Unrelenting

In their excellent book, Unchanging Witness, Professors Fortson and Grams spend a chapter recounting the capitulation of the numerous mainline denominations to the homosexual agenda, including the Episcopal Church and Evangelical Lutheran Church. But the account that caught my attention was the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (PCUSA).

I am not an expert on the history of the PCUSA, but I believe there were serious issues, such as rejection of the authority of Scripture, rejection of the supernatural, and ordination of women, which preceded their acceptance of homosexuality. If true, their capitulation to the homosexuals was not a surprise. A denomination that ordains women is going to have a hard time barring the doors against homosexuals. Here is the timeline how the PCUSA moved to accepting gays, gay ministers, and eventually same sex marriage (Fortson and Grams p. 157-158):

1978-United Presbyterian Church in the USA adopts a policy forbidding the ordination of homosexuals, but allowing gays and lesbians into church membership.

1979-The Presbyterian Church in the US adopts a similar policy.

1983-These two denominations join to create the PCUSA. The policy from 1978 remains in force.

1983-1993 There was constant debate in the denomination about ordaining homosexuals. So much debate that in 1993 a ban was instituted to prevent the issue from being voted on for three years.

1997-Conservatives passed an amendment to the PCUSA constitution requiring candidates for ordination "to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and woman, or chastity in singleness."  Liberals presented a substitute amendment which said, "fidelity and integrity in marriage or singleness." The substitute amendment by the liberals was defeated.

1998-Liberals again pushed for their substitute amendment. Again it was defeated though the votes grew closer. This happened again in 1999 and 2001. Each time the votes for the liberals grew.

2006-A PCUSA task force recommended allowing exceptions to the "fidelity and chastity" clause. This allowed homosexuals to be ordained.

2009-Again the liberals pushed for a vote to change the constitution. Again it was defeated though by the smallest margin yet.

2011-The language from 1997 was finally gotten rid of and openly gay persons could now be ordained to the ministry.

2014-The PCUSA approved a policy allowing pastors to perform same-sex marriages in states where the practice is legal. In that same year an additional vote was made that changed the definition of marriage from one and one woman to two persons. That passed by a 71% majority.

What I find fascinating is how "unrelenting" to use the authors' word, the pro-gay lobby was. They never stopped bringing up the votes. They found ways around official policy, such as the 2006 task force. They kept pushing and kept fighting until they got what they wanted.  I am sure this began long before 1978, but even from 1978-2014 is a pretty long time. It reminds me of what Edwin Friedman said in his excellent book Failure of Nerve. Pathogens do not stop. They will not stop. They must be cut out. Long before sodomy ever became an issue someone within these denominations compromised on basic Christian teaching. It may have been the authority of Scripture. It may have been human sexuality. It may have been the denial of the resurrection of our Lord. But they compromised and here is the key no one disciplined them for it. Maybe they disciplined them the first time and second time and third time, but eventually they stopped, eventually the good guys gave up.

In the previous chapter Fortson and Grams discuss all the denominations that remain faithful to the Scripture's teaching on homosexuality, such as the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC), and Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS). I look at those denominations and my own, the Communion of Reformed Evangelicals (CREC), and I pray. I pray that we can hold fast. I pray that we have the stamina and backbone to fight. I pray that we have the courage of our brothers in Africa who stood up to the Anglican bishops who compromised. I pray that we are not afraid of being hated, cast out, and maligned. I pray that we can preach faithfully what the Word says. I pray we have the strength to excommunicate when necessary. I pray that our seminaries fire those who compromise. For we can be assured of this; the homosexuals will not stop. Their goal is not live and let live. Their goal is that churches everywhere accept them as true Christians no matter their sexual practices. For the sake of Christ, his sheep, and the lost we must be as unrelenting as they are. If not we will end up just like the PCUSA and the proverb will be fulfilled:

Like a muddied spring or a polluted fountain is a righteous man who gives way before the wicked. (Proverbs 25:26)

Did the Early Church Approve of Homosexuality?

Revising history has been one of the common ploys in the gay Christian movement. In particular John Boswell and former Jesuit priest John McNeill have written books that revise the history of the church to be more friendly to gays. These books have been used by gay Christians as proof that Christianity from it's earliest times was welcoming of homosexuals. Boswell even argues that same-sex unions were approved by Anselm. Their scholarship, if it can be called that, has been called into serious question time and time. Yet they are cited by gay Christians as proof that sodomy really has not been that big a deal in church history.

To combat this error Donald Fortson and Rollin Grams have written Unchanging Witness: The Consistent Christian Teaching on Homosexuality in Scripture and Tradition.  These authors carefully cite numerous primary sources from the early church into the modern era that show without a doubt that sodomy in all its forms has been condemned by the church. Michael Kruger has a review of the book here. He states:

After reading Fortson’s and Rollin’s book, they may not agree with what Christians have always believed.  But, they would have to admit that Christians have always believed it.

I have only gotten through the chapters on the early church and the Middle ages, but both are valuable and clear. Several points stand out.

First, the church has always taught that the sin of Sodom was homosexuality. Hospitality is sometimes mentioned alongside of homosexuality, but homosexuality is always mentioned. I read nothing that indicated that the primary problem was homosexual rape either. 

Second, sodomy was often grouped with murder and bestiality as the gravest of sins.

Third, the celibate priesthood was a breeding ground for sodomy. Sodomite priests were common enough that specific punishments were put into law for priests who were homosexuals. Despite these laws sodomy continued to be a problem in monasteries.

Fourth, marriage between a man and a woman was always considered the only proper outlet for sexual expression. Sodomy, masturbation, prostitution, bestiality, lesbianism, mistresses, concubines, etc. were all sins of varying degrees with sodomy being at the top of the list.

Finally, there were distinctions made between different types of homosexual behavior, including sex with boys, the dominant male, and the submissive male. But all of these were considered a gross violation of nature. One does not get the impression reading the primary sources that the main concern was sex with boys. The problem was sodomy not the sexual abuse of boys.

Here is the conclusion to their chapter on the church fathers:

This brief survey of the early Christian centuries underscores several assertions that can be made with confidence about Christian attitudes towards homosexual practice. Given the ethnic diversity of Christians and their geographic dispersion throughout the Mediterranean world in the earliest centuries after Christ, the evident consensus on this issue is remarkable...The church fathers were aware of homosexual practices in their culture and consistently condemned such behavior...The Fathers believed homosexual practice was perverse and would lead one down the path to destruction. Same-sex activity was considered a grievous sin against the Creator who designed men and women for each other. In addition to violating divine design, homosexual activity-according to early Christian writers-was an instance of humans abusing and polluting one another. 

