How should we think through issues like homosexuality?
The conversation the past couple of weeks has been great. I hope though, as we have these discussions, we keep Ephesians 4:1-7 top of mind, particularly verses 3-4: "...with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." We all have the same God and we are all striving for Him, not to be right or win an argument.
So I want to continue the discussion on homosexuality but, first, I want to take step back. My primary hope in raising this topic honestly had nothing to do with homosexuality -- it was to point back to The Dude's post a few weeks ago. He outlined a few steps he follows in thinking through issues like this one:
1) Why do I hold this position (emotionally, intellectually, culturally, traditionally, and scripturally)?
2) How does the larger Biblical narrative (creation, fall, redemption, new-creation) influence this topic?
3) What do Scripture, my own experiences, and church tradition say in general terms about this topic?
4) Taking #1-3 into account, what might a thoughtful Christian response be?
5) What other areas of my life does this issue affect and need to be integrated with?
The problem with this approach is it takes too long. But don't we owe it to God, ourselves, and each other to take the time to really seek Truth? My hope is that we as Christians won't allow our view of Truth to be swayed by the shifting winds of politics or public opinion. But if we hope to withstand that pressure, we have to examine the foundation of our beliefs. Let's do that for homosexuality this week. I'll take a shot at answering The Dude's 5 questions for myself (as briefly as possible):
1) I grew up in the Bible Belt, going to two mega-churches both of which are actually fairly liberal for the Bible Belt, but I would say that my view of homosexuality was almost always just assumed: "It's wrong." I never had any interaction with nor even knew anyone who was gay (I do now, though). Then in college, I heard that the former pastor of my church was now teaching at a church in New York that the open practice of homosexuality was Biblically acceptable. I was confused and researched the sermons I could find and wrote my pastor to ask his opinion. I'm just now going back to revisit that process I started in college to determine why I believe what I believe.
2) When I look at the Creation story, I see God say "It is not good that man should be alone" (Genesis 2:18) and then proceed to create for Adam a female companion. Unfortunately, I know that we sinners twist every good thing God created for us. From the very beginning, God's intention was for "man [to] leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed" (Genesis 2:24-25). But somehow, between that time of open and unashamed nakedness, we sexualized our relationships with women and even other men such that this gift of female companionship, of physical, emotional, and spiritual oneness, served little purpose beyond the gratification of fleeting lustful urges. Of course I trust in Jesus' promise to redeem us despite our perversion of this great gift and to restore His intended creation.
3) Ephesians 5:22-33 clearly outlines the intent for husbands and wives to reflect the relationship between Christ and the Church in marriage: "This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the Church" (v. 32). 1 Peter 3:1-7 also provides instruction for the husband/wife relationship saying "[show] honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life..." (v. 7). In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul says "For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does" (v. 4). Paul wished that "all were as I myself am (single)" (v. 7) and even says, "To the unmarried and the widows, I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion" (v. 8-9). He goes on to say, "The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided...I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord" (v. 32-35).
If I was to look purely at biology, it would be clear that heterosexual sex is the only natural means for procreation. Thus, any other form of sex is not natural. I believe this includes masturbation, homosexual sex, and many other perversions. Of course, heterosexual sex can be unGodly (casual sex, rape, incest, etc.), but it is natural and, biologically and spiritually, we must begin there.
4) I believe my response to this Scripture, my own experience with marriage, and the experiences of married men and women much wiser than me is to say marriage is an incredible gift from God that, like most of His Creation, was designed to point to Christ, not to satisfy man. The same is true of sex. Marriage and sex are gifts, not rights -- and, again, their purpose is Christ. Paul strongly encourages abstinence in 1 Corinthians 7 that our devotion to the Lord may be undivided. He explains to the Ephesians that marriage is a mysterious union that paints a living portrait of Christ's relationship with the Church. A man cannot be substituted for the woman in these verses. A male/male relationship fails to reflect Christ and the Church as marriage was intended to do. God created us in His image and I think few of us would debate the fact that God created male and female distinctly different (physically and emotionally). It is together, when male and female are one, that we reflect the full range of His character.
