Beliefs Culture Doctrine & Practice Ethics Faith Gender & Sexuality Government & Politics Jonathan Merritt: On Faith and Culture Leaders & Institutions Opinion Politics Social Issues

InterVarsity authors and alumni protest policy terminating employees who support gay marriage

InterVarsity students. Photo courtesy of InterVarsity

(RNS) InterVarsity Christian Fellowship USA (IVCF), a large ministry operating on 667 college campuses nationwide, faced widespread backlash after it announced last week it would begin “involuntarily terminating” employees who hold a theological position supporting gay marriage. But the heat is rising today as influential authors and InterVarsity alumni are now publicly protesting the decision.

In a public letter obtained by Religion News Service, more than 50 authors in InterVarsity’s publishing house stable including Shane Claiborne, David Dark, Christena Cleveland, Ian Morgan Cron, and Chris Heuertz are calling on IVCF head Tom Lin to immediately replace the policy with one that makes space for opposing views. The letter indicates that the signers “do not all share the same theological or political views” but “are united in our concern for the dignity and care of our fellow Christians whose jobs are threatened by your policy.”

Chris Heuertz, co-founder of the Gravity Center in Omaha and author of multiple books with InterVarsity Press, sent the letter to Tom Lin via email on Tuesday afternoon. He made clear that the letter was drafted in the spirit of friendship and sadness, not anger.

“As friends of IVCF, this letter comes from a place of deep sorrow,” Heuertz said. “This is not an attack on IVCF or the important work IVCF does, rather it is an invitation for unity in diversity–something many of us have learned through the embodied credibility of IVCF.”

The full draft of the letter is posted below this article with instructions for how other InterVarsity authors can add their names.

These influential authors are not alone in their dismay over IVCF’s policy. This week, a public protest letter from “concerned ICVF alumni” was posted on and addressed to Tom Lin and IVCF’s board of trustees. Similar to the authors’ letter, this petition stated that signers “hold a range of beliefs with regard to marriage and human sexuality.” The petition, in part, states:

The new policy, which excludes many Christian siblings and silences sincere disagreement, contradicts InterVarsity’s values of authentic community, loving-kindness, intellectual rigor, and abundant grace. If not changed, we fear for the future of the organization and its ability to continue to minister to students and faculty, to the ultimate detriment of the gospel message and the legacy of an organization we dearly love.

Today, the petition has exceeded its goal of 1,000 signatures from IVCF alumni.

In addition to these efforts, a large coalition of LGBT Christians has issued a public statement opposing the position. The Gay Christian Network, which has more than 30,000 registered members and runs the world’s largest annual gathering of LGBT Christians, sent Religion News Service a draft of a public letter stating concern that “this decision sends a clear message to LGBT students that they are not wanted in InterVarsity–and many will surmise that they are not wanted in the church, either.”

The letter asserts, “While we sympathize with the need for religious organizations to be able to take theological positions, we do not believe witch hunts based on privately held personal beliefs are the right way to handle a sensitive issue where many Christians are evolving and where those most affected are a minority community with a history of feeling unwanted in the church.”

The full draft of the letter was sent to Religion News Service by Justin Lee, president of the Gay Christian Network and author of Torn: Rescuing the Gospel from the Gays-vs-Christians Debate. It has been posted on the GCN website.

When Elizabeth Dias of Time first broke the story about InterVarsity’s policy, the organization responded by claiming that the article incorrectly reported their position. “The scope of InterVarsity’s reiteration of its position on biblical sexuality is primarily theological in nature,” a public statement said. In other words, IVCF employees will only be fired for holding to theological positions affirming gay marriage, rather than political positions affirming civil marriage for LGBT persons.

An email attempt to contact Tom Lin was not immediately returned for comment.

October 11, 2016

To Tom Lin, the InterVarity Christian Fellowship USA Cabinet and Board of Directors,

As authors who have published with InterVarsity Press (IVP), we are deeply troubled and concerned about your organization’s recent “involuntary termination” policy. Since our IVP books indirectly tether us to your organization, we feel it is necessary to make our feelings known to you and those with whom we have relationships. We understand that conversations related to marriage, sexuality, and gender are critical for Christians, but we also recognize that Christians of mutual goodwill can have those conversations and arrive at various conclusions. While we do not all share the same theological or political views, we are united in our concern for the dignity and care of our fellow Christians whose jobs are threatened by your policy.

Therefore, we urge you, for the sake our our collective integrity and the credibility of your organization to revoke the “involuntary termination” policy and replace it with one that allows your staff to conscientiously object. Allowing IVCF staff to remain in community despite not completely agreeing with a particular view of sexuality and marriage will demonstrate the inclusive and open-armed spirit of Christ. The Christian community is in desperate need of healing at this moment, and we believe you can help lead this effort.

