, non of which you contacted. I brought your book along. My review is not “false”, I do not twist truth. I tell the truth as I believe it and am lead by the Spirit to understand it. Your plea to counter my review inspired me to post it again.
At a conference three weeks ago, one of the leaders of a residence program for over 10 years who was also a board member and president of a major ex gay program attended. In the last two years, he has done a 180 and is now speaking out. What he sees at ex gay conferences is fear and shame. At glbt Christian conferences, he sees people who are in freedom and serving Jesus, living in the Spirit. Yet another insider exposing the myth of ex gays. I roomed with a former Exodus leader for 15 years this weekend. She wrote 2 of their books, did most of their interviews and trained leaders. And her wife picked her up from the conference. One of the founders of Exodus is on my board. You may not like what I write Michael, but I do not twist things. You wrote from fear. I suggest you go experience the freedom in Christ that glbt Christians know.
While I was in CA, over 300 glbt Christians were meeting in Atlanta. I got a report of the incredible things of the Spirit that happened there from some friends today. Deny it from afar. A revival is coming in the glbt Christian community and no man will stop it and no book can deny it. Discount me continually and that will not stop it either. Jesus shines, the Holy Spirit lives in and God is calling His glbt children. And ,they are remaining same sex attracted. You may not understand it, but God clearly does not need your approval to put His Spirit in His gay and transgender children.
Your negative words about me invite me back her to defend my integrity. You are certainly welcome to post a comment to my blog anytime.
Kathy,
You are the one speaking and spreading negative words, as if it is somehow your personal mission to discredit my book, and it seems that wherever it is sold online, you will post your review. Thankfully, God is using the book to touch lives and open eyes, and can people can see through what you have written (as is the case on the Christianbook.com website). I only respond here to bring everything into the light and to call you to account before the Lord, for your sake and the sake of those who follow you.
The fact is that you do twist the words of Scripture (on your blog and elsewhere), and that’s the greatest concern I have. A young lady came up to me a few weeks ago, deeply concerned after going to your website. She had read your review on Amazon and then went to your blog and said to me, “I’ve only been saved for one year, yet it’s so clear to me that this woman is distorting the Word of God. Something is very wrong.” And do any of your LGBT friends believe that, when Jesus healed the servant of the centurion, that it was actually the centurion’s young same-sex lover? That perverse interpretation is common in “gay Christian” circles, as is the idea that Jesus had a same-sex relationship with John (it is ugly even to write such things, but you should know by know that these views are common). Do any of your friends hold to them? In my book I mention that many “gay Christians” reject such blasphemous interpretations, but sadly, many “gay Christians” embrace them and so much more, and I simply documented this in my book, fairly and accurately.
Sadly, you also present blatant lies in your review, claiming, for example, that I never tried to contact Andy Marin, whereas I tried on numerous occasions to reach out to him directly and through his co-workers, without ever receiving a single response. But it seems that truth is not the main thing that drives you; rather, it is your experience with “GLBT Christians” that shapes your views, and that is why you continue on the path of deception. (I should also remind you that I asked you a couple of months ago to connect me with any “GLBT Christians” in my area, and I promised to spend quality time with them, but again, you haven’t followed through on that. Is that also my fault?)
In April, I spoke with the pastor of one of the finest churches in the country, and with tears he told me about the amazing work God is doing in the gay community in his city. He shared with me how so many of them hate their lifestyles and want to be changed, and the Lord in fact is meeting them. You should rejoice over this, Kathy, rather than deny it.
As to people remaining same-sex attracted, I have met and talked with many ex-gays — the conferences I have participated in have been filled with grace, joy, love and have been marked by the absence of fear — and I have seen the whole spectrum: Some of them remain same-sex attracted but refuse to act on their desires (you should commend them as heroes, Kathy); some of them have experienced minor change; some major change; some are 100% delivered. I know them personally. I have watched them over the years. You cannot deny their experiences and call yourself a Christian at the same time. “Love believes all things”! You must also deny the power of God, who can change and transform anyone, and you must also deny the Word of God (1 Cor 6:9-11). I choose to believe God and His Word, and even if someone does not experience a change in their sexual and romantic desires, they are still called to holiness, which remains abstaining from sexual acts outside of God-ordained, male-female marriage.
Yes, a revival is coming, but it is not what you are expecting. The Lord is raising up intercessors and houses of prayer and they are crying out to God day and night, fasting and praying and shedding many tears for LGBT people, tears of great love and compassion, and all of us are convinced that there will be a massive harvest of souls from the LGBT community — we believe that multiplied tens of thousands will be coming to faith in the coming years — and we are preparing the churches to receive them with love and patience. And Kathy, Jesus will touch them to the very core of their souls and many will be delivered from deep-seated same-sex desires by the power and love of God.
As for posting on your blog, I appreciate the invitation, but at this point, I have no desire to do so. I didn’t pursue you on these issues. Rather, from the first day we announced our God Has a Better Way rally in 2009 on Facebook, you were there to criticize and to judge, and you have continued in that path until today. I have simply responded to you publicly and privately, offered to meet with you face to face, and invited you to talk with me by phone. The invitation remains open on my end, and I still don’t know why you choose to post online rather than interact one on one by phone or face to face, so yet again, despite the intensity of my schedule, I’m opening the door to you: Let’s set up a time to talk by phone this week since it’s not possible to meet face to face. You can call the number of my website and get your contact info to me. What do you say?
I will wait for in person, it is so much more effective. I may come down to “The Call”, to protest, of course in Sacto in September. I will let you know. My posts are more for the person seeking another POV, just as I think your posts to me are also for the onlooker. We disagree and neither will change the others mind. Someone sent me the SId Roth commercial on your book. When the technique is fear, you just have to wonder.
This comment IS to you Michael: About contacting Andrew, you have said that. If I were writing a book, which I am, and I wanted to fact check, I would DOG someone till I got the answer. I would also back it up with other experts in the field. When you wrote your book, even Peter Gomes was alive. Dr. Ralph Blair is intensely approachable. I had four one on one times with him in three days. Justin Lee is right up the road from you. Now that you have published this book, we all see your heart on this one. All of us realize that you are entrenched and don’t really want to see what God is doing in this community. If you had, you would have done the research with far less of a blind eye. As for Exodus, you spoke when they were still doing the hardline–even they are shifting because they KNOW they old message is not the truth.
And yes, I will do what I can to discredit your book. The LORD and I are doing just fine. And I am very accountable to Him. Maybe we will meet face to face in Sacto. I don’t imagine influencing you at all; your readers tho, amongst them–yes.
Kathy,
God willing, we will be having another God Has a Better Way event on August 27th in conjunction with the Pride Charlotte event, so feel free to come and meet me then.
As for the Sid Roth commercial, you can take that up with Sid’s ministry, which produced it.
As for my contacting Andrew, I pressed two of his colleagues to put us in touch and then reached out to him directly on two more occasions, and beyond that, I will not make a nuisance of myself. But I use that as an example because you wrote about that falsely in your review and yet had the audacity to post it — falsehoods and all — on a Christian book website. As for Dr. Blair, I read his material online and watched Justin Lee’s videos online, and God knows how often I have sought Him on this with tears, asking Him if there’s anything on any level that I’m not seeing.
I pray that you would do the same and come down from your high horse of judgmentalism. Even if this, your latest post, you pour out your judgments again, even claiming to know me and things about others better than I or they do. May the Lord help you to see! The bottom line is that God indeed has a better way.
And as far as being able to influence you, I have hope for that as well, in Jesus’ name and by His Spirit and Word. All things are possible with Him.
Would love to be in Charlotte, I assume GCN will have a booth tho. Go visit them. I have federal jury duty that week. Maybe next year. That Pride is on my wish list to specifically counter your message. No surprise there. Did you read my post on SFpride this year. This is what I do at Pride events. http://canyonwalkerconnections.com/2011/07/05/in-the-center-of-his-will-at-civic-center-sf-gay-pride/ and I actually do believe I am doing His will. I see you are talking about NY marriage today. I am going to be writing about it. Check it out later.
Wonder if we were to back up this conversation to where God created us. In the first creation story, brewing and breathing into us…. into the image of God’s likeness, both male and female – not distinct but a fluid unison of divinity brought into existence along with all other creatures. Perhaps, if we were to stop the “chain of being” premise in our thinking we would begin to see ourselves and each other as God intended? Not as male/female. Not as gay/straight but a harmony of both, fused together into an eternal dance with each other and the spirit?
Perhaps it is time to go after the real culprit in all of this binary thinking? After all, how big is God? Who, after all, is creating here? Us or God?
Kathy,
By all means, come to Charlotte and oppose our message, which is this: God deeply loves LGBT people, and Jesus shed the same blood for them as He did for heterosexuals. Through the cross, God offers complete forgiveness of sin and the power to live above sin, and by His grace and the help of His Spirit, we can live in conformity to His Word.
Feel free and oppose that message, but you won’t be opposing me. You’ll be opposing the Lord and His gospel.
You should also know that I have reached out to the local “gay Christian” community, inviting them personally to join me for a forum at our church to discuss “Can you be gay and Christian,” assuring them of equal time and guaranteeing that there would be no gay bashing allowed. I invited their straight allies too, but they chose to boycott the event (back in 2008). I also shared a meal with local “gay Christian” leaders before a forum we all participated in at a local college and then reached out to a local lesbian leader (who identifies as Christian) after the God Has a Better Way event in 2009, exchanging emails and having lunch together. In fact, when she and her lesbian friends attended our God Has a Better Way rally, they went over to some of our percussion instruments and started to play, and we were glad to have them there with us, asking the Holy Spirit to touch them. After the event, the lesbian woman I just spoke of said to me that being in our midst, she recognized what we were doing was “radical love.” It is that same love that compels me to oppose LGBTQ activism and a queering of the Bible.
I am praying for you, Kathy!
HiHopes,
Are you saying that God is or is not guilty of ordaining the male-female distinctives as part of His divine order?
We completely agree on this ” God deeply loves LGBT people, and Jesus shed the same blood for them as He did for heterosexuals. Through the cross, God offers complete forgiveness of sin and the power to live above sin, and by His grace and the help of His Spirit, we can live in conformity to His Word.” How we each navigate those last few words is the difference. You do your thing and I will do mine–we both say God directs, so in Him we each stay for direction. Thanks for the prayers Michael and I assume you do pray God’s will, not yours.
Kathy,
We all know Jesus’ picture is not on the money we use daily. If I need or want more money than comes my way by work and/or appointment, since Jesus indicated rendering to Ceasar what is His, isn’t there lots more available for the having in most banks? Or, is this notion coming from somewhere and taking me somewhere I should not go as a believer in what is written in the ‘Word of God?’.
Sorry Jabez, not into riddles. The ministry I work in is clearly laid out. You have a question related to it ask. And do so on my blog; it is easier to point there. Going for a hike seems a better use of my next hour.
Kathy,
Everyone knows the whole notion of having parents too is becoming outdated and unfashionable. Soon the enlightenment of child self raising will be vogue.
Hey Jabez, this is what I posted on my FB wall directly referring to you “People that ask me “cleverly couched questions” intended to entrap me actually sound quite stupid to me. You got a question, just ask it and don’t slowly weave the intricate nets you are slipping beneath my feet and waiting for the exact moment to yank on. Although I love games, this is one that bores me and I walk away.” Bye.
@jabez — I take it you believe what is written in the Bible. The question is, which version? Which translation? Just looking at 1 Cor 6:9 — the current NIV translates “Arsenokoitai” as “homosexual” or “men who lie with men”, the King James Bible translates the same word as “abusers of themselves with mankind”, and when Martin Luther translated the verse into German he used what we would call “pedophile” today. Four different interpretations of the same word. Which one is right? The Greek “Arsenokoitai” is made up of two parts: “arsen” means “man”; “koitai” means “beds.” Literally it could be translated as male beds, or man- bedders. The meaning is completely unknown to us as the only places in the Bible it appears is in a list (this verse and the one in Timothy), and there is no context. In other Greek literature where there is context to help interpret the word, it is used 2 different ways. 1) “pederast”, a corruptor of boys ( this ties directly to Luther’s translation of the word), and 2) it is used to descibe husbands who practice anal intercourse with their wives (which would be heterosexual in nature). Which translation do we believe? For me, I’d rather trust the original Greek, as that was what was inspired. Translations can, and probably have been, subject to err by the biases of the translators. Translations of translations of translations are particualarly prone to errors. Ever play the game telephone? Same premise.
Tim, there’s really not much debate about this on a serious, scholarly level, as a check of all standard lexicons of ancient and NT Greek will indicate. Many gay scholars concur with this as well. In short, throughout the entire Bible, there is only one kind of sexual activity blessed and sanctioned by God, and that is in the context of male-female union in marriage. Everything else is a form of sexual immorality.
As for the specific Greek word you reference, see my lecture here, where I even cite the Online Gay and Lesbian Encyclopedia for support: http://coalitionofconscience.askdrbrown.org/resources/2007_lecture_monday.html.
I’m sorry… is there something false in what I said above? We may not come to the same conclusions, but please point out where I wrote something false.
Oh, and the ONLY reference I made to marriage was something between husbands and wives, so I’m not sure why you brought that up. Are you saying there is only ONE acceptable way for married men and women to enjoy sexual relations with each other, and all other expressions, even within their marriage, is sinful? Then surely the sixth century definition of “Arsenokoitai” works with that, does it not?
Ok, time out!! I have to say something about the whole – one man, one woman thing.
How many times in the bible have we seen one man with 500 wives or concubines, etc??? Plus David and Jonathan admitted that their love together was greater than that of a woman. We could go at this all day picking scripture after scripture and picking parts of the bible and ramming the information down people’s throats.
If you would like to look at the bible as a WHOLE then good luck following everything that is written. It is IMPOSSIBLE for us to do so. That is exactly why Jesus is in our lives. He was the only one that was perfect and without blemish. If you are looking at the New Testament and believe that grace is what separates us from the OT, then consider the commandments we now have. “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself.” We are given a commandment to LOVE not CHANGE. VERY big difference in my eyes. JESUS is the one who directs people’s lives and if that goes against what Mr. Brown thinks (or anyone else), then that is just too bad. But people do NOT have to CHANGE in order to RECEIVE His UNCONDITIONAL LOVE. It is already a free gift and where Christ leads them is HIS choice. Not ours. Not mine, not anyone’s. If someone believes they have a purpose and are gay and want to tell others about His love, then THAT is what they should do.
Tim, perhaps I misunderstood you, but it appeared you were saying we don’t really know what the Greek word meant. Wasn’t that the point you were making? As for my emphasis on male-female union in marriage, I was underscoring the biblical pattern, aside from the Greek word in question.
Sarah, when the Bible speaks of a king with multiple wives and concubines, it is in a negative, not positive context. As for David and Jonathan — please! They were wonderful, close friends, and there’s no sexual language used in their relationship. And David was a healthy heterosexual. In fact, his lust for a beautiful woman got him in big trouble.
This is not a matter of picking and choosing what we believe. It is matter of taking God’s Word seriously, so start in Genesis 1 and see what God intended for His creation.
As for God’s unconditional love, I have a statement and a question. First, the statement: God’s unconditional love changes us radically, and if we show no evidence of deep and lasting change, we have not really encountered His love. Second, the question: Do you believe that God will show unconditional love to a man who leaves his wife and kids in order to live with another woman, or will He call on that person to repent?
I look forward to hearing your answer to this, and I remind that the same Jesus who said, “I do not condemn you” also said, “Go and sin no more.” We do well to take ALL His words seriously.
Tim,
It is clear in the Greek, and in the 66 “books” found Bible bound of similar reference to this matter as well, that what Paul does take to task about human sexuality is of the same principle found in Levt. 18 & 20. This section of the Bible on sexuality and the people of God was his own understanding, as was known from his well tutored Biblical foundation personal history set among those of the People of the Book of the Chosen Nation in the First Century, and from a direct revelation of Jesus. Biblical holiness, as a unique state of being–for being identified as useful as set apart for God’s work for doing his ministry–is founded in this foundational section given to Moses as being ascribed to the Lord himself. Holiness is defined on God’s terms partly on the subject you raised as applied to God’s own, throughout time. What is given in these sections of Leviticus for believers’ standards is about sexual blessing founded in man/woman faithful marriage relationship alone. So the matter you raised from Paul’s citation is about God’s own declared life principles in the area of sexual faithfulness, which Paul knew from his lifetime of an alike aquaintance, not as somehow set by our own likes and dislikes of preference or pleasure for an individual life interpretation (not for a lifestyle pursuit by whatever is vogue in changing society).
The New Covenant people of God of the time of the penning of what you have isolated as a Greek word were largely converted to faith by the Apostles as were sent forth from among the Jewish people as being Christ’s own disciples going into the Nations. There they indeed also opposed the relative standards of various cultures and so when not honoring the blessed arena of marriage and family. Even in the areas of man woman relationships, and the government of the church, the Apostles had much directly related Jesus’ guidance to give. Church gatherings became holy gatherings by the ways, gifts, and standards of Jesus Christ, quoted in the New Testament life applications of His reflected teaching; this was after the receipt of direct faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ by the writers themselves of the New Testament. Read Jude or II Peter if you think Paul’s attitude and teaching on homosexuality is somehow isolated teaching on the matter you responded to me about.
Paul, the writer of your very isolated word reference, as was removed from its context, as a former Pharisee and a still observant first century Jew–tbeing the Apostle directly chosen by a personal appearance of Jesus after the resurrection and sent to go forth for church planting missions into the pagan Nations in Acts–declared newly converted Gentile believers both free, and of a necessary obedience to what Jesus taught. Jesus upheld keeping certain requirements stated to Moses’ people in the early covenant revelation to them (then beginning to pass) by the coming of the New Covenant carried to all receiving the Gospel in the Nations. Such details of Jesus’ declared teaching were passed on to Paul for service to God, devotion to God’s work, and to the family through the blessing of marriage, as well as to the principled and free family of God. Paul, as one so cast to the road while headed to Damascus, found Jesus as the all at once suddenly discovered One: an interrupting, overpowering, and humbling “Lord”. Jesus blinded him in this encounter, when knocked to the ground by Jesus as Paul was journeying on that road.
His next step was to go to professed believers in Jesus in Damascus as Jesus instructed him. He was guided to Damascus, and in humility yielded before those serving God in Christ where Christ then removed scales from his sight. Why was it so complicated, getting through to Paul with the Message of Jesus as Lord, Messiah, and standard bearer? Going strongly with one hate-filled intention to Damascus to persecute new believers in Jesus, why was his life suddenly interrupted and overpowered for an essential change in purpose? How would Jesus later rock the known Roman Empire areas of settlement and government through Paul’s actions and essential message thereafter (among the same empire which upheld the relative belief that its own emperor was a God)?
Paul was of the Pharisees which had opposed Jesus to his face; Paul became the writer and teacher of the Gentile churches newly founded among the Nations. It is HIS INSTRUCTION FROM JESUS YOU ARE QUARRELING WITH, as founded first in law by God among his chosen Nation. Paul was a Pharisee, of the group which opposed Jesus. Like you, he first had another notion of what was good and what was evil, and that was not about what Jesus taught and lived on the matter we are discussing here.
“The fundamental difference which quickly arose between our Lord and the scribes and Pharisees was the definition of holiness. The scribes and Pharisees had a distorted perception of the Old Testament definition of holiness, which to them was attained by human effort, by avoiding external ceremonial defilement and by observing the prescribed rituals of the Law of Moses. Thus, they concluded that Jesus, who mingled with sinners, who touched lepers, and who challenged their interpretation of the Law, could only be a sinner, operating in the power of Beelzebub. Ultimately, playing their version of holiness and their interpretation of the Old Testament Scriptures to their ultimate conclusion, they found Him worthy of death.” –Bob Deffinbaugh. Yet the New Testament says that they were blind in their own conceit and blind guide selves, far from the intentions of God revealed in Jesus Christ. Do you want to both claim Jesus, and ignore his teaching and standards?