We have discussed "committed homosexual relationships" -- I would agree that these are possible -- but it is called friendship. I am confident that two homosexual men, two heterosexual men, or any combination thereof can have a committed, intimate friendship that does not involve sex. There are many examples of intimate relationships in the Bible (e.g., David and Jonathan, Jesus and Peter), but sex was designed, from the very beginning of Creation, for a man and woman to become one and, in so doing, understand Christ's love for us in a unique way. I feel like I need to reiterate my belief here -- sex is a gift from God but we must never mistake that gift as a right.
On a slightly different note, I feel I ought to address one comment a couple of weeks ago that noted Christ Himself never condemns homosexuality. I disagree. Condemnation of homosexuality may never have come from Jesus' physical mouth, but Old Testament Scripture is often cited as Jesus' words. Obviously Jesus, in His earthly form, was not yet alive so this is mysterious. The explanation is spiritual. John 1:1,14 says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us..." Jesus is the Truth. Truth is a man, not a collection of verses. A pastor at our church once said we must take the “sum of Scripture” not “some of it.” Looking in a concordance and plucking verses – Old Testament or New – that include the word “homosexual” to develop a belief is spiritually irresponsible. As The Dude has laid out in this 5 step process, we must consider a lot of factors if we hope to truly understand the depth of our beliefs. Let's be careful not to discount Scripture outside of the Gospels. Jesus certainly didn't.
5) I think this issue is much, much more than a plank in a political platform. Personally, I need to be much more cognizant of my words and actions and how they convey my love for people regardless of sexual orientation. I need to be aware that, if there aren't gay people around me, there are probably people around me with gay people in their lives -- so I need to stop making "gay" jokes and stop saying "that's gay." I also need to think proactively about the ways I can love the gay people in my life. But, on a much broader scale, I need to encourage a Christ-centered view of intimacy with my wife and close friends. We need to build deep relationships based on prayer and Scripture and shared experiences and hopefully those relationships will stand in stark contrast to the lie that intimacy equals sex. We need to raise our kids in that environment and drive a deeper sociological shift back to a reverent understanding of sex's role in marriage and, spiritually, to understand its reflection of Jesus and the Church.
I'll close with a quote from The Dude's last post: "This process is not simple and I usually wrestle hard over this stuff. And I am convinced that faith is what allows me to come to any decision. Not certitude. Faith. Not that I'm right but rather that I am doing my best to follow the story of scripture and that it is OK for me to make a mistake."
What are your thoughts on this process? My comments?
So I want to continue the discussion on homosexuality but, first, I want to take step back. My primary hope in raising this topic honestly had nothing to do with homosexuality -- it was to point back to The Dude's post a few weeks ago. He outlined a few steps he follows in thinking through issues like this one:
1) Why do I hold this position (emotionally, intellectually, culturally, traditionally, and scripturally)?
2) How does the larger Biblical narrative (creation, fall, redemption, new-creation) influence this topic?
3) What do Scripture, my own experiences, and church tradition say in general terms about this topic?
4) Taking #1-3 into account, what might a thoughtful Christian response be?
5) What other areas of my life does this issue affect and need to be integrated with?
The problem with this approach is it takes too long. But don't we owe it to God, ourselves, and each other to take the time to really seek Truth? My hope is that we as Christians won't allow our view of Truth to be swayed by the shifting winds of politics or public opinion. But if we hope to withstand that pressure, we have to examine the foundation of our beliefs. Let's do that for homosexuality this week. I'll take a shot at answering The Dude's 5 questions for myself (as briefly as possible):
1) I grew up in the Bible Belt, going to two mega-churches both of which are actually fairly liberal for the Bible Belt, but I would say that my view of homosexuality was almost always just assumed: "It's wrong." I never had any interaction with nor even knew anyone who was gay (I do now, though). Then in college, I heard that the former pastor of my church was now teaching at a church in New York that the open practice of homosexuality was Biblically acceptable. I was confused and researched the sermons I could find and wrote my pastor to ask his opinion. I'm just now going back to revisit that process I started in college to determine why I believe what I believe.