Here are some conclusions from their chapter on the Middle Ages:

The cumulative evidence from centuries of medieval sources points to the church's unequivocal condemnation of all forms of homosexual practice. As in the patristic era, despite the geographical separation and diverse cultures of early medieval Christians, they shared a commitment to biblically defined sexual ethics...no extant source includes an example of medieval Christians expressing toleration of homosexual behavior. There was no medieval deviation from patristic teaching concerning the accepted code of Christian sexual morality...all varieties of homosexual practice were condemned by the medieval church...in the late medieval era, when massive collections of earlier Christian writings  emerged, the compilers of canon law provided a comprehensive picture of the church's views of homosexual practice. What one observes is a consistent pattern of both denunciation and pastoral care for persons guilty of homosexuality.  

Here is the final paragraph in the chapter on the Middle Ages:

The medieval material indicates a distinction among persons who engaged in same-sex acts. Younger boys experimenting with homosexual sex were treated far more leniently than adults, adults who habitually engaged in homosexual acts were treated more severely than occasional offenders. The texts reveal a medieval awareness that some people felt sexual desire for persons of the same gender, but this did not legitimate acts against nature. Rather extreme measures were taken to help persons with same-sex attraction avoid eternal damnation, from penance to strict requirements concerning their living arrangements. Homosexuality was not viewed as a psychological disorder: it was sin. While homosexuality may have been characteristic of some persons-an orientation-ethics was not reduced to a psychology of inclinations or orientations; it dealt with actions that proceeded from the wickedness of fallen humanity, a humanity that could be transformed through the work of Christ. 

The authors have done the church a great service by doing the research and writing this book. It will be a great resource for the body of Christ as she ministers to those coming out of the gay culture to Jesus and as she stems the tide of the gay Christian movement which attempts to turn the Bible's teaching on its head and to throw out 2,000 of the church's teaching on sexuality in general and sodomy specifically.

Culture First, Then Laws

Dr. Al Mohler in his book  We Cannot be Silent, spends a chapter chronicling how the homosexual agenda gained traction through the latter part of the 20th century. He begins by noting that in 2004 eleven states voted to ban gay marriage. In all eleven cases the referendums passed with not less than 66% voting in favor of banning gay marriage. Compare this to 2012 where four states voted to ban gay marriage and in all four cases the vote failed. He also notes that in 2008 most polling data indicated a vast majority of Americans were opposed to gay marriage. By 2014 the polling data had changed dramatically with many being open to gay marriage as morally neutral or even a good thing. Add to this the Supreme Court's decision in the summer 2015 and one can see that gay marriage and indeed the whole gay agenda has taken hold in America.

Mohler is not ignorant of the many compromises prior to the gay movement that set the stage for where we are at today. Still, the magnitude of the moral shift along with speed of the shift is striking. In less than fifty years, America moved from a country where sodomy was immoral and where same-sex marriage was unthinkable to a country where many accept sodomy and same-sex marriage as a moral right. How did this happen?

The answer is interesting. Mohler explains how the gay movement decided not to try to change laws, but rather to change the moral landscape and then use laws to stamp their morality with approval:

In After the Ball [a pro-homosexual strategy book published in 1989], Kirk and Madsen [the authors] set out a program that, in retrospect, was likely even more successful than they had dreamed, largely because it focused on changing the culture, rather than just changing the laws...They demanded far more than legal recognition. They demanded that American society embrace homosexuality as a normal sexual experience and view same-sex relationships on par with heterosexual marriage. [Emphasis Mine]

Mohler goes on to recount how homosexuals worked to change public opinion concerning sodomy through what essentially amounts to a massive PR campaign. They did not seek to change laws. Instead they sought to change the minds of professors, movie stars, journalists, psychiatrists, psychologists, students, pastors, and judges. One good example of how drastic this change has been is that in the 1970s same-sex attraction was a form of mental illness. We have now arrived at a place where those who believe same-sex attraction is wrong are mentally ill. In almost any field, from sociology to medicine, from movies to law, from clothing to churches, the gay revolution has been successful. Sodomy has been normalized. To speak against it is to speak against the cultural norm. Most of this happened without the help of the courts. Here is Mohler's summary of the connection between culture and the courts for the gay agenda:

At every point along the way, the approach was to use the courts as a means to extend the cultural gains already occurring in the larger society. 

The reason the gay agenda worked was because culture, or perhaps more clearly, society, changed first, then the laws followed giving a stamp of moral approval to the cultural changes.

I am not opposed to changing laws. The Christian witness must extend to the courts and legislative bodies around the country. We should be speaking prophetically to law makers, judges, and politicians. We should also be raising up Christian men who will work in these places to bring about better laws. But sweeping changes, such as the gay movement has seen over the last fifty years, does not come primarily through courts or laws. It comes from changing the minds of people "on the ground" if you will. How can the church do this? I will address that in a later post.

Should Christians Attend a Same-Sex Wedding?

Here is Dr. Mohler's answer from his book We Cannot Be Silent. All punctuation and emphasis is his.

Attending a wedding ceremony always signals moral approval. This is why The Book of Common Prayer (which has provided the traditional ceremonial language known to millions of people throughout the centuries) contains the phrase that asks if anyone knows any cause that should prevent the marriage-"speak now; or else forever hold your peace." These words reveal the historic function of the wedding ceremony as a gathering of celebrants who come together to grant moral approval to the union of two people in marriage. Attending a same-sex marriage ceremony is to grant a positive and public moral judgment to the union. At some point, that attendance will involve congratulating the couple for their union. There will be no way to claim moral neutrality when congratulating a couple upon their wedding. If you cannot congratulate the couple, how can you attend? 

Heterosexuals Started It

I am reading Al Mohler's book We Cannot Be Silent. The second chapter details how birth control, no fault divorce, and fornication by heterosexuals led to an open door for the sodomite agenda and same-sex marriage. Here is the last paragraph from that chapter. Emphasis mine.

It is profoundly true that the sexual revolution did not begin with same sex marriage. The sexual revolution began when a significant number of people in modern society decided to liberate themselves from the inherited sexual morality that had been derived from Christianity and had informed the cultural consensus throughout human history. That was a decision largely made by heterosexuals who intended to legitimize their own sexual sin by means of a new moral argument. There were sexual revolutionaries advocating and hoping for the normalization of homosexuality from the beginning, but these were voices far outside the mainstream. Today's movement toward the total acceptance of homosexual behavior and relationships was only made possible because some heterosexuals first did their best to undermine marriage.