For the sake of our friends,

Janell Anema, National Trainer with Sources of Strength, Director/Co-Director of IV’s Global Urban Trek to South Asia, and contributor to Letters to a Future Church: Words of Encouragement and Prophetic Appeals.

Kent Annan, author of Slow Kingdom Coming: Practices for Doing Justice, Loving Mercy and Walking Humble in the World and Jesus Through the Eye of the Needle: Living Fully, Loving Dangerously

Jamie Arpin-Ricci, Pastor of Little Flowers Community, co-director of YWAM Urban Ministries Winnipeg and author of The Cost of Community: Jesus, St. Francis and Life in the Kingdom.

Leroy Barber, Director of The Voices Project, author of Embrace: God’s Radical Shalom for a Divided World and Everyday Missions: How Ordinary People Can Change the World.

Ivy Beckwith, Faith Formation Minister and Team Leader United Church of Christ in Cleveland, Ohio and co-author of Children’s Ministry in the Way of Jesus.

Kristie Berglund, Pastor of First Presbyterian Church of Brookings, South Dakota, former IVP academic sales manager, and author of Resurrection: Living as People of the Risen Lord.

Brent Bill, Quaker minister and co-author of Finding God in the Verbs: Crafting a Fresh Language of Prayer­ and Awaken Your Senses: Exercises for Exploring the Wonder of God.

Beth Booram, Co-founder and Director of Sustainable Faith and author of Starting Something New: Spiritual Direction for Your God-given Dream and Awaken your Senses.

Jared Patrick Boyd, Founder of The Order of Sustainable Faith, Pastor and Spiritual Director at Franklinton Abbey, and author of upcoming Imaginative Prayer: A Yearlong Guide for the Spiritual Formation of Your Child.

Shane Claiborne, co-founder of Red Letter Christians and The Simple Way and co-author of Becoming the Answer to our Prayers: Prayer for Ordinary Radicals.

Rodney Clapp, editor, Cascade Books, and author of Families at the Crossroads: Beyond Tradition and Modern Options and A Peculiar People: The Church as Culture in a Post-Christian Society.

Julie Clawson, author of Everyday Justice: The Global Impact of Our Daily Choices.

Dr. Christena Cleveland, Ph.D., Associate Professor of the Practice of Reconciliation at Duke Divinity School and author of Disunity in Christ: Uncovering the Hidden Forces that Keep Us Apart.

Rev. Ian Morgan Cron, Episcopal priest and co-author of The Road Back to You: An Enneagram Journey to Self-Discovery.

Dr. David Dark, Ph.D., educator at the Tennessee Prison for Women and Belmont University, and author of Life’s Too Short to Pretend You’re Not Religious.

Dr. Megan DeFranza, Ph.D., contributing author to Evangelical Postcolonial Conversations: Global Awakenings in Theology and Praxis, and author of Sex Difference in Christian Theology: Male, Female, and Intersex in the Image of God (which is listed under recommended reading in InterVarsity’s position paper on Human Sexuality).

Rev. John Flett Ph.D., DTheol.Habil., Associate Professor of Missiology and Intercultural Theology at Pilgrim College/ University of Divinity, and author of Apostolicity: The Ecumenical Question in World Christian Perspective.

Dr. Dwight J. Friesen, D.Min, Associate Professor of Practical Theology at The Seattle School of Theology & Psychology, and co-author of The New Parish: How Neighborhood Churches are Transforming Mission, Discipleship and Community.

Sean Gladding, author of The Story of God, The Story of Us and Ten: Words of Life for an Addicted, Compulsive, Cynical, Divided and Worn-out Culture

Dale Hanson Bourke, author of Responding to HIV/AIDS, The Skeptic’s Guide to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and Immigration: Tough Questions, Direct Answers.

Rev. Peter Goodwin Heltzel, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Theology and Director of the Micah Institute at New York Theological Seminary and co-author of Faith-rooted Organizing: Mobilizing the Church in Service to the World.

Christopher L. Heuertz, Founding Partner of Gravity, a Center for Contemplative Activism and author of Simple Spirituality: Learning to See God in a Broken World, co-author of Friendship at the Margins: Discovering Mutuality in Service and Mission, and contributor to Living Mission: The Vision and Voices of New Friars.

Phileena Heuertz, Founding Partner of Gravity, a Center for Contemplative Activism and author of Pilgrimage of a Soul: Contemplative Spirituality for the Active Life and contributor to Living Mission: The Vision and Voices of New Friars.