2) When I look at the Creation story, I see God say "It is not good that man should be alone" (Genesis 2:18) and then proceed to create for Adam a female companion. Unfortunately, I know that we sinners twist every good thing God created for us. From the very beginning, God's intention was for "man [to] leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed" (Genesis 2:24-25). But somehow, between that time of open and unashamed nakedness, we sexualized our relationships with women and even other men such that this gift of female companionship, of physical, emotional, and spiritual oneness, served little purpose beyond the gratification of fleeting lustful urges. Of course I trust in Jesus' promise to redeem us despite our perversion of this great gift and to restore His intended creation.
3) Ephesians 5:22-33 clearly outlines the intent for husbands and wives to reflect the relationship between Christ and the Church in marriage: "This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the Church" (v. 32). 1 Peter 3:1-7 also provides instruction for the husband/wife relationship saying "[show] honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life..." (v. 7). In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul says "For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does" (v. 4). Paul wished that "all were as I myself am (single)" (v. 7) and even says, "To the unmarried and the widows, I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion" (v. 8-9). He goes on to say, "The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided...I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord" (v. 32-35).
If I was to look purely at biology, it would be clear that heterosexual sex is the only natural means for procreation. Thus, any other form of sex is not natural. I believe this includes masturbation, homosexual sex, and many other perversions. Of course, heterosexual sex can be unGodly (casual sex, rape, incest, etc.), but it is natural and, biologically and spiritually, we must begin there.
4) I believe my response to this Scripture, my own experience with marriage, and the experiences of married men and women much wiser than me is to say marriage is an incredible gift from God that, like most of His Creation, was designed to point to Christ, not to satisfy man. The same is true of sex. Marriage and sex are gifts, not rights -- and, again, their purpose is Christ. Paul strongly encourages abstinence in 1 Corinthians 7 that our devotion to the Lord may be undivided. He explains to the Ephesians that marriage is a mysterious union that paints a living portrait of Christ's relationship with the Church. A man cannot be substituted for the woman in these verses. A male/male relationship fails to reflect Christ and the Church as marriage was intended to do. God created us in His image and I think few of us would debate the fact that God created male and female distinctly different (physically and emotionally). It is together, when male and female are one, that we reflect the full range of His character.
We have discussed "committed homosexual relationships" -- I would agree that these are possible -- but it is called friendship. I am confident that two homosexual men, two heterosexual men, or any combination thereof can have a committed, intimate friendship that does not involve sex. There are many examples of intimate relationships in the Bible (e.g., David and Jonathan, Jesus and Peter), but sex was designed, from the very beginning of Creation, for a man and woman to become one and, in so doing, understand Christ's love for us in a unique way. I feel like I need to reiterate my belief here -- sex is a gift from God but we must never mistake that gift as a right.
On a slightly different note, I feel I ought to address one comment a couple of weeks ago that noted Christ Himself never condemns homosexuality. I disagree. Condemnation of homosexuality may never have come from Jesus' physical mouth, but Old Testament Scripture is often cited as Jesus' words. Obviously Jesus, in His earthly form, was not yet alive so this is mysterious. The explanation is spiritual. John 1:1,14 says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us..." Jesus is the Truth. Truth is a man, not a collection of verses. A pastor at our church once said we must take the “sum of Scripture” not “some of it.” Looking in a concordance and plucking verses – Old Testament or New – that include the word “homosexual” to develop a belief is spiritually irresponsible. As The Dude has laid out in this 5 step process, we must consider a lot of factors if we hope to truly understand the depth of our beliefs. Let's be careful not to discount Scripture outside of the Gospels. Jesus certainly didn't.
5) I think this issue is much, much more than a plank in a political platform. Personally, I need to be much more cognizant of my words and actions and how they convey my love for people regardless of sexual orientation. I need to be aware that, if there aren't gay people around me, there are probably people around me with gay people in their lives -- so I need to stop making "gay" jokes and stop saying "that's gay." I also need to think proactively about the ways I can love the gay people in my life. But, on a much broader scale, I need to encourage a Christ-centered view of intimacy with my wife and close friends. We need to build deep relationships based on prayer and Scripture and shared experiences and hopefully those relationships will stand in stark contrast to the lie that intimacy equals sex. We need to raise our kids in that environment and drive a deeper sociological shift back to a reverent understanding of sex's role in marriage and, spiritually, to understand its reflection of Jesus and the Church.
