- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (11/2)
- Next Post »7 Weird Things I've Written
The Struggles of Gay Christians
- 11/02/10
- 113
The issue of homosexuality is one in which the church has not done so well over the years. The majority of Christians have long held fast to the clear teaching of Scripture—that homosexuality is against God’s plan for the people he created and that homosexuality is a serious sin, one that manifests a particular hardness of heart. In all of this Christians have honored God, I am convinced. But where Christians have been less than exemplary is in a commitment to engage the very difficult issues. I am beginning to see a lot of growth here, but the fact remains—Christians tend to engage the issue of homosexuality on only a surface level. We have easy answers that, to those who demand them, are not at all satisfying.
Wesley Hill has had to engage this issue in a far more serious way. Hill is a Christian and he is gay. Now I know many will get no further than this phrase: gay Christian. Hill uses that phrase as a kind of shorthand to express that he is a Christian—an evangelical who holds to the tenets of the Chrisitan faith, but he is also a man who is homosexual in what seems to be his natural orientation or inclination. He has always been attracted to men and only men. He has remained celibate through all his life, convicted and enabled by the Holy Spirit not to act out his sexuality. But hope and pray as he might, he cannot change his inability to be attracted to women. I am not crazy about the phrase gay Christian, but will use it in this review while adding it to my growing list of things to think about in the future.
Washed and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness and Homosexuality is his attempt to answer some of the most difficult questions, and to answer them not in an abstract sense, but from the perpsective of someone who has labored over them and shed many tears along the way. What does it mean for gay Christians to be faithful to God while struggling with the challenge of their homosexuality? What is God’s will for believers who experience same-sex desires? How can gay Christians experience God’s favor and blessing in the midst of a struggle that for many brings a crippling sense of shame and guilt? These are the questions the church needs to be willing and equipped to answer. We have to be able to do better than “Homosexuality is wrong.” And that’s what this book is all about.
Hill maintains throughout the book that homosexuality is a result of the Fall. Never does he soften this or backpedal on it. Never does he seek to excuse his inclination to homosexuality anymore than he’d downplay any other sin. What I most appreciate about Washed and Waiting is his ability to take us inside his struggle. We all have sins we struggle with; we all have what seem to be besetting sins. Why should we read a book about those who naturally tend toward homosexuality instead of those who naturally tend toward lying or cheating or some other sin? I would answer that in two ways. In the first place, issues of sexuality and sexual identity strike very, very close to the core of a person. A person who is drawn to shoplifting does not self-identify as a thief. That is not his identity. But a person who is homosexual truly does identify that way. It is a major part of who he is. And hence it is a very difficult sin to deal with. In the second place I would say that society is feeding all of us, those who go to church and those who do not, all kinds of false messages about homosexuality and we need to be equipped to respond in a robust way—in a way that shows we truly understand the issue on more than a surface level. This isn’t about yucky sexual deeds—the “yuck factor” (a term that I believe was first coined by C. Gerald Fraser in the early 80's). It is about people made in God’s image who seem to have a part of their core identity that through the reality of sin is just plain miswired.
Let me share just a few poignant parts of the book:
To say no over and over again to some of my deepest, strongest, most recurring longings often seems, by turns, impossible and completely undesirable. If a gay Christian’s sexual orientation is so fixed and ingrained that there seems to be little hope of changing it, should he or she really be expected to resist it for a lifetime?
…
What other group in contemporary society does the church confront as directly and sharply as it does homosexual people? Heterosexuals are at least given the option of marriage and thus the possibility of having their sexual urges satisfied. For homosexual Christians, there is no such possibility.
…
When we homosexual Christians bring our sexuality before God, we begin or continue a long, costly process of having it transformed. From God’s perspective, our homoerotic inclinations are like the craving for salt of a person who is dying of thirst. Yet when God begins to try to change the craving and give us the living water that will ultimately quench our thirst, we scream in pain, protesting that we were made for salt. The change hurts.
…
While those in the grip of Christ’s love will never experience ultimate defeat, there is a profound sense in which we must face our struggles now knowing there may be no real relief this side of God’s new creation. We may wrestle with a particular weakness all our lives. But the call remains: Go into battle.
I particularly appreciated Hill’s comparisons of homosexuality and singleness. After all, for the homosexual who is a Christian seeking to live in a God-honoring way, he has been called to a life of singleness. This puts him in a category with many Christians who desire relational intimacy, who desire sexual intimacy, and yet who have to deny themselves these things simply because it seems that God’s plans do not include them. And in that way, his struggle may be quite similar to another single person—one who does not necessarily feel called to a life of celibate singleness, but one whom God has not blessed with a spouse. Of course there are still differences; a heterosexual may hold out hope that he will meet a member of the opposite sex with whom he will fall in love; the homosexual, unless his desires are changed, will never have that opportunity. This brings about a deep loneliness and a deep lack of fulfillment. Just recently I was speaking to a pastor who has a man attending his church who appears to have been saved, and yet this man, homosexual but celibate, continues to live with his “husband.” While he is able to forego sex for the sake of his commitment to Christ, he cannot bear to part with the man he has shared his life with. I trust that eventually God will allow him to sever this relationship, painful though it may be. But once more, it points to one of the deep and difficult issues that we tend to ignore when we think about homosexuality.
While Hill does not deny the reality that God does at times choose to change a homosexual’s orientation, in many cases, and in his case, God has not done so. He longs to be attracted to women and some of his desires here are nearly heart-rending to read. And yet the fact remains that he simply is not attracted to women and has been unable to remedy that.
In this book Hill offers deep reflections from three people—himself, Henri Nouwen and Gerard Manley Hopkins. Both of those other men were apparently homosexual and both wrestled deeply with their sexuality, eventually choosing not to practice homosexuality. Of course the other thing that is true of those men is that they were Roman Catholic. Hill, then, necessarily draws upon people, mentors of sorts, whose understanding of the gospel would be far different than what evangelicals would hold to. I was a little disappointed to see his reliance upon these men and yet it made me think that this may be one more way in which evangelicals have probably been less than exemplary: there are few who have been willing to reveal their deep-rooted struggles with their sexuality. I could be wrong here, but it seems that a man seeking to reconcile Scripture and a homosexual orientation may find few other mentors.
It may be that this book’s greatest strength is its ability to take us deep inside the struggle. Those of us who have never struggled with this sin have probably never considered all of the difficulties that come with it—all of the feelings of guilt and shame, remorse and hopelessness. 1 Corinthians tells us that when one member of Christ’s body suffers, all suffer together. This book invites us into the suffering experienced by some of our brothers and sisters. There are things I wish Hill had done better, times I think he could have addressed issues differently, but his book remains powerful, always looking to Scripture, always seeking God’s will.