The only thing I would add to Dr. Mohler's analysis is that heterosexuals who started the sexual revolution were often part of the church.

Interacting with Professing Christians on Homosexuality

With all the focus on abortion, it is easy to forget that just a few weeks ago the highest court in the land ruled that every state must approve of same sex marriage. This issue may prove to more divisive in churches over the next few years than abortion. How do we approach professing Christians who disagree with us on sodomy/same sex marriage? I want to give some guidelines for how to navigate these disagreements.

Shepherd or Sheep? 
The Bible teaches that those in authority will be held to a higher standard than those who are being taught by them. James 3:1 is the classic statement on this point.

Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.

In the Bible shepherds are rebuked for their failures to care for the sheep by teaching them truth. Israel was in danger because her shepherds were hirelings (John 10:13). The New Testament writers warned their readers over and over again about false teachers. The first question to ask when a person is soft on sodomy or is gently gliding towards "God approves of same sex marriage" is are they shepherd or sheep? We should treat shepherds and sheep differently. A false teacher must be rebuked and often with strong admonitions.  These rebukes should involve solid arguments and proof from Scripture of their errors. But eventually a true shepherd will warn the sheep to avoid these men and women (I Timothy 1:20, II Timothy 2:17-18, Titus 3:10, II John 1:10-11).

In our culture, it is not easy to separate shepherd from sheep. In the old days, it was difficult to get any traction if you did not have some type of official authority. You had to be ordained or work at a seminary or something like that. But now all you need is a keyboard and wi-fi and you too can become a teacher. It is possible for a lay person through the power of the internet to actually have more power over people than a pastor. Some examples of teachers in our culture are: pastors, elders, professors at colleges and seminaries, bloggers, writers of books, magazine articles, etc. 

Many times these people will claim to not be teachers. "I am just a blogger thinking out loud." Or "I am just a professor doing some research. I am not making any dogmatic claims." Or "I am not ordained. I am just a Christian trying to help other Christians." That is a smokescreen, a ruse to avoid real accountability. You can't write or speak exerting influence over people and trying to persuade them and then claim not to be a teacher.

Teachers who are soft on sodomy, talk in "nuance," refuse to take a stand on the issue, refuse to call those involved to repentance, or actively promote homosexuality need to be called out publicly. And no, you don't have to send them a private email first. They are teachers. They are destroying souls. They are wolves who need a true shepherd to drive them out. Shepherds, such as pastors, elders, and seminary professors are the primary ones responsible for rebuking these false teachers (Acts 20:29-30). 

Four Groups

Shepherds need to be called out and rebuked. But what about the sheep, the professing Christian sitting in the pew? Here are four different groups of professing Christians you might meet, their views/relationship to sodomy and how we should interact with them. 

First, is the apologist for sodomy. This is a professing Christian who thinks sodomy is a legitimate expression of the Christian faith and they promote this idea. This person does not have to be a homosexual nor do they have to be mean.  They are often gentle and kind. They are not always militant. But they are trying to persuade people that Jesus approves of same sex relationships. This person is a predator and should be dealt with quickly and decisively. You should not associate with this person, except to evangelize and/or rebuke them. In many ways this person is like the shepherd above. They are promoting a practice that sends people to Hell. They obviously should not be a part of your church. Bad company corrupts good morals (I Cor. 15:33). People who are proselytizing for sodomy are dangerous. 

Second, is a professing Christian who approves of sodomy but does not push the idea.  The difference between this person and the first one is the second does not promote homosexuality even though they think it is fine and may practice it. They will usually have a live and let live mentality. This person is probably not a threat to you or your family, but you still should be wary of the influence their lifestyle might have.  Many well meaning Christians have flipped on sodomy because they became friends with a homosexual and found out they were nice. You wouldn't want this second person to be a close friend. This person should not be a member of your church either. A person who approves of sodomy, even if they do not practice it, is in danger of Hell. But as long they are not ramming things down your throat you can maintain a relationship and look for opportunities to encourage them to repent of their sodomy (if they are practicing homosexuals) or to correct their thinking.

These first two groups are not Christians in any meaningful sense of the word. Paul is clear that sodomites will not inherit the kingdom of God (I Cor. 6:9). 

Third, is the Christian who is genuinely confused by the issue. They have some sympathy for homosexuals. They do not want to be thought of as mean or unloving. But they also have reservations. They are not sure what the Scriptures teach. They know that sodomy was considered a great sin throughout most of church history. This person needs careful, patient, and clear teaching on what the Scriptures say about homosexuality. The difference between this person and the second is the firmness of their convictions. The first and second person are convinced that sodomy is fine for Christians. This third person is wavering. 

Finally, you have Christians who are refugees from the homosexual world. These might be actual homosexuals/lesbians who have left the lifestyle or folks who had bought into the lie and now are trying to get back to what the Scriptures teach. This group will swell over the next couple of decades. Churches should be prepared for a steady influx of those who are disillusioned with or broken by sodomy and the lies surrounding it. Depending upon the situation these people will need a heavy dose of Jesus, particularly the forgiveness of sins, help in overcoming bad habits, otherwise known as sanctification, lots of love, and good solid teaching over a long period of time.

A person who belongs to any of these four groups should not be a teacher or leader in the church or the church community, including the online community. Obviously, the first and second person are disqualified from teaching God's people because they believe something contrary to the Scriptures. They are false teachers. The third person is confused. There are some issues it is okay for a shepherd to say, "I am not sure about that." This is not one of them. A person who is confused about sodomy should not be teaching God's people. The fourth person could eventually become a teacher of God's people, but they would need to grow in sanctification and their understanding of God's Word before they would be qualified. It is possible they will never be qualified depending upon the circumstances.

The church needs protection from the first group.

The first and second group both need to be evangelized.

The third group needs patient teaching.

The final group need a loving church that preaches Jesus, models Jesus, and will help the person grow into Christ's likeness.

Being able to distinguish between shepherd and sheep and between these four groups will help us to effectively minister to people involved in, approving of, practicing, or coming out of homosexuality. 