I'll close with a quote from The Dude's last post: "This process is not simple and I usually wrestle hard over this stuff. And I am convinced that faith is what allows me to come to any decision. Not certitude. Faith. Not that I'm right but rather that I am doing my best to follow the story of scripture and that it is OK for me to make a mistake."
What are your thoughts on this process? My comments?
posted by Matthew at 10:30 PM
10 Comments:
I had a conversation with a colleague last week about homosexuality. He told me about a friend of his that is homosexual, and the fact that he except his friend as he is, and do not think that it is wrong. Then I asked if he thinks his friend was born that way, or does it have something to do with his upbringing, to which his answer was, “Probably his upbringing. Had he been more involved with sport in school, he probably wouldn’t have become gay”.
English is not my first language, so please excuse my grammar! Secondly, I am working in London, and I am the only Christian in my department, the colleague I refer to, don’t believe in God.
My opinion and my message to my colleague was that God created a man and a woman to be together and to recreate. If his intention was that two men could be together, he would have created only two men, or two women. My colleague's reaction was “But how do you know God created a man and a woman?” my reply, “because the Bible says so”. His reply, “And the Bible also says that Jesus walked on water, which is absurd”.
After this he changed the subject.....but, I have been thinking about this a lot and feel that, if people can use there common sense, it’s very easy to see that being homosexual is wrong. Firstly, only a man can make a woman pregnant, and therefore, if everybody was homosexual, the human race will not be on earth for very much longer!
Secondly, a child needs a father and a mother in his/her life to fulfil certain roles. Children that grow up in a single parent homes, or homosexual homes, face a lot more challenges in life, and I feel very sorry for them.
In my opinion, the Bible is clear on the fact that homosexuality is a sin. And yes, no sins are bigger than others, and we all are sinners, so what’s the issue? Well, the issue for me is, that being homosexual, versus other sins like adultery, are done in a lot less “discreet” way. The majority of sins are done in ones mind, therefore only you and God knows about it, or perhaps one or two other people, with some other sins. With homosexuality, everybody sees it, and for especially children, to see two men kissing each other in public, is simply unacceptable, and could have serious emotional consequences for that kid later in his/her life.
I think we have a duty to protect our children against seeing this happen. Having said that, as Christians, we ought to love everyone, including homosexuals, and try to lead them to see that they need to stop what they are busy with. They were definitely NOT born a homosexual!
George, your friend was obviously not that close to his gay friend if he was purely speculating that it was "probably his upbringing." Did he ever sit down and talk to him about it...or was it just his own biased view? To add to his argument that "had he been more involved with sport, that he would not be gay" is mind-blowing and ignorant. Does he also think the contrary, that a girl involved in sport, is more likely to become a lesbian? Both crazy arguments if you ask me.
How many gay people do you know? How many many of the gay people that you know have you sat down and had a serious intellectual talk with? Have you asked them if one day they just chose to "become gay." And by choosing this, transform their "normal" life into one in which they are threatened, mocked and shunned upon (could extend this list for 5 paragraphs) every day? Does that make any (common) sense for one to "choose" that lifestyle?
I would argue that being discreet with your sins (adultery, etc...) has the potential to cause 100x as many problems with your children/family than exposing them to two men kissing indiscreetly on the sidewalk.
How can you say that we are DEFINITELY NOT born a homosexual. There are millions of people in this world that would argue otherwise. Go talk to one! I feel sorry for people that have never tried to reach out and hear the other side...left only with a very narrow view.
I would like to pose the question: How would you treat your own child if he/she was born (or for the sake of your argument, chose to be) homosexual? Do you live your entire life in shame and fail to accept what your own genes created?
Street- I just want to throw one thing in the mix in what is seeming to be an appeal to understanding. Or the perceived disjunct between genes and choice.
If the nature of Sin is so pervasive that everything in our experience is tainted why should we expect our genes to be spared? Does that absolve me from responsibility just because i might be more genetically inclined to act harshly in anger like my Father?