At the end of it all (160 pages or so) we are left with Hill calling on gay Christians to remain committed to celibacy and to find fulfillment not in pursuing their bodily desires, but in pursuing Christ. I was glad to see him point to the power of the local church in finding the kind of relational fulfillment that so many homosexuals are simply unable to find in other ways. He points to the power of the Holy Spirit working through the Word and working through the church, he points to the tough reality that life on this side of eternity may offer no transformation of desire. And yet he declares the truth that any of us, including gay Christians, live in this world washed and waiting—free from the guilt of sin, from the stain of sin, while eagerly awaiting the day when all is made new.
Washed and Waiting is by no means the final word on this topic and it is marked by a few weaknesses. But I do consider it quite a valuable read, predominantly for the diagnosis and to a lesser extent for the suggested cure. It speaks of an issue that Christians just can’t afford to ignore.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (113)
Tim, along these same lines I’d like to recommend the blog of a friend, a good brother, a clear thinker, and a gifted writer who is very transparent about his struggle with (and war against) homosexuality:
http://thom-signsofastruggle.blogspot.com/
It is a honestly hard topic to speak about in an educated manner due to the complexities that the Bible throws out there. I have no ill will toward any gay person, it is with their lifestyle I have issues as I assume God does also.
Without further diving into the Word, I am as uneducated as the majority of folks though. I have a few friends who are a “gay Christians” but do not practice their gay lifestyles. Its a very hard thing.
Thanks for posting. You get right to the heart of the matter. Sin is a condition of the heart. Yet, as Christians, we all too often focus on the outward manifestation of that condition rather than the condition itself. I used to have a very hard time accepting that homosexuals are “born that way” until God opened my eyes and made me realize that they are born, just as we all are, with a self serving nature that only wants to fulfill its own wants and desires. It doesn’t matter whether that desire is if it is anything other than to glorify God with every thought, word, and deed. I could have taken anything in the post and changed homosexuality for any of the many desires I do struggle with and been rightfully convicted.
Just FYI Tim,
Henri Nouwen’s sexual orientation is not truly known. After he died, someone wrote an unauthorized biography of him that claimed he was homosexual. However, that’s not clear from his own mouth, but could simply be a ‘reading between the lines that aren’t really there’.
Nouwen’s sexual orientation is subject to debate because he took a vow of celibacy (as a priest), and because he wrote a beautiful piece about a disabled man he cared for in his vocational work with L’arche Daybreak (“Adam’s story”).
Thanks for your review, Tim. As usual, I’m grateful for your thoughts.
And thanks to Wesley for taking the vulnerable step of writing this book.
Henri Nouwen's sexual orientation is not truly known. After he died, someone wrote an unauthorized biography of him that claimed he was homosexual. However, that's not clear from his own mouth, but could simply be a 'reading between the lines that aren't really there'.
Right. I’m aware that there is some disagreement over the nature of Nouwen’s struggles (which is why I used the qualifier “apparently” to describe him as homosexual). It seems that he probably was, but it’s not entirely clear.
The term “gay Christian” is an interesting choice of words. On the one hand, we are told being gay is a sin like any other (which is true), yet on the other hand we are told “gay Christians” represent a different class of Christians, hence the adjective “gay”. Yet if being gay is just another sin, why not use the term “sinful Christians”, which we all are.
Also, by using the term, it almost seems to imply that it’s okay to continue being gay as a Christian. Would we use the term “murdering Christian” or “lustful Christian”?
Tim, I understand that all sinners need compassion, but I’m not sure we should be trying to understand homosexuality “in a far more serious way.” Do we need to understand a pornographer or murder to teach them the gospel? I’m curious as to how much of the book is repentance based on Scripture?
I would say that a person identifying themselves as a “gay Christian” should really test themselves to see if they are in the faith (1 Cor 13).
Also, by using the term, it almost seems to imply that it's okay to continue being gay as a Christian. Would we use the term "murdering Christian" or "lustful Christian"?
I agree to a point. But I guess that’s where I’d say that homosexuality somehow involves a person’s identity in a way that other sins do not. A term like gay Christian is a concession and, at the very least, is a whole lot more convenient than saying something like “a Christian who has sinful natural tendencies toward homosexuality” or something like that.
So in the case of Wesley Hill, he is using the term to describe a person who is truly saved but who feels a natural inclination toward homosexuality, even while acknowledging that this is a sinful inclination. And in that case I don’t know that this person ought to feel any extra burden to test himself to see if he is in the faith—no more than the rest of us, at least.
Wow! I have a very close friend who identifies himself as a gay Christian yet remains celibate. I have long struggled to understand his struggle and this book seems so timely. The kind where I will have to put down everything else that I am reading and read this. Thanks for posting.
Thanks for your review Tim. The Church would be well-served to read Hill’s book as I think it describes the struggle of an insider (someone growing up in the church) coming to grips with their homosexual orientation. From my own experience, this is a particularly difficult path to tread as the Church is often unaware of the identity issues tied in with sexual orientation, and has often had an us vs. them mentality towards homosexuality in general.
I though his use of Nouwen was quite helpful. Nouwen’s views certainly are Roman Catholic, but you can’t read his books and not see his deep, abiding love for Christ and what is essentially a very Christ-centered theology. Ford’s biography, which I assume is the one alluded to above, gives pretty ample evidence that Nouwen almost certainly had a homosexual orientation. Simply reading through his works and journals, the evidence points to this conclusion consistently.
Thanks for the review, Tim!
I counsel adolescent males, some of whom are struggling with their own sexual identities. Though I am one person and by no means an expert possessing THE answer, I have yet to meet the acquaintance of a homosexual male who has experienced a meaningful, touching, intimate relationship with his earthly father. Perhaps, though I have no personal experience in counseling girls in this same area, I might pre-suppose that the corresponding lack of an intimate relationship of a lesbian daughter with her mother might be evidenced as well? Is homosexuality perhaps a lifelong mental struggle to acquire the experience of a loving parental relationship, that at least from the outset, and during critical times of personality developement, was significantly less than desireable; or painful?
If that is the case, then I am joyful in Spirit that Hill is seeking a relationship with his One, True Heavenly Father rather than working out this conflict within a fleshly pursuit of his earthly father. A Godly-Father relationship will never let him down, disappoint, or cause him to be pained or conflicted.
Does Hill speak of his relationship with his dad in the book? Any thoughts on this theory? I believe that Dobson holds this observation as well.
I ask these questions as my brother, who after 15 years of marriage and JUST after the death of our father, decided to throw away his marriage and children to pursue a homosexual relationship. Our dad treated the two of us quite differetly and seemed always to have contempt for my brother. Is there any significance in this? Are homosexuals created this way by our Heavenly Father, or are they “created” this way by our earthly father (mother)?