The fundamental difference which quickly arose between our Lord and the scribes and Pharisees was about the complete heart understanding of godliness and holiness being centered around how the chosen One cared, served, and loved indeed. Jesus, as God’s only begotten Son, and co-creator of the world and the heavens, and all in them, inherently knew the difference between human understanding, its vain pursuit, self righteousness and insistence, and His own life establishment of eternal truth and grace. If he interrupted Paul, as a zealous Pharisee, after Jesus death and resurrection, what will he interrupt of our own self preoccupations? The person who led me to Jesus in 1970 was a university student in Illinois who was about to blow his brains out with a pistol. When he put the gun to his head, the room filled with light, Jesus appeared, and interrupted his intentions. He was in despair over being a believer, and having a homosexual history. Jesus reached into his very being to show him the Way. He then came to Colorado that summer, and witnessed about the fulfillment of prophecy in the Bible in modern day Israel, and that Jesus was the anointed One sent by Father God. This led me to read Jesus’ own claims and words in Matthew and John and to inquire directly of Jesus if He was ‘really real”. I did, and discovered through that encounter that He was indeed the Son of the Living God. He is not the God of the pleasure principle, He is the God of care, agape love, and new life. He is the God of order, not chaos. He made man and woman, and placed them as one family.
We are discussing here Jesus Christ’s own standards, as creator and Lord, not the feeling states of anyone not oriented toward the liberating word and clear instruction of the creator-lord-kinsman redeemer sent into this world as of equal consequence. Sin is sin first in one’s heart. If Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees ‘blind guides’, and confronted them for their ignorance and selfishness, how then will he treat anyone who wishes their own way of pleasure seeking to be the way of living???
Tenach Priests were held to certain standards regarding conducting Temple worship and sacrifices for God’s own reasons. ““I am the LORD, who sanctifies you’ (21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32). This expression occurs elsewhere only in Leviticus 20:8…. And the Lord said to Moses…” is clear enough as to the matter we are discussing. We cannot sanctify ourselves, especially by living in rebellion to the standards of God in Christ. Those as to sexuality are stated in Levt. 18 & 20; so, read up, and ask Jesus about the matter you have placed before me. Ask Him what does and does not carry forward from the cultic ritual of the law of Moses given the chosen Nation as was also understood by Paul and shared in his letters. We are then privy to the very instruction of Jesus Christ himself on this matter. We do not have to go our own way; we can chose His Way, but not of our own conceit, ignorance, or self centeredness. He, not we, is the standard bearer, the chosen One, and the Holy Lord God’s Son. Let us hear Him on this matter, by looking into his word.
When Michael Brown writes to you he does so out of knowing Jesus, trusting His word, and His Life as the Life among lives which leads to eternal life. He is writing you because of the love of God sent into this world by Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son. Jesus died for you, Michael, me, and others. Repentance, or changing our minds and life direction is empowered by a relationship with living and loving Jesus Christ, not by carnal pursuits.
Michael Brown: “What was the purpose of this [the pedophile] chapter? It was to expose the weakness of these arguments, the very arguments used by gay activists to prove the rightness and acceptability of homosexual practice.”
Really? Couldn’t we put Christianity to the same test?
“1) Pedophilia is innate and immutable.”
I’ve heard a lot of Christians claim that, deep down, we all know Christianity is the truth and that it is through faith that we come to know ourselves. And I have read that scientists believe that faith might actually be genetic
“2) Pederasty is richly attested in many different cultures throughout history.”
Christianity has been richly attested in many different cultures throughout its history.
“3) The claim that adult-child sexual relationships cause harm is greatly overstated and often completely inaccurate.”
Christians would claim that the harm done by Christians have been greatly exaggerated. Sure there were the Crusades, and the Inquisition, and the burning of women falsely accused of being witches, the persecution of scientists like Galileo, and most recently the terrorist attack in Norway killing over 90. But it’s not like all Christians are that way, right?
“4) Consensual adult-child sex can actually be beneficial to the child.”
Christians would say that consensual acceptance of Christian tenants is beneficial to converts, many of whom are quite young. Ever see Jesus Camp?
“5) Pederasty should not be classified as a mental disorder, since it does not cause distress to the pederast to have these desires and since the pederast can function as a normal, contributing member of society.”
Christians would argue that Christian faith should not be classified as a mental disorder, even though many Christians profess to believe fantastical things one might associate with advanced psychosis–babies being born of virgins, women being fashioned out of the body parts of men, dead men coming back to life–because Christians are often happy with their beliefs and can function as normal, contributing members of society.
“6) Many of the illustrious homosexuals of the past were actually pedophiles.”
Many of the illustrious Christians of the past and present were/are pedophiles.
“7) People are against intergenerational intimacy because of antiquated social standards and puritanical sexual phobias.”
Christians would say that many are against them because of antiquated “pagan” beliefs. What’s all this Earth Day business but a return to pre-Christian nature religions, right?
“8) This is all about love and equality and liberation.”
Yeah, many Christians would say that about Christianity.
It seems that by Michael Brown’s logic, one can dismiss the advocacy of just about anything if one can make a superficial comparison of that advocacy to his argument for the acceptance of pedophilia.
I suspect that Michael Brown’s real motive–conscious or unconscious–in bringing up pedophilia was to associate pedophilia with homosexuality in the minds’ of his readers. And those of us who have read our Shakespeare know that disclaimers shouldn’t always be taken at face value. “I have come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.”
For starters…. let me see if I understand the statement correctly…
Are you saying that someone cannot experience the Unconditional love of Christ if we do not change? Are you referring to all people or just “gay” people? I am sorry for seeming arrogant, but I honestly am a bit confused by where you are going by your statement. How can you look into someone’s heart and claim they haven’t received deep and lasting change in their life? This is simply something you cannot tell just by looking at a person and claiming because they are “gay” or “homosexual” Christ hasn’t worked in their life according to HIS will.
I am sorry, but I must disagree with you on who has encountered His love and who has not. I certainly have, and yes, I am a lesbian. Christ has shown me more things in the past 3 years than He has my entire life ( I am now 33). In the past 3 years, I gave up and said- Ok Lord, there is a REASON I am gay, I have a purpose and I surrender to YOUR WILL. Believe it or not, I STOPPED praying to be “straight” and THAT is when I noticed the significant change in my life. I fervently WANTED to change and in 10 years, it didn’t happen.
For some reason your comment leads me to believe that you are spreading a message you MUST CHANGE before you can receive Jesus’ UNCONDITIONAL LOVE. When you place a “must change” policy before approaching the cross, it then appears that you are portraying His love to be CONDITIONAL. I am not saying that is where your heart is, but is sure gives the appearance that is where it is. I’m sorry, but I am strong enough in my relationship with Christ to know, this just simply isn’t true. Us humans attach conditions to God’s love, not Him.
I believe I have a purpose, just as you, Kathy and anyone else who has commented here believes they have. I stopped hating myself and starting seeing myself through Jesus’ eyes.
I am sorry, but I refuse to be told I am not worthy to have a relationship with my Savior unless I change. I will NOT allowing anyone to keep me from the cross again. I have traveled that road and little did I know, I didn’t have to.
I cannot tell what change has taken place in your life anymore than you can tell what has taken place in mine.
And as far as your question- Are you asking me if adultery is wrong? What in the world does this have to do with homosexuality? I am confused how my life has anything to do with a straight man, leaving his wife and kids and committing adultery? So sorry, but I am missing the connection there.
Gary,
I am sure Michael Brown will reply to you, but I can’t have helped but have noticed that you are comparing what may be sometimes found in animal pen yards as the byproduct of their occupancy with the kind of interchanges that fellow fruit growers may enjoy around supper tables by sharing the best of their bounty. Your thought development becomes ludicrous and humorous, just by word associations, all at once. But, unfortunately, it suffers from calling a spade a gambling instrument held close to someone’s chest, not a spade passed around from one to another as one develops blisters from its necessary use to get the job done. Someone has to remove what builds up in those animal pen yards.
Sarah,
I’m talking about all people, gay, straight, or something else. God’s Word is totally clear from beginning to end. He requires holiness of His people. He requires repentance — which means change. Jesus called for repentance constantly, and God’s love calls us out of our sin and into His holiness. If we refuse to change, we refuse His love.
So, do you accept God’s Word – the Bible — as really being God’s Word? Let’s start there. If so, then you must recognize that there is no such thing as “unconditional love” without a call to turn away from our sins and turn to the Lord. I can interact with you better if you let me know if you believe that God’s Word has absolute authority in your life.
Gary, I’m assuming you were serious about this post, in which case I feel bad that you took the time to write it.
First, the purpose of the chapter was exactly what I stated it was. I’m the one who wrote it and I can tell you exactly why I wrote it. I can just as well claim that the reason you posted here is because you want people to get to know you and you will soon reveal your identity here and then run for president. A statement like that is just as ridiculous as your claim that, “I suspect that Michael Brown’s real motive–conscious or unconscious–in bringing up pedophilia was to associate pedophilia with homosexuality in the minds’ of his readers.”
Totally false, Gary, plain and simple. Had I wanted to do that, I would have written an entirely different chapter, but that was not my purpose. The fact is as I studied these issues, I was struck by the information presented in the chapter, and when I submitted it to other philosophers and lawyers and others with relevant scientific or counseling background, they agreed with thesis of the chapter. You had best deal with the substance of what I wrote as opposed to create non-existent motives out of thin air.
You argue: “Couldn’t we put Christianity to the same test?” Of course not! Let’s start with your very first point:
“1) Pedophilia is innate and immutable.”
You wrote: “I’ve heard a lot of Christians claim that, deep down, we all know Christianity is the truth and that it is through faith that we come to know ourselves. And I have read that scientists believe that faith might actually be genetic.”
To the contrary, there are billions of people around the world born Hindu or Buddhist or Muslim or Jewish, and they live and die their entire lives without becoming Christian, while the New Testament clearly teaches that someone must be “born again” to become a true Christian, and throughout the NT, there are warnings about the possibility of leaving the faith. What is innate, according to Christianity, is that we are born with a propensity to sin and to go against God!
Enough said. Your whole argument – as silly as it is – breaks down before it starts, whereas the points I presented, which have not been seriously challenged to date, are factual and logical. Try dealing with the actual points rather than ascribing false motives to me. That way we can have constructive interaction.
Sarah,
I hope you spot this post too before responding to my previous post. I want to make two things perfectly clear: First, do not change first in order to receive God’s unconditional love. Rather, His unconditional love changes us — changes us from our sin into His image. If we do not change, we have not truly received His love.
Second, He requires holiness of us, not heterosexuality. I have friends who still have same-sex attractions but they recognize that it is sinful to act on them, just as it is sinful for a single heterosexual to act on their opposite-sex attractions. So, if you tell me that you have a wonderful relationship with Jesus as a celibate, same-sex attracted woman who renounces those attractions and who will not act on them, then I honor and commend you for doing what is right in God’s sight. If you tell me that you are actively living as a lesbian and as a follower of Jesus at the same time, then you are deceiving yourself, and God’s love is calling you to repentance and change.
It is comforting to know that there are countless glbt Christians who have full open healthy relationships with God and the Spirit and follow Jesus and are still same sex attracted and “acting on it.” I know all three of the people personally (and IN PERSON) you are responding to Michael. It is also comforting to know that God does not need Brown’s permission or proof texting to have relationship with His glbt children.
I read this sentence “If we do not change, we have not truly received His love.” and it makes me so sad that you believe that . Free people free people–you hold them in your bondage Michael. You need to seek out the ex gay leaders who are changing views currently. The ex pres of the major one? He ran the residency program for over ten years. I think he might well know better than you Michael. He saw people living as heterosexuals, making choices to be celibate, people in denial and people living in shame from others. Now, having been to two glbt Christian conferences, he is changed and speaking out. The house of prooftexting will come tumbling down when God’s spirit in glbt’s confounds the arrogant who declare they KNOW. Your experience with glbt is minimal by my standards and your contact with the leaders is nil by my standards. And yes, I am measuring that. Your book is based in fear. Did not see love or compassion. I was hoping to, did not see it. To Gary , Sarah and Tim—I think you are all wonderful and see Jesus in ALL of you. And more importantly God it crazy about you just the way you are. He will change what He sees fit to change in you and your sexual orientation is not on the list. Each of you has begged him and bargained and now reconciled. Move on to holiness in Him which I know you each do. Back to my next post which will drive Brown and the like batty–“Jesus Left Room for Same Sex Marriage and NY State Moved in | Mazel Tov” or something like that.
Kathy, we don’t block your posts here since they do not violate policy (although you often cross the lines of personal accusation, but we’re being gracious to you; see below), and since your posts continue to expose the serious deception you are walking in. You wrote, “I read this sentence ‘If we do not change, we have not truly received His love.’ and it makes me so sad that you believe that . Free people free people–you hold them in your bondage Michael.”
Kathy, I believe Jesus and His Word! I believe in the liberating, transforming power of the gospel! I believe God! Apparently, you choose to ignore wonderful, liberating verses like these: “Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor practicing homosexuals nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” (1Co 6:9-11)
You wrote, “The house of prooftexting will come tumbling down when God’s spirit in glbt’s confounds the arrogant who declare they KNOW.” In other words, experience trumps truth. That is the path to error and deception, and you are only hurting those who you claim to love. I do pray that God will grant you repentance and revelation so that you can bring people into true liberty — in this world and the world to come.
So, you go ahead and follow the words and feelings of people. I will follow our good Lord and His unchanging Word. “Let God be true, and every human being a liar. As it is written: ‘So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge.'” (Rom 3:4)
One final exhortation to you, though: In fairness to others, whom we hold to our guidelines, if you want to continue to post here, then you’ll have to drop the personal accusations (such as calling me or other arrogant or claiming that I wrote in fear, etc.). I could care less about people slandering me for my convictions. Jesus told us to expect that. But we don’t allow personal attacks in this forum, and so, as much as I believe you’re doing us a real service by posting such blatant error for all to see, you’ll have to step higher to continue to post here. I trust you’ll be able to do so. Thanks!
I would say it is FAR MORE egregious to call unclean what Jesus has called clean and to doubt people’s status with God than to call you arrogant. You are messing with eternity, I am labeling your behavior.
The post title includes my name and you constantly call what I say false and me deceived. Is that any less attacking than “arrogant”?
You don’t need to answer, surely you have a show to ready and I have a post to edit.
Kathy, you are the one calling clean what the Word calls unclean — and I’m talking about same-sex activity of any kind. And God is the judge of each individual, which is why I share His Words here, which you choose to reject or twist.
Yes, I call what you write false. That is not a personal attack. It is a judgment on your words. And yes, it is deception to claim that God means something other than what He plainly says. I do not judge your motives. I am simply interacting with the erroneous statements you make here so as help those seeking truth.
I will continue to pray for you, as I am even now.
I’ll just step in here for a moment and comment on one thing .. and that is your chapter on pedophilia. If you have researched this as long as I have I am sure you know by now that many thoughtless Christians have painted some very bad (and even slanderous) pictures of gay and lesbian people including linking them to pedophilia. So although you make multiple disclaimers in this chapter it seems to me that you certainly picked a sore point from which to draw comparisons. If nothing else you might consider how the gay or lesbian person who has already been wrongly accused of such things is going to receive such a comparison.
Additionally I might add that you could use your pedophile analogy to cover just about anything .. divorce .. sex outside of marriage .. unfaithfulness in marriage .. and .. years ago .. affirmation of slavery .. affirmation of laws that disallowed interracial marriage and so forth. Obviously those last two would not be very positive. In case you are wondering what my point is.. it is simply this : Using outrageous behavior that harms children as an argument against something you disagree with is IMO a rather lousy way to make a point. It is extremely offensive and if you are trying to reach people you might start by not insulting them. I have a feeling that if .. in your ministry .. you used this analogy in a sermon against sex outside of marriage or remarriage after divorce or some of the other things I listed you might find you have a very angry congregation on your hands. … and rightfully so. Stating what you believe the bible says is one thing. using examples that could easily be taken as the vilifying or slandering others is another. Again .. if you think the pedophile example is fine .. then use it all the time .. use it against abortion .. divorce .. remarriage .. sex before marriage .. and so forth. Jesus had a way with words that, hopefully, we are all trying to emulate. .. Your pedophile chapter is not IMHO one of those ways. ( I might also add that the bible puts slander on the same level as sexual immorality … see Romans 1:30, I Cor 5:11, I Cor 6:10. If we are to flee sexual immorality I would certainly think that we would flee any appearance of slander as well)
I will say finally that I know Kathy and have sat in on several of her sessions. Though we are on a different side of the fence on some issues I respect her work , her love for Christ, and the time and effort she puts into caring about the gay community. I am convinced that God is doing a lot of needed healing through her mininstry. I will also say that it seems that much of what I am seeing here is from a black and white perspective. However I do not see this as a black and white issue because God looks at everything … not just the one thing we disagree on. The only white knight here is Christ. The truth is that the church has failed here in many ways .. at times causing almost irreparable harm to many who are gay including some of its own (gay) members. This harm both drives people out of the church and keeps others from entering. In short there are many wrongs here .. some of which have kept people from the very salvation that Christ shed his blood for. You might consider this larger picture as you move forward in this.
Dave
“Gary, I’m assuming you were serious about this post, in which case I feel bad that you took the time to write it.”
And I feel bad for you because you didn’t understand what I was getting at even though it was so obvious.
“First, the purpose of the chapter was exactly what I stated it was. I’m the one who wrote it and I can tell you exactly why I wrote it. I can just as well claim that the reason you posted here is because you want people to get to know you and you will soon reveal your identity here and then run for president.”
You can claim whatever you wish. Your claim is either be true or false. In this case, false.
“A statement like that is just as ridiculous as your claim that, ‘I suspect that Michael Brown’s real motive–conscious or unconscious–in bringing up pedophilia was to associate pedophilia with homosexuality in the minds’ of his readers.’”
Not hardly. You see, I’m not running for president. I’ve not claimed that I aim to run for president. And my statements here would not in any way help me if I did. I don’t have an exploratory committee. I’m not collecting campaign donations. But you, on the other hand, are running a campaign against gay rights. And your associates in that fight, whom you have described as “venerable”, have claimed the advancement of gay rights will lead to the acceptance of incest, pedophilia and bestiality. They also compare homosexuality to those things. I’m sure you know this. And yet you wrote your little gratuitous inflammatory chapter and included it in your book.
“Totally false, Gary, plain and simple. Had I wanted to do that, I would have written an entirely different chapter, but that was not my purpose.”
So you claim. But as I pointed out, disclaimers are often suspicious. Attacks are often sly.
“The fact is as I studied these issues, I was struck by the information presented in the chapter, and when I submitted it to other philosophers and lawyers and others with relevant scientific or counseling background, they agreed with thesis of the chapter.”
This, just as your repeated claims of being a Biblical scholar, is an appeal to authority, which is a logical fallacy. Who are these philosophers and lawyers? What do they know? Why should we take them seriously? Surely not simply because you refer to them as philosophers and lawyers.
“You had best deal with the substance of what I wrote as opposed to create non-existent motives out of thin air.”
I’ve not created anything out of thin air. I’ve seen your videos. I’ve read some of your posts. I’ve visited your Facebook page. When you think you’re talking to your amen corner, you talk about gay people as if they are an invading army to be feared. You talk about “spiritual wars” being waged against them. And you have high praise for the likes of Focus on the Family and the American Family Association. I listen to what Bryan Fischer has to say about LGBT people almost daily. It’s not kind. And Bryan, for one, has came right out and claimed that gay people are more likely to molest children, and he is the face and the voice of the AFA ministry you claim is “venerable.” And before you accuse me of claiming you’re guilty by association, I want to point out that you’re not just in the same room with these people, you are unreservedly endorsing them.
“You argue: ‘Couldn’t we put Christianity to the same test?’ Of course not! Let’s start with your very first point:
“‘1) Pedophilia is innate and immutable.’
“You wrote: ‘I’ve heard a lot of Christians claim that, deep down, we all know Christianity is the truth and that it is through faith that we come to know ourselves. And I have read that scientists believe that faith might actually be genetic.’
“To the contrary, there are billions of people around the world born Hindu or Buddhist or Muslim or Jewish, and they live and die their entire lives without becoming Christian, while the New Testament clearly teaches that someone must be ‘born again’ to become a true Christian, and throughout the NT, there are warnings about the possibility of leaving the faith. What is innate, according to Christianity, is that we are born with a propensity to sin and to go against God!”