I just want to explore and potentially question the notion of this dichotomy between natural/spiritual. Thoughts?
Broun-
I would argue that one who is genetically inclined to be homosexual is not in any way affecting my life or yours. If he and his partner choose to live that lifestyle, they are not doing any harm to society (in my opinion). If they were, then they would need to seek help and make a change to that aspect of their life (just as a genetically inclined alcoholic would need medical attn/rehabilitation). I would say the same about someone who is directly "acting harshly like your father" towards other people.
I just do not link being a homosexual and one's personal sexual orientation as being harmful or destructive to the rest of the world.
We have to be careful of 2 things. Both have been expressed but not explicitly, and I want to do that now.
1) We must be careful to deal purely with abstractions. 'Homosexual' as a category is MUCH different than a person who has a sexual preference towards the same sex. We tend to mingle these two things together in argument and it does not yield helpful results. A theological, biological, or moral argument for or against homosexuality DOES NOT and MUST NOT determine how we are to treat other human beings made in the image of God. The question "How would you treat your own child if he/she was born (or for the sake of your argument, chose to be) homosexual?" has nothing to do with this argument. We are not discussing our ability, inability or desire to love one another. Fortunately that has been decided for us already. We are to love our neighbors and our enemies; we are to be devoted to God and to the well-being of humanity. UNfortunately, this does not dismiss us from making moral and ethical statements in line with what we think God's ordered world looks like.
2) That being said, sin must be seen on both an individual and corporate level. Because of the interconnectedness of humanity my sins necessarily effect the human community. Although we may not see those effects or experience directly (or even in our lifetime) those effects on humanity, we must be careful not to think that 'what I do in my own home is my own business.' In some ways this is true, but one of my biggest arguments I've been making throughout the history of this blog is that we need to begin to see our indivudual lives as part of a larger community life. My actions effect the community in some way, for better or worse; for community integration or community disintegration. Internet pornography is one example in which what I do in my own room effects the community because it changes me and the way I interact with others, my ability to become intimate with others, and decreases my ability to interact with the community in a fruitful way. No action is in a vacuum.
To conclude, this is not a question of 'should we love the other?' Absolutely without question we should. But this is a question of human sexual ethics and we must be careful not fall in to the postmodern trap of indifference. And we must see our individual lives necessarily intertwined with a community, however that plays out.
Honestly, this seems like you've started to think though some issues, but didn't get very far. Your reading of scripture seems to lack breadth. Can/should only passages that talk about men/women or sexual practice dominate your understanding (and only a particularly reading of those texts at that)? What do passages relating to the sabbath, Job, or Jesus' parables contribute to your thinking? This is my way of saying that it looks like you went to the places that seemed most obvious to you, but that has the tendency to confirm what you already thought. When you treat passages, you often make jumps which seem to do the same. "He explains to the Ephesians that marriage is a mysterious union that paints a living portrait of Christ's relationship with the Church. A man cannot be substituted for the woman in these verses." While in a situation like this, I'd agree that Paul is likely thinking man/woman, but you don't answer why a homosexual relationship cannot be "mysterious union that paints a living portrait of Christ's relationship with the Church" or why a homosexual marriage isn't "an incredible gift from God that, like most of His Creation is designed to point to Christ." Your biological naturalism breaks down as well. Here I'd recommend Bruce Bagemihl's Biological Exuberance. On a chromosomal makeup or even on the basis of genitalia, the picture is much more complicated than you make it. If you assume that everyone running around has either XX or XY, then you have one simple answer to address part of a complex question. What do you do with XXX girls, XYY boys, etc. While I haven't refuted you, in short I'd say that "nature" arguments are often theologically agnostic (though you did derive an ought from an is in the Genesis account--another questionable move) and more often than not scientifically naive. Lastly, there's not a lot of theological thought or reference to any sort of tradition in any of this. It would have been fun if you referenced John Cassian (360 – 433) when he says that nocturnal emissions are a proof that we even sin in our sleep (though perhaps women do not!).