Struggling with this. We certainly cannot day that their is a ‘sin’ for which Christ’s death was not sufficient to conquer… so we know from Romans that sin does not ‘have’ to have power over us. There can, with the proper help, support, deprogramming or whatever live im victory over this sin as with others??
In all honesty, the term “gay Christian” contradicts itself, at best. It’s an oximoron. “Christian” means “little Christ” - so breaking it down, a homoexual is, in essence, a “gay little Christ”…? No, that can’t be.
As I’m sure you’re well aware, in the book of Leviticus God calls homosexuality an “abomination.” And, of course, we know the judgement of God fell both with the flood and with the raining down of fire on Sodom and Gommorah - both circumstances involving homosexuality.
I know, I know… hate the sin, but love the sinner. And I do. I have friends that are *practicing* homosexuals… who, by the way, were once some of the greatest Christian encouragements I had when I was in highschool. So what happened…? Did they just come out of the proverbial “closet” one day on a whim? No, it had been in their heart all along - and as a man “thinketh in his heart, so is he” (Prov. 23:7a). How can a person be “right with God” and openly (or secretly) live a life so contrary to His Word? How can someone truly serve the Lord with a heart so given over to wickedness? “Oh, but they’re not a practicing homosexual…” And that makes it okay, how? Are not their hearts pondering and practicing this sin?
If it was “okay” to be a homosexual, then why do people try to hide it? Why do they deny it? Why are they ashamed of it? …finally, they get tired of living a double life, so they come out - and it’s shouted from the rooftops.
I’d like to remind everyone that mankind was created in God’s own image. Why would he “give” someone homosexual desires when even the idea of such a lifestyle is a rotten stench in His nostrils?
God is not the Author of confusion. He will not say one thing and do another. Satan is the author of concusion - he wants nothing more than for people to believe this awful, wicked sin is “okay” and that we should accept it. Homosexuality is wicked, it’s vile… and it should not and cannot be accepted or tolerated - ESPECIALLY in the Church.
“But God loves all people, right…?” No.”For God so loveD the world that he gave His only begotten Son…” LoveD is past tense. He loveD us, He gave us His Son, but it’s our choice now… if we want the love, we have to submit to God’s terms. We have to meet Him at the cross, repent, confess, and believe.
Wow, many thoughts come to mind as I read this. I’m a person who has struggled with homosexuality from the time I was about 12 years old (I’m now almost 50) so I can relate to much of what I read here - but not everything. I can relate to the reality of this temptation always being there, even if only in the back of my mind, and the reality that most of the other men I encounter both inside the church and out, do not deal with it and have no idea what it’s like. Thankfully, God through His grace and mercy has given me freedom from bondage to this sin (meaning I don’t have to white-knuckle it every day to keep from acting out now) but I can still be tempted by it and have to be ever vigilant. However, I am also happily married. Though I don’t have a strong sexual attraction for women in general, I do find sexual fulfillment with my wife.
I worked for many years with other men who struggle with homosexuality through a Christian ministry dedicated to helping such people and I don’t recall ever encountering someone who was so exclusively homosexual that the thought of intimacy with women was completely off the table - so I cannot relate to that aspect of what he says - either personally or though experience with others. I won’t comment further on that, at least until I’ve read the whole book but suffice it to say, I don’t think what he describes there is typical of the struggler one is going to encounter.
Another difference is that I would NEVER call myself a “gay” Christian or even a “homosexual” Christian any more than I would call myself a “drunkard” Christian or an “adulterous” Christian - should those be areas of temptation for me. Often people dealing with homosexuality are (rightly) concerned that the church treats this sin differently from all others. However, if we want to encourage people to treat it like any other sin, we who struggle with it should treat it that way too. Saying that our identity is wrapped up in our sexuality (whether heterosexual or homosexual) is the message of a sex-obsessed world, not of scripture. I personally have had to repent of such thinking in my own life many times (and will many more I’m sure before my life ends) because the temptation is so great to buy into the world’s view of what it means to have homosexual feelings.
I am thankful to be in a church where several other men know of my past sin in this area and my need to remain vigilant in the present. These men support and challenge me in my walk with Christ (and I them for the areas they struggle in) and this has been breath and life to me.
I appreciate Tim posting this because I’m sure there are many men in churches out there who struggle in silence with this - I was one of them for years. If you’re one of those people, I would encourage you to seek out a Christian brother whom you trust and begin to share your struggle. Darkness, silence and isolation are the enemy’s tools to keep you in bondage. Freedom in Christ is found in the light.
This is about as honest a view as I’ve ever seen. We seem to be comfortable confessing sins like pride, lust, greed… but homosexuality? It doesn’t play well in the current church.
I can’t say that I’ve ever considered this in much detail, but it has made me stop and think of the trial this brother is facing.
I think of these words from Spurgeon that I recently read from one of his sermons:
“We are not to try ourselves, nor to desire other men’s trials; it will be well if we endure those which the Lord appoints for us, for they will be wisely chosen. That which would most severely test me would perhaps be no trial to you; and that which tries you might be no temptation to me. This is one reason why we often judge one another so severely, because feeling ourselves to be strong in that particular point we argue that the fallen one must have been strong in that point too, and therefore must have willfully and earnestly have determined to do wrong. This may be a cruel supposition. We hastily conclude that the temptation must have been as feeble in his case as it would have been n our own; which is a great mistake, for a temptation which to you or to me would be no temptation at all, may be to another individual, of a peculiar constitution and under singular circumstances, a most fierce and terrible blast from the adversary, before which he falls mournfully, but not with malice aforethought. Divers trials, says the apostle, and he knew what he said.”
While the lust for another man is no temptation at all for me, I pray the Holy Spirit grant this brother strength in his peculiar trial.
Briefly: what Dr. Mike said.
Less so: I wonder how welcoming and affirming we’d be of books by men or women who identify themselves as “Christian rapists,” “Christian blasphemers,” “Christian child-molestors,” “Christian thieves,” or “Christian atheists,” using terms which (no matter how they protest) indicate similarly impossible pairings and embrace of sin.
I have observed in the writings of some Christians who battle same-sex attraction an insistence on romanticizing their temptation, shielding and ennobling it somehow. On the one hand, they’re not to be shunned, because they’re sinners like everyone else (true); on the other, no one can understand or relate to them, because theirs is a special case (not true).
I just don’t see how verbally coddling sin in that way accords well with the relentless mortification of sin to which we’re all called.
“I have observed in the writings of some Christians who battle same-sex attraction an insistence on romanticizing their temptation, shielding and ennobling it somehow. On the one hand, they’re not to be shunned, because they’re sinners like everyone else (true); on the other, no one can understand or relate to them, because theirs is a special case (not true).”