That isn’t a refutation of what I wrote. I never said that everyone in the world is Christian or would become Christian. I said many Christians claim that, deep down, we all know that Christianity is the truth. Ah, how many times have I heard Christians claim “The kingdom of heaven is within you”? That may clash with your particular theology or not, Michael Brown, but many Christians do claim that, and I’ve heard them. I never said it was true, btw, but some Christians do claim this. And I’ve also read articles about scientists who are looking for genetic explanations for faith. So yes, one could claim that Christians (at least some) believe their faith is innate, and one could claim that some scientists believe faith may be innate. So yes, there is a similarity between the advocacy of Christianity and the advocacy of pedophilia as you describe it.
“Enough said. Your whole argument – as silly as it is – breaks down before it starts, whereas the points I presented, which have not been seriously challenged to date, are factual and logical.”
I‘m sure you would love to think that, but what you fail to realize is that the supposed silliness of the comparison I made demonstrates the silliness of your own comparison. You see, despite your alleged help from philosophers and lawyers, you made a glaring rookie mistake. In formal debating circles, you created what is often referred to as a straw dog or a straw man argument. You created a flimsy and rather easily refutable argument for the acceptance of pedophilia and then claimed that there’s not much difference between what gay rights proponents are advocating and what your imagined pedophiles are proposing. If you want to refute the arguments for gay rights, stick with the arguments for gay rights.
It is absurd to say that there is no difference between a pedophile claiming that they have consensual sex with a child and an LGBT person claiming that their relationship with an adult is consensual. A pedophile can claim whatever he/she wishes, but that doesn’t make it true. A child can’t consent because children lack the experience and knowledge to make an informed decision. The same can not be said of an adult unless that adult has been incapacitated in some way. Your comparison here is as stupid as claiming there is no difference between a legal contract signed by an adult and one signed by a child. And just because you can find some yahoo lawyer willing to claim both documents carry equal weight, that doesn’t mean the argument is valid.
Your claim that adult LGBT people proclaiming their relationships are good for them is the same thing as a pedophile claiming that sex with a child is good for the child is also ridiculous. I have no way of knowing if molestation is traumatic for all children who experience it, but the fact is children are easily manipulated and adults can act selfishly, either consciously or subconsciously. And we know that molestation is very harmful to a large number of children even if we’re unable to state with certainty that it’s harmful to all. So there is reason enough to try to prevent adults from engaging in sex with children. Adults, on the other hand, are and should be free to decide for themselves what is best for them, and they should be allowed to engage in consensual sexual activity with other adults.
Your aside about how some of the same psychologists who argued to declassify homosexuality as a mental illness also argued that pedophilia isn’t a disease is offensive and absurd. The fact is, the declassification didn’t depend on the opinions of a few rogue voices. Virtually the entire medical establishment has accepted that homosexuality is not a disease. There will always be rogue voices going against the trend. That’s how science operates. Nothing is ever truly settled, and science is supposed to be open to reexamining an issue if someone can make a case for doing so. So you have individual scientists who make all kinds of claims, but just because you have a few researchers claiming that battery acid is good for you doesn’t mean that lay people should dismiss medical science and believe whatever the want. I hardly think that would be good advice.
“Try dealing with the actual points rather than ascribing false motives to me. That way we can have constructive interaction.”
I can say the same to you, Michael Brown. You want to talk about gay rights, then stop talking about pedophilia. It’s apples and oranges. Just like it’s apples and oranges to talk about pedophilia and Christianity.
And if you don’t want people drawing the wrong conclusions about your motives, then perhaps you should do a better job of distancing yourself from arch homophobes who are doing exactly what you claim not to be doing.
Several times you have complained that gay Christians don’t denounce the ideas of gay theologians who you find offensive. Well, I don’t see you denouncing ideas and attitudes coming from the far right that I find offensive. In fact, I see you embracing those ideas, endorsing them, egging them on. And then you tell me to take you at face value? Why should I? Because you’re so trustworthy?
Kathy informed you of the way you’re book is being promoted by Sid Roth. That promotion is so over the top it’s like watching a trailer for a B horror movie. You’d think LGBT people were alien invaders intent on subjugating the human race after watching that ad. And this is your book Roth is promoting. These are your words he is trying to spread with terror and fear. Roth is saying that his audience should be afraid, very afraid of homosexuals. He is demonizing and marginalizing LGBT people, and he’s doing it in your name. And what did you have to say to Kathy when she brought this to your attention? You told her to take it up with Sid Roth. And you want me to take you at face value? Really?
Just a reminder: AND IT HAPPENS: If someone is turned over to a reprobate mind: THEY STAY REPROBATE and oppose THE TRUTH *and* GOD’S MORAL COMMANDMENTS.
Remember it. … and grace IS FOR THE REPENTANT. period.
Gary, I would be glad to interact with you if only there was a purpose, but when you claim to know what I mean and refuse to accept my own words, it’s quite futile. So, when you write, “You can claim whatever you wish. Your claim is either be true or false. In this case, false,” you’re shutting the door on the possibility of any constructive interaction whatsoever. You might was as well save the time in posting and just have a conversation with yourself, looking in the mirror, since you claim to be able to answer better for me than I can answer for myself.
As for distancing myself from “homophobes,” I’ve done that time and again, in public and in private and, in fact, throughout my book.
As for your issue with Sid Roth, yes, that’s between you and his ministry. We did the interview, which I stand behind, after which they recorded a skit, which I didn’t see it until someone told me about it on YouTube.
Enough said. When you’re ready to believe what I write as actually representing what I mean and believe and feel, great. Until then, I wish you well. If you want to post comments accusing me of lying, you’ll need to refrain (not to mention get a grip on reality).
“‘You can claim whatever you wish. Your claim is either be true or false. In this case, false,’ you’re shutting the door on the possibility of any constructive interaction whatsoever.”
That was in reference to your claim that I might be running for president and using this forum as a jumping off place. Was I supposed to take that seriously? In any event, what I stated was true. If I were you, I wouldn’t count on me running for president any time soon.
You say that you’ve distanced yourself from homophobes. Have you distanced yourself from Bryan Fischer? Let’s hear some concrete examples of you distancing yourself from homophobes.
“(not to mention get a grip on reality).”
What a snide remark coming from someone who is calling for civility and claiming to be picked on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SRLEF4kRAKQ
This is how your book is being promoted. Care to comment?
Gary, the comment I meant about you was intended to be a completely absurd and ridiculous “reading into” your motives, as if you could read into mine. What you say about me is as ludicrous. That being said, I certainly meant you no insult in a personal way, so if anything I said communicated that, please forgive me.
I’m in the midst of my radio show, trying to post during a break, but I trust you’ve read my statement of apology to the Charlotte gay and lesbian community, first delivered in 2006? That’s a good place to start.
As for Bryan Fischer, I haven’t followed his comments or writings, but feel free to ask me about specific statements.
The Gospel According to Romans: God is on our side. “No one is condemned who is in Christ Jesus. In Christ Jesus the life-giving rule of the Spirit has set you free from the rule of sin and death… If God is on our side, who is against us? He did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all; how can he fail to lavish every other gift upon us?” -Rom. 8:1-2, 31-32.
The bottom line: God loves and accepts ALL in Jesus, no one is judged or condemned. No one is “unclean” or “defiled” or “an abomination” in Christ Jesus; all are unconditionally justified, declared “not guilty” by a loving and holy God of truth by the deliberate and sacrificial act of the one righteous man, Jesus Christ. All are included in Jesus; no one is shut out of the family of God because of race or ethnic heritage, gender, sexual orientation, class or economic status, or other biological or cultural differences.
Those who insist on excluding people, based on human prejudices, institutionalized stereotypes, or misinformed (though popular) assumptions, from God’s unconditional, free and infinite grace have a distorted understanding of the gospel (it is the Good News of total and free salvation, after all) and are, unfortunately, closing the door of their heart to our Lord Jesus and his brothers and sisters. It is high time we all got on our knees and humbly asked God to forgive our obstinate and unmerciful hearts, to lead us to a Spirit-filled knowledge of his holy Word (the classic book of Romans is a good place to start) read through the lens of the love of Christ, and to earnestly start to practice what we claim Jesus preached about loving our neighbor as ourselves and treating the other as we want to be treated.To fail (oh, how we fail!) this is to betray the gospel and exclude ourselves from the feast of God’s wonderful, filling and satisfying feast of grace.
” ‘TODAY,’ therefore, as the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit) says – Today if you hear his voice, do not grow stubborn as in the rebellion, at the time of testing in the desert, where your ancestors tried me and tested my patience, though for forty years they witnessed all that I did for them. So I was outraged with that generation and said, Their hearts are forever astray; they are incapable of learning my ways; therefore I vowed in my anger, they shall never enter my rest.” -Hebrews 3:7-11. “That they may be one as we are one.” (John 17:22)
Tracey,
Just to be sure I understand you, do you agree with these words?
ESV Ephesians 5:1 Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children.
2 And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.
3 But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints.
4 Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving.
5 For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.
6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.
7 Therefore do not become partners with them;
8 for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light
9 (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true),
10 and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord.
11 Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.
(Eph 5:1-11 ESV)
Or how about these, from Jesus Himself?
27 “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 lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell.
30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.
(Mat 5:27-30 ESV)
Dave,
Thanks for your post. Have you read my book and the chapter in question? You surely don’t want to rely on what someone else says about it, right? It’s important you read everything in context and in the spirit in which it was written. I stand behind the chapter fully and without reserve.
With regard to Kathy, I’ve never met her (although I’ve attempted to), but she has deemed it her role to attack me and our work in the GLBT community for the last two years now. That’s between her and God, but I will expose the serious error of her use of Scripture, her misleading attacks on what I have written and said, and the fact that in the name of standing with “gay Christians,” she has fully embraced the goals of gay activism and downplayed GLBT sin. That’s why I pray for her!
Dr. Brown,
I certainly do agree with the texts you’ve provided, brother. I also agree with the Holy Spirit in Acts 10:15 as it applies to our tendency to reject others based on our inherited and ingrained cultural and religious prejudices, “But the voice spoke again: ‘Do not call something unclean if God has made it clean.’ ”
I also agree with the man from Galilee when he says, “Why do you fixate on the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye, with nary a thought for the plank lodged in your own eye? What gives you the right to say to your brother, ‘Let me take out the speck from your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own? You hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” (Matthew 7:3-5)
I also agree, though I do not perfectly exemplify, the sentiments of St. Paul, when he urges both Jewish and Gentile converts to the new way in Jesus, “Don’t just pretend to love others. Really love them. Hate what is wrong. Hold tightly to what is good. Love each other with genuine affection, and take delight in honoring each other. Never be lazy, but work hard and serve the Lord enthusiastically. Rejoice in our confident hope. Be patient in trouble, and keep on praying. When God’s people are in need, be ready to help them. Always be eager to practice hospitality. Bless those who persecute you. Don’t curse them; pray that God will bless them. Be happy with those who are happy, and weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with each other. Don’t be too proud to enjoy the company of ordinary people. And don’t think you know it all!” (Rom. 12:9-16, NLT)
Or, in a one-word sentence that captures the practical implications of salvation in Jesus Christ, “Therefore, accept each other just as Christ has accepted you so that God will be given glory.” (Rom. 15:7, NLT)
Some will never accept homosexuals, bisexuals, transgendered, queer or questioning individuals as equal partners and heirs of the grace of life. God has accepted both them and us, not because of us being “good” people, or because some of us assent to statements of belief or tests of faith, but because Jesus Christ loved us and laid down his life for us while we were yet sinners. God did in Jesus what we are incapable of doing, namely, loving us totally and unconditionally, thereby opening up the kingdom of heaven to all human beings.
Dave,
One more quick note, as I can only write quickly during breaks in my radio show. I fully recognize that this is a multi-faceted issue and that the church has driven many gays and lesbians away and done great damage to many in the name of the Lord. I have apologized for that on many occasions and I devote myself to undoing that damage constantly. At the same time, I stand against the goals of gay activism. The Lord spoke to me in January 2005 to reach out and resist, meaning to reach out to GLBT’s with compassion and to resist gay activism with courage. By God’s grace, that is what I have been doing, and the primary purpose of my book was the “resist” part of the commission. On a regular basis, I also work toward the “reach out” part and equip others to do so with love and compassion and sensitivity and longsuffering. I hope this helps!
Tracey, could you kindly show me where in the Word God calls “clean” practicing homosexuals or bisexuals or anyone else have sexual relationships outside of (male-female) marriage?
Also, the way you write, it seems as if people can deny Jesus and not profess or follow Him and still make it in because of God’s unconditional love, in which case you don’t actually believe any of the verses I cited.
Kathy stated, “It is comforting to know that there are countless glbt Christians who have full open healthy relationships with God and the Spirit and follow Jesus and are still same sex attracted and “acting on it.”
I had to read this statement more than once to comprehend both Kathy’s claim to belief in Jesus Christ and the advocacy contained in Kathy’s unyielding support of the GLBT folks sin, plain and simply put. Here we have Kathy’s basis of opposition to what Michael Brown has written to awaken our society to its own reprobate pursuit in the ‘Queering of America’ in a nutshell. Kathy has become a law unto herself, basically opposed to any presentation of God in Christ having boundaries on sexual behavior by Biblically stated law and matters of sexual propriety obedience at all. If I were Dr. MB, and having done the spade work to write such a book, and came across such a statement as the core value on sexuality boundaries, or their lack, by Kathy I would simply quote this one statement as being her own foundational ideal for sexual relations.
As pointed out by my remarks to Tim, and later by Dr. Brown, holiness is at the core of the blessings and boundaries placed on human sexuality and freedom to choose by the heart of God’s word, not the degree of relational feeling states. My God, basing understanding of acceptance in the beloved on feeling states alone is the core of what Eve heard from the Serpent in the Garden. What was the outcome of regarding that
false instruction and “acting on it”? It seems Kathy would uphold that Eve was just acting on the freedom to so choose, irregardless of what boundaries God placed on the Garden of Eden experience.
Kathy, be warned, repent, and act circumspectly in this arena of human endeavor, or something not only deceptive but life impacting not in a positive stead will be your own demise. Acts 2:38 and 39 are at the heart of the free offering of God founded in Jesus Christ, not unconditional love of all human choices. That God clothed and drove the first parents from the Garden is clear enough. There is no fear of God whatsoever in what you write and advocate, to your own and others detriment.
Dr. Brown,
If foods are no longer to be called “unclean” (abomination in Lev., Heb., “toevah,”) because Jesus declared all foods “clean” according to Mark 7:19, and uncircumcised, non-Torah observing Gentiles, according to Acts 10:15, are no longer to be considered “unclean” by virtue of God’s unmerited favor in Christ toward all, it follows that others excluded for certain behaviors by Torah holiness code prohibitions in Leviticus as “unclean” (including male homoerotic behavior in Lev. 18:22) can be and indeed are declared “clean” (not “toevah”) by God. God sees the heart, and he knows who belongs to him. Humans judge based on appearances and a limited field of vision prevents us from seeing clearly.
Those who deny Jesus, in word or in deed, in order to ingratiate themselves with people, he will deny in the presence of God’s the father in heaven. (Matt. 10:33.)
The OT canon includes numerous types of marital relationships, most of which pass without commentary. Their are monogamous heterosexual marriages, plural marriages, sexual slaves and concubinage, harems, even kidnapping and forced marriage. It was Jesus, in Mark 10:7-8, who interpreted marriage to be representative of God’s covenant relationship with his faithful people, a mystical union of two discrete individuals into one living organism, expanded further in Ephesians 5:31-32. These verses neither prescribe heterosexual marriage nor prohibit same-sex unions.
God desires all people to exist in a mutually faithful, loving and committed covenant relationship with him through his Son, and with each other. It matters not to our Creator and Father our sexual orientation; what matters is love overflowing in good deeds of mercy and justice. We have been saved by his grace to do good and to bear much fruit for his glory by trusting in the faithfulness of Christ. In Jesus, we all are brothers and sisters, beloved by God without partiality.
Shalom.
Erratum: God the Father, not “God’s the father” in my last comment. D’oh!
Tracey,
All clear. You have absolutely no scriptural support for your claim that practicing homosexuals can enter God’s kingdom (anymore than practicing fornicators or adulterers or alcoholics or swindlers — etc. — can enter God’s kingdom), nor is there a stitch of evidence to support your claim that “It matters not to our Creator and Father our sexual orientation.” Tracey, would you genuinely say that to people of ALL sexual orientations? Really?
You rewrite the Bible when you speak of “a mystical union of two discrete individuals into one living organism” being Paul’s model in Ephesians 5. Rather, it is the union of the man and woman — two different parts of the whole; two God-fashioned opposites whose union produces oneness — that is the analogy for the union of the heavenly Groom (Jesus) and His bride (the Church). Surely there are differences between the two!
Out of love for you and many others and out of love for Jesus, I tell you plainly that you are speaking God’s truth but rather the projection of your own heart. You may mean well — I don’t doubt that you do — but you are only hurting others and grieving the heart of our wonderful Father.
For clear statements on what the Word says, I urge you to watch these two videos:
http://coalitionofconscience.askdrbrown.org/resources/2007_lecture_monday.html
http://coalitionofconscience.askdrbrown.org/resources/2008_lecture_monday.html
May the grace and goodness of God bring you back to the path of life.
Dr. Brown,
The law of God, not you or I, defines sin. The law defines adultery as sin in the decalogue (Ten Commandments), which is upheld by Jesus in letter and spirit. Adultery is sexual unfaithfulness to one’s covenant partner, husband or wife. Jesus considers lustful thoughts to be a form of adultery, or unfaithfulness, against one’s covenant partner. Homosexuality, however, didn’t make it in the decalogue or on Jesus’ lips. It did become codified as taboo, or forbidden for the Hebrews in the holiness code of Lev. 18, which plainly correlates the forbidden behaviors listed to worship of Canaanite deities. Idolatry, the worship of foreign gods in place of beside the true God of Israel is the sin prohibited by both the decalogue and the codes in Leviticus. It is exclusive covenant faithfulness to YHWH that is the point of the Ten Commandments and Leviticus, and our unfaithfulness which necessitates a covenant redeemer, that is, the Messiah Yeshua.
In the ancient world, fertility cults were plentiful, and intercourse with shrine priests and priestesses was engaged in by both sexes to tap into the spiritual essence and power of the priest/priestess to ensure a bountiful crop and material prosperity for the participants. Much the same behavior is highlighted in the anti-pagan polemic of Romans 1:18-32.
Therefore, it is not logical, from a text-critical or historical-cultural basis, to conclude, based on a subjective interpretation of select biblical texts that scripture categorically declares all same-sex intimate relationships as “sin.” “Toevah,” the Hebrew translated “abomination” in Lev. 18:22 of the RSV and KJV, means “ritually unclean” or defiling, and in the book of Leviticus also applies to certain foods and types of clothing God commanded the Hebrews were forbidden. Toevah does not mean sin or connote a moral fault or failing; it connotes what is forbidden for religious purposes on the grounds that the Hebrews were to be separate from the surrounding climate of religious pluralism and polytheism. One Hebrew word for sin, “chet” (among a variety of terms) is not employed in Lev. 18:22 or elsewhere in the dietary, clothing, and holiness code prohibitions.
Pedantic by semantics, I know, but the point is, the real sin is prejudice against an oppressed minority – in this case, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered persons and their partners – by the church and the larger society. The good news is, we are all forgiven our sins and accepted by God through Christ, and no one is excluded from reconciliation. To make this reconciliation effective, to activate the true potential of grace in our lives, individually and collectively, all we have to do is trust in Jesus Christ and receive him as God’s gift in our hearts and minds.
Grace and peace be yours in abundance.
Dr. Brown, I find Jesus’ words in Matthew 21:31-32 both welcoming and chilling: “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you. For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him.’ ”
It is those judged unworthy, unclean and despised by the religious authorities – those arbiters of righteousness and ritual holiness – who are depicted by our Lord as entering the kingdom ahead of the chief priests and elders of the temple. God’s grace is for the despised, the condemned, the ones deemed “unacceptable” by traditional religious authority.