Jesus and Homosexual Desires

Pastors are impotent shepherds because they believe their message is impotent. Nowhere is this seen so clearly as in our reaction to same sex attraction. The message that we give to those who struggle with SSA is that you can never overcome this attraction and temptation. The only thing you can do is hope to keep from acting on your desires. It is strange that Christians who talk so much about idols of the heart and having the right desires would not call someone tempted by homosexual sins to kill that desire in their hearts. But we don't. Instead we say the goal is gay celibacy. The goal is not the reshaping of desires, but simply making sure we do not sin with our bodies.  But we don't do this in other areas of the Christian. Here are some scenarios that I hope will make my point about how we approach same sex attraction.

Scenario #1
A married man enters the pastor's office and says, "I am struggling with the secretary at work. She is attractive and flirtatious. She has come on to me several times. I have not given in yet, but I find myself wanting to. I really desire that woman and at times fantasize about her."  What should the pastor say? Well he should probably begin by encouraging the man in his resistance to temptation. He has sinned in his heart, but not with his body...yet. He should tell the man to get another job or move to another part of the office. But if he was a faithful pastor he would not stop there. He would remind the man that the problem is not the woman. The problem is his heart. He would encourage the man to memorize verses. He would help the man start examining the why. Why do I not find satisfaction in my wife? Why do I think this woman would be better than my wife? This man is not just struggling with temptation to adultery. He also is sinning with his discontent, his lack of self-control, his witness to Christ, etc. A faithful pastor will use the Scriptures to dig deep into the man's heart. Keeping the man from committing adultery is a goal, but certainly not  the only one or even the primary one. The goal is rooting out those sinful desires that make that other woman attractive. And yes, even those desires need to be repented of.

Scenario #2
A mom of three young children enters the pastor's office and says, "I am struggling with my children. I hate them at times. I have not hit them yet or hurt them, but I want to. There are times where I have to leave the house so I do not strike them with my fist or throw something at them." What should the pastor say? Again he begins by encouraging her that she has not yet acted on her anger though no doubt it has affected her home.  But he does not stop there. Why is she angry? What about her situation makes her want to hurt her children? She has a heart problem. She needs the Scriptures to reshape her desires. She also needs practical advice, such as getting a break, memorizing Scripture, getting adequate rest, etc. But that is certainly not all she needs. To give her the tools to cope without ever addressing the desires that produce the sinful attitude is to heal the wound lightly. And again, even the desire to harm the children is sinful and must be repented of.

Scenario #3
A young man enters the pastor's office and says, "I am struggling with homosexual attraction. I do not find myself attracted to women. I find myself physically attracted to men. I have not acted on that yet, but I want to." What should the pastor say? Why would the pastor say anything different than what was said above? Why would he not encourage the young man in his resistance so far, but then start using Scripture to address his desires? Why would he not tell the young man that those desires that drive him to want to have sex with men are sinful and need repenting of? Why would a pastor fail to use the gospel to address the heart as well as the hands? Why on earth would he say, "As long as you don't have sex with a man you are fine?"

None of this is meant to minimize the difficulty of dealing with our sinful desires. It is a long, slow process that all of us are going through. Nor is it to equate temptation with the act itself. For a married man to look at a woman other than his wife is not to commit adultery. To be tempted to sex with a man is not to actually have sex with a man. Yet even that desire is sinful and it must be seen as such if we are ever going to kill sin.  I will also admit that the line between temptation and lust is gray. If I see a woman in a bikini and look for a second and then quickly glance away have I lusted or was I just tempted to lust? The answer is not easy. But we all know that in a perfect world this would not be a problem. Therefore even in that gray area we are weak sinners.

Of course, a Christian man tempted to homosexuality should not act on those desires.  But this is not celibacy. Just as a single man refusing to sleep with a prostitute is not celibacy. It is a rejection of sinful acts.  A man tempted to homosexuality may be called to a life of celibacy. But he is not called to be a gay, but celibate Christian just as the woman above is not called to be an angry, but not physically abusive Christian and the man is not called to be a lusting, but not committing adultery Christian.  A Christian man tempted to homosexuality, but who refuses to give in is simply a Christian fighting the good fight. Nothing more and nothing less. His sin is not in a different category on the pastoral level than other sins.

Homosexual desires are sinful.  For some reason we are scared to say this. Is it because we believe Jesus cannot reach those desires? Is it because we want to sound compassionate? Is it because we have let psychology determine truth instead of Scripture? Or maybe we don't think a man wanting to have sex with another man is a sin. Whatever the reason, we are wrong. We are called by Christ to bring our actions, our desires, our thoughts, and our words under his Lordship (II Cor. 10:5).  The gospel is able to reshape our desires and not just our actions. Jesus died to make us new creatures outside and inside. If we do not preach that Jesus can change our deepest desires then are we preaching the real Jesus? If we do not preach the real Jesus, the Jesus who calls us to repent of and kill the sin in our hearts, we are not really loving homosexuals. To say that same sex attraction is something a Christian can live with is to deny the power of Christ to truly change us.

A Square Triangle: Same Sex Marriage and the Rejection of Scripture

Here is my sermon from this past Sunday on the decision by the Supreme Court. My goal was to be clear. There are numerous things I do not talk about, such as how to interact with homosexuals, etc. that I hope to blog about in the future. Here is a simple outline of the sermon:

1. Basic Scriptural teaching on marriage: One man, one woman married for life, serving God and man by taking dominion over the earth and having children. This paradigm is the only proper place for sexual expression. All other paradigms, men to men, women to women, multiple spouses, being married to animals, divorce, adultery, fornication, etc. are consistently and regularly rejected by Scripture. 

2. How did we get here? Short answer: we slowly began to reject God's Word as the final source of truth in our lives. 

3. Where is here? Three things:

Sodomy is judgment. The church and our country are being judged by God. Sodomy is not just a sin it is a judgment. 

The homosexuals want us to approve of and participate in their immorality. They do not just want to commit the acts. They want us to say the acts are okay, righteous, just, natural, and good. They also want us to participate in the immorality by celebrating it with them in weddings and other events. 

We live in a country where the government actively supports the homosexual agenda. Therefore Christians need to continue to disentangle themselves from the government. 

4. What should we do about it? See this blog post for the answer to that. 

A Theologian of the Cross and the Same Sex Mirage

I just read Carl Trueman's Luther and the Christian Life. I highly recommend it. One of Luther's key ideas was that we need "theologians of the cross." That is people who understand that God works not through power and might, but through weakness, pain, and suffering. He saved us through the death of His Son on a cross as a criminal. Glory came through suffering and weakness. That is the way God works. Yesterday and today we have seen a power play by our Supreme Court. But it is a mirage. True power is not found in black robes and judges. So what should we do? How should we rise up against this tyranny?  Where is the true revolution? What does a cross shaped response look like in response to the Supreme Court's ruling? I think Luther would approve of this list because most of it is Christianity 101, which is not surprising since our marching orders do not change.