From the point of view of one who has struggled in this way (I wrote post #17) I think you hit the nail right on the head here. I have often struggled with the temptation to set this sin apart as special - even while insisting that others in the church not do that. We who struggle this way must be on guard against this I think as much as the sin itself.
“But I guess that’s where I’d say that homosexuality somehow involves a person’s identity in a way that other sins do not.”
It is true, as R.C. Sproul has commented, that there are different levels of sin against God. But I’m not sure we can say homosexuality is in a class of it’s own. Romans 1 appears to list it as part of the “lusts of the heart” or “degrading passions.” Being a Christian is more than just what we practice or do. It’s also a change of heart, a change in the way we think. To identify yourself as “being gay” (present tense) implies that gay is still a big part of your life. And how is being a gay Christian “considering yourselves to be dead to sin” (Rom 6:11.) “Consider” is past tense, as in we should no longer consider ourselves alive to that sin.
“And in that case I don’t know that this person ought to feel any extra burden to test himself to see if he is in the faith—no more than the rest of us, at least.”
We should indeed all examine ourselves, yet the level of sin in our lives should cause us to examine ourselves more intensely. There are certain sins which should not rule over us in the mind or body once we are Christians. This seems to be what Paul says in various places (Rom 6:19,20, 11:30, Col 3:6,7 and Titus 3:3) where he speaks of certain lifestyles in the past sense, essentially saying “You once walked in these sins, but not longer.” These sins once marked you, identified you, but not any more. As Anonymous 11/02 @ 10:56am appears to be saying above, he is no longer ruled by this sin. Not that it never appears in his mind, but it is not so much a part of his life that he would “identify” himself as that kind of person.
I appreciate your review, and will be getting the book to read and to keep as a resource.
Just yesterday I saw a video on Mars Hill’s blog on this subject. Worth watching (scroll down to Pastor Bill interviews Dan): http://blog.marshillchurch.org/2010/10/31/jesus-is-changing-shoreline-2/
But we do have married Christians. And we have single Christians. And we have rich Christians. And we have poor Christians. We have American Evangelical Christians, where clearly the identifying features are important to capitalize. One book on my shelf at the moment: “Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger.” I don’t think the vast majority of commentors would take issue with the phrase “straight Christian” as they understand such a phrase to include heterosexual persons independent of marital status.
Reading comments like the ones here, I have to wonder what the sin actually is. Is the sin simply using the word “gay”? Is living a single, celibate life unacceptable for a Christian who does not desire marital intimacy with a person of the opposite sex? Is such a lifestyle “a gay lifestyle” that is so easy to hate? As such, are all persons who do not desire marital intimacy with a person of the opposite sex expected to seek such a desire in prayer?
Is it wrong for a man to share life with other men? Is it wrong for a man to have a particular closeness with even a small group of men? If so, it seems that all of the men’s (and by extension, women’s) groups at various churches fall short of God’s design for living in community. What about the various male dyads and female dyads (and sometimes whole groups of same-gender persons) who carried the Gospel? Did Christ make a mistake sending the 70 to go 2 by 2? Does the encouragement that two can lie down to keep warm only apply when one person is male and the other person is female, and when both parties are united in marriage?
Please, so much of Christian thought seems to be little more than a dead moralism that assumes to load a heavy burden on people. I am a sinning Christian. I am ashamed of how hard my heart can be at times, especially when I can appreciate why something should stir within it the love of Christ. Sometimes God affords me the grace to know my sin that I may seek repentance. But to say that I have no sin is to deceive myself and others. I am called by Christ to take up my cross, to follow Him, to struggle with Him to become like Him, offering myself as a living sacrifice. I realize how weak my spiritual efforts are, particularly when I try to pray, fast, and give generously. But the Gospel is not fundamentally about me; it is about Christ.
I tend to agree with Heather. I think this man should examine his faith to make sure that it’s genuine. I have three acquaintances who have issues with pornography and repeated adulterous affairs and swinging sexual relationships, respectively. Sadly, their lives show no indication that they are children of God. It’s not just the obvious sin that indicates their lost state; it’s the way they live their lives in disobedience to God. This modern gospel, that all three of these individuals have fallen victim to, sells repentance and regeneration short.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the author is also a victim of the heresy that’s proclaimed in the vast majority of pulpits Sunday after Sunday. Before God granted me faith and repentance four years ago, I struggled with pornography and with the constant adulterous thought. But by His Grace and Mercy, He has delivered me from those things. Yes, there’s the occasional slip of an adulterous thought, but I’m not preoccupied with it as I once was when I was a false convert. Apparently this man’s god is powerful enough to keep him out of hell, but not out of sin.
From my perspective, Heather Joy’s comment (#16) is a perfect example of the kind of bitter, fear-induced boycotting that the church has far too long dished out to homosexuals.
Is a homosexual orientation “okay,” as long as a person does not act it out? Of course not. But I don’t think anyone’s suggesting it’s “okay.” Certainly not the author of this book, who is himself struggling against his sinful desires, and calling other homosexuals to do the same. Certainly not Tim, who largely resonates the same challenge in his post. The point is, it’s a sinful desire that should be struggled against, not given in to. That’s the whole point of this book, and this post.
Why do Christians who struggle with homosexual desires feel shame and hesitate to make it known in the church? Good grief. Because the church has responded to them like you are responding to them in your comment. Is it “okay” for a heterosexual person to continue in an addiction to pornography? Of course not. Should that person seek counsel and support from the church? Absolutely. But similarly, there’s shame and disgrace associated with that particular sin, because the church has historically reacted with fear and judgment, instead of with grace and encouragement. The threat of shame and rejection causes many who struggle with pornography to remain in the shadows with their sin. The same is true, and probably to an even greater extent, of Christians who struggle with homosexual desires. They fear - not without warrant - that the church will have nothing to do with them.
The truth is Christians have often been guilty of singling out certain sins (usually dealing with sexuality) as more shameful and degrading than others, and responding to those sins with fear and rejection. I’m really sick of seeing that in the church. Do you think Jesus would say to a homosexual, “Sorry - come back and try again when you’ve cleaned up your sexuality”? A thousand times no! He welcomes and embraces them, and calls them toward purity - which is not an instantaneous act (Oh look, suddenly I don’t have homosexual desires anymore! It’s a miracle!), but a long process of dying to sin and and living to righteousness. If we’re not willing to understand that, we’re going to continue to alienate people we should be loving and serving, and possibly destroy the work of God.
I have often struggled with how to counsel people on homosexuality - both gays and straight. I agree with Tim that it is related to their personal identity in a very strong way — much stronger than other sins. The separation between sin and sinner is almost non-existent in the mind of the homosexual. You do not see people proclaiming themselves to be adulterers or fornicators, yet those are also sexual related sins. Homosexuals are different in that they acknowledge their sin and identify with it. Condemning their sin therefore, though Scripturally correct, is condemning them — not the best approach to help that person. It is immediately polarizing and drives them away.