“The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!” -Jesus, in Mark 1:14-15 (NIV)
Dr Brown,
I was basing my opinion of the chapter in question on *YOUR* description of it. Quite honestly .. it sets off red flags for me. … because .. quite bluntly it sounds really close to slander if not actually there so I am not really inclined to buy your book. Whenever we speak as ambassadors of Christ I think it is very important to understand the culture into which we are speaking. … It may sit well with you but it does not sit well with this straight pastor ..nor with Kathy .. (another straight person) .. and not with the several presumably gay folks who have responded to it. I am not judging yuour heart here .. just making you aware of the effect this type of approach has. So .. IMO .. you might want to reconsider this approach since trampling the harvest is not a very effective means of reaching people for Christ.
I was pleased to see in a later post that you do recognize this as a multi faceted issue and that you have apologized many times for what the church has done in this area. If you truly recognize how multifaceted this is and how the church has erred you might show it by what you choose to include and not include on your website.
Some examples (of the concerns I have about your website) follow..
I notice you support the Manhattan Declaration .. something I will never support nor sign .. mainly because I find its descriptions of political things to be rather fabricated or just plain deceptive .. see below for two examples from the declaration….
1.Per the declaration: In New Jersey, after the establishment of a quasi-marital “civil unions” scheme, a Methodist institution was stripped of its tax exempt status when it declined, as a matter of religious conscience, to permit a facility it owned and operated to be used for ceremonies blessing homosexual unions.
—
This is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts .. This was in fact a campground loosely connected to the Methodist church with a public boardwalk and pavilion paid for with 50% public money as part of a voluntary state funding program. This voluntary program clearly stipulated that properties bought or upgraded with these funds must provide meaningful public access. The tax break was a part of this program. Anyone out there that seeks to use public funds / public tax dollars understands that there are hoops you must jump through to get the funds. If you don’t want to jump through the hoops then you don’t take the funds
2. Per the Declaration: In Canada and some European nations, Christian clergy have been prosecuted for preaching Biblical norms against the practice of homosexuality. New hate-crime laws in America raise the specter of the same practice here.
—
So far the examples I have seen of this have been gross distortions of what actually took place. Canadian law (C250) specifically allows for preaching against this from a biblical text. So that claim is a bit overdone to say the least. The other case I have heard of involved Pastor Ake Green of Sweden. All that Christian sources say of this is that he was sentenced to prison for preaching against homosexuality. However .. what they fail to say .. (and this is old news) is that he was successful in having charges against him overturned .. this eventually went to the Supreme Court of Sweden as a test case which established a legal precedent of protection for persons who might choose to preach their moral view on homosexuality. Lower court judges.. in response to this case … expanded the protection even to demonstrators ..
As for the second part of number 2 above .. one would think that when a person looks at happenings in another country they would consider the cultural context. Afterall we do this with understanding scripture all the time. Some foreign countries still have state run churches .. something we avoided here in the United States. Additioinally.. the laws of Canada .. Sweden .. and many other countries that we get all in a knot about are hate speech laws … not hate crime laws. Slurring the two together is at the very least sloppy if not outright deceptive. I have seen Christians get all up in arms over false information such as this. Indeed it was in response to these claims in a bible study that I lead that I went home and looked up this issue .. I was quite saddened to find that many of the people I had trusted to give me the straight scoop in the political area had lied to me.
The above examples are not isolated to the declaration but are used prominently along with many other false examples by conservative Christians who have chosen to fight the political culture war using worldly weapons (more on this later)
I also noticed on your website that you are unhappy with the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) . You claim that they added several groups including Focus on the Family to their hate group list. Ummmm .. I think you better check your facts on this one .. Focus on the Family is *NOT* on this list … most likely because Dr. Dobson managed to avoid some of the false slanderous things that some of these other groups put out. I happen to find truth in some of what the SPLC says though I would rather keep the word “hate” out of the conversation. For a thorough study of this I would suggest that you check out this page .. http://wthrockmorton.com/2010/11/30/splchatelist/
Among some of the things that these groups did to get on the SPLC hate list was to claim that the Nazi’s were actually militant gay people … and/or compared gay folks to pedophiles. (note: this second part is what you walked into .. or close to ..when you included this chapter in your book). I also think it is important to note that just being against gay marriage or against gay sex did *not* earn a group a place on the SPLC hate group list. I’ll let you read the above referenced page for yourself.
As I said in my first post here .. there is no white knight other than Christ. ALl have sinned and fallen shor of the glory of God. Scripture does not elevate lying and slandering to being holy .. rather it groups lying and slandering in with sexual immorality. So, with many in conservative Christianity falling into the worldly trap of either telling or believing lies .. we really do not look very different from the world. I guess many have forgotten that we are to be in the world but not of it and that the weapons of our warfare are spiritual not carnal. I also want to add that being in the world and not of it is a lot more than just having a moral view on a few hot button issues that we might find in a voter’s guide. Being holy .. being like Christ … encompasses so much more than that .. how we speak .. how we act .. how we extend grace and so forth.
Dave
Tracey,
Thanks for your thoughtful and literate post. I found nothing pedantic in it all. That being said, I categorically differ with your interpretation and application of these passages on historical, exegetical, philological, sociological, hermeneutical, and even Christological grounds. Please do watch the videos I linked in my earlier post for a response to each of your points.
More fundamentally, the very texts you cite in terms of the tax collectors and the kingdom of God completely refute the point you are making, since they were received into the kingdom of precisely BECAUSE they responded to the message of repentance, meaning, turn away from your sins and turn to God. It remains the fundamental message of the New Testament, which consistently links forgiveness of sins to repentance. Surely you cannot deny this.
Dave,
Thanks for your lengthy and considerate post. If you only knew me and understood me and read my books and listened to my messages, you would come to vastly different conclusions about who I am. How about taking a few minutes out of your time to start here: http://coalitionofconscience.askdrbrown.org/resources/debate.html. If you don’t have time to listen to the entire debate, then just listen to my opening comments.
I cannot help the fact that others have grossly misrepresented me — in the name of Jesus, at that! — or that people these days prefer sound bites to truth. I wrote the book with a broken heart, with many tears, with a deep sense of divine calling to do so, and I carefully documented every word and claim — hence more than 1,500 endnotes. And there is ample, carefully documented support for the claims put forth in the Manhattan Declaration, which is a gracious statement of truth. As for the SPLC’s statements, they are as flawed and biased as can be imagined, as I and others have exposed. (See my relevant article on this website.)
The Lord graciously saved me 40 years ago, and I have had the privilege of preaching the gospel overseas on more than 100 different trips, along with around America. Grads from our ministry school serve the poorest of the poor in many countries, demonstrating the love of Jesus in a tangible and touchable way 24/7. And I work daily to see the lost sheep of the house of Israel — my own Jewish people — come to faith in Yeshua. This is what makes my heart beat day and night. I have also been called to “reach out and resist,” as articulated in a previous post, and I will not be disobedient to that calling. Love compels me. Truth compels me. And I seek to do this always in a way that glorifies the Lord and as His ambassador.
The fact that you were encouraged by my recognizing the multi-faceted nature of this discussion indicates that you a very wrong concept of who I am and what I stand for. Hold to the principle of John 7:24, and we can move forward constructively.
So, check out the video link, find out in truth who you’re interacting with — put the attacks and posts and opinions of others aside — and then we can grapple with the real issues, issues that still drive me to my knees with tears for the GLBT community.
Dave, Tim, Tracey, and Kathy,
Have you viewed the videos Michael Brown requested
you to???
@Jabez–yes I have . I watch both side of this constantly.
Good grief!
I’m sorry to say, this is just one big ridiculous mess!! Seriously?
I’m sorry Mr. Brown, but I think you and I interpret God’s Word a bit differently. My relationship with Jesus is not the same as yours is with Him. How can you take a cookie cutter and make everyone be EXACTLY like you?
I am no better than anyone else and have never claimed to be. I claim to be walking with my Savior and it is NO ONE’S right to tell me anything different OR how to live my life with Him. I am so over this “DON’T KILL THE MESSENGER” attitude. Jesus is always used as a scapegoat for other people’s control tactics. Personally, why are you so “concerned” about what I do in my own life that you feel you need to control it?
God’s word is a two-edged sword that is meant to be shoved into the devil’s stomach, not your fellow brother’s and sister’s backs who make you…. um shall we say “uncomfortable”?
I’m sure the next comment will be how that is exactly what you are trying to do- “save us from our SIN!!!”
“It’s not my rules, it’s God’s”
“love the sinner, hate the sin”
yada yada….
UMMM I believe Jesus said “love the sinner, hate your OWN sin”
Stop pointing fingers at everyone else.
Leviticus, Romans, Corinthians, Timothy, BLAH BLAH BLAH- keep the verses coming. I have studied them all at GREAT length. Not one of them has the affect you would like it to have on me because I know the context from which they were written and they don’t “scare me” at all. I’m so sorry, I forget they are shoved in my face in “love”. My apologies.
Sodom and Gomorrah BLAH BLAH BLAH We are all abominations-
PLEASE look up that word. It has to do with IDOL WORSHIP, not homosexuality. Plus, Corinthians and Timothy tie into Sodom and Gomorrah so you cannot throw one out there randomly without looking at all THREE texts together.
It would take a good week to go over all these scriptures… I’m sure you’ve heard them though since you claim you have spent a LOT of time with Christians from the GLBT community in preparation for your book.
However,
I’m so over all of this. I am tired of people using God’s Word as a rock to stone people with rather than “loving” people to Christ. Jesus is not an excuse to hide behind.
This isn’t loving and I can tell you, if I wasn’t a believer, OH the DAMAGE this would do! I’d be running from the cross and shooting myself in the head! I’m so thankful I know better!!! I know my worth is Jesus eyes! He has changed me and nothing you or any of your “followers” can say can hide that truth. The more I have these conversations, the more I thank Jesus for who I am. It makes me realize how blessed I truly am to have Him in my life.
What really scares me is the influence you might have on people who are vulnerable and highly impressionable. I am not interested in seeing the results of suicide as people get their hands on your book or come to you for answers or counseling.
I agree with Kathy- ETERNITY IS AT STAKE! I am commanded to love- Jesus is the ruler and Lord of a person’s life. It saddens me to see how many people in the church have the “God Complex” and can make radical, life changing decisions for people without His knowledge. Any form of control is playing God in my eyes. I am not interested in controlling or being controlled. I’m SO over that GAME that a lot of my fellow brothers and sisters like to play.
“I am going to MAKE you listen and then I am going to intimidate and scare you with my scriptures so you submit to me” Puhleeeze! How many times have I heard this song and dance before?
I will continue to reach out to ALL people who need Jesus love. Plain and simple, that won’t change.
I do appreciate the conversation. I must say I’ve learned a few things the last few days. However, I see the agenda loud and clear and have come to the realization, my time would be much better spent elsewhere.
Love and Blessings to you all! :)
Sarah,
Thanks for your final post, and I’m glad you have appreciated the conversation. I’ll keep my comments short.
You wrote: “I’m sorry Mr. Brown, but I think you and I interpret God’s Word a bit differently. My relationship with Jesus is not the same as yours is with Him. How can you take a cookie cutter and make everyone be EXACTLY like you?”
Who is asking anyone to be exactly like me? I’m simply being a witness and sharing God’s love and truth. He calls ALL OF US to repent and believe, and there are practices He blesses and practices He rejects. It’s really not that complicated. If you haven’t watched my videos that I have linked here, please do.
You asked, “Personally, why are you so “concerned” about what I do in my own life that you feel you need to control it?”
Who is trying to control you? And what makes you think I started the conversation about what you do in your own life? My book is about gay activism — in other words, about activists wanting to change society in a way that affects my grandkids and beyond — not about what you do in private with your own life. That is between you and God, and again, I simply serve as a witness to the truth. I know many people who have come out of homosexuality who are tremendously blessed in the Lord and thrilled with their new life, and I offer that same new life to others. Jesus truly transforms!
May God’s grace and mercy and goodness and power flood your life!
Hello Dr. Brown,
The video you recommended is almost 2 hours long .. so I only had time to listen to the first 50 minutes or so. More on the video in a moment. .
First I would like to respond to your last post to me. Look friend .. I spent well over 100 hours over a period of many months looking at the political claims of organizations such as the AFA the FRC and so forth … Conclusion: I didn’t think it was possible for Christians to lie like this. My heart broke and I questioned my faith and its validity and even the validity of Jesus Christ. Why?? Not because of some gay agenda or gay activists. But because plainly and simply .. the people that I had trusted to carry the banner of Christ and give me the straight scoop on political issues had failed miserably at it. Fortunately I came out of it loving Christ all the more .. but with a much more skeptical eye toward what or who I might trust. To review… Comparing homosexuality to Nazism is slander .. plain and simple. There is no way to get around that. Miscasting gay folks as pedophiles is slander .. there is no way to get around that fact (which is why I avoid the comparative arguments such as what you put forth .. others have already soured the milk in this area). The SPLC noted where groups did this and called them out on it. They weren’t bad or wrong for doing so .. they weren’t telling lies.. they were telling the truth .. they were/are right. You claim to follow truth .. so do so. See if these groups did what the SPLC claimed they did. The link I gave you should be sufficient to take you on your own voyage of discovery. If you want the SPLC link where they link specific complaints against specific organizations it is here .. http://splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/the-hard-liners Note: I saw Bryan Fisher’s name mentioned somewhere in the above posts who often blogs on the AFA blog. You might take a very close look at what he claims.
I was pleased to have the video reference and be able to hear your tone of voice in what you had to share. Just a little tid-bit to consider .. you mentioned that abomination is used in reference to homosexual sex. Ummm you might want to check Proverbs 12:22 KJV which states that lying lips are also an abomination to God. Now I am not referring to you .. I am referring to the deceptions I found from the organizations I used to trust and to the deceptions I found in the Manhattan Declaration. While there were some things in it that I could agree with I cannot ally with a document that deliberately tells political lies. Quite frankly the whole document sounds like a loud gong or clanging cymbal .. I trust you understand the reference.. Let me be clear here… What political position you take and how you apply your faith to your politics is your business. But as a holiness pastor I am concerned with how we get there and whether that path is marked with honesty or deception. The lies and slander of worldly politics have no place in the life of the Christian. Scripture instructs us to test all things .. hold fast to that which is good. I think that principle very much applies here.
As for the portion of the video that I had time to view .. a couple of points ..
On orientation change: If you go to the website I directed you to you will find a wealth of information on change .. whether it happens or not .. and so forth. . You will also find an alternative to change therapy called SITF which is more honest with folks who are trying to find congruence between their faith and their orientation. You might also be surprised to find that per Dr. Mark Yarhouse (a well known person in this field) .. folks who had/have same sex attractions who are in heterosexual marriages found that their desire for the same sex increased .. rather than decreased Change of internal feelings to heterosexual was not happening. There is no guarantee in scripture that for those that seek orientation change .. they will receive it. Time and space do not permit a full exploration of this here. Some quick parallel examples follow… scripture does not guarantee freedom from ADHD, autism, aspergers, clinical depression, blindness, high intelligence, low intelligence, good musical ability, poor musical ability and so forth. Some things are what they are in this life and constantly telling people that God will change them when God, for whatever reason, chooses not to can be very wearying to the individual.
Some references for you on this ..
Orientation not changing ..
http://wthrockmorton.com/2011/07/15/new-study-sexual-behavior-changes-but-not-sexual-orientation/
The problems with reparative therapy..
http://wthrockmorton.com/reparative-therapy-information/
On the success stories of change that you know: For every example you have of people that allegedly changed orientation there are hundreds who didn’t or couldn’t. I accept at face value what people tell me .. however I am also aware that there is a considerable amount of shame surrounding this in the church that can, at times, shame people into saying or doing what they think you want them to say or do. There are also people in denial for many years driven by that same shame. And there are people who have realized their bisexual potential. And there are people who were never gay to begin with. Still others may define change differently. This is a short list of the many variables you may find in this if you look below the surface of what is being said. I would recommend that you recognize the diversity in this and stop pushing only one solution or pointing to a day .. out there somewhere .. when change might happen. I know people have spent 15 plus years of their lives pursuing (orientation) change .. and it didn’t work.
On pedophilia and bestiality: You continue to go off the deep end of : if this .. then this. It appears that, in your thinking, anytime we go off the literal message of scripture we are going to fall over a chasm somehow. I understand your slippery slope mentality but I really do not agree with it. I have really bad news for you … We, in the church, have gone off the literal meaning of scripture many times. Here are some examples. Jesus affirmed slavery. He used it endless times in his parables so He was well aware of the practice. Yet He said nothing against it. In fact many of his parables showed the dire consequences of not obeying the master. And the church for centuries upheld the practice of slavery due to this and the instructions in the letters of Paul and Peter. Other issues are the church’s changed attitude toward divorce and remarriage .. (not sure what you believe about this.) .. the churches changed attitudes about women and head coverings ..women in ministry .. the general increase in respect for women and so forth. I am not sure what faith tradition you are from .. Mine is Wesleyan .. we use scripture tradition reason and experience. It’s the Wesleyan Quadrilateral .. I’m guessing you have heard of it. I think you need to recognize that most every faith tradition does bring experience and reason into the equation. So please stop going off the deep end anytime someone claims a slightly different understanding. It’s a standard argumentative technique.. but I really do not want to argue and it is really not a great way to interpret scripture.
On your statement: “God does not bless homosexuality”: In its context I think you meant that homosexuality is not a gift of God. This in itself is not a very complimentary statement nor is it very provable. Beyond that .. just how in your opinion should the person who is same sex oriented feel about themselves? How should they value themselves as members of God’s kingdom. This is rather important because much of your language does not show value.
On your theological arguments: A couple of things .. in the video you quote gay authors (out of context) who say that same sex sex in scripture was condemned .. this is nothing new.. as I am sure you are aware .. people who affirm same sex sex recognize that scripture condemns it in certain contexts .. their question is whether it is condemned in all contexts. Also .. you might be surprised to know that of the gay Christians I know that are celibate ..some/many of them do not rely on your interpretation of the so called clobber passages (many especially regard as irrelevant .. the Sodom and Gomorrah story).. Instead they rely on other principles. So you are really not speaking to some of them .. You might try talking to a wider variety of people and get some ideas about what they believe. Also .. and this is mainly for some of the conversations I have seen here… I would hope you would recognize that some have shared a interpretative view of the scripture that is more diachronic .. historical critical with perhaps a hermeneutic of suspicion. This is quite different than the synchronic conservative interpretative method that you are using. As a result people are talking past each other in languages that neither can hear.
—-
In summary of the many things I have shared… the churches failings in this and other areas are numerous. Many believers have been duped by conservative political organizations and motivated by fear tactics based on a false presentation of legal/political issues. This is not holy. Nor does it take into account nor respect the sovereignty of God. I get weary of people who say the church is under attack. What they fail to realize is that the church and the world are in God’s hands. God will accomplish His purpose. God will have His church. God is quite capable of protecting His church. And He is quite capable of judging the church for her failures. And it would not be unbiblical for Him to do so using a non-Christian resource to do this. He sure did this with Israel and the pagan nations that surrounded her. God wants a church that is willing to be uncomfortable in order to fulfill the great commission .. and if it doesn’t do so .. He is quite capable of shaking it up (even using resources you don’t like) in order to get it to where He wants it to be.
So I find it impossible to paint gay activists as all bad and conservative resources as all good. It’s not that simple. There is a much bigger picture here. This is why I appreciate the work of Christians .. even those I do not completely agree with … in reaching out to others and bringing them in to the kingdom of God. I will take the sincere seeking faith of people with whom I may not totally agree over those who have made their political agenda and method more important than holiness. There is a lot more on the table here than just this one issue of the morality of same sex relations.
Finally, I am just an unknown (to you) …. a poster, who happens to be a straight pastor, who has decided to drop in on your blog .. You don’t have to listen to anything I have to say .. never-the-less here are some things you might consider doing..
1. Decide whether you are going to be a pastor or a cultural warrior. You can’t do both IMHO. It seems your heart leans more pastoral but your book and website lean more culture wars.
2. Research the political claims of groups like the AFA .. the FRC and so forth. People who are likeminded as you have done so and found them to be faulty. Claiming they speak truth when they do not is not doing anything good for your credibility.