Worship God every Sunday. No matter what. Be there with God's people. Sit underneath the mighty Word. Hear again the old, old story. Do not lose confidence in the ordinary means of grace.  A theologian of the cross knows that true power is found in the sanctuary where the Lord is worshiped, the Word is preached, water is poured, and the supper is celebrated.

Don't forget the gospel. Plead the shed blood of Christ. You are a vile, wicked person. Your sins are many and great. But Christ is greater. He has removed them. Be at peace. All of your sins are forgiven in Christ. They are vile, wicked sinners. Their only hope is Jesus Christ and His blood. If we forget the gospel what will we have to offer them when they cry, "What shall we do?" (Acts 2:37)

Sing the Psalms. The time for impotent songs is over. We have been at war, but we forgot and our swords gathered rust. Now the enemy has burst through the wall and we are waking up. We need Psalm 2, Psalm 3, Psalm 9, and Psalm 56. Okay we need them all.

Read the Bible again and again. Believe every word it says without apology. Teach it to your children.

Be bold. Do not fear the world. A theologian of the cross knows that death, their greatest threat, is our greatest triumph. Why fear them when the most they can do is usher us into glory?

Be prepared to suffer. Following Christ will now cost. Rejoice when your reputation is ruined, you lose your job, friends reject you, and you are run out of town. You are starting to catch up with the prophets (Matthew 5:12) and your brothers and sisters around the world.

Love sinners, including homosexuals, but do not expect them to feel loved. Sinners do not love those who call them to repent. But love them anyway. Overcome evil with good.

If you are in a church that is compromising on human sexuality or is silent about it, leave. The ship is sinking. It is time to get off.

If you are in a church that refuses to call it members to repent, leave.  Without repentance in here, there will be no repentance out there.

If you are in a church that refuses to call sinners out there to repent, leave. You cannot worship Jesus without repentance. A church that does not call the culture to repent is a church that is not preaching Jesus.

Learn what the doctrine of lesser magistrate is. We need politicians with the balls to say no to our Federal government. We need men who will take the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court and burn it in the street. Here is a good place to start.

Pray for your leaders (I Timothy 2:1-2).

Marry someone of the opposite sex. Stay married.  Make love. Have children. Raise them in the Lord.

Remain cheerful. Life is a comedy. If God can laugh (Psalm 2:4) then so can we. In the end, all will be well.

Book Review: What Does the Bible Really Teach About Homosexuality?

What Does the Bible Really Teach about Homosexuality? by Kevin DeYoung
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

The best introduction to the subject that I have read. DeYoung is clear and avoids sarcasm. He walks through the key Biblical passages and answers several common objections. He does not give ground, but he does exhibit compassion towards those who are struggling with same-sex attraction. And as usual DeYoung keeps us tight to the Bible and encourages us with the Gospel. He does not address all the issues. He puts the political aspect in an appendix. But overall this is where I would send people to understand what the Bible says about homosexuality.

View all my reviews

Opening the Floodgates

One more quote from Robert Reilly's book Making Gay Okay. Here is a paragraph from his concluding chapter. Reilly is bit over the top, but his central point is a good one.

We cannot blame the homosexuals for all of this. As mentioned before, first came contraception and the embrace of no-fault divorce. Once sex was detached from diapers, the rest become more or less inevitable. If serial polygamy is okay,  and contraceptive sex is okay, and abortion is okay, what could be wrong with a little sodomy? First, short-circuit the generative power of sex through contraception; then kill its accidental offspring; and finally celebrate its use in ways unfit for generation...I only wish there were survivors from the 1930 Lambeth Conference-which first endorsed limited use of contraceptives-who might be forced to attend the Gay Pride events and officiate at same sex "marriages", so they could dwell upon what they hath wrought. Just as there is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant, there is no such thing as a little compromise on moral principle, as the Boy Scouts are about to find out. If the ideology behind the Casey decision [Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, a 1992 court case, which upheld the right to abortion] is correct, then the homosexual position is the right one. It substitutes the primacy of the will for the primacy of reason. If we can make it up as we go along, then there are no moral standards in Nature to distinguish between the use and abuse of sex, only personal taste. The broad embrace of this view has opened the floodgates to sexual dystopia. The problem with this inundation is that it threatens the very democracy that allows it. 

Ten Quotes: Making Gay Okay by Robert Reilly

Robert Reilly's Making Gay Okay is a natural law defense of traditional marriage from a Roman Catholic perspective. He covers how the sodomites invert natural order and then walks the reader through the different ways sodomites have gained power in psychology, education, the military, Boy Scouts, and foreign policy. The book is filled with common sense, covers a lot of ground, and is worth your time. Some of these quotes will be men Reilly quotes throughout the book. All emphasis is the authors. Brackets are mine.

What they [homosexuals] want is legal recognition that obliges everyone to recognize  the legitimacy of their act. 

Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and...transforming the very fabric of society...we must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society's view of reality. [Paula Ettelbrick, former legal director for Lambda]

When morally disordered acts become the defining centerpiece of one's life, vice can permanently pervert reason, and the inversion of reality becomes complete.

The central insight of classical Greek political philosophy is that the order  of the city is the order of the soul writ large. If there is disorder in the city, it is because of disorder in the souls of its citizens.

Aristotle taught that man cannot reach perfection by himself; he needs society and the political order to reach his full potential. The polis is necessary to him. Rousseau asserted the opposite: man begins in perfection which the formation of society then takes from him. 

[Here Reilly is commenting on the idea that a refusal to allow same-sex marriage is an injustice.] Before justice can be enlisted on behalf of this cause, we should ask ourselves: What is justice? The classical answer to this questions is that justice is giving to things what is their due according to what they are. In other words, to act justly, one must first know what things are. Without this knowledge, one cannot act justly. This may seem self-evident, but its application is far more difficult than one might first think. In order to know what things are, one needs metaphysics and epistemology. 

The separation of sex from procreation logically leads to the legalization of contraception, then to abortion, and finally to homosexual marriage and beyond. The logic is compelling, in fact, inescapable. Only the premise is insane.