I would describe homosexuality as similar to the pathology of an addiction. There is a physical reaction that craves fulfillment - in a similar way to the drug addict or alcoholic. This is not an identity - but I can imagine that it is all-consuming - and the addict sees his life defined by the struggle. Another aspect of addiction is denial — many gays deny what they are doing is wrong and attempt to rationalize their behavior in other acceptable ways, e.g. love, marriage, family.
I believe we all struggle with sin as an addiction in our lives. Just in different areas and in different degrees. Because we have victory in one area should not give us freedom to judge another in that same area. We need to examine the plank in our own eyes. When the Bible speaks of repentance - it is similar to going ‘cold turkey’ on the sin that besets us. Who hasn’t struggled with that? If we approach the gay person in this context, we are likely to make a better impression.
Sin like addiction - is bondage. We do not have the strength in ourselves to break the bonds of sin. We need Christ. We need the power of the Holy Spirit. Without God, sin will inevitably lead to destruction. It seems like Wesley understands this and lives it every day more than some of us do - except perhaps the drug addict or alcoholic. I appreciate his courage in writing this book and his commitment to remain celibate - by God’s grace not his own strength. I pray for God to uphold him - and to give me the same strength to overcome my sin. If a homosexual does not relate to sins destruction today, there will come a day when he will - when God will reveal it to him. Perhaps they will acknowledge it as sin then and turn to God. We are called to sow seeds today that may reap a harvest much later.
I also think we should not get hung up on labels. I agree that the term gay Christian is difficult. I would suggest it is shorthand for a Christian who struggles with homosexual addiction. It is similar to any Christian who struggles with sin. We need to acknowledge it and thank God that He has provided the remedy and the power to overcome. It is a daily process - we never fully overcome this side of eternity. Wesley helps us understand this more clearly through his struggles.
I do have problems with the homosexual agenda. In their need to rationalize their behavior they are following the path of Romans 1 - promoting sin and approving of others who participate in it. They condemn others who oppose their agenda as being homophobic and intolerant. Their agenda is to make sin a normal and acceptable lifestyle. All of this is anathema. As Christians we need to stand against this agenda, but in a way that provides a clear alternative to those God loves, demonstrating His grace. We need to pray for wisdom! There are some though, perhaps many, that God has given over to their sin. We do not know who they are - but God does - and one day He will judge. We do best to leave that to Him.
I can’t see how lustful homosexual desires are any more (or less) sinful than lustful hetrosexual desires. Further, I don’t think it necessarily true that sexual activity within marriage reduces lustful sexual desires. For 40+ years before being born again I enjoyed such heterosexual thinking, irrespective of years of marriage. For the last 30 + years I have not enjoyed such thinking. During this time God has mercifully renewed my mind so as to lessen such thoughts. Nevertheless, and always when least expected, such thoughts arise from my old nature, reminding me of who is my deliverer.I do not think a person who does not practice homosexuality should refer to himself as gay because the very word implies activity in our culture and as such it immediately brings a negative response from Christians.It seems to me that if preachers had, when homosexuality first became a hot topic in society, taken Paul’s instructions in 1 Cor. 5:9-13 seriously and had condemned from the pulpit the adultery and fornication occurring in their own churches, rather than preaching against homosexual activity in the genral culture, then we would be able to deliver the gospel to homosexuals as we would any other sinner. Singling out homosexuals as special sinners does not seem to have been very helpful in communicating the gospel; it has been more of a wedge than instrument of reconciliation.
Kyle, I’m sorry that you feel I am bitter. I’m sorry you think I participate in fear-induced boycotting. Call it what you may, you’re wrong.
I have nothing but love for these people, while I hate their sin. I also realize that their sin is no worse than MY sin. I also understand that God is not a respector of persons - and therefore, will in no wise cast them out (John 6:37).
I was merely pointing out and reminding people what God said about it.
And honestly, homosexuality shouldn’t even be a “struggle” for a “Christian.” It shouldn’t even be a thought in their mind. As the same remains true for all other sins - and while we fall short on all accounts with God, there is grace and there is mercy.
If someone comes to the church for help, then let it be so. However, I have witnessed that many people who come professing the desire to be helped do it for the wrong reasons. They do it for their mom, or their brother… their dad asked them too… they’re tired of hiding in the closet. Sure, it’s good that they’re seeking help, but they’re doing it for the wrong reasons. If they are not seeking for help out of a convicted, repentent heart, then it will not last. They will fall back into the sin again… as will the liar, the thief, the drug addict, the alcoholic, the hypocrite, the backslider… and so on.
God does not wink at sin, nor does He excuse it. There is a Biblical priniciple of “church discipline” that ought to be practiced more than it is. “But we don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings…” Really? What about God’s? He only died for you…
“And honestly, homosexuality shouldn’t even be a “struggle” for a “Christian.” It shouldn’t even be a thought in their mind…”
If you believe the struggle against sin (any sin) disappears when one becomes a Christian you’re deceived.
And Heather, take a look at the latter half of Romans 7. I think its completely unrealistic to expect a gay person to become a Christian and never struggle with the sin. Yes, there may be stories of people walking away from the gay lifestyle, cigarettes, alchohol, etc. , and never having a single desire. But far more often I think it is a struggle. I am concerned about the “gay Christian” label as something that is closely identified with, but if a Christian who comes out of the gay lifestyle is able to remain celibate as he/she struggles w/lust, then I give them my kudos. Although I think perhaps more Christians claim to be “celibate” in this area then actually are. Paul in I Corinthians 7 clearly refers to believers having a general “lack of self control” sexually; since he also refers to former gays in I Cor. 6, I think that the lack of self control applies to them as well.
2 Corinthians 5:17 17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
“And honestly, homosexuality shouldn’t even be a “struggle” for a “Christian.” It shouldn’t even be a thought in their mind. As the same remains true for all other sins …”
That’s a lie.
A person’s sinful desires doesn’t magically disappear when they become saved. The condemnation is gone, but the temptations are still there. You will be struggling with sin until the day you die.
And Heather has NO STRUGGLE with sin, because a Christian should not struggle with “?”, nor should “?” even be a thought on her mind. Heather, have you even read Romans 7:18-20?
Heather, you may think that what you are saying is nothing more than a plea for godliness (Amen! and Amen!), but you are coming off as a bit self-righteous and unbiblical when it comes to the struggles of the sinful, yet regenerate heart.
A good dose of John Owen would do thee well!