3. Listen to people’s feedback when they say they find your *method* or * analogies* offensive. Yes .. I know that truth can be an offense .. but there is a difference between being offended by truth and offended by method or perceived attitude.
4.. Take time to review the resources I gave you on change .. recognize the complexity of this issue.
5. Talk to more people who have been unable to change .. seek to understand their frustrations .. their loneliness and their inability to find a place in the church .. Come along side of them and engage them where they are at in their journey.
6. Spend more time with people who believe differently than you on this issue. Be a pastor to them … not a confrontationalist.
Finally .. assuming you take the pastoral care direction .. what does pastoral care look like when you are done with all the theological arguing? This is not going to go away .. cultural and church trends show an ever widening acceptance of the view that you disagree with. I have been at this for a long time and can tell you that neither side is ever going to totally win the day with their biblical argument. Just as there will always be disagreement in the church about divorce .. remarriage .. women in ministry and so forth. So it will be for this issue. So.. how are you going to pastorally care for those who are gay who happen to agree with your position? What does that look like? Are you going to take the time to know their hearts and minds? Are you going to assist them in their efforts to find a place of value in the church? And how are you going to pastorally care for those who are gay who don’t agree with your position? What does that look like? Are you going to continue down the road of the pedophile argument? Are you going to continue to call ministries that compare them to the Nazi’s right and good? Are you going to take the time to know their hearts and minds?? Are you going to assist them in their efforts to find a place of value in the church? These are the long term questions … the day by day come along side ministry questions that I think you need to prayerfully consider.
Blessings,
Dave
Just to jump in here–I HAVE READ LIVELY”S BOOK– I have it right here on my desk. I actually got a copy DIRECTLY from him. I email exchange with him regularly (Prob 30K words btwn us) —-propaganda, lies, hate, deceit and no Jesus. I know you have had Ssempa on your show Michael and been on AFTAH (another strictly anti gay organization.) You trip the lights fantastic very close to the SPLC Hate List folks. I hope they pick a few more up this year–like United Families out of AZ. Their stuff is appearing all over Russia and eastern Europe translated and HATEFUL and filled with lies well disputed decades ago. Paul Cameron and Lively are doing the Eastern Europe junket. Always be careful who you ally with. Lively is POISON.
Kathy, again, if you have differences with Scott Lively, feel free to interact with him. And please allow Dave to speak for himself. I would dare say, though, that you ought to look in the mirror before challenging others on who they ally themselves with.
Kisses, Michael. Look at my board–excellent integrity. And Dave, I will lend you both Lively and Browns books when we next see one another. Dave is WELL equipt to dialogue for himself. A man of great integrity and love.
Wow, Michael, listen to what you say…amazing. Ego seems to have you chained. Just my opinion.
Bless you, Kathy! I could attack you for dancing with gay guys in a gay bar — an act of solidarity for you — but I simply urge you to look in the mirror before attacking.
Pam — I don’t follow your post. You make a serious judgment here when you say that, “Ego seems to have you chained.” If it’s your opinion, you do best to keep it to yourself; if you have facts to back that up, please enlighten me. Thanks!
As I said, it’s just my opinion. You have spoken your opinion quite profusely. It seems you don’t need to keep yours to yourself, but I should. Interesting set of standards.
Oh, I LOVE that post http://canyonwalkerconnections.com/2011/01/14/dancing-at-a-gay-bar/ and let me tell you about the young man in the picture: Kevin. He is a Haitian immigrant from a family that struggled with his orientation. He would probably not be on the planet had it not been for people loving him. Talk about SWEET spirit!!! He lights up a room with his kindness and genuine love of Jesus. I was last with him in March in LA staying with some friends of his in another part of a complex. I got to visit with him quite a bit. He has the voice gifted to him by God and is pursuing a singing acting career and succeeding at it. His morals are excellent and he exudes Jesus. I LOVE this kid.
The point of the post seems to be precisely what you struggle to be Jesus-like at. Accepting and loving people right where they are. No matter who they are. This spoke LOUDLY to these kids. “Kathy sees us and loves us” and that very week i got four phone calls from sub -25 wanting to talk. Not about sexuality, but DEEP concerns. They trust me and I get to mother them. so am I proud of what I do and how I do it? It may not be orthodox but it sure does work. And I will be as radical as I need to to live out God’s calling.
I go where I can be with people. And to shock you–I intend to go to the SF Folsom Street Fair. They are straight , gay, pan and NEED Jesus. So, I will put my judgments aside and go talk to them and love on them with a pastor friend. I spent time with the leather folks at SF Gay Pride and had wonderful conversations, and yes, about Jesus and God. You could never pull it off, but God has gifted me to be able to do it. It will twist heads and theologies the people I talk to and love on. Hey, Jesus was quite controversial and HE is the one I follow.
There is GREAT healing when a person know you just love them. It was never our job to be morality police. We point and the Holy Spirit changes hearts and behaviors. How He wants to. When He wants to.
Glad to know you read my blog .
I hope to see dearest Kevin again in the Fall when i go back to speak at a church, a GSA in a school and visit with a local Gay Christian Network group. They are some of the FINEST young Christians I know.
Kathy, sorry to say I don’t read the blog, but feel free to send me links you think are worthwhile. I happened to spot that one when looking at your attempts to justify your position scripturally. I’m all for going into the midst of sinners to share the gospel — absolutely — which is why God tells us not to judge the motives of others, hence my exhortation to you about your judgmentalism of me and others. Otherwise, I’ll let your post speak for itself, for better or worse.
Pam, yes, it’s best to keep opinions about others off the blog here. We can interact about issues constantly, and we do, and we can passionately agree or disagree. But we don’t allow for personal attacks on others. Fair enough? I also would encourage you to be careful about making judgments even in your own heart, since ultimately God only knows the individual life and we can best judge by the fruit.
…then we agree that we are judged by our fruits. And we leave it at that.
Pam, bless you! Of course, we can discuss doctrinal issues and judge those issues by the Word, but we don’t judge people’s motives, etc. Thanks! One more point: I try to honor those who post here by responding when possible, hence some long, recent posts.
Dave,
Thanks so much for your lengthy and detailed and thoughtful post. Much appreciated! I’ll respond to your concerns and points seriatim.
You wrote: “First I would like to respond to your last post to me. Look friend .. I spent well over 100 hours over a period of many months looking at the political claims of organizations such as the AFA the FRC and so forth … Conclusion: I didn’t think it was possible for Christians to lie like this.”
Dave, I spent way more than 100 hours – really, thousands of hours – investigating these issues over a period of more than six years. My conclusions are 100% opposite to yours. I have also sat side by side in meetings with some of the leaders of the FRC and AFA and FOTF; I have also prayed with them and cried out to God together. All of them whom I know personally are men and women of real integrity and Christian grace and are deeply committed to the truth. I would trust the FRC over the SPLC a million times over, without hesitation.
You wrote: “To review… Comparing homosexuality to Nazism is slander .. plain and simple. There is no way to get around that.”
Actually, there is one primary individual who has written on this, Dr. Scott Lively, and one main spokesperson in one of the organizations whom you mentioned who has picked up on this. Why attack all the other family organizations for this? Also, you overstate the claim – which is dishonest, in my eyes. Finally, I’m assuming you carefully read Dr. Lively’s Pink Swastika book, given all your research?
You wrote: “Miscasting gay folks as pedophiles is slander .. there is no way to get around that fact (which is why I avoid the comparative arguments such as what you put forth .. others have already soured the milk in this area). The SPLC noted where groups did this and called them out on it. They weren’t bad or wrong for doing so .. they weren’t telling lies.. they were telling the truth .. they were/are right.”
Dave, please read what I wrote on this. The arguments are clear and compelling and have not been refuted at all. Instead, people have simply slandered me and misrepresented the chapter.
You wrote: “I was pleased to have the video reference and be able to hear your tone of voice in what you had to share. Just a little tid-bit to consider .. you mentioned that abomination is used in reference to homosexual sex. Ummm you might want to check Proverbs 12:22 KJV which states that lying lips are also an abomination to God. Now I am not referring to you .. I am referring to the deceptions I found from the organizations I used to trust and to the deceptions I found in the Manhattan Declaration.”
First, I always cite Prov 6:16-19 in that regard too. Amen to that! Second, there are no deceptions in the Manhattan Declaration. In fact, it is understated.
You wrote: “The lies and slander of worldly politics have no place in the life of the Christian. Scripture instructs us to test all things .. hold fast to that which is good. I think that principle very much applies here.”
Alas, you are believing the lies and slander of others who are attacking people of good faith and good will.
You wrote: “On orientation change: If you go to the website I directed you to you will find a wealth of information on change .. whether it happens or not .. and so forth. . You will also find an alternative to change therapy called SITF which is more honest with folks who are trying to find congruence between their faith and their orientation. You might also be surprised to find that per Dr. Mark Yarhouse (a well known person in this field) .. folks who had/have same sex attractions who are in heterosexual marriages found that their desire for the same sex increased .. rather than decreased Change of internal feelings to heterosexual was not happening. There is no guarantee in scripture that for those that seek orientation change .. they will receive it.”
Dave, I know Warren Throckmorton’s site very well – including his radical position changes over the last seven years – and of course, I’ve looked at his material carefully. This is a lot of what I’ve been doing for the last seven years! I also have Mark Yarhouse’s most recent book – very well done, in fact – and have read extensively from all those who say change is not possible. I have a whole chapter in my book where I lay out the claims against orientation change being possible. I have also spent countless hours with ex-gays – including my late brother-in-law – and I rejoice in the liberty they have. I also have talked with many who still struggle deeply. What God requires is holiness, which includes self-denial for all of us. It is a gross deception to tell a same-sex attracted person that God will bless or sanction his or her romantic and sexual relationship with a person of the same-sex, and we do them a terrible disservice when we tell them that. What I preach is that God requires holiness, not heterosexuality, and that’s where the emphasis must be. If the Lord also brings about a change of orientation or desire, all the more wonderful. Again, I’ve been immersed in this stuff for years now and give you all the arguments against change. When you refer me to well-known websites as if I never heard of them, you tell me again you have no idea who I am. No offense on this end, but it makes for a lot of wasted interaction.
You wrote: “On the success stories of change that you know: For every example you have of people that allegedly changed orientation there are hundreds who didn’t or couldn’t.”
And you have documented this? Again, I repeat, my ministry emphasis is on holiness first, not heterosexuality, but I have heard countless stories of people who have changed. To me the real deficiency is in the depth of our ministry to people, not coming in the fullness of the Spirit, not being able to get to the root of their issues, not being able to help them find wholeness. I put the onus of responsibility on those of who minister, not on the people we’re ministering to.
You wrote: “I know people have spent 15 plus years of their lives pursuing (orientation) change .. and it didn’t work.”
Yes, I’m aware of this and feel their pain acutely. God knows. But I also know people with other, deep-seated conditions – to the core of their being – who have wanted to get rid of certain desires or inclinations but have not been able to. Do we rewrite the Bible on their behalf, or do we call them to crucify the flesh and still enjoy the goodness and love of God?
“On pedophilia and bestiality: You continue to go off the deep end of : if this .. then this. It appears that, in your thinking, anytime we go off the literal message of scripture we are going to fall over a chasm somehow. I understand your slippery slope mentality but I really do not agree with it.”
Once again, it appears you are not hearing my argument, which was not a slippery slope argument in this case. It was an argument against the idea that saying, “I was born this way and can’t change” carries any moral weight. That was the whole point. We all reject pedophilia – including every gay person I’ve ever talked with – and when they say, “But I’m only attracted to kids and I can’t change and I’ve pleaded with God to take this away and He hasn’t,” we love them and cry with them and pray for them, but we don’t tell them, “Well, in that case, it’s fine.” Again, if you read my book, you’ll understand these points in great depth.
You wrote: “ I have really bad news for you … We, in the church, have gone off the literal meaning of scripture many times. Here are some examples. Jesus affirmed slavery. He used it endless times in his parables so He was well aware of the practice. Yet He said nothing against it. In fact many of his parables showed the dire consequences of not obeying the master. And the church for centuries upheld the practice of slavery due to this and the instructions in the letters of Paul and Peter. Other issues are the church’s changed attitude toward divorce and remarriage .. (not sure what you believe about this.) .. the churches changed attitudes about women and head coverings ..women in ministry .. the general increase in respect for women and so forth. I am not sure what faith tradition you are from .. Mine is Wesleyan .. we use scripture tradition reason and experience. It’s the Wesleyan Quadrilateral .. I’m guessing you have heard of it. I think you need to recognize that most every faith tradition does bring experience and reason into the equation. So please stop going off the deep end anytime someone claims a slightly different understanding. It’s a standard argumentative technique.. but I really do not want to argue and it is really not a great way to interpret scripture.”
I address these arguments in depth here:http://coalitionofconscience.askdrbrown.org/resources/2008_lecture_monday.html. I also strongly recommend this book: http://www.amazon.com/Slaves-Women-Homosexuals-Exploring-Hermeneutics/dp/0830815619/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1311787737&sr=8-1.
You wrote: “On your theological arguments: A couple of things .. in the video you quote gay authors (out of context) who say that same sex sex in scripture was condemned .. this is nothing new.. as I am sure you are aware .. people who affirm same sex sex recognize that scripture condemns it in certain contexts .. their question is whether it is condemned in all contexts.”
Please cite book and page where I took these authors out of context.
You wrote: “ Also .. you might be surprised to know that of the gay Christians I know that are celibate ..some/many of them do not rely on your interpretation of the so called clobber passages (many especially regard as irrelevant .. the Sodom and Gomorrah story).. Instead they rely on other principles. So you are really not speaking to some of them .. You might try talking to a wider variety of people and get some ideas about what they believe. Also .. and this is mainly for some of the conversations I have seen here… I would hope you would recognize that some have shared a interpretative view of the scripture that is more diachronic .. historical critical with perhaps a hermeneutic of suspicion. This is quite different than the synchronic conservative interpretative method that you are using. As a result people are talking past each other in languages that neither can hear.”
Of course I’ve listened to such people, if not in person then on their videos or blogs or books. I have immersed myself in the writings and teachings of those who differ with me, and I continue to do so. To give you an idea of the books and articles cited in my book – not including countless hundreds of web articles and blogs – see here: http://aqueerthing.com/content/bibliography-and-index. As for a hermeneutic of suspicion, I earned my M.A. and Ph.D. from NYU in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures, meaning that I didn’t study with believers but only with those who differed with my faith – or, in some cases, with any faith. That doesn’t make me right, but it certainly means I don’t come to the Word in a naïve way.
—-
You wrote: “In summary of the many things I have shared… the churches failings in this and other areas are numerous. Many believers have been duped by conservative political organizations and motivated by fear tactics based on a false presentation of legal/political issues. This is not holy. Nor does it take into account nor respect the sovereignty of God. I get weary of people who say the church is under attack. What they fail to realize is that the church and the world are in God’s hands. God will accomplish His purpose. God will have His church. God is quite capable of protecting His church. And He is quite capable of judging the church for her failures. And it would not be unbiblical for Him to do so using a non-Christian resource to do this. He sure did this with Israel and the pagan nations that surrounded her. God wants a church that is willing to be uncomfortable in order to fulfill the great commission .. and if it doesn’t do so .. He is quite capable of shaking it up (even using resources you don’t like) in order to get it to where He wants it to be.”
Can you see the sovereignty of God in raising up voices like mine – among many others – as prophetic witnesses to the society and the Church?
You wrote: “So I find it impossible to paint gay activists as all bad and conservative resources as all good. It’s not that simple. There is a much bigger picture here. This is why I appreciate the work of Christians .. even those I do not completely agree with … in reaching out to others and bringing them in to the kingdom of God. I will take the sincere seeking faith of people with whom I may not totally agree over those who have made their political agenda and method more important than holiness. There is a lot more on the table here than just this one issue of the morality of same sex relations.”
That’s why I take every opportunity I can to reach out to gay activists and professing “gay Christians,” and that’s why I spent most of the last 40 years calling my own people – the Church, and the lost sheep of the house of Israel – to repentance, beginning the call with my own life. Again, you have misjudged who I am and what I stand for, failing to remember the Jonathan Edwards principle of judging the whole, not the parts.
You wrote: “1. Decide whether you are going to be a pastor or a cultural warrior. You can’t do both IMHO. It seems your heart leans more pastoral but your book and website lean more culture wars.”
God called me to do both – to reach out and resist – and by God’s grace, we are seeing fruit in both areas. Years ago I was told I could not to practical ministry and scholarship together, but I the Lord had other thoughts. I’m His servant, as I trust you are as well, and He gives the directives based on His wisdom and plan.
You wrote: “2. Research the political claims of groups like the AFA .. the FRC and so forth. People who are likeminded as you have done so and found them to be faulty. Claiming they speak truth when they do not is not doing anything good for your credibility.”
Again, I beg to differ, based on massive research on my end. I constantly find fault with my “own side,” but in this case, again, I differ, nor would I say that Dr. Throckmorton is a voice on the same side with me, given his recent propensities – and I say this with respect, not hostility.
You wrote: “3. Listen to people’s feedback when they say they find your *method* or * analogies* offensive. Yes .. I know that truth can be an offense .. but there is a difference between being offended by truth and offended by method or perceived attitude.”
Just because I differ with someone of the blog here doesn’t mean I don’t do what you suggest. To the contrary, we regularly look at attacks and criticisms against me or my team or ministry to see where I am/we are falling short so we can humble ourselves before God, receive his correction, and be more like Jesus.
You wrote: “4.. Take time to review the resources I gave you on change .. recognize the complexity of this issue.”
Again, as stated, I have been reviewing them without a break for more than six years now, and every week I receive numerous links to related studies and stories. Once more, I refer you to my book.
You wrote: “5. Talk to more people who have been unable to change .. seek to understand their frustrations .. their loneliness and their inability to find a place in the church .. Come along side of them and engage them where they are at in their journey.”
This really boggles my mind. Of course I have done this, time and time and again. And of course I’ve read the books written by the Mel Whites and the Troy Perrys and others. And I constantly call on pastors and leaders to make room for people just like this – constantly! – urging them to patience and compassion and longsuffering and genuine friendship. I even urge them to be ready to receive men wearing women’s clothes, with hands raised worshiping God and with Bibles in their pocketbooks. We will meet them where they are and then seek to bring them into wholeness and repentance and freedom. As long as they are willing to receive love and ministry, we will work with them.
You wrote: “6. Spend more time with people who believe differently than you on this issue. Be a pastor to them … not a confrontationalist.”
I know this is sounding like a broken record, but I do this all the time. And I also confront. Both are biblical, are they not? Did not Jesus and Paul do both?
You wrote: “Finally .. assuming you take the pastoral care direction .. what does pastoral care look like when you are done with all the theological arguing? This is not going to go away .. cultural and church trends show an ever widening acceptance of the view that you disagree with. I have been at this for a long time and can tell you that neither side is ever going to totally win the day with their biblical argument. Just as there will always be disagreement in the church about divorce .. remarriage .. women in ministry and so forth. So it will be for this issue. So.. how are you going to pastorally care for those who are gay who happen to agree with your position? What does that look like? Are you going to take the time to know their hearts and minds? Are you going to assist them in their efforts to find a place of value in the church? And how are you going to pastorally care for those who are gay who don’t agree with your position? What does that look like? Are you going to continue down the road of the pedophile argument? Are you going to continue to call ministries that compare them to the Nazi’s right and good? Are you going to take the time to know their hearts and minds?? Are you going to assist them in their efforts to find a place of value in the church? These are the long term questions … the day by day come along side ministry questions that I think you need to prayerfully consider.”
Dave, I have prayerfully considered these issues day and night and interacted with people about these issues constantly for years now. Here’s a great, helpful resource: http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Christian-Guide-Understanding-Homosexuality/dp/0736925074/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1311788668&sr=8-1. Re: the alleged wrong arguments I use and bring, do your diligence to rightly understand me first, and then your questions will disappear.
Under normal circumstances, time doesn’t allow me to interact at length like this, but I felt your post was that important and that the issues you raise would be meaningful for others to see and read as well. Should you desire to meet face to face or to talk by phone, just email my website and we’ll what we can work out. Also, if you’d like to receive a DVD where I lay out the important steps needed for ministering to the LGBT community, I’d be happy to send it your way.