What began as a plea for diversity ends with a demand for conformity. [Here Reilly is commenting on the proliferation of sodomite literature in schools.]

Homosexuality is incompatible with military service. The presence in the military environment of persons who engage in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements, demonstrate a propensity to engage in homosexual conduct, seriously impairs the accomplishment of the military mission. [Department of Defense Directive given in January 1981.]

Homosexuality is one of America's most successful cultural exports. [Ronald Lee, former homosexual.] 

And One:

 Justice Kennedy teaches, unassailable "private conduct between consenting adults" made under the inviolable "autonomy of self" is at the heart of liberty. But this cannot be right, particularly if it leads to self destruction...The reason is that the key to democracy is not free choice...the key, as our Founding Fathers knew, is virtue. Only a virtuous person is capable of rational consent because only a virtuous person's reason is unclouded by the habitual rationalizations of vice. Vice inevitably infects the faculty of judgment. No matter how democratic their institutions, a morally enervated [weakened] people cannot be free. And people who are enslaved to their passions inevitably become slaves to tyrants. Thus, our Founders predicated the success of democracy in America upon the virtue of the American people...Our culture no longer corners us into virtue, however, but impels into vice. 

Wheaton's Capitulation to Sin

Recently Wheaton College in Illinois hired a woman who declares herself to be a celibate, gay, Christian. You can read the World magazine article here. She says that she is gay, but that being gay does not define her. She is defined by Christ, not by her sexual orientation. She also says she will not act on her desires. What are we to make of this argument? Is it valid to say I want to have sex with women, but I won't act on that desire? The hiring shows the continued breakdown of a Biblical understanding of sin, temptation, and repentance at Wheaton, which has been coming on for some time. Owen Strachan has responded over at Patheos. Toby Sumpter has picked up on one aspect of the debate. Here are a few of my thoughts.

Sin is not just external action. To argue this is to undo the church's teaching on sin and oddly enough to become legalistic. The article implies that sin is really in what you do, not in what you want. But this runs contrary to the Scriptural narrative. Remember Matthew 5:28. Lust is adultery. Wanting to sleep with a woman is as bad as sleeping with her in God's eyes. James 4:1 makes it clear that outward sin, wars and fights, come from inward sin. Numerous sins, such as bitterness, anger, malice, lust, covetousness, are inside us. Even external sins begin in the heart. Jesus said that adultery, murder, and sexual immorality come from the heart. Sin lives in us. Sin is not simply engaging in an action that is wicked. It is thoughts, desires, and emotions that are contrary to God's character and His will for the human race. Putting to death sin does not just mean dealing with external manifestations of sin. It means reshaping our thoughts, desires, and emotions so they are brought in line with God's will. To argue otherwise is to hold a deficient view of sin, repentance, and the Spirit's work in our lives.

What we want matters. Desires matter. We can be guilty of sin by wanting something that we should not have. Here is why same-sex attraction is a sin. It is a twisted desire. It is wanting what one should not long for. With any other sin this is clear. If I hate man and want to kill him the solution is not simply to refrain from killing him. The solution is to repent of the desire itself. My desire to kill the man is a sin even if I never do kill him. If I long to look at porn the solution again is not to simply refrain from looking at porn. The solution is to repent of the desire for porn. So it is with every sin . The external expression is merely a part of the sin and often the easiest to deal with. To argue that I can be attracted sexually to the same gender and not be sinning is contrary to the Scriptures. The desire is a sin and should be repented of.

Sexual sins, both their internal and external manifestations, can be overcome by the Spirit of Christ, the Word of Christ, and the body of Christ. To argue otherwise is to say that Christ cannot make us new. A theme running through "gay Christian" articles is that same sex attraction can not be fully dealt with. We do not say this with other sins.  A man filled with greed should not be told, "Well you can never overcome your greed orientation.The Spirit can't deal with that. You are stuck. But make sure you never steal."  What hope is there in that? What grace is there in that? The Jesus who drove out demons and converted a murdering psychopath cannot help me? Too many Christians have too low a view of the Spirit's work. It is not easy to put our sinful desires and actions to death. But it can be done.

Finally, homosexual sin is not in a separate category from other sins when it comes sanctification. Paul in I Corinthians 6:9-11 puts sodomy right along with all the other sins we might think of, fornication, idolatry, drunkenness, etc. In other words, sodomy can be dealt with by the regular ministry of the church.  A man or woman with same sex desires can be reoriented just as a man with a desire for drunkenness or prostitutes can be reoriented. We tend to take Romans 1 and put homosexuality in its own category. On a cultural level it might be. But on an individual level it is like any other sin. How should a minister deal with a young man with a porn habit? How should he deal with a man who is filled with anger and rage? How should he deal with a woman who is filled with bitterness? The same principles he applies there should be applied to the sodomite.

Book Review: Is God Anti-Gay

Is God Anti-Gay?: And Other Questions about Homosexuality, the Bible and Same-Sex Attraction by Sam Allberry
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A very helpful book for those who are struggling with same sex attraction and for churches, ministers, and lay people who counsel, evangelize, or talk to homosexuals. It was a good reminder that the temptation to homosexuality is like any other temptation in the Christian life. It needs to be fought by prayer, the support of Christian friends, and looking to Christ and his cleansing power. As a pastor, it made me want to be more prepared to minister to those coming out of the homosexual lifestyle and those who trust in Christ, but still struggle with same sex temptation. It also reminded me to not be afraid, to be compassionate to individuals struggling with this sin, and to be aware of how common it has become in our culture.

It did have some drawbacks. First, it provides a very basic outline. It would great if a Christian pastor who has shepherded homosexuals could write a book giving more insight into how to minister to them over the long haul. That will surely become more of counseling burden in the coming decades.

Second, there is no discussion of the politics of sodomy. This may be because it is outside the purview of the book. But the political side of sodomy is huge, whether Christians want it to be or not. For one on one discussion with homosexuals the book was great. For how to interact with a world cramming sodomy down our throats it was not.

Finally, there was one statement that I thought needed to be qualified. He says that a homosexual should not be confronted on his homosexuality until he has been told about Christ (p. 64-65). He says he wants to start with the Gospel and then move to the person's sexual behavior. This is the modern evangelical way to do things. And there is a place for that approach. However, it is often the case that the need for the Gospel is only seen in light of one's sense of their own sinfulness. In other words, if you want people to see their need for Christ they must recognize their own depravity. So while I agree we should not pounce on a homosexual. I do not agree that we must begin with the Gospel and then move to sin. Often, we must work the other way.