#23, Agreed, this is why the love the sinner, hate the sin framework is a waste of evangelistic time. You slam the door shut before ever beginning the conversation. It’s like beginning a conversation with, “I want to destroy the very foundation of your worldview… now let me tell you why Jesus loves you.” It’s utterly nonsensical. Let’s begin the conversation somewhere else.
Wesley Hill looks like he’s still a fairly young guy. Is it really good for him to have announced his lack of desire for women?
I think of married men and women who are not, or who go through seasons when they are not attracted sexually to their own mates. To announce such would be harmful and detrimental to the future healing of the relationship. I am having trouble articulating exactly what I’m troubled about and of course haven’t read the book.
Has he said, in effect, this is the way I am and I don’t see it changing? I don’t know that men in Hill’s situation need encouragement to continue in a celibate but homosexually-oriented state; it seems to me they need encouragement that they can marry because “And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified… ” If Wesley has been born from above he isn’t gay anymore.
As a Christian who struggles with same-sex temptations, I am a Christian (period), who thinks Dan is absolutely correct. We are all sinners, falling short of God’s glory, born into a world rich in a variety of sins. Until we loose the therapeutic, pragmatic view of Christianity and embrace our profound sin nature, we will be unable to pursue mortification of any of our sins.
Tim,
I appreciate the insight you offer in your review, and, of course Wesley’s book. I am one who has struggled, but now feels the clear call of God to offer hope and grace through truth with compassion to men and women who find themselves poised somewhere between the very clear Word of God and the very loud call of culture. I’ve been writing about this for a while now and I’ve discovered that the greatest need of all is for the church to take that truthful and compassionate position that expressed the love and intent of God. Christians are struggling in secret with a need that can be met.
In fact, my latest post asks for Christians to come out of the closet … not the closet of hiding their sexuality … but the closet of hiding their love. I hope you will read it. I’d appreciate your reaction. It’s at http://thom-signsofastruggle.blogspot.com/2010/10/who-really-needs-to-co…
Thanks again for addressing a need. My book, “Surviving Sexual Brokenness: That’s What Grace Can Do,” comes out late this month from WestBow and I hope you will take a look at it.
God Bless,
Thom
Tim,
I appreciate your article highlighting this book. I have a friend who just “came out of the closet.” Both of us went to the same Christian college and traveled on a ministry team from that college. After talking with him, I realized that this is a far deeper struggle than most Christians are willing to admit? Why do you think homosexuality is becoming more and more of a struggle, even for Christians? The book doesn’t seem to answer that question.
You misunderstood what I meant. That’s my fault, and I apologize.
What I meant was, if you’re truly a Christian - if you’ve been washed by the shed Blood of the Lamb - then you are a new creature - “old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new” (II Cor.5:17).
It’s not that we won’t struggle with sin - but that it shouldn’t have that “pull” on us like it once did. Our desires should change from being our own lusts, to that of Jesus Christ.
“”The truest repentence is to do so no more.” ~ Martin Luther
Rob, I apologized in another reply comment - so I’ll do the same to you. I believe you misunderstood what I was saying, as I re-read what I wrote I realized I was not very clear.
Please see my other comment I just posted for clarification.
I’m grieved to see some suggesting that the author of this book needs to examine himself to see if he is even in the faith, simply because he struggles with homosexual desire to the extent that he does.
Let’s be clear. We have no reason to doubt that Hill indeed remains celibate. So when Hill says “struggle” he means it, unlike the way most evangelicals use the word. When most Christians I know say “struggle,” it’s often code for “this sin is kicking my butt and I’m not putting up much of a fight.” That isn’t what Hill means. He recognizes and is at war against his own sinful inclinations. His attempts to mortify the flesh have a reality and weight to them that many attempts lack on the part of those in our congregations whose salvation we have not thought to question.
The comparison made earlier with addiction seems apt. I have mentored two professing Christians who experienced homosexual desire and were not attracted to women. I have discipled and had accountability relationships with former drunks and addicts as well. And the key things that most of them have in common are first the craving that never quite goes away, and second the loathing of the craving coupled with a desire to be free.
It is true that we are new creations in Christ (2 Cor 5:17). But we also do the things we hate and fail to do the things we ought (Rom 7:22-23). The biblical account of sanctification is not perfectionist; it is progressive, with passages such as Rom 8:5 and 12:1-2 and Eph 4:22-24 teaching us that being renewed is an ongoing process that begins in the mind and works its way outward. The fact that Hill recognizes his desires as wrong, longs for different desires, and constrains himself not to give in to them is strong evidence that he is in fact regenerate. If he were not, why deny himself (see Rom 8:7 and Eph 4:19)?
Am I comfortable with the label “gay Christian”? Not especially. But with the explanation Hill provides, I get what he means. And while he might have few evangelical mentors, by writing this book he may himself have become one for others.
Unfortunately, you were right Tim, when you stated, “Now I know many will get no further than this phrase: gay Christian.” You stated very clearly in your post, and Wesley states even more clearly in his book, that he adheres to a biblical understanding of sexuality - that sex is reserved for a man and woman within the context of marriage. The term simply defines his (and my) temptation: to lust after people of the same sex. Not an active lifestyle of gay sex. Simply the temptation towards it.
Even Christ was tempted (Hebrews 4:15), though he did not sin. Temptation is not sin; giving into it is. (I think many of your readers haven’t carefully read the post - and certainly not Wesley’s book - or they wouldn’t be confused about what the term means.)
Yet rather than take this book for what it is - an open discussion on the challenges facing those who struggle with homosexual temptations and how they can live a full, God-glorifying life alongside other Christians - commenters on this blog have chosen to latch onto an issue of semantics and delve into debate. That’s not even what the book is about! Nor is it crucial to the discussion! You can take it or leave it. I recognize it has both pros and cons, as does Wesley.
When our first inclination is to run towards disagreement and the need to argue a point rather than uniting around the Gospel to offer hope and love and grace to those who are struggling, we find ourselves in a place where those struggling with homosexual temptations have no comfort or hope in the cross, because no one will show it to them.
Let us prop up those strugglers by listening, by not being shocked by their weaknesses, by patience, by telling them we love them, by reminding them of the cross faithfully, by preaching grace, by standing with them for the long-haul, by graciously correcting when necessary, and by weeping alongside in times of grief. Let us be The Church.
I encourage everyone to read Hill’s book if they want a fuller picture of what life is like for those of us struggling with same sex attraction, or encouragement to face the road ahead.
My only critique of the book is that Hill used the term “gay Christian.” I don’t think he was necessarily sinning in doing so, but it has obviously distracted from the point of the book. If he had used “Christian who struggles with same-sex attraction” for every instance of the term “gay Christian,” pretty much half — if not all — of the critiques in the comments here would be eliminated. Get around any group of Christian men or women who struggle with same-sex desires and temptations, and “gay” is often used as shorthand. There’s an implicit understanding among them (I should say “us”) that it obviously doesn’t mean practicing or justifying homosexual sex and lust. It’s just an easier term to say than “same-sex attraction” or “homosexual temptation” when speaking about this condition.