I do hope that as you continue to study and pray about these issues you will see that you’ve been quite mistaken on a number of points thus far. I also urge you to meditate on Matt 5:13-16 and ask yourself what that means. Grace to you!
Blessings,
Dr. Brown
“Then the Lord God brought the woman to the man. The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man.’ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.” (Genesis 2:22-24)
Jesus Christ reiterates the natural sexual union as God intended it,
“But at the beginning of creation God made them male and female. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” – Jesus Christ (Mark 10:7)
To seal the truth of how God intended human sexuality and covenant union, Paul the Apostle reiterates it as well, saying that this natural order speaks of an Eternal Truth.
“’For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the Church.” – Paul the Apostle (Ephesians 5:31-32)
This is why marriage is so important because it is at the heart of reality. It is at the heart of what God is showing us about Himself through human reality. It represents Eternal Truth.
God made woman for man, and not man for man, and not woman for woman. In this current state of reality, human nature is subject to corruption, and so there is the ability to deviate from our natural purpose. But we cannot excuse our corruption because it is “who we are”, for all of corruption comes from who we are, and from our natures ability to corrupt.
Are people born this way? Maybe. We are born into a struggle between God and sin, true reality and false reality. We are born with many deviant inclinations.
Jealousy, malice, hatred, deceit, fornication, selfishness, bitterness, and lusts that stray from the clearly natural order of things, are all deviations of our nature into darkness and away from Truth. God calls us to deny these deviations, and seek healing and restoration to Truth, because of the effect they have on our hearts. They steal us from the truth and knowledge of who God is, and make us delve into the darkness of our own deluded natures. There is no limit to the ability of human natures corruption. This is what it means to be lost.: the truth and knowledge of God, the established Ultimate Reality, is not regarded in the heart, and human nature is enslaved to its deviations.
“God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.” -Romans 1:24-32
Regardless of what worldly systems or governments allow or do not allow with the societal rights and title of “marriage”, and regardless of a cultural opinion concerning same-sex relationships, it remains that the covenant union of a man and a woman is what God ordained to be an expression of the divine Truth of Christ and the Church. This is a Truth of our reality, and no worldly decree can change the Truth of what God Himself initiated into our reality as a reflection of a higher and sacred Truth.
True Reality is not mocked, nor is He intimidated by those who wish to corrupt the union initiated into reality and established as the foundation for civilization. He did not establish the marriage of man and woman in the shaky foundation of governments that rise and fall, or in cultural opinions that sway with the spirit of the age.
He established it as an immovable Truth in the very essence and fabric of reality. Governmental decrees and societal opinions never had an effect on Truth. The Truth is Truth, it won’t be moved, and it will prevail, regardless of the ever-changing systems of the world in an evil age.
The union of man and woman is what is natural and right and it is a main foundation of human reality and thus of civilization, serving to reflect the divine union of God and humanity through Christ and His Bride, the Church.
Look at the anatomy of a man and the anatomy of a woman and the inference is there. Whether it be in the obvious anatomical structure of the complimenting sexual organs, or the natural hormonal reaction of men and women to one another, or that the sexual union of man and woman results in the ability for procreation, or how the feminine and masculine aspects of male and female compliment and fulfill one another.
These are not societal constructs.
Society did not decide that man and woman would be anatomically built for one another, complimenting one another, to which the masculine and feminine aspects also follow, with procreation fulfilling this set order.
When one points out that there are animals which participate in same gender sexual acts, this does not have any bearing on human beings, who are moral, rational beings. Animals are not moral, rational beings. Some animals pack rape, other animals eat their own young. One cannot use irrational, instinctual beings as role models for moral, rational beings.
These are unnatural desires in that they deviate from the purposed order, but they are because of human natures ability to corrupt and deviate into unnatural cravings and desires. This is what the Scriptures call “sin”. The original word is “hamart” and it simply means “to miss the mark” as when an archer shoots an arrow and misses the target.
Because we are rational beings made for Truth, we need salvation from these deviations from Truth. We are rational beings, and because of this we are held accountable to a Truth from which proceeds all moral order, without which we may plummet to the depths of depravity and darkened thinking.
We cannot compromise the truth of Gods revelation of how He intended human beings, and how the union of man and woman was initiated into reality to serve as a reflection of what He is bringing about through this reality, which is the pinnacle of history, the wedding of Christ and His Bride, the Church.
The dynamic of human sexuality how God intended it and man and woman’s union is extremely important as one of the deepest reflections of eternal and sacred truth concerning God and His relationship towards humanity. It is a moral issue, yes, but it is also a divine issue of God’s consummate purpose for human reality.
While it is true that God ultimately is not a gender, He does use the masculine representation, because of what I have explained: He created male and female to be a representation of His relationship to the collective group of humans that are His people, His Bride.
This is why Jesus is revealed as a Man, not to elevate man above woman, but in keeping with the dynamic of man and woman being a representation of God and humanity, Christ and the Bride.
Therefore it is unbiblical and not in keeping with God’s relation to humanity as revealed, to call God a “She” or “Her”. Not because God is a male, but because it messes up God’s whole revealed relation to humanity as represented by mans relation to woman. Let us not tamper with the order which God has established.
God defined sexual union and marriage once and for all by creating two humans that complement one another anatomically, and declaring at the beginning that “a man shall leave his mother and father and be united to his wife”, and initiating this dynamic into reality for the purpose of representing the Eternal Truth of God’s relation to corporate humanity, as Christ and the Church, His Bride.
There is no turning around what God established. And what we are seeing with this historically unprecedented homosexual agenda is the breakdown of moral truth and the paving the way for moral lawlessness, being given over to all sorts of thinking which deviates from Truth.
While Paul says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor free; there is no male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28), he is speaking of the fact that race, social status, and gender have no bearing upon our status in the Kingdom. In God’s eyes, certain humans do not have more worth than others, even if sometimes humans see it that way. Christ gave His life equally for everyone. But race, social status, and gender have no bearing upon morality. Sexuality, however, does. Notice the absence of Paul saying “neither fornicator nor pure in heart, neither liar nor honest person, etc.” Paul is saying that the Kingdom does not differentiate between the classes that humans divide into, but is not suggesting that there is no difference between people who practice morality or immorality.
Sexuality has huge moral implications all throughout Scripture. That is because sexuality is a deep part of human nature and purposed by God for HUGE things, even birthing new conscious beings into existence, as well as being a representation of Eternal Truths like the union of Christ and the Bride. And when such a powerful symbol and part of human nature is deviated from the Truth of how God intended it, it not only leads us astray from God’s reality of Truth, but leads to the further breakdown of morality and Truth.
So is homosexuality a special sin that is worse than heterosexual fornication? No, it is not. All sin hardens the heart and leads it astray from the purity of God’s Reality. However, homosexuality is the breakdown of the natural order, and brings a lie over the consciousness and perception of who you are and what is natural to desire, and joins an unnatural deviation to who you are. Such a deviation has a hardening effect to the truth of who God is, and opens one up to all sorts of deviated ways of thinking that are not in harmony with the truth and love of God.
I am going to make this rather short ..
The fact that you see things 100% differently than I do regarding these organizations and the Manhattan Declaration says alot and is a bit of a red flag to me. The Manhattan Declaration used the same carnal worldly method that these organizations have used of entering into political lies .. spin .. and inuendo. This isn’t rocket science .. nor is it subject to a whole lot of personal opinion, nor is it hard to figure out. The research is not that complex. When a group or declaration makes a claim about a legal situation .. you look it up to see if they gave you the facts or not .. if they didn’t .. then they are lying. Many of the SPLC’s claims about these organizations matched much of what I found in my independent research .. so .. yes .. they were telling the truth here.
Playing the NAZI card .. as Scott Lively does is also a standard carnal worldly technique which Bryan Fisher of the AFA used. If the AFA wanted to they could refute what he said but they haven’t. Their silence is very loud to me. . Lively’s book : The Pink Swastika is not regarded highly at all by historians. His use of this so-called knowledge to whip Ugandans into a fury over the alleged NAZI threat of homosexuality is a further example of Christians gone bad.
As Christians we are called to be above reproach .. unfortunately in the examples I have cited here and elsewhere in my posts we have not been .. The leaders of these organizations you mentioned may be .. or may have been godly men .. however they have allowed the ways of the world to influence their methods. Sadly, I can no longer rely on their information. When an organization or group loses credibility in one area .. it effects how people see their credibility in other areas. More to the point .. when this happens in a Christian organization.. it discredits the gospel and the truth of Jesus Christ.
Lord have mercy,
Dave
Dave,
Perhaps listening to false and misleading information about brothers and sisters who are, in fact, speaking the truth, discredits the gospel? Perhaps siding with the spirit of the world rather than the Spirit of truth brings reproach to the Lord and division to His people? Perhaps you are the one who has been wrongly influenced?
I’m not talking about arguments concerning homosexuality and the Holocaust (again, that’s an issue I’ve never once addressed; I simply referred you to the primary source for this argument; you also have a false impression of the impact of Scott Lively’s meetings in Uganda; finally, you might this find this article by gay journalist Johann Hari of interest: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-strange-strange-story_b_136697.html).
But I am talking about the Manhattan Declaration, which you cite. I attended an early initial meeting with men like Chuck Colson who helped frame it; I’ve heard Robert George lecture and read his books; I would stand with these men and their message as opposed to the SPLC’s of this world any day of the week.
Keep studying and researching, Dave, with an open heart and mind. There are more dramatic discoveries in store for you if you have the grace to go with the truth wherever it leads, regardless of cost or consequences.
Grace to you,
Dr. Brown
When did Focus on the Family make it to the SPLC Hate List? Not that I do not think they tread carefully around it by publishing falsehoods about glbt people.( http://canyonwalkerconnections.com/2011/02/28/focus-on-the-family-you-make-us-look-stupid-stop-lying/ ) I was just reading your (MB) articles in TOWNHALL and noticed that statement. It will bet repeated over and over as truth, maybe you could correct that? This comment probably belongs there, but I don’t want to create yet another account and get mail. The end point is to just correct the misspeak with the author. Thank you.
Kathy, this will clarify things. Thanks for your post. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45144
No, I still don’t see that they are on the list. I watch this stuff closely. Family Research, yes. I get copies of their propaganda on glbt translated and sent to me from Europe all the time. They cut back on it here in the US , but they are at in in Eastern Europe.United Families SHOULD be on this list. I am sure they each do lovely things in their mission statement. I have communicated with UF and asked them to look at the docs they send out. Hidden in a little footnote of their resources is some nasty lies. So I do watch this stuff.
All these people are being written about currently in a detailed book by their former and now repentant fundraiser for 25 years. He sat in all the meetings and had a “born-again” moment and is now writing.. What an interesting read that will be. A CO Springs insider talks.I often call him and say ” _____, am I right about this?” and he says “yes. Write it Kathy.” FotF is not lily white. Nor is FRC or CWA. He sat in meetings where they CHOSE to lie. Yikes! —-oops, off topic. This stuff is deep and wide and not so pretty.
Kathy,
Have you considered how the posture of your comments comes across? Perhaps the old addage, s/he thinks she knows more than God best sums up the overwhelming attitude conveyed. Even if you respected the written Word–which is clearly not the case–a self superiority tone is constant in this blog, where, it lingers like a kite flying in a forbidden safety zone near the airport where all our flights must come down to earth to achieve their purposed intention.
Thanks for the opine–I know a lot about this topic that is certain. If I correct lies, I think that is actually a good thing. You are off base with your assessment :”Even if you respected the written Word–which is clearly not the case–”, but that is okay too. I know my relationship with God and His Word. Maybe the soaring kite is actually a prophetic voice that is tightly tethered to her LORD and some people can’t see that or are intimidated by it? I do not know more than God–whoa –that would be some human that thought that! On this topic of gblt and the church, I do know lots more than the average person. Calling, gifting, purpose, passion. Just like MB knows about the Jews, this is my area of knowledge. I would love to get a totally neutral eye to read all this and assess it as communication in the natural. It would be quite interesting.
Actually, I need to let this all go, too time consuming to follow and respond. It’s been nice and even civil. Nice job all.
Kathy, yes, I have clarified the issue in the article I linked, which states this clearly: “To be technical, the SPLC labeled the AFA an “anti-gay group” but featured them on the same list with the other “hate groups.” Since then, the liberal media, almost without exception, has labeled the AFA an SPLC-designated hate group. And because the SPLC in the past labeled FOTF an “anti-gay group,” they too are considered to be on the SPLC’s hate group list.” Search online, and you will see because of the SPLC’s irresponsible name calling in the past, it is recognized that the Focus on the Family has been branded a hate group by them — and the SPLC has not raised a finger to correct this. They started the name-calling and bad reporting. They need to fix it.
As for your accusations here, drop it, Kathy. We don’t allow attacks on other Christians or groups here based on “Someone said so.” When the book in question comes out, I will gladly have the person on my radio show to air their charges, with someone on the other side to respond to them.
So, I remind you that posts like your last one, in terms of your attack on other groups, not your challenging what I have written, will not be allowed in the future. And Jabez’s exhortation to you is well-taken. Again, I urge you to look in the mirror.
Kathy, this too is an area of expertise for me, as is the subject of my Jewish people. I recognize it’s an area of expertise for you too (not in terms of biblical scholarship but in terms of lots of interaction with professing “gay Christians”), which is one main reason I dialog with you about it and one main reason I warn you about serious error. You are in my prayers!
Rather than send Kathy to your own article (which incidently makes false claims about who is on the SPLC hate group list ).. why don’t you actually visit their site ..
Here it is the website for your convenience http://splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/the-hard-liners
As you can see in the above article .. FOTF is not on the list …
If you need further proof lets visit their page for Colorado hate groups… see link.. http://splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-map#s=CO
Once again .. Focus on the Family is not on the list..
For someone who claims to speak the truth you seem to have great difficulty doing it. Small wonder you have trouble seeing falsehood in the Manhattan Declaration or anything else that has been presented to you.
Dave
Dave,
Thanks for starting to reveal what’s in your heart towards me. I still bless you in the name of the Lord, and I encourage you to step higher.
My article, to which I linked, clarifies my comment in the article first cited by Kathy and sets the record straight. That’s why I referenced it! Yes, FOTF is NOT on the SPLC’s hate list, and yes, because of the SPLC’s prior attacks on SPLC — name-calling and error and innuendo — it is assumed by the media that FOTF is on the SPLC hate list, and the SPLC has done nothing to correct this perception, one which began by their irresponsible reporting to start. I reached out to the SPLC numerous times, but they refused to interact with me on any level. That’s a fact, like it or not.
So, I suggest you do your homework a whole lot better before throwing around accusations. Shouldn’t a pastor do better than that? I say that in love, brother.
Sorry for the typo. Instead of, “yes, because of the SPLC’s prior attacks on SPLC,” please read, “yes, because of the SPLC’s prior attacks on FOTF.”
#134,
As self proclaimed find the myth of one upsmanship. Superior Kathy, inferior everyone else.
So Jabez, I was basically saying the same thing yesterday in reverse (i.e. ego). It seems if someone is on the other side of the opinion they get admonished (albeit condescendingly so). But the Michael side of the block can blast away. I thought Michael said “we” don’t do that on this blog. Interesting.
Pam, you are absolutely right, and our friend Jay needs to step higher with his last comment (#141). I was about to address this too, but you beat me to it. Thanks! The same standards apply to all of us.
I wonder if anyone read my post, and if so, why no response?
Jacob, not every post draws a response, but your post was filled with excellent biblical insights and those who failed to read it should do so. Thanks!
Thanks Michael. I think it’s really important for followers of Jesus, when defending natural, God-ordained sexuality, to show that we are not only dealing with Scripture passages which outright say homosexuality is wrong, but we are also dealing with an eternal truth which is the very reason God initiated male and female into reality in the first place, to be a picture of the marriage of God and humanity in Christ and the Bride. This is a theme in Scripture from beginning to end. And the end of the story, all of human history, culminates in this reason for man and woman being created, which is the Wedding of Jesus and His Bride.
God, being God, could have created a reality with just one gender that could somehow pull off the miracle of procreation in and of itself. But God didn’t do that. He created a reality with this dynamic of man and woman. Why? We see a divine mystery playing out in God’s creation. The divine image is reflected through humanity, both man and woman equally; however there is also a divine truth reflected through male and female, that God is expressing through our reality. Though man and woman are both made in the image of God to reflect the glory of God, underneath this general truth, there is another revelation that God is showing through the dynamic between man and woman, a dynamic which reflects a divine truth and purpose which God is bringing about through this reality. This is the very purpose God made man and woman, to represent the eternal reality of Christ and the Bride.
I believe this is why there is such an attack on marriage, and the natural order of male and female, in these last days. Because the enemy knows we are on the verge of a Wedding, the Wedding that all of history is leading up to. Therefore the physical representation of this on earth is being destroyed.
By the way Michael, i just want to let you know how much I appreciate your unflinching loyalty towards truth. I cut my teeth on people like Leonard Ravenhill and you, and was rocked by your book Revolution about 10 years ago. As we can see, the times are getting darker, and deception is getting so much more sly and cunning. People really don’t know they are being deceived. But God is going to break forth on His church with power and the true reality of Christ. Those who stand their ground and heed the first thing that came out of Jesus lips when speaking of the endtimes, “Be sure that no one deceives you”, will become considered fundamentalists and extremists, but our love and truth will be testified to in our martyrdom. This may sound far-fetched, but just look at how drastically the spirit of the age has progressed in only a matter of 10 years! It will begin really picking up speed in the next 10 to 20.
Jacob, thanks for the kind words, and amen to your scriptural insights. Be assured that truth and light will triumph and that God will have a people for Himself who will bring glory to His name, regardless of cost or consequence. May Jesus be exalted in each of us!
My last response was considerate of two assumptions made by Kathy, and, especially as to her last remark picking up my own statement. Kathy remarked in 134, picking up on my exhortation by analogy about flying a kite in an airport landing safety zone, “Maybe the soaring kite is actually a prophetic voice that is tightly tethered to her LORD and some people can’t see that or are intimidated by it? I do not know more than God–whoa –that would be some human that thought that! On this topic of gblt and the church, I do know lots more than the average person.: This, coupled with her earlier statement as I quoted in # 102, to my understanding makes up a basis for assumption and self foundation of argumentation above what is stated in God’s Word on the matter of boundaried human sexuality blessing and practice.
She stated earlier what seemed her nutshell advocacy position as being ““It is comforting to know that there are countless glbt Christians who have full open healthy relationships with God and the Spirit and follow Jesus and are still same sex attracted and “acting on it.” This was not retracted, but extended as to inclusion of her last response, which included, as is quoted herein, as a partial response to me “On this topic of gblt and the church, I do know lots more than the average person”.
Did I miss something here, for, this remark coupled with nonretracted earlier statements indeed depicts a one upsmanship dialogue by comments made. The format must be considered as well. I would do Kathy an injustice indeed if not pointing out a lack of retraction of a self centric authority over a God centric autority as to the locus of control for her past stated, unretracted, advocacies. I feel I have not been unfaithful to the love of God in admonition in the present format of disjointed discussion not achieving literal ongoing uninterrupted clarification of dialogue.
Jacob, Thank you for your clear and sound quotations and foundational remarks of truth and grace. I was reading an interchange and concentrating on that primarily. Though your postion was a well bolstered truth and grace in Christ’s Word position, it seemed to not bring up more to respond to in the debate at hand.
It was also my desire to support Dr. M.B. who takes on many fronts in the righteous and kind battle he has undertaken as a watchman and prophet in the body of Christ. He is not alone, as you have underscored.
Jabez,
To be sure, I have warned Kathy repeatedly about the serious error of her ways, and from day one of her internet interactions with me (initiated entirely by her), she has deemed it her role to tell me and others of like mind that we are hurting, not helping, God’s work among homosexual men and women. And in light of her posts, I understand why you were motivated to write, “Superior Kathy, inferior everyone else.” That simply crosses the line of what is appropriate in terms of avoiding personal attacks, but I do appreciate you taking the time to explain what you meant by the comment in the context of her other remarks.
Blessings and grace to you!