View all my reviews

Gay Marriage, Civil Disobedience, and the Christian Future

This was originally posted at Kuyperian. 

“Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.” George Orwell, 1984

Jack Phillips is a Christian baker in Lakewood, Colorado. In 2012 Jack Phillips refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. This couple then reported him to to Civil Rights Commission. A lawsuit followed. The judge ruled against Jack Phillips. The Civil Rights Commission has now come back with its ruling, which consists of three parts.

First, Jack Phillips must change his store policies immediately and begin make wedding cakes for gay couples.

Second, his entire staff must attend training on Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws and agree to abide by them.

Third, for the next two years he must submit quarterly reports to show that he has not discriminated against customers based on their sexual orientation.

Jack Phillips might appeal the decision, but it is hard to see how anything will change.

Here are few quotes.

The Commission chairwoman, “You can have your beliefs, but you can’t hurt people at the same time.”

The ACLU attorney, “Religious freedom is undoubtedly an important American value, but so is the right to be treated equally under the law free from discrimination…Everyone is free to believe what they want, but businesses like Masterpiece Cakeshop cannot treat some customers differently than others based on who they are as people.”

The judge, ”At first blush, it may seem reasonable that a private business should be able to refuse service to anyone it chooses. This view, however, fails to take into account the cost to society and the hurt caused to persons who are denied service simply because of who they are.”

Let the tearing begin.

So how should we live in this country where the rejection of God’s created order is law? How should we live when those in power want to reshape our minds in ways contrary to Scripture? Here are a few thoughts in no particular order.

First, we are past the live and let live stage (if one ever existed).  The sodomites are not saying, “We will live this way and you live that way and we can coexist.” They are demanding that we publicly accept their sins. Anyone who believes that we can all just get along will soon wake up to find their position overrun.

Second, they will come for our children. How long before the State demands that home schooled children and children in Christian schools get “sensitivity training?” If they can make a business owner train his employees why not a principle his students and teachers? Why not a parent their children?

Third, Christians in all walks of life should expect more traps. Think of Daniel 6. Pastors should expect homosexuals to visit their congregations to see if they are preaching against homosexuality. Christian business owners should expect homosexuals to come in and see if they get turned away.  Christian politicians should expect homosexuals to try and out them in some way. I am not encouraging hand wringing, just open eyes.

Fourth, human sexuality, including male-female roles, marriage, procreation, female ministers, sodomy, abortion, divorce, rape, pedophilia, sexual abuse, transgender, etc.  is the battle line right now in America. There are other issues, but few are as pressing as this one. Therefore this is where we must fight.  I am not saying this is all we talk about. And I understand that there are many ways we fight against this wave of immorality, such as love our wives, worship the living God, evangelize our neighbor, teach our children, live holy lives, and preach the Word. But let’s not miss the obvious: one way we must fight is by saying clearly and without apology what God’s Word teaches on these subjects.

Fifth, any pastor or public Christian leader who refuses to speak against these things is a coward. Again, I am not saying this is all we to talk about or that we speak with malice . But our stance on sodomy, and issues related to it needs to be clear and public.  It is our duty to stand in the line of fire, to preach the Word, and to rally God’s people around the truth. A pastor or Christian public leader whose stance on the above issues is vague or unknown is not being a faithful shepherd.

Sixth, pastors and Christian leaders need to teach their people what godly civil disobedience looks like. There is a lot of freedom in how we resist the State’s growing power.  But the time for abstract theological discussion about civil disobedience is passing quickly. We must study God’s Word, meditate on it, pray through it, and study our fathers in the past to learn from them. Then we must teach our people the proper responses to the State. What can we do as Christians? Is there any place to take up arms?  (Maybe those debates about the Revolutionary War and the Civil War are not so arcane after all.) Should we march? Should we keep our businesses open even if there is the threat of police action? Should a Christian business owner reject a homosexual job applicant? What should we do if they come for our children?  What if they come for our guns? Should Christians accept government money in any situation? What should Christian schools do if they are commanded to teach that homosexuality is fine? How should Christian magistrates function? Should Christian soldiers get out or resist from within? Pastors and churchmen should be leading the charge in answering these and other questions.

Seventh, Christians should expect to lose money, businesses, tax breaks, jobs, etc. for taking a stand against unbiblical sexual practices. The Church and her members need to be prepared for this. We should think long term in our financial dealings so that we can “have something to give him who has need.” (Ephesians 4:28)

Eighth, churches should pray for leaders in corporate worship. I Timothy 2 is clear on this point. Do we pray for our leaders? Do we pray for new, righteous leaders to rise up? Do we pray that God would cast down those who hate his Church? Do we pray for pagan leaders to repent and turn to Christ? Do we pray for that we may lead a quiet and peaceful life in all godliness (I Timothy 2:2)? Do we pray for our leaders by name?

Ninth, Christians need to be known as a peaceful people. Psalm 120:7 says, “I am for peace, but they are for war.” We should be the ones who long for peace. This does not mean we are quiet about everything. Nor does this mean we compromise the Gospel to be at “peace with all men” (Romans 12:18).  But it does mean we are careful about what battles we fight. Young people, of whom I am one, especially need to hear this.  We tend to think that every sin is worthy of fire bombing.  But we need to make sure we are hitting the big targets and not spending days chasing one lone enemy through the forest.

Tenth, we must not despair. Jesus sits on throne. We should act from faith, not fear.  We should not be anxious, worried, fretful, fearful, depressed, or discouraged. Our Lord told us this would happen. Our Lord told us to rejoice when we are persecuted.  The Church will march on. We have a job to do. Let us do it with joy in the Holy Spirit, faith in Christ, and dependence upon our Father. In the end, all will be well.

The Faithful Church

What must the church do to combat the idea that homosexuality is fine for Christians? 

1.       She must faithfully and courageously preach the whole Bible. She must particularly preach those passages which the world finds offensive.

2.       She must faithfully preach Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. This means two things: First, he, as our Savior, has defeated sin and can forgive all of our sins. Second, he, as our Lord, commands us to leave off sinful desires and actions.

3.       She must faithfully preach that Christ has given his Spirit that we might overcome our sins.  Those in Christ are freed from their sins.  Sodomy is not excluded.  This doesn’t just mean forgiveness, but it also means victory over those sins in our lives.

4.       She must faithfully show love to Christ, His Church, and to homosexuals by calling them to repent and turn from their sins.  This is to be done graciously, but without compromise.