However, outside of that very narrow and specific context, “gay” does carry the connotation of homosexual behavior and advocacy (especially in conservative settings.) So I think it’s wiser for us Christians who struggle with it to refrain from using it. That’s why most literature on the subject does use terms like “same-sex attraction” and “homosexual temptation.” Using the shorthand term “gay” makes Hill’s book more conversational, but I think if Hill had refrained from using it, the message of his book would have been just as clear (if not more-so) and a lot of the criticism we’re hearing here would have been eliminated. Everyone is hung up on a three-letter word, and few people seem to be engaging with the actual heart of the text.
I do think that criticisms of him romanticizing or coddling sin are unfounded, though. I read the book, and I don’t recall any wistful longings about sodomy or homosexual pornography within its pages. He talks about loneliness, the desire for companionship and the difficulty that perpetually single people have in the church. To long for a companion is not the same as longing for homosexual sex, and I think we do a disservice to people who struggle with same-sex attraction if we equate the two. Longing for the sex is lust. It’s sinful. Longing for a companion and a mate in the other areas of life is normal. It’s loneliness, and it’s the type of loneliness that, as Frank Turk once eloquently pointed out about another Hill article, people need to be aware of so they can stand with their brothers and sisters who are experiencing it.
As Tim pointed out (and as C.S. Lewis once wisely wrote in a letter to a friend about this topic,) a Christian who experiences exclusively homosexual desires is no different from any other single Christian who would like to be married, but for some reason still finds themselves a singleton. The only difference — and it is a unique issue related to homosexuality — is that Christians who struggle with same-sex desires are often faced with the prospect of lifelong singleness at a very early age, an age when their heterosexual peers are dating, getting engaged, and marrying. That’s difficult. Recognizing unique circumstances that go along with a particular kind of sin doesn’t legitimize or coddle the sin. It simply helps others in the church pastor and disciple the sinner.
As a Christian guy who struggles with same-sex attractions (albeit in my case not exclusively - I also experience significant feelings for women) and someone who has read Washed and Waiting, I feel that many people here have misunderstood the term “gay Christian” as Wesley uses it. Although many who label themselves “gay Christians” consider their sexuality a core part of their identity, I don’t actually believe Wesley does. He is merely referring to his long-term sexual attractions. It’s no different than if I were to refer to myself as a “same-sex attracted Christian.” Some of us have never been involved in sexual behavior with another person, so it wouldn’t be accurate to call all of us “addicts” or anything like that.
Nearly all heterosexual guys struggle with the temptation to lust after and fornicate with women. Although through Christ many experience a (typically partial in this life, it seems) victory over these sins, the temptations remain. Specifically, the biological component of raw attraction usually doesn’t go away - looking at an attractive girl, particularly if she is underdressed, results in a certain unchosen reaction in most guys. That’s why it takes discipline to avoid known sources of temptation. We don’t expect that if a guy is truly a Christian, he can look through a porn site without feeling anything because he only desires his wife.
In a lot of ways, same-sex attraction (SSA) is the same way. One of the realities of living in a fallen world is that for whatever reason some people, men and women, experience feelings for others of their own gender, often exclusively. If you talk to people who have experienced changes in their orientation, you’ll find that most still experience homosexual temptation to some degree. Does this mean that their testimonies are worthless or that Christ hasn’t done a significant work in their life? Not at all! However, we do need to be careful about proclaiming that “change is possible” without being clear about our meaning, particularly given that those who experience change in their orientation seem to be in the minority among Christians who deal with this.
Jerri, as I interpret the 1 Corinthians passage, living a celibate life in accordance with God’s moral commands is an example of a changed life. The word Paul uses for “homsexual” most likely refers to a man who has sex with other men. Looking at it with orientation change in mind, as though he’s referring to people who used to be attracted only to the same sex but are now attracted only to the opposite sex, seems to be using a meaning foreign to the passage.
I think Wesley’s book does a great job bringing up and dealing with some of the particular issues that people with SSA often face. I don’t think he’s finding his identity in sin but rather just being honest about what he’s dealing with. Unfortunately, his choice of the word “gay Christian” has apparently made this difficult to understand for many readers or would-be readers. Terminology can be a difficult thing discussing this - “gay” means different things to different people, for instance.
I agree with Tim’s comments about how evangelicals are often not doing a good job of dealing with this. Aside from Wesley’s book, some of the best thinking I’ve seen has been from blogs. Thom Hunter posted earlier in this thread. In addition, some of the other really good blogs by Christians addressing these issues include:
http://pursuegod.wordpress.com
http://disputedmutability.wordpress.com
http://battlingchristian.blogspot.com
http://collegejay.blogspot.com
http://www.peter-ould.net
With regards to causes, we really have no idea at this point. Many guys who deal with this do have issues relating with their fathers, but some such as myself really do not. My relationship with my dad wasn’t absolutely perfect, but it was better than what a lot of my straight friends experienced. Given that we live in a fallen world where we all inherit a sin nature, a biological cause for SSA wouldn’t be theologically unprecedented and wouldn’t be any indication as to the morality of homosexual practice. The science really doesn’t tell us at this point.
I don’t think homosexuality is fundamentally a different issue than any other sin, but it does seem to be one that happens to be particularly misunderstood and stigmatized at this point in time. What I think Christians struggling with this is community and discipleship with other Christians who deal with different issues - we are all one body of Christ and we need to bear each other’s burdens, even if those happen to be SSA issues. In order for this to happen, it would help if people struggling with this felt they could talk openly with others.
Heather, with all due respect to the many true things you said, you didn’t really interact at all with anything Tim said that Wes said. I would really recommend that you read the book. Wes is in no way encouraging his own sin or others to do so. And most of what you said would offer no comfort to someone who knows the Gospel but who wrestles daily with their temptation, in what feels like utter loneliness.
I’m 28…I’m in seminary…and I know what it’s like to wrestle with my sin to that degree. Wes and I share the same struggle and for someone to come to me and tell me that *I* just want someone to validate my sin (as it seems you are indirectly accusing Wes of doing, forgive me if I’ve read too much between the lines) would be utterly offensive to me because it simply isn’t true. I’ve been single my whole life, attempting to live in a way that is consonant with the Gospel and the call to repent and believe that you (very appropriately, actually) ended your post with.
