I say that to emphasize that this is not an assault on this person or his motives, it's me thinking out loud as I work through his statements.
Here is the opening phrase:
Growing up as a pastor’s son
The relevance is unclear to me. It's a loaded statement that without more discussion could mean many different things - or nothing. But to a large number of people, this reinforces their "see what happens when you grow-up in religion" prejudice. They will be fast to jump to that conclusion without really knowing what kind of father or pastor this man was. Separately, we have no reason to expect that because one has a great father that we are free from the bonds and pains of sin. In fact, we are all born into that condition regardless of our father. So without belaboring this point, this phrase without more information is meaningless but some will use it to support their bias.
The next phrase:
... knowing I was gay robbed me of my self worth and belief that I could be unconditionally loved by God and family.
Another loaded phrase.
- Being gay didn't rob him, being a sinner, not receiving forgiveness and healing from God, and not understanding true identity in Christ robbed him
- There's confusion between unconditional love and relationship. We are loved and we love unconditionally but our relationships are conditional. This is not contradictory and the liberal mind fails to understand this.
In addition, the phrase starts with a very common error. If he is truly in Christ, then he needs to stop defining himself by his temptations. Sinners and many who call themselves christian miss what it means to be in Christ. Many believers try to help those wrestling with temptation or who have sadly succumbed but fail to identify that the real issue is the persons failure to properly identify who they are by the power of God. At best they become worldly counselors who can offer only advise rather than power and at worse, they reinforce the person is what Satan is preaching.
Also note, that thus far, this is not limited to the particular issue of homosexuality. Those dealing with all areas of sin have made these claims - yet for some reason professed believers think this holds greater validity for homosexuals.
The commenter continues:
I didn’t think His grace was big enough to cover me and my sin.
The good news, he sees homosexuality as sin. I wish someone would have responded to him that God's grace is big enough if he is repentant. Sadly subsequent commenters only reinforce that homosexuality isn't a sin in need of grace or at least in need of repentance. Separately, I'm not sure why this commenter refers to his "sin" because I do not detect that he practiced homosexuality and he doesn't even indicate he had on-going, lustful thought patterns. He talks more of what I would call same sex attraction which I would call temptation not sin.
Interestingly, this man speaks of the rejection of others yet he tells us that they didn't really know for sure about his temptations. The point here is that his guilt and separation from others was self-induced. The pain he felt wasn't from the lack of love but from the sting of sin (if he actually did) and failure to understand the redeeming power of the Gospel. Again, true for any sin issue.
Interestingly he talks of getting involved in controlling religious organizations. I'm not sure if they really were or not but certainly that would be consistent of one who does not understand freedom in Christ. It is typical for fallen man to turn to works for the approval of God and of others. Again, not a homosexual issue and not the direct fault of these others.
In regard to this religious organization, he mentions that "the leaders knew it [homosexuality] was in my background, but thought I had “overcome” it." Well, in a sense if he wasn't living it he was overcoming. On another level however, he clearly wasn't free from temptation. On one hand, we never are this side of glory ... on the other hand our new nature becomes more manifest and our response to temptation becomes more right, quicker, and more natural. So here I am picking up on a false expectation that temptation never comes and more important, there is a growing disdain for the Church. And again, nothing here is unique to homosexuality.
This disdain becomes even more evident when he continues, "The leader even asked me once, “How do you get through to those people?”, figuring gay people who needed to hear the Gospel were somehow different from anyone else." Well come on, the Gospel wasn't in question. The question was how do I rightly show up and present it. Is anyone naive enough to really think we show up the same to all? The issue here is this person is building resentment - a typical symptom of a guilty heart. He needs healing. He does not need a bunch of believers to pile on and talk about the wrongs of the church.
The disdain continues. Later in his life he goes to a group for help. Again, he uses loaded words.
When someone had heard second hand that I had been seen at a gay establishment, I was sent to a retreat 3,000 miles away to “make me straight”.
He says "someone heard second hand" indicating his focus is placing blame on others. That plus "seen at a gay establishment" indicates he isn't coming clean with his being tempted versus his flirting with a sinful lifestyle versus his giving in to that lifestyle. And he caps it with "was sent" and mentions how far away - again, building the blame and insinuating guilt of others rather than talking his role in this. He was an adult at this point so I'm unclear what "was sent" could even mean and regarding the distance, he seems to be implying people wanted to be rid of him and were ashamed of him but we don't know that was the case. It could be simply that's where a good place was located. The point is meaningless in and of itself.
Then he caps it with a statement that depending on ones preconceived ideas is either great or not. I take it as the former.
The group I went to was not for gay people but for people struggling with their relationship with Christ. They knew I was gay, but did not even focus on that. They focused on the cross of Christ, the simplicity of the Gospel, and unconditional love. It was the first time in my life I felt I actually saw the Gospel LIVED by people in spiritual leadership.
He needed the Gospel not only a focus on a particular sin. But sadly what he understood as a Gospel lived was not. He confused approval of sin and blame of others who hold to Scripture as the Gospel. And belies his disdain with sarcasm.
They told me those who sent me to the retreat (at their expense) were the ones who were dysfunctional! God DOES have a sense of humor.
Without other information, it could be that it was the folks that paid for him to go to this "camp" that were the ones that loved him. From one perspective, it is those that encouraged his sin that were deceived by the wicked one whose only interest is to destroy this man and keep him in bondage. He bought it. My point here is again, this could be about any sin and if homosexuality is sin, then this person and his sympathizers are getting this backwards.
The commenter then reveals that he doesn't see continued life of both denial of sin and participation in it as inconsistent with life in Christ. He writes, "there are plenty [of gay Christians] out there, including my own brother. My gay brother accepted his homosexuality years ago and has been living with his partner for 10 years and is an ordained UCC pastor." This evidences that the embracing of sin by the Church has not had the affect of promoting righteousness as we are called to do but instead is taken as evidence that holiness is not the call of the people of God. Worse, that salvation does not bring about changed life, only life at peace with sin. This is backwards. It is only the fallen who are at peace with sin. Christian's tolerating sin are not showing true love, they are promoting a different Gospel. They are denying the freedom that comes by the power of God.
The commenter adds:
I was even involved in a ministry to gays for a year in Australia who tried to teach people they could be free from homosexuality & even become heterosexual. Of course, this is not possible, nor was there anyone in the group who had claimed to have reached that point.
Again, missing the power of the Gospel.
If we sinned sexually, we were just encouraged to once again renounce our homosexuality, keep clear of the person we had been with, regardless of our feelings for them and be celibate.
And confusing falling with being. That is, he missed that even if he sinned, if he repented, he would be forgiven and can continue to grow in Christlikeness.
He writes more:
It made me wonder, as man’s greatest desire is to love & be loved, if God just wanted us to be alone, even if we met another person of the same sex we were attracted to and could have developed a monogamous relationship with. I wonder, now that I am in my 50’s, had I embraced as a young age that being gay was normal for me, how my life would have been different. I will never know. I still feel I am very much emotionally scarred and disabled.
He misunderstands man's real greatest desire, that is to be in right relationship with God. And he compounds that now by allowing his desire to question what God said, not unlike Adam and Eve in the garden. He is hurting because he is missing the true freedom found only in Christ. Sadly, he is blaming his family, friends and church and now questioning if embracing the sinful desire of his heart would have been better.
Unfortunately his follow commenters do not shout a resounding "no" and point him toward Christ. They sadly encourage him to pursue sin. And it is in that that they sin themselves.
Technorati Tags: homosexuality
No comments:
Post a Comment