Michael Hidalgo, Lead Pastor, Denver Community Church, Author of Unlost: Being Found by the One We Are Looking For and Changing Faith.

Dr. Daniel White Hodge Ph.D., Director of The Center for Youth Ministry Studies & Associate Professor of Youth Ministry at North Park University and author of The Soul of Hip Hop: Rimbs, Timbs, and a Cultural Theology.

Jon Huckins, Co-Founding Director of Global Immersion and co-author of unnamed, upcoming 2017 IVP book.

Erin Lane, Assistant Program Director for Clergy and People of Faith at the Center for Courage & Renewal and author of Lessons in Belonging from a Church-Going Commitment Phobe.

Andrew Marin, President and Founder of The Marin Foundation and author of the award winning Love Is an Orientation: Elevating the Conversation with the Gay Community.

Dr. Jennifer M. McBride Ph.D., Associate Dean of Doctor of Ministry Programs and Assistant Professor of Theology and Ethics at McCormick Theological Seminary and contributor to Christian Political Witness.

Dr. W. Travis McMaken, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Religion and Chair of the Interdisciplinary Studies department, Lindenwood University and author of upcoming Explorer’s Guide to T. F. Torrance.

Rev. Dr. Kai Mark Nilsen, D.Min., Lead Pastor of Peace Lutheran in Columbus, Ohio and author of Renew Your Life: Discovering the Wellspring of God’s Energy.

Mark Oestreicher, Partner, The Youth Cartel and author of Hopecasting: Finding, Keeping and Sharing the Things Unseen.

Dr. Margaret Kim Peterson Ph.D., Associate Professor of Theology and Psychology at Eastern University (St. Davids, PA), co-author of Are You Waiting for “The One?” Cultivating Realistic, Positive Expectations for Christian Marriage, and member of the editorial advisory board for the IVP’s Strategic Initiatives in Evangelical Theology series.

Dr. John Phelan Jr. Ph.D., Senior Professor of Theological Studies, North Park Theological Seminary, former IVCF staff, and author of Essential Eschatology: Our Present and Future Hope.

Caryn Rivadeneira, author, Broke: What Financial Desperation Revealed About God’s Abundance.

Rev. Alexia Salvatierra, founder of Faith-rooted Organizing UnNetwork and co-author of Faith-rooted Organizing: Mobilizing the Church in Service to the World.

Hailey Scandrette, contributor to Belonging and Becoming: Creating a Thriving Family Culture and contributor to Free: Spending Your Time and Money on What Matters Most.

Lisa Scandrette, Teacher with ReImagine, co author of Belonging and Becoming: Creating a Thriving Family Culture and contributor to Free: Spending Your Time and Money on What Matters Most.

Mark Scandrette, Founding Director, ReIMAGINE, author of Practicing The Way of Jesus: Life Together in the Kingdom of Love, author of Free: Spending Your Time and Money on What Matters Most, and coauthor of Belonging and Becoming: Creating a Thriving Family Culture.

Christopher Smith, Founding Editor of The Englewood Review of Books, co-author of Slow Church: Cultivating Community in the Patient Way of Jesus and author of Reading For The Common Good: How Books Help Our Churches and Neighborhoods Flourish.

Suzanne Stabile, Co-founder and Animator of Life in the Trinity Ministry and co-author of The Road Back to You: An Enneagram Journey to Self-Discovery.

Jer Swigart, Co-Founding Director of Global Immersion, a peacemaking training organization and co-author of unnamed, upcoming 2017 IVP book.

Laura Sumner Truax, Senior Pastor at LaSalle Street Church and author of Undone: When Coming Apart Puts You Back Together

Dr. Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen, Ph.D., Professor Emerita of Psychology at Eastern University, and author of Gender and Grace: Love, Work, and Parenting in a Changing World, and My Brother’s Keeper: What the Social Sciences Do (and Don’t) Tell Us About Masculinity.

Mark Van Steenwyk, Director of the Center for Prophetic Imagination, Co-Founder of the Mennonite Worker and author of The UnKingdom of God: Embracing the Subversive Power of Repentance.

Wendy VanderWal-Gritter Executive Director, New Direction Ministries contributor to Letters to a Future Church: Words of Encouragement and Prophetic Appeals.

Will Vaus, Pastor of Stowe Community Church in Stowe, Vermont and author of Mere Theology: A Guide to the Thought of C.S. Lewis.

Dan White Jr., Co-Planter of Axiom Church Syracuse, New York. Co-author of The Church as Movement: Starting and Sustaining Missional-Incarnational Communities.

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove, co-author of Becoming the Answer to our Prayers: Prayer for Ordinary Radicals and Associate Editor for IVP’s Resources for Reconciliation Series.