Dr. Brown
I apologize that my unclairified remark seemed like an attack, which was not intended. May Jesus Christ be lifted up in this present matter, and all He upholds.
@Jabez per #111
Yes, I have. I do not agree with all that is presented. As I said in an earlier post, I am a logical person, and while logic dictates why I believe what I do, I, like all of us, have to use my own experiences to form what I believe. While there is only one truth, we all see it through our own set of rose-colored glasses. Just sit in a court session sometime and listen to various witnesses discribe the same thing… they are always different. Stepping outside of our own perspective of things is probably the hardest thing we can do.
Here is what I believe… we will not know God’s Truth until the last day when Christ returns. All we can do until that happens is live our lives as best we can with what has been given to us by God with our own limited personal understanding…and do our best not to cause harm to others.
Tim,
Certainly nonharming is a goal, as is articulated for such an emphasis in Buddistic philosophy, as such. But Buddistic philosophy does not risk or invest self with a submitted trust coupled with personal effort and community life alliances to purpose purpose with faith, logic, momentum, body, mind, and emotion in calculated ways. Discipleship to Jesus asks for investment of self and self resources toward service to others as a disciple of Jesus’ declared Kingdom. In committed mindful pursuit submitted to serving Christ’s own goals in the manner gained from the New Testament, one acts in concert with living Christ as He is. In Christ, in order to gain a purposed or calculated Way, with the guiding principles of the Commission which He left for His disciples to follow until the end of the Age (as presents an engaging and interactive action plan for all His followers), one will risk unsetting many apple carts placed along the pilgrim path of a life of devotion to Christ. To love as Jesus loved differs from nonharming. It is written it pleased God for His Son to become the atoning caretaking provision for others.
In Biblical terms devotion to Christ would be accomplished within certain boundaries and potentials discovered of an abiding word, testimony, and conduct. Such is not simply assummed in spite of or by knowlingly remaining outside the limits of such boundaries and potentials, in ignorance fo such. The Bible is saturated with boundaries and potentials for belief, human effort and resource investment, for bodily action conduct, with heartfelt hopes, and related trust–where life investments of faith, hope, and love by a disciple are put completely in Jesus’ hands as to gaining insight into and ambition for His desired end results so to speak. His life standard is not nonharming, through some kind of eastern detachment (while coincidentally indulging self in personal sin as is the case in point in the matter of this blog); it is risk taking through personal pursuits formed for yielding to His being, His truth, and serving in His ways as are established by the Bible. It is His own Kingdom within and among His own which suffers violence as a result of a disciple’s engagement with it, not others suffering harm by His disciples devoted efforts.
Since the big picture of any scenario, situation, or status is only partially grasped or comprehended by any of us as to its literal time determined requirements and outcomes, it is always a certainty of hope that one can align with God’s own stated values and standards–formed in his book, the Bible–and not in the process err toward what the Bible would label as ultimate harming. Jesus said redeem the time; Buddah saw time as meaningless. Ultimate harming would be to not offer the Plan of Redemption as is stated in the NT as being founded in Christ to be stated, believed, received, and acted upon for anyone. Ultimate harming would be to ignore what is written of Jesus as judge, and how His Kingdom works in Mt. 13.
To err is only human; to stand with God’s published framework and foundations in any arena of human challenge is most often the most certain route to nonharming as to final human existence results. Harming is not simply a stimulus response or philosophical strategy for building community, avoiding conflict or injury, and offering nondemanding invovlement or healing to others so affected by any so-called harmful reality; nonharming in the final analysis is left to the judgment seat of Christ as to how one’s assumptions and actions will pan out. And so by an informed faith, not a fool’s errand. Here on our planet seldom is building one construct, lifestyle, or assumption in given situations of challenge ever quite certain, where side effects and other results than those of intention may happen. So, Christians risk going with and trusting the Word of God as granting guidance for right conduct, as such.
Christ taught that until He returns, the wheat and weeds would grow together here on earth. These are symbolic of people of obedience to His word (wheat), and those of self direction without obedience being for their own consideration (weeds)–resulting in both being cut in harvest, yet only the wheat being gathered. Both grow side by side on earth, until ‘that Day’, or the Day of Splendor and Wrath on His return (see Zech 12-14). Splendor is given for the children of obedience, wrath to the children of disobedience. Once He returns the proof of what has harmed is His determination, not our own, for He taught reckoning, reconciling, and rejection, through a great sorting out as it were by a ‘wine press’ of human beings under His determined outcome.
All being cast in fate into His own hands, in time. I am certain that approaches to problem solving around life’s issues or experience is approached many ways, and that experience with certain personal states of being are indeed both felt and contemplated, as such. I am not so regardful of an assumptive lack of knowing God’s truth coming into the mix, as you state you are. Mindfulness then in Christian terms is not about a detachment for nonharming, it is about trusting and obeying the Word of God founded in the life of Christ, as written in the Apostle’s teaching of the NT.
Jesus stated that unless one’s righteousness exceeded that of the Scribes and Pharisees of His day and placement, one would, as they would, “likewise perish”, in the final outcome wine press of human truth and consequence. I am not interested as a living disciple to end up on the ‘last day when Christ returns’ as only then having a clue of the outcome of obedience, trust, and faith in the Words of Jesus. I remain interested in building my own house on the solid foundation of His teaching, love, and propitiation for my own sin and sins. ‘Doing our best with what has been given’, as you have stated, is arbitrary as to not really meeting up with Jesus own standards of love, which He clearly gave in the Sermon on the Mount, for, “be[ing] perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” God loves by His standards, the just and the unjust. Now this is remarked by Him in terms of not practicing an outward conformity to lawful standards, but an inward conformity which leads to a state of fulfillment of what it was the Prophets of Old were taking exception to.
One would have to read their words to have a clue. Read Isaiah 40 on if you do not think that this is about an unusual state of concern and considered planning for the redemption of adopted children by the promised Messiah.
As believers in Jesus we then have to be preoccupied with the government of God, known by his teaching, and forming that within and without, it being the stuff of our essential relationships. This does not drift to feeling states, likes and dislikes, immorality, and phenomena as a basis for who we are, as believers, but solidifies on the Rock that is formed of confessing and trusting Jesus in all matters of life and devotion. This kind of life pursuit then differs from a life built of what we experience alone, or with the flow of others of alike persuasion; it remains God’s truth and grace which draws a believer to want to please Christ, to know Christ both intellectually through His written word, and through a promised spiritual formation dependent on the promised Holy Spirit of Christ.
The entire New Testament offers a “New and Living Way” which self perspective alone would distort as to an accurate discovery of truth and grace as Christ Himself determined it to be. As I read of His life and those of His chosen Apostles, no ‘rose colored glasses’ are even remotely suggested when living in fellowship with His being.
Peter, James, John, and Paul, as well as Jesus, all experienced personal pain, self denial, and the cost of discipleship your response tells me you remain unaquainted with by outlook, alliances, and assumption. To assume can make an Ass U Me (A** of U and Me). To trust in the solid Rock of Jesus’ given life, teaching, and provisions is not then to trust in all experience being equal for some future outcome only known then, or as only or primarily relative in perspective and outcome. To “overcome the world” is to find the victory of abiding in Christ in all matters of heart and conduct. Intenalizing His words then is a matter of life and death in the final analysis. I agree, stepping outside of our own perspective indeed asks much of one, yet His yoke is light, and easy.
I am not so presumptuous to think I can even begin to know what God knows. All I can do is trust that the Holy Spirit will led me where I need to go for my Salvation and to help others on their paths to Salvation as well… and to love my Lord, Jesus, and follow His words.
It is obvious that we will not agree with each other on what we believe the Bible says about homosexuality. I believe homosexuality is innate to a person, and you do not. Arguing about it does nothing.
I am color blind. I know for a fact that the sky is naturally gray. That is my reality, due to the way I see colors. It is how I was born. It is one of the gifts that God has given me. You can argue with me that the sky is blue, or orange, or red… any color you want and I will not agree with you, because it is not my reality. Knowing I am color blind you can dismiss the way I see colors… you would probably call my sight defective. One thing I do know, I am perfect in the eyes of God, due to my faith in Christ, and that all my sins have been washed in His Blood. Neither one of us is wrong in regards to the color of the sky. It is just our realities, how we see things. I praise God for my color blindness… it allows me to see the world differently from most other people.
Peace be with you.
Tim,
#77 covers the broken record track repetitive approach to problem solving in the case addressed. Let’s see, since one stole from the corner candy store since being a kid, one must always….
Presumption???, hardly the claims of the creator, Jesus, found with the Father from the beginning. In the case you first raised, there indeed would be challenges, but not without the resource of the provider of grace and truth joining to lead to peace. It is the practice of sin well listed in scripture, not the temptation to sin, which is remedied by application of the blood, spirit, and word. “He who overcomes” is the promised receiver of grace, truth, and peace.
What then is to be “not harming” of the soul?
@Jabez,
Here are the differences between us, as I see them. You assume your Biblical interpretation on homosexuality is correct. I assume my interpretation is correct. You presume that God agrees with you. I do not. I acknowledge that I may wrong. I don’t not believe I am, but acknowledge the possibility. I base my interpretation on work by Biblical scholars… those you probably don’t agree with, but Biblical scholars non-the-less… as well as my own personal experience with the topic. I grew up in a conservative Christian church, I went through 5 years of ex-gay therapy, I had a exorcism performed over me to rid myself of “homosexual spirits”, I was married (to a woman) for 8 years. I attempted suicide twice because I didn’t want the attractions based on my beliefs at that time. I trusted what others told me God wanted, instead of researching and praying about it on my own. It was when I went from praying “take this away” to “help me understand” that things started to make sense to me… about my life, about the Bible, and about what God wanted for me. You can dismiss my experiences all you want. But we all use our own experiences when forming conclusions about things. Even Michael Brown uses his own experiences with his brother-in-law to form his conclusions. I don’t dismiss what he knows, or what people have told him. I know in my own life I have never met a person who claimed to be “ex-gay” that would not admit that the attractions never went away. A left-handed person can learn to use their right hand, but it doesn’t make it natural for them.
Tim,
I appreciate your candor, and even more the Bible as a living book of practical and spiritual community, quite consistent on the matter of discussion. This does not remove your experience as your own, but does offer a particularly sobering look at relationships of intimacy: both in marriage, and of other covenant particulars. We cannot presume Ecclesia, for example, it is mentioned by Jesus for His people’s edification and belonging in mutually edifying and accountable community. Romans 12-16 speak of bearing with the weak in faith in love. And the same author, Paul, carries his understanding coming from the Lord to the matter at hand. Michael Brown has cited the texts. They are clear enough in context and written language. This is not presumptive assumption, but ferreted out meaning cast of original intention. It is consistent from Genesis through the Revelation.
Particularly sobering is Jesus’ statement against divorce because of what was framed ‘from the beginning’ being indeed His own outlook (even taking to task Moses). Paul compares the relationship between Jesus and the Church with the marriage relationship, where, the mystery bond is cited by him as sacred and appointed for mutual growth and development. I have spent years studying scripture, and am amazed at its consistency on the framed matter of joy. Presumption is not of accurate exegesis, which is the basis for actual scholarship on the matter we are considering here. The Biblical model has not shifted or changed to permit what has been called unpermitable. No, my understanding is not presumption, assumption, ascription, nor pretense at all, it is the word of scripture. I bend my knee before Him in matters of such dispute.
I do not discount your outlined struggles, as being your ‘experience’; the entire subject of holiness, and service to Christ however is noncompromising on sexual standards of blessing, conduct, morality, and disposition. It is literally a matter of the heart in the final ‘experience’ of one in Christ. My pastor during my early Charismatic Christian experience, was like Haggard, a secret homosexual. He was living a lie. I came before him like Jeremiah, weeping, toward the final days of being in his fellowship. This was from about 1972 on for a dozen years. He introduced heresy to our fellowship in many ways. Among these was the substitution of the shepherd of our souls with his own voice as the local ‘shepherd of the sheep’. It became emotional catharsis, not mature excellence, all taught. What transpired over those years was increasing psychodrama, bondage to personality and fear, and false teaching. Why? Because he introduced presumption of self centeredness in place of the written and clear word on many subjects. When so submitted, many in the community remained powerless to overcome sin, stuck in fear in futility of mind and thought.
When it became apparent that BP was a practicing homosexual, it also became apparent that what was permitted by meeting based persuasion in outlook was not the love of God in Christ, but the approval of a man by manipulation of personality. Lust deceives, agape liberates unto Christian heart, mind, and service. Spending years in futility of thought with statements about the psychological state of humans, permitting the only expression of thought for community members as meeting based prophetic phenomena, and not permitting children to worship separately at their own level of need, told of the controlling outlook at the basis of the kind of submission practiced in that unhealthy community.
Why unhealthy, if the scriptures presume your outlook? Because the love of God is shed abroad from heaven to earth, in refined excellence, coming then into His people. His people do not lay in wait inside and at the doors of His sanctuary for sexual experience, they commit to marriage, family, community, growth, and ever-increasing four fold love, as scripture has illumined it to be. Experience falls to the ground before the altar of Christ, placed on the earth before His cross. His anointing is not burning of lust and incomplete desire, it is of grace and truth, establishing the justice and mercy of His peace offering before the Father.
But there is the crux of the matter. If I fall in love with someone so fully that I would give my life for that person, that I want to commit my entire being to that relationship just as I give my entire being to the Lord, it is somehow dismissed if that other person is the same gender. My relationship with another man, who fulfills everything I am looking for a partner, would be considered less than if I was in a relationship with a woman, even if I had no desire for her. Because I have no natural desire for women, I am broken and need to be fixed, in the eyes of some.
In Roman Law at the time of Christ, Natural Eunuchs — that is, by definition, men who were physically fully functional but had no psychological desire for women — were permitted to marry (even each other), adopt children, and inherit property. Being physically fully functional means that everything was in place and worked. Natural Eunuchs were not aroused by women. This is one of the reasons they were often put in high positions of royal courts, particularly to protect the women (because they could be trusted not to have sex with the women). You can argue our modern interpretation of Eunuch all you want, but even Christ mentions 3 distinct types. All research I have found on the topic, including the Jewish Talmud, indicate that Natural Eunuchs had sexual desires for each other, unlike castrated men who retained their natural desires for women.
Christ, in my opinion, mentions eunuchs because He is saying that there are some people who fall outside the “normal” paradigm. Some would say that because they don’t fit the “normal” male/female paradigm, they need to remain celibate. I can appreciate that position, but I disagree. Paul does say that it is better to marry (could I say commit?) than to burn. While I remain celibate for my own personal reasons, if I were to meet and fall in love with someone I would want to give myself to that person completely, including sexually… much like men and women give themselves to each other in marriage. You call it unhealthy, and I fail to see HOW it is unhealthy. Do some people in the “homosexual community” live unhealthy lifestyles? Absolutely. But it is unfair to label ALL homosexuals as living that “lifestyle” because they do not. Would you want ALL heterosexuals labeled on the college party circuit of binge drinking and random sexual conquests?
Tim, I’m sure Jabez will be commenting soon on your post, but I want to add this brief comment: You cannot possibly read the eunuch passage in Matthew and come out with any other meaning than celibacy. Anything else violates everything Jesus is saying there. And, in places where same-sex “marriage” is now legal, it becomes even more impossible to read it the gay way, since you would now have to apply the whole teaching about marriage to the very people you’re claiming can’t or don’t marry.
So, the simple truth is this. There’s no ambiguity in what Jesus meant when he spoke of those who were made eunuchs by other men: They could not function sexually and had no desire for women. Some, Jesus says, are born like this (this does not mean intersex or gay), while others make themselves like this for the kingdom (meaning, renouncing sexual and romantic relationships to be devoted only to the Lord). That means that you have the option of holy celibacy, given over to Jesus alone, or the option of transformation by God’s power into a heterosexual, which is possible with Him. But you don’t have the option of sexual and romantic practice as a homosexual follower of Jesus. The two are incompatible, and God has a better way. We cannot deny His Word.
Dr Brown, While I can appreciate your interpretation of “natural born eunuch”, my personal research produces a different result. There is plenty of evidence that “natural eunuchs” were men in every way except for their natural desires. “Natural eunuchs” were said to be “cold” with women. While they could physically have sex with women, there was no desire to. They did not understand reproduction at that time like we do today. They thought that the “heat” from a man caused his seed to be planted into a woman producing a child, and “natural eunuchs”, being “cold” with women, did not produce children when women attempted to seduce them. The Kama Sutra, while not something one would use for morality, does provide clues to “natural eunuchs” as it has a section on “eunuch/eunuch” intercourse — while it is technically male/male, the original text, written before the birth of Christ, says “eunuch/eunuch”. Nowhere in the Jewish Talmud when discussing possible ways to tell if someone is a “natural eunuch” does it mention any genital defects. “Natural eunuchs” were known to be sexual beings… with each other. To say that when Christ said some are born eunuchs ONLY means those born with some sort of genital defect making them incapable of a sexual union with a woman is, in my opinion, a misreading of the verse… especially with “born” (or natural) eunuch is only used once in the Bible. You must rely on outside resources of the time to understand what that term means.
Despite your statement on made eunuchs… all evidence, then and now, on men who are castrated do not lose their desires for women… they just cannot act on them physically with genitalia.
Severus, the Patriarch of Antioch, said of St Sergius and St Baccus, “we should not separate in speech they who were joined in life.” Some of the earliest texts found on these two Saints calls them, in New Testament Greek, “lovers”. There is evidence in the Vatican archives that the Roman Catholic Church performed “Same-Sex Unions” well into the 16th century. There is recorded evidence that in 1578 at St John Lateran in Rome (traditionally the Pope’s parish church) that as many as 13 same-sex couples were joined during high Mass with full cooperation of the Vatican clergy, “taking communion together, using the same nuptial Scripture, after which they slept and ate together.”
The evidence is out there for those who want to find it. But I will turn back to Christ’s words… “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it was given.”
Tim, yes the evidence is there, and it stands against your interpretation and application of the passage, regardless of how you argue about the meaning of eunuch. And the words of Jesus do not mean, “Some people will be able to accept that I’m giving homosexuals a free pass to sexual relationships, outside of marriage, as opposed to my strict standards for heterosexuals” (of course not!). Rather, as the best commentaries recognize, He is saying that some can accept His word about celibacy for the sake of the kingdom, yet you, in order to justify your attractions and desires, turn His sacred words into a license to have a sexual and romantic relationship with someone of the same sex. I really do pity you for such dangerous eisegesis, and I am rightly concerned about your soul. (BTW, why did eunuchs attend to the king’s harem in the ancient Middle East?)
As for the alleged same-sex unions sanctioned by the Church that Boswell argued for — and that you reference here — his book on that has been rightly discarded by top historians for distorting the evidence.
Tim, if Jesus is saying anything to you in Matthew 19, it is that you have an invitation to give yourself to Him alone, as some of my formerly-practicing homosexual friends have done, and their lives are quite full and blessed. Or He offers you the possibility of change, as in 1 Cor 6:9-11. But do not delude yourself and use the Lord as part of that delusion.
Tim,
Michael Brown has probed deeper in this article and his responses to you than your apparent looking into this matter (shown in scholarly contrast to your examples as mentioned as such): into the foundations lain with creation, by Creator; for those regenerated in His Image, as embraced by the ongoing guidance of all disciples of Holy scripture; and as to the words of Jesus, who was creating from the beginning with the Father [and was sent as God’s remedy to the problem of sin in the fullness of appointed time]. He has declared Jesus own mind on the matter of being a eunuch for the Kingdom. Your interpretation of this passage ignores the consistency of all Jesus taught and lived during his visitation to the Jewish nation. The words you share show gross miscomprehension of Jesus and His Kingdom intentions.
Your #159 middle paragraph pursues what you have self declared and past called “presumption”. Even were it correct iby your believed example as to assumption of the meaning of Jesus, as John the Revealer of Jesus in relationship to those bearing His faithful testimony in history declares, Rome and its practices were persecuting the church by pursuit of an antiChrist intention by the way of its own presumptive preoccupations (and it bears your model of meaning?).