5.       She must faithfully excommunicate all Christians who refuse to turn from their sins. This includes sodomites, adulterers, thieves, liars, pedophiles, pornography addicts, Pharisees, abusive husbands, etc. Here is one of the greatest failures of the modern church. Her refusal to discipline sinners has caused the inner life of the church to rot. It is hypocritical for a church to refuse to discipline the adulterer, but try to discipline the homosexual. Thus most don't discipline either. 

6.       She must faithfully work to drive wolves out of the Church. Any man or woman who teaches that sodomy is an acceptable lifestyle for Christians is a wolf who is working with Satan to tear the lambs into pieces. Pastor, elders, seminary professors, etc. must be exposed and disciplined who teach that sodomy is not a sin. 

7.       She must expect the world to hate her and persecute her. To combat this hatred she must fight with faith in Christ, steadfastness in prayer, clinging to God’s Word, holy living, the communion of saints, faithful worship, and Biblical love for neighbor. 

Slaughterhouse or Feast?

               Yesterday, I wrote a post stating that the main question in sodomy debate is, "Is homosexuality a sin?" Of course, I believe that it is because that is what the Scriptures teach. Tomorrow I will list some specific things the church should do. Today I want to remind us of what sin does to us.  It seems easy and loving to say that it is not a big deal if churches compromise on this particular issue. But the Word of God says otherwise. 

  

Sin which is not repented of and turned from:

1.       Is displeasing to God. (I Thess. 4:1-12)

2.       Separates us from God. (Isaiah 59:1-3)

3.       Enslaves us. (John 8:34)

4.       Is unnatural. (Romans 1:26-27)

5.       Destroys relationships. (James 4:1-6)

6.       Destroys families. (David’s Adultery, II Samuel 11-19, Titus 1:10-11)

7.       Destroys cultures and cities. (II Kings 17:7-23,Rev. 16:19)

8.       Brings death and unfruitfulness.  (Romans 6:23)

9.       Blinds us to the truth. (Matthew 23:16, 17, 19 24, 26)

10.   Brings down the wrath of God. (Col. 3:6)

11.   Sends us to Hell.  (I Corinthians 6:9-10, Gal. 5:19-21)

                No Christian who loves Christ, has understood forgiveness, and loves his neighbor would want someone to remain in the state above. To say that sodomy is not a sin is like sending men and woman to the slaughter house while we tell them they are going to a feast. It is a lie with terrible consequences for men, women, children, churches, cultures, and our witness for Christ. Any minister who declares that something is not a sin, which the Word declares is, has invited the devil into the midst of his church. He has declared, "I love to keep my people enslaved. I refuse to bring them to the One who can free." The church cannot declare forgiveness of sin and freedom from sin unless she declares that we are sinners.  

What is the Homosexual Debate Actually About?

                Homosexuality has been a hot topic for some time. The intensity of the debate has picked up as the homosexual movement has continued to push its agenda. What is most disconcerting is that the church continues to compromise.  Churches are folding on this issue either because they are tired of discussing it or because they have changed their minds. I want to examine the Biblical basis for opposing homosexuality in an upcoming paper.  But first I want to discuss what is actually being debated within the church.  What are we talking about? What are we not talking about? Throughout this article I use "homosexual" to refer to both men and women who attracted to the same sex. Also conservative and liberal refer to religious groups, not political groups, though obviously there is some overlap. 

Here are some things conservative Christians are often accused saying, but are often slanders.

                We are not saying that sodomy is the unforgiveable sin. The Bible does not teach that sodomy is an unforgiveable sin. All sins can be forgiven, assuming someone repents and turns from them to Christ.  I Corinthians 6:9-11 makes this clear. Conservative Christians are often accused of saying that Jesus did not die for homosexuals. Of course, he did. But that is not the center of the debate. The question is can someone trust in Jesus and still keep a lifestyle of sinning that is contrary to the Bible? There may be Christians out there who think sodomy cannot be covered by the blood of Christ. But they are not at the center of the evangelical faith and they are wrong.

                We are not encouraging people to hate homosexuals. The Bible does not teach that we hate homosexuals any more than it teaches that we hate murderers or adulterers or pedophiles. We tell them to repent and turn from their sins. Again, there are some Christians out there who hate sodomites, but these are on the fringe. I do not know of any evangelical leader who would encourage hatred of homosexuals. Of course, if hatred means calling them to repent, then count me guilty. But that is not biblical hatred.

                We are not encouraging people to be afraid of or make fun of homosexuals.  Here some work needs to be done in the Christian circles. There is still this idea that homosexuals are “disgusting.”  Some of this comes from their practices.  Some of this comes from a junior high mentality that likes to poke fun at weird people. As Christians, this is generally not acceptable. Yes, there are places to mock a homosexual agenda, but this should not be normal, especially as we talk with homosexuals one on one. They are bound for Hell. Their practices are disgusting. But so are the practices of the adulterer or the man addicted to porn or the greedy CEO. All sin disgusts God. We should stop being disgusted by them and start calling them to trust in Christ.  I will admit this is a more prevalent problem than the previous two, but it is still not what most leaders in the church are calling their flock to do.

                So what is the debate about in Christian circles? What are the places that conservative Christians are being asked to compromise on by liberal Christians?  Here are three. But the first one is key.  

                First, is a homosexual lifestyle consistent with Christianity?  I am talking about homosexual desires and deeds from which a man/women refuses to repent and turn.  Can someone be a practicing homosexual and still trust in Christ? Is homosexuality even a sin? Can we call homosexuals to repentance? Or are they just fine the way they are? Here is the primary debate between conservative and liberal Christians.  The view one has of God’s Word is the single greatest factor in how one answers this question.

                Second, for those who agree that homosexuality is a sin how should we approach homosexuals in private and how should we combat the public assault by homosexuals on the Christian faith? There is a lot of good discussion among Christians on how we can best show Christ to this group of sinners. But be assured this is not the primary debate. Not always, but often this debate is just a smokescreen. The primary debate is usually the first one: is homosexuality even a sin? Many of those who claim to be talking about the public debate are actually compromising with the issue of homosexuality as a sin.

                Third, how should we treat Christian leaders who have compromised on this particular issue? I believe they are false prophets leading people to Hell.  As Mark Driscoll says, “Shoot the wolves.”  They are wolves. They need to be actively opposed by Christian leaders.  To sit by and oppose them in our minds is compromise.