It’s my hope and prayer that many people attend, and that many learn to humanize (or more precisly, learn to see the pre-existent humanity of) those who are so often dehumanized by the politicized rhetoric.  It grieves me to know that many Christians are unable to differentiate those who engage in promiscuous gay sex from those who commit to unconditionally loving and serving an other human being of the same gender (even if we might not agree with how they do it).  Are we so elevated on our moral high horse that we can’t see the difference?

The focus of the exhibit as stated on its web site is to and I quote “By educating people of all ages to recognize, support, and celebrate the full range of diversity, our traveling exhibits are designed to help reduce prejudice, stereotyping, and harassment of all people who are perceived to be “different” from the “norm.”

I think this is sad in that biblically I cannot “recognize” “support” and “celebrate” this lifestyle.  I cannot make it okay, nor do I think God does.  This comes across as an attempt to normalize behavior in the church that God speaks against.  Daniel, help me understand your thinking please.  Are you saying that it is okay to be homosexual in a monogamous committed relationship?  I was trying not to see that but that is what I saw.

Daniel,

First let me say that I think I understand what you’re saying - that committed homosexual relationships are not “as sinful” (if they are sinful at all) as promiscuous homosexual sex.  Am I right?

Second, if I am correct in my paraphrasing, you are saying that we should grade sins.  But if all sex outside of marriage is sin, why is committed monogamous homosexual sin any better than promiscuity?  Both are sins - why do we need a distinction between them?

Also, I’ve mentioned it before, but don’t know if you’ve seen it, and so I mention it again for the sake of personal context: my father-in-law is gay (I have no idea if he is currently active) and I’ve lost two friends to AIDS gotten through homosexual activity - one of which was in a committed monogamous relationship...).  I only mention this because it is far from a theoretical argument for me - it’s downright personal since it involves someone I love who claims to have Biblical justification for his position.

Brian

This is going to be the issue which we will have to be dealing with for the next decade at least. We will bring our verses and our interpretations and we will have to determine not only how we deal with this issue but how we deal with differences that will arise.

I am often amazed at how this issue get press. Given that less than 3% of the population is GLBT, why has this become the front burner issue? Racial issues still plague us and when you combine the Hispanic and African-African popuations you get 26% or better of the country.

Daniel a committed relationship between an adult and child is wrong in any category. it is the same with the gay relationships.

Back on point…

I think it is disturbing that a church is supporting this display which celebrates what seem obviously non-biblical (read “wrong") ideas about what makes a family.

Bart, that’s because the display is not religious in nature.  Separation of church and state only applies to the state supporting religion or supporting one religion over another.  The display is meant to illustrate an expansion of the definition of “family”.  Just because it’s sponsored by a church doesn’t necessarily make it religious in nature.

Peter, you’re assuming that every church believes as you and your church does.  You’ve got to remember that not all Christians and not all churches agree with you on this issue.  This is a church that affirms homosexuality and monogamous same-sex relationships as valid and acceptable.

Daniel, not all Christians disagree with your position, or your openness to consider new ideas.  I think the biggest tragedy of this disagreement is the animosity and antagonism is brings out, but that is to be expected with an issue that engenders a response on such an emotional level in most people.

The Bible does pretty clearly call it a sin, just as it calls adultery a sin, but you rarely see anyone get as worked up about adultery as they do about homosexuality.  Most Christians, even gay affirming Christians, will call adultery a sin, but it doesn’t trigger such a heated emotional response as does the issue of homosexuality.

Wow.  What a powder keg of thoughts.  I struggle with the way the issue is understood within the church today.  I think more listening, less pontificating and much more respectful dialog is in order.  The struggle in my heart is not over the truth about the sin but about how we as a people of faith respond and offer redemption and freedom to those trapped by the deceitfulness of sexual sins.  How can we whose stand is clear on what the Bible teaches about homosexuality offer hope?  We cannot offer hope by deconstructing the teaching as some are want to do.  Lowering the bar on sin does not set people free, it only traps more people. 

I have to admit that this article is triggers in me much more than a conversation about the rightfulness of homosexuality, it opens dialog about the rightfulness of our response as Christians and pastors.  From the extreme ashes of gay pride marches that are militant assaults on Biblical values to the “god hates fags” extreme must come an answer to the questions we have about homosexuality.  The simple answer is what the bible says about the sin, the more difficult answer is how I can let the redeemers love flow through me in such a way that is both true (biblical) and gracious. 

I went to a conservative, evangelical Bible College.  One of the students was discovered as gay, not by anything that happened at the school, and the college kicked him out.  The administration told every one of us never to have contact with him again and made sure we knew that his sin was an abomination.  I agree wholeheartedly that the sin is an abomination but something didn’t set well with me.  That was going on 30 years ago.  No one wanted to take time to understand what happened in his life that triggered such a lifestyle?  Didn’t anyone want to offer help?  Didn’t anyone want to bring the truth in loving kindness so as to offer a way out of a lifestyle destined for loneliness, hurt and separation from a creator who went to the cross to forgive that very sin?  The answer was “No” and the reason was the “Bible Says this one is an abomination.”

Let me be clear; I believe homosexuality is a sin, not a genetic but a societal sin.  I also believe unless we can have a careful, biblical, and prayerful and Holy Spirit driven dialog we too will be in sin. 

One final thought, based upon John 8 and the woman “caught in the act” I sure wish Jesus had come out with a biblical response and condemned adultery.  He should have announced its evil and destructive impact upon families, marriages and society.  I wish he had let everyone know that this sin is heinous and an abomination.  I really do because that would have been much easier for me as a model of how to respond to these sexually charged sins.  Instead he offered redemption in the face of the condemnation of others.  He commanded a life of change on the heals of grace and truth.  Jesus response was much more difficult than wagging my finger, proclaiming the Bible says.  But there was a group there that day doing that wasn’t there?  To offer God’s redemption apart from God’s truth is impossible, but is it possible we have offered God’s truth without redemption in some of these issues?

Daniel,

I am not sure how to respond since your politics play into this issue so much.  Any quick peek (took me 5 minutes) into the voting record and the issues this candidate possesses would tell you the foolishness of the argument in the article and the silliness in using a biased reporter whose job it is to sell papers not represent the facts as a source of wisdom.  Are there bigger issues?  I would say some, but not all issues are bigger.  Are you willing to hold her counterparts to the same scrutiny?  The reporter obviously is not.