To assume that Roman culture and social example are role models as practiced apart from the Revelations God Himself gave through the Jewish scriptures, and so for the meaning of Jesus the Jewish Messiah, through Rome’s continuous vexations for such a presumption (as being ascribed of Christ in your argumentation) is to look downward, not upward where Jesus now dwells. After returning to the Father Jesus soon undid Rome’s existential assumptions through His words as sown in short centuries among the Nations. His Kingdom’s world changing result came after His visitation through His worshipers bearing Spirit and Truth through His Gospel.
In worshiping and regarding indeed all that is false and idolatrous as to forming a role model for achieving godliness, the desires and practices of Rome erred to such degree that the Revelation of John takes them to task through Jesus as the final NT Revealer of God’s literal and abiding truth. Read the Book of Martyrs on how the Apostles were treated by your model culture used for your research. And your research is biased toward presumption that the literal eunuch–not the Kingdom eunuch Jesus spoke of as gifted as such–once castrated, increases in lust, ignores the impact of castration on hormonal drive and availability, and shifts by your willful words representation alone toward homosexual desires. The purpose of literal castration was to cease any desire in their constitution that might have preyed on the women kept by rulers of ancient empires, and lesser Lords. Eunuchs were the neutered masters of women kept for some ancient rulers of empires as guards of their harems. To project homosexual practices into such a castrated celibacy is absurd. To call this research, rather than opinion, is pitiful. Eunuchs became the ever changed nonsexual protectors of their master’s indulgence, not their own ever changed indulgence. Jesus reference then was about a Eunuch for the Kingdom not marrying or having sexual relations in order to achieve a focused ministry, as called.
Jesus words given persecuted believers through John–not to be added to or removed in sanctity without taking on a personal curse as the NTs final words–then called for the endurance of the Saints in the face of Emperor worship, debauchery, persecution, and Roman socail order of the first century living for its self gratification, indulgence, and blood lust (as is cited in prophetically cloaked language by John in depicting Chrsit as the demise of the Roman culture’s claims to an authoritative legitimacy). The symbols, the pagan realities, and the lack of Mercy and Justice achieved by Rome in the Revelation of John becomes representative of the world system which contrasts with the very Messianic reference you believe you have claimed (in comment 159 by blasphemous assertions regarding the words of Jesus, the Holy One of God). I add this word for you to the warnings already given by Dr. Brown.
Michael Brown has taken on a sacred prophetic duty of declarative communication, as did John, toward the church, God’s people, and this once devoted Nation. His words are sobering and humbling all at once. Repent, turn to Christ so that times of refreshing may come for your life remaining.
I would add to his warning that the time is short for the return of Jesus as Judge and Messiah-Lord. I request that you soberly read the Revelation of John on the price of discipleship, C.S. Lewis’ The Four Loves, and the need for God’s people to bear the testimony of Jesus Christ at all costs until He returns. He who sows to the flesh will reap corruption (see Mt. 13). It is myopic to presume to align the mind of Christ with such meaning and lust as you make in posting 159. You are now thrice warned as to consequences of such a position (by MB, JH, and the Apostle John).
Further, your first paragraph indicates a lack of comprehension of love, as Jesus came to clarify it to be. Eros was created by God to lead to sexual relations he did not presume, but defined (see the creation narrative, Levt 18-21, Paul’s lists of the Fruit of the Spirit vs. the lusts of the flesh, James’ contrast of the wisdom from above with earth’s sinful attiributes, and II Peter’s stern warnings. Read I John on the kind of love that casts out fear and fulfills the message and way of Jesus Christ. Read what Jesus ushered in in the letter to the Hebrews as being the New and Living Way. This is not the new and lustful way; it is made possible by the actions of who Jesus as set above all on earth, as He defined Himself and believers in Him to be). His, and the other definitions of love in scripture lead somewhere other than sexual relations for life’s meaning as such. As a remedy to present presumptive deceptions also declared as so in the consistent body of scripture find love defined clearly, circumspectly, and soberly as being a choice, not a feeling, in interrelationship to all forms of human love with the divine Love of Jesus Christ (clarified in C.S. Lewis’ book, The Four Loves. This is essential to understanding what God calls love, not what those in lust declare it to be). If you are a seeker of wisdom, and truth, as well as grace, it is an essential read for your future, as well as mine and Dr. Brown’s.
Your words simply look to the wrong model, the model of a fallen earth culture, which will be rennovatedby fire when the Lord returns. Jesus spoke always of the Will of Heaven come to earth and the works of the Satan being undone by His visitation. He declared salvation as of the Jews, not the Romans. His references are of Hebrew Roots. Read the sobering words of Paul, and of John as to who will inherit the Kingdom of God. It is not those of homosexual practice, nor thieves, nor adulterers, nor all liars. Four categories of sin practice result in exclusion, not inclusion. Your argument aligns with the enemy of Christ, the deceiver’s own falsified character agenda. And Dr. Brown has warned in the Spirit of Christ clearly on this matter by writing a timely study and admonition to God’s People. It is to be brought soberly to one’s prayerful conscience, in light of these times.
As I wrote prior, I do not doubt your experience or feelings, and I do not doubt the capability of the Spirit of Christ to overcome such. Your experience can bring glory to Christ once accepting and pressing toward His remedy to such sin. It is not sin which beguiles the sinner, but the heart which leads the sinner to its beguilement (“for out of the heart come forth” all that separates one from God in Christ. Sin rests at the door of the heart, and one must master it in Christ.). There remains His cross for eternal address to what you call the crux of this matter, and all matters which capture the heart apart from His offer of new life.
Christ came, and comment 159’s outlook and presumptions were the stuff which martyred his followers, not embraced their community. The people of God in example, outlook, and future promise by the model culture you believe you cite of eunuch intention reference died at its hands. To use NT times Rome as a basis for such assumptive research, flawed too as to its mentioned understanding by the lack of statistically and empirically based consistent information, is to embrace the enemy of Christ. The People of God taken to task at the time the NT was written, and in the seasons of future challenge Jesus addresses today through John in the Revelation.
All, please remember that while everyone is welcome to post differing viewpoints, the discussion must fall within our guidelines for posting:
Three Simple Rules To Abide By When Commenting
1. No Profanity
2. No Attacks on an Individual
3. No Attacks on a Group of People
A comment that violates these rules has been removed, as well as all subsequent comments referring to it; also, no pending comments violating these rules will be approved. If you have submitted a comment that has been removed or remains unpublished, feel free to edit it and re-submit without profanity or attacks on individuals/groups of people, and it will be published. Thank you!
Dr Brown… Natural eunuchs attended the king’s harem because they had no natural desires for women. Boys who are castrated before puberty also never develop attractions of any kind. Men who were/are castrated after puberty still have desires.
Jabez… not all eunuchs were neutered. The “neutered” ones were often untrustworthy, and took other liberties with the women they were entrusted to protect.
I can appreciate those who are called to celibacy. But not everyone is. Paul praises those who are called to celibacy. But even Paul realizes that not everyone receives that call. We could call Jesus the third type of eunuch… those who are called to celibacy.
But both of you want to read modern interpretations of eunuch to the natural born eunuch Jesus mentions. If that’s what you want to do, fine. I’m content with what I have learned, by the grace of God.
And just to make one thing clear. I have NEVER given a free pass to those who have sexual relations outside of marriage. I hold homosexuals to the same standard I hold heterosexuals. You just don’t want to call homosexual relationships a marriage. I will continue to call for the right for any two adults to commit themselves to each other before God and family and friends… and call it marriage.
Marcus — who is attacking??
Tim,
First, the corrective post from Marcus had nothing to do with you. There’s nothing that violates our policy here, and your posts are quite welcome.
Second, when I bring interpretations of words and verses based on my study of the texts in their ancient context, because this differs with your views, I’m reading a modern interpretation into them? Do you genuinely believe this?
Third, marriage in the Bible, from creation onwards, only means male-female union. Nothing else can possibly be called marriage in the Bible through any fair reading of the text. It is not that I just don’t want to call homosexual relationships a marriage. It is not marriage in God’s sight.
Fourth, the standard you set at the end is of no real value, since you are constructing your own way for yourself or others in the LGBT community to have sexual relationships regardless of what God in His Word or society calls it. Can’t you see how you have rationalized your way into this position? I don’t say that to demean the challenges you have being same-sex attracted. I simply speak the truth in love.
TIm,
One more note. I differ, of course, with your statements about eunuchs, but you don’t seem to be open to other scholarly or sociological information here, so I’m not pursuing the argument further.
For those who want a clear and detailed statement re: the eunuch issue, see: http://www.robgagnon.net/articles/homosexScripReallySays.doc.pdf. Here’s a relevant excerpt:
The references to eunuchs in Isa 56:3‐5 and Acts 8:27‐39 refer to persons who were physically castrated against their will, not to persons who willingly removed their marks of masculinity, much less actively engaged in sexual relations forbidden by Scripture. Jesus’ saying about eunuchs in Matt 19:12 presupposes that eunuchs are not having sexual intercourse at all, let alone having forbidden sexual intercourse. Both Jesus’ response to the woman caught in adultery and his outreach to sexual sinners was aimed at achieving their repentance so that they might inherit the kingdom of God that he proclaimed. Isaiah 39:7 makes clear that the eunuchs mentioned in Isaiah 56:4-5 were Israelites who, against their will, were taken to “the palace of the king of Babylon” and made eunuchs, but had now returned to Israel. According to Isa 56:4-5, God will not cut them off from his people so long as they “choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant.” There is no way that the author would have regarded someone engaged in same-sex intercourse as still pleasing God and holding fast to the covenant. These are persons that had a portion of their masculinity taken away from them against their will. Why should they now be penalized if they do not support erasure of their own masculinity and have no intent to violate any of God’s commands regarding sexual behavior? A first-century Jewish text, The Wisdom of Solomon, both extols a eunuch who does not violate God’s commands and condemns homosexual practice (Wisd 3:14; 14:26). Another Jewish work presumes that eunuchs are not having any sexual intercourse (Sirach 20:4; 30:20).
This is exactly what Jesus presumes when he compares “eunuchs who make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of God”—that is, Christians who opt out of marriage and choose a celibate life in order to have more time and freedom of movement and action to proclaim the gospel—with “born eunuch” and “made eunuchs.” The analogy only works on the assumption that eunuchs do not have sexual relations. So if “born eunuchs” included for Jesus not only asexual men but also men who had sexual desire only for other males then Jesus rejected for them all sexual relations outside the covenant bond of marriage between a man and a woman. In fact, the whole context for the eunuch saying in Matt 19:10-12 is Jesus’ argument that the twoness of the sexes in complementary sexual pairing, “male and female,” is the basis for rejecting sexual relationships involving three or more persons. He can hardly be dismissing the importance of a male-female requirement for sexual relations immediately after establishing the foundational character of such a requirement—certainly not in Matthew’s view of the matter.
Dr. B.,
#168 is an excellent source which certainly bolsters the Word of God in Christ as to His essential meaning in His allusion to one set aside as so gifted for Holy service for the Kingdom of God. As you have pointed out in other articles in the VOR, to sexualize our children, or what is pure in reference in the scriptures is to
work against the will and community of Christ. Be well, Jabez
1. No Profanity
2. No Attacks on an Individual
3. No Attacks on a Group of People
Homosexuals are fair game though. Right?
I read these posts with fascination and frustration, knowing that neither “side” will ever persuade the other.
Quote: 3. No Attacks on a Group of People
Homosexuals are fair game though. Right? Unquote
There’s a tricky line between “attack” and “criticism” or “disagreement”. “I don’t agree with Hitler’s Nazis, because I think murdering innocent people is wrong.” That’s not exactly an “attack” on a group of people. (“We should kill Hitler’s Nazis because they are murdering innocent Jews” would be an “attack”.
The book doesn’t actually “attack” homosexuals, although clearly it is based on the idea that sexual activity outside of man-woman marriage is wrong. The book exposes and disagrees with, criticizes, gay activists.
Robert Gamble
rdgamble@sylaba.poznan.pl
Robert,
The book asserts as a primary premise for its presentation that scripture and the universe both report creation as being framed by the Creator. Such was formed with earth being the place for the beginning of the family of God. A resulting unique first family happened, and was granted dominion, over which they failed as beguiled as to completing a simple regardful execution of boundaries; this impacted their offspring throughout all time.
Later, a renewed and adopted family stemming from Father God’s source of life came together with qualitative differences from the first family. This happened after Jesus visited earth by his followers sharing and interacting with the Good News of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit was sent to that community primarily to grow an awakened heart understanding of a chosen and holy relationship. This relationship was based on a totally newly revealed kind of love. That love compelled a life of devotion to Christ and His service.
Such captured by God’s election new life mutual practices of belief coupled with God’s Spirit coming to souls who took the leap of faith to align with the Kingdom of God’s source. They were given provision and were changed and are changing to conform to His image. That Kingdom was declared by the begotten and revealed Son of God. It is written that without the Spirit of God He promised being honored indeed among His people’s gatherings they can not gather to Him. The Spirit leads to life in the Spirit in contrast to self conscious self centered life in the flesh (see Romans 6-8).
God is gentleman enough to tolerate our sin for a season here, over which He asks our repentance. And He will return to announce for some a deal consummation for faithful and true service, and, for others, what has become their own deal breaker. He will then uphold what His Apostles have written and He has declared as spoken into existence about His then realized Kingdom come. He is not a man that He should lie.
There is an appointed Day of splendor and wrath to sum all things up as then centered in Christ Jesus, and His judgement, not in subjective feelings (Mt. 13, Zech. 12-14). We are warned to make ourselves ready and waiting for the King of Kings to return for His people and to renovate this earth. A mind preoccupied with a predisposition to sexual desire to form a lifestyle of opposition to the family of the faithful’s inclusion in grace and truth cannot inherit the Kingdom of God (according to Paul and John the Apostles, not the writer disagreed with in the comments section). This has been spelled out for us all from the written word’s own statements of Christ centerdness. Responses from some continue to ignore what is written and uphold their own feelings over and above what is written.
Perhaps the present “disagreement” may be summarized in terms of eccentricity, where, it seems those of advocacy for homosexual practice are talking of personal experience and their feelings as their frame of reference, while the Book of books speaks of a Creator framer boundary-maker as its shared central reference. It upholds abiding in His sent atoning anointed chosen One as the connection of choice for entering into relationship with Father God and inheriting His Kingdom. His life is acknowledged as full of grace and truth for a believer: sprining up to eternal life. .
Mr. Gamble:
Mr. French used the word “attack” in a different context than what you said. I agree with what you said. However, “attack” had a different meaning in this instance.
Thank you Dr. Brown! You truly are a light in this darkness. It hurts me to see how many people are decieved by the false teaching. It’s a veil that’s over their eyes. The only way it can be removed is by God. I’m praying for you Dr. Brown that you stand strong in your faith and God gives you strength to keep going. I’ve seen several videos of yours and read many books of yours and unlike everyone that combats you and God’s Word, I know the kind of integrity you have and I’ve seen how you heart is hurt over the glbt community. The only thing I can do is pray with you and for you and spread a good word about this book. Thank you for not going with the grain. Jesus never said it was going to be easy, but He also said He will not forsake you. He was beaten and mocked on the way to the cross and He said how much worse is it going to be for us, as followers! Keep up the good work!
Dr. Brown, I get thousands of viewers on my YouTube videos and occasionally I respond to some of the more hateful comments as long as they don’t post profanity (which I don’t tolerate). As such, that led me for the first time to view an incredibly false and misleading video on false teachings about the ancient city of Sodom and the sin of homosexuality by this Kathy Baldock who I had never heard of in my fifteen years as a well know Christian ex-homosexual ministry activist.
Here is my response to her very false teachings on the matter:
You are purposefully ignorant on matters pertaining to the Bible and the sin of homosexuality. The reason you are is because you have a predetermined agenda of promoting acceptance of homosexuality. In almost all instances where your kind seeks to deceive others on the sin of homosexuality, in particular, the deceptive parental enablers of homosexuality who run PFLAG, you refused to fight for the deliverance of a child or close relative who became bound in the sin of homosexuality. Instead of obeying God regardless of the cost, you placed a higher priority on accommodating the sinful child or relative, you had to have the co-dependent “friendship” with them rather than laying your life and your desires down, and sacrificing your wants on behalf of the eternal salvation of the one you claim you loved. And in the end, you doomed them and yourself with your deceptions. As a man who successfully left 30 years of homosexuality 15 years ago, I thank God that He mercifully did not leave my eternal future in the hands of someone like you who would have doomed me to hell via your false teachings on this sin. It is an evil and manipulative win which deceives and betrays those who affiliate with as indicated by your very own falsehoods. “For their vine is from the vine of Sodom, and from the fields of Gomorrah. Their grapes are grapes of poison, their clusters, bitter. Their wine is the venom of serpents, and the deadly poison of cobras.” Deuteronomy 32:32-33
Here is what Jesus said would be His judgment against false women who come into the church to promote homosexuality for the purposes of building up a false pagan religion in the House of God AND to steal the holy eunuchs who were put on this earth for only one reason and one reason only: the beautifying of the Bride of Christ for the eternal wedding feast with the Messiah instead, as you false teachers seek: the beautifying of demonic Jezebel, the bride of satan’s humanistic and hell bound paganized enterprise:
“And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write: The Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and His feet are like burnished bronze, says this: ‘I know your deeds, and your love and faith and service and perseverance, and that your deeds of late are greater than at first. But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of perverse homosexual immorality and to eat things sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent of her own perversions and deviant immorality. Behold, I will throw her on a bed of sickness, and those who commit deviant perversions with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of her deeds. And I will kill her children with pestilence, and all the churches will know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds. But I say to you, the rest who are in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not known the deep things of Satan, as they call them-I place no other burden on you. Nevertheless what you have, hold fast until I come. He who overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end, TO HIM I WILL GIVE AUTHORITY OVER THE NATIONS; AND HE SHALL RULE THEM WITH A ROD OF IRON, AS THE VESSELS OF THE POTTER ARE BROKEN TO PIECES, as I also have received authority from My Father; and I will give him the morning star. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’”
Revelation 2:18-29
What is it that these dark-minded Jezebels are seeking to destroy in destroying the holy eunuchs? These holy eunuchs were sent to earth for one purpose. It is not to engage in the routines of life as others do. They were not to get married and have children, thus they were not born with a desire for such. The prophet Jeremiah, the prophet Daniel, the prophet Isaiah, John the Baptist, the prophet Elijah and the prophet Elisha are a few such eunuchs who never married or gave birth to children. Further, the eunuchs who prepared Esther to meet King of Persia are forerunners of these last days holy eunuchs who are to prepare and beautify the Bride of Christ. Yet, this devil and his bride Jezebel have come to manipulate these holy eunuchs into believing that the void for marriage and children indicates they must then be homosexual. The Jezebellian false prophetesses then commence to corrupt the holy eunuchs and to warp their minds with rebellion to God and to lust after homosexuality to fill the void intentionally placed in them by God. What does Jezebel want from them? They were born with gifts from God, for beauty, for the arts, for music, for fashion, for facial makeup and hairstyling, for all sorts of jewelry designs and sculpting and many other eternal gifts: for the beautifying of the bride of Christ in preparation for her wedding to the Messiah, Lord Jesus the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords. Thus, this witch, this dark minded Jezebel lusts for such gifts from the holy eunuchs that she can be beautiful for her husband, the devil. Jezebel seeks to steal the holy eunuchs from the Lord to deny God His rightful presentation of a glorious bride for His own Son who sacrificed His own life and His own blood in pursuit of a bride without spot or blemish. And Jezebel will stop at nothing to rob God of that bride by killing off the holy eunuchs with the sin of homosexuality. If she can kill off all the holy eunuchs then there will be no beautified bride and the devil and Jezebel will remain on the earth indefinitely without facing their final judgment and hell forever.
Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD say, “The LORD will surely separate me from His people.” Nor let the eunuch say, “Behold, I am a dry tree.” For thus says the LORD, “To the eunuchs who keep My sabbaths, and choose what pleases Me, and hold fast My covenant, to them I will give in My house and within My walls a memorial, and a name better than that of sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name which will not be cut off. Also the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to Him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be His servants, every one who keeps from profaning the sabbath and holds fast My covenant; Even those I will bring to My holy mountain and make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be acceptable on My altar; For My house will be called a house of prayer for all the peoples.” Isaiah 56:3-7