Adrianna Wright, former online publicist for InterVarsity Press.

Keri Wyatt Kent, author of God’s Whisper in a Mother’s Chaos: Bringing Peace Home and The Garden of the Soul: Cultivating Your Spiritual Life.

Mark Yaconelli, Executive Director of The Hearth, author of The Gift of Hard Things: Finding Grace in Unexpected Places.

*If you are an IVP author/contributor and would like your name added to this letter please indicate that by sending a message here. Also, please note that organizations and titles listed for identification purposes only and do not necessarily reflect the position of the institution.

About the author

Jonathan Merritt

Jonathan Merritt is senior columnist for Religion News Service and a contributing writer for The Atlantic. He has published more than 2500 articles in outlets like USA Today, The Week, Buzzfeed and National Journal. Jonathan is author of "Jesus is Better Than You Imagined" and "A Faith of Our Own: Following Jesus Beyond the Culture Wars." He resides in Brooklyn, NY.


Click here to post a comment

  • Jonathan,

    I gotta say I really don’t know whether to laugh or cry. IVP has been publishing books smudging the line on sexuality for a number of years. What in the world did they think would happen with this policy?

  • Homosexuals who consider themselves “Christian”, are actively rebelling against Jesus’ teaching. How could they possibly bring someone to the awareness that Jesus died for them and that they need to renounce their sin, when they don’t think they need to? Homosexuality is a sin. There is no such thing as a homosexual Christian.

    Jude 1:17-19King James Version (KJV)
    17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
    18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
    19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

    2 John 1:9New King James Version (NKJV)
    9 Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son.

    1 John 1:6 – If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth.

    1 John 3: 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. 8 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

    Jesus will forgive and heal them of their sin, but you cannot have it both ways. You cannot actively participate in sin and be a Christian.

  • Uh, first off, the King James? Seriously? And secondly, none of those passages address homosexuality at all.

  • Well, looks like the Gay-Marriage pressure is on now. As always, David must either bow down and kowtow to Goliath, or else find the true strength and courage in God to actually FIGHT Goliath.

    Today’s “David” just happens to be IVCF. Tomorrow, it may be YOU (the Christian reader), or your church, or your campus Bible Study group. Make no mistake, Goliath is coming for you too — unless you’ve ALREADY decided to bow down to him and do his, umm, bidding.

    I sincerely hope that Tom Lin and IVCF will fight back — fight hard — against Goliath. If they try to appease Goliath with one compromise after another, they’re going to lose and lose badly.

    InterVarsity MUST fight back now. No joke, no jive, no junk. Otherwise they are guaranteed to suffer the same sad fate as the United Methodist Church, all divided, confounded, and collectively neutralized.

  • Either that or David can calm down and go back to cuddling with Jonathan. (Seriously, their story has the structure of a romantic narrative, and is either the only “really good best buds” narrative in Scripture, or it is one of many Old Testament romance narratives. I find it funny that you took literally the gayest character in the Bible as the centre of your metaphor.)

  • If there’s one thing we’ve learned from the evaporation of mainline Protestantism, it’s that theological identity provides the basis of confessional discipleship and spiritual fellowship. The churches in the early twentieth century that tried to hollow out their confessions to “make room” for fundamentally opposing notions of God and man are the same churches now being turned into museums. You can grow businesses and political programs with pragmatism, but you cannot grow a church. Samuel D. James

  • This has been a confusing mess on the part of IVCF, at least as far as their position and policy are concerned as measured against their public statements. Why not let the departures of staff who disagree with the stated theological position of the ministry depart over time by attrition, rather than by the rather draconian methodology stated here. New hires could be required to affirm the theological position of IVCF before being hired. In any case, the backlash from those who disagree with said theology will have its effect. The famous and vaunted tolerance of the Progressives, whether Leftists, Christians, or otherwise, has given way to a pattern of bullying that clearly demonstrates that the tolerance of the Left is a sham and equal to the putative intolerance of the Right.

  • Uh, exactly what is the “important work” that ICVF does? AFAIK, all they do is condemn others and attempt to force their beliefs on others.

  • I didn’t know it was Christian doctrine to fire a person for agreeing with same-sex marriage. Must have missed that passage.

  • Yes there is. A homosexual who doesn’t engage in sexual activity. Remember, hate the sin, love the sinner? Homosexuality is biologically based. If one can’t help that they can certainly refrain from actions.

  • No, it is not a protest against moral standards, but against intolerance, exclusivity, and mis-exercise of power.

  • No-one mentioned sex, except you. What WAS mentioned was romance.

    “Clowns”? You call your opponents “clowns”? You