As I said in a previous comment: "it is a bit difficult to try to find what we now call homosexuality addressed in Scripture. No, I don't need you to send me a list of verses, since the question is whether what those verses discuss - given the structures of first century sociality in the case of the NT - are anywhere close to what we talk about today when we talk about homosexuality." We should do well to remember that we do no honor to the Bible by wringing from its words answers to questions which were not in fact in the minds of those who used these words, and that by doing so we may only obscure the undivided attention with which the biblical authors concentrated upon their own themes. It is a difficult sociological question to ask whether there could have possibly been in the ancient near east anything remotely approximating what we've called homosexuality since the 18th/19th century. The tendency is to read the 21st century American suburb back into biblical times/writings on sexuality where you have polygamy, adult/youth relationships, concubines and eunuchs, all within the realms of normalcy.
Now I realize I've yet to say anything positive (by which I mean provide my own account of the questions before us). That's because it's not clear to me how much work Matthew or anyone one else here is willing to do to start asking difficult questions. In the previous comment already referenced, I said "it would be helpful if people would read books such as Homoeroticism in the Biblical World, and The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology." I'd also add Eugene Rogers's Sexuality and the Christian Body: Their Way into the Triune God. These are not representative of my position, but it's clear that the kinds of questions they raise are not on the table here. Since I've already said why I think the kind of reasoning that has gone on here is weak and needs to be expanded, I'll wait to see if any expanding goes on. Otherwise, I'm not even sure we're playing the same game.
Oh, and I'd also recommend one of the last chapters of Fowl's Egaging Scripture where he likens the process that the Jews had to go through "looking for the Spirit's work" to see if Gentiles could be a part of the church to what must go on with regard to the place of homosexuality within the church.
Tolle lege!
err...should read 'particular' not 'particularly' near the top of the comment above.
Here is something I feel compelled to share with you all: One of my best friends is a homosexual man. I call him one of my best friends because he treats me with tremendous respect and challenged me to get to know Jesus better. He is an outspoken atheist, a proud homosexual, and against conservative Christians. I have sat down with him and listened carefully to his story. He came to UT for graduate school and he was engaged to a woman at the time. When he first read the UT Tower's famous words "Ye Shall Know the Truth and the Truth Shall Set You Free", it hit him that he was gay. At that moment, he broke up the engagement with this woman and pursued a completely different lifestyle for more than 10 years. He said he had found the "truth". He even knew the words came from the Bible (John 8:32). The reason why he is so anti-Christian is his negative view of Christians as a whole. Christians are against him and treat him with hatred and such. He even told me that the Christians he sees everyday are not reflective of Jesus character at all. You see how he challenged me?! Because of him, I thought hard and a lot about my actions. We all need a better understanding; so I encourage you all to sit down and listen to their story and you'll most likely have an opportunity to share your story. After 5 years on campus not really understanding how "the truth will set you free" and much thought and prayer, I finally got it. Here is an example: Scenario #1: You're driving down the road and speeding over the limit. A cop pulls you over and explains that you were violating the law by speeding and hands you a ticket. You're obviously not "free" because you didn't know the speed limit, the "truth". Scenario #2: You're driving down the road and already know the speed limit, but you were speeding anyway. A cop pulls you over and asks you why you were speeding. You obviously have no explanation unless it was an emergency. You still get a ticket. Again, you are not "free" even though you knew the "truth". Scenario #3: You're driving down the road and you made sure you knew the speed limit and kept driving at or below the speed limit. You see a cop on the side of the road and you wave at the cop. The cop smiles and waves back at you. You are actually "free" because you found the "truth".
Now, back to my friend, after spending time with him and sharing my story with him (with words such as "all Christians aren't perfect, just saved"), he has reconsidered his viewpoint on Christians. He appreciates my words and said that I've given him some "spiritual real estate". It may not be enough but its a start. I'm still not going to pressure him or change him into a heterosexual; I am striving to be like Jesus and treat him and all others with patience, kindness, gentleness, and understanding. Jesus LOVES everyone. I do love this guy and hope he understands the Truth (Jesus).
More of a good read, than a fair fight:
http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/article.php3?id_article=1957
click here.
Post a Comment
<< Home