But “deny yourself!” is not the Gospel. And it offers no comfort. Does Jesus bid us die to our sin? Yes. But He does so in the context of union with Him…not in terms of “just do it!” I think you would be surprised by Wes’ approach if you were to pick up the book and read it. We must be truthful and I think you are trying to be. But please believe me…your statements above simply came off to me at first read as off-topic meanderings RATHER than what I’m sure you aspired to do: to stand up for the truth.
Please consider reading the book, Heather. Even if you end up disagreeing with Wes over terminology, I think you’ll come away better equipped to deal with folks in and out of the church who struggle with homosexuality.
The last five comments have restored my hope in this thread. It looked like it was veering hopelessly off track and into the useless netherworld of the blogosphere, but these last few posts from folks who themselves wrestle with same-sex attraction have redeemed the conversation. Thanks, guys, for the grace and wisdom with which you’ve interacted with previous comments here. And thanks for staying in the battle. Your Savior stands with you, friends.
Two interesting perspectives have been made by authors here:
1. “Are homosexuals created this way by our Heavenly Father, or are they “created” this way by our earthly father (mother)?”
2. “It is about people made in God’s image who seem to have a part of their core identity that through the reality of sin is just plain miswired.”
On the one hand we have a commentator asking whether people who struggle with their sexuality are created that way by God and Tim who says that sin is to blame for the miswiring. I’m sorry I struggle with this question. Fearfully and wonderfully made we are, but somewhere along the line, we end up with all sorts of developmental and genetic problems, heritable traits and so on. Do we really know what makes a person born with a sexual misorientation tick? My observation is that some may be very much nature but also nurture does play a role… My own brother reckons he was born that way. From a very early age he showed quite effeminate traits, and this is quite a repeatable observation.
I appreciate the posts above which speak of grace so deeply to those who struggle as people, who by no fault of their own, may end up struggling with their bodies-mind-will-emotions, however they may have recieved them (by chance of genetics or however we may see their origins).
Hi Beau,I really respect the humility you evidenced in the way you phrased this comment. I’m so sorry about what your family must be going through with your brother, and I’m glad you are involved in counseling young teenage guys- so needed!
Did just want to say that I have several very close friends who have homosexual orientations, and incredibly close and beautiful relationships with their same-sex parents. For sure that can contribute sometimes, but it definitely is NOT always the case. These male friends have been blessed to be loved deeply by their dads and have often found a safe place to process their struggles and be prayed for with them.
“The truth is Christians have often been guilty of singling out certain sins (usually dealing with sexuality) as more shameful and degrading than others, and responding to those sins with fear and rejection.”
Kyle,
Just a thought from the Bible on this: Paul does say that sexual sin is unique because it is a sin against our bodies (1 Cor. 6:15-19). So there is some precedent for that kind of thinking.
I sent a link to this discussion to my boss, Peter Jones, and thought that his comments were worthy of posting (with his permission):
“Tim is trying to be generous and non-judgmental, and that is a good understandable reaction. Homosexuality is a sin. Paul calls it “dishonorable passions,” but Paul is not a homophobe. Homosexuality is a sin like all other sins, no better, no worse. Since we are all sinners, saved by grace, moralism can never be part of our vocabulary. Sinners ourselves, tempted in all things, we can never reject a fellow believer who knows temptation. In the same context Paul actually says, in Romans 2:1 “you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things.”
But I think Tim goes too far. Like other blog entrees, I too do not approve of the term “gay Christian.” It gives “gayness” a certain objectivity that it surely ought not to have. Thus it comes over as a bizarre oxymoron, joining two opposing elements, and thus seems to broaden Christianity to include the sin of homosexuality as a valid Christian life-style. Thus, even if long, “Christians tempted by same sex attraction” is much more acceptable, and is surely much shorter than the explanation one has to give for what one really means by “gay Christian.”
At another level, allowing the term “gay Christian” to pass into the normal vocabulary in the Christian community of the twenty-first century, IMHO could have untold nefarious implications for the future for the church and for our naive youth now arriving on the scene. Already bombarded with the cultural normalization of homosexuality as a perfectly valid life-style, worthy of the sacralization of marriage, for them to discover that homosexuality is merely a category of Christian believer, may well mean that this next generation will lose much of the sense of the creational and theological distortion this sexuality implies. They will then naively do what the Liberal and radical Emergent Christian groups are already doing, namely, with “non-judgmentalism,” calling homosexuality a God-created and God-pleasing life-style. When that happens our Twoist worldview is gone and we enter the pagan world of spiritual Oneism where the Gospel can hardly be heard [see my book, One Or Two: Seeing a World of Difference].”
I would commend Wes’ book to Dr. Jones. I am familiar with his lectures on Oneism and hold him in high regard. Nevertheless, I think he’s making a snap judgment on a term that does not mean what he’s taking it to mean, at least not by Wes.
David Gill -I will more than likely pick up the book and read it - I like to read, I like to be informed, I like to learn.I will openly admit though, that I am what some people would consider to be “close-minded” about certain things. However, I will also admit that I am trying to stretch and better myself about that.
If I came off as offensive, arrogant, or cocky, that was not my intention. Many people that I love and care about have “come out of the closet” over the past couple years - in all honesty, it hurts. Please don’t think I’m playing the victim, I’m really not. However, to have people come out that have said one thing to you their whole life come out and admit that everything has been a lie up til this point - it breaks a trust. I’m not bitter. I’m not angry. I’m not condemning. But I believe the Bible. and I don’t condone any sin (including the sins I struggle with on a day-to-day basis). No sin is worse than any other - I understand that. They are all equal in God’s eyes.
More people are hurt by homosexuality than just those directly involved. It’s a domino effect situation - and I’ve watched first hand (as I’m sure you have to) the outcome.
Thank you for your understanding reply - my words never seem to come off as gentle, no matter how hard I try. That is a fault on my end.Blessing.
“Struggling with same-sex attraction” isn’t exactly a short-hand either. One never says “I’m struggling with opposite-sex attraction.” People just simply talk about their lives. If in talking about his or her life, a Christian indicates anything that suggests that he or she is not absolutely heterosexual, then the Christian has a ton of explaining to do. Have they committed to a healing ministry? Are they seeking deliverance through the laying on of hands and anointing with oils? Do they regularly see a counselor? ….oh yeah, and the Christian should probably leave any aspect of Christian service until God has dealt with the sin appropriately.
Please. People claim that struggling with same-sex attraction is like “any other sin” while simultaneously constructing a Gospel message that fundamentally excludes anyone who has “a lasting and predominant sexual and emotional and relational attraction to members of the same biological sex” because those individuals choose the word “gay” to describe their understanding of their sexual orientation.
Additionally, let us remember “gay” is not a word that is in the Bible. It can mean any number of things, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that a person is “practicing homosexuality” although I would love for commentors to indicate what they consider “practice.” Right now, using a three-letter word accounts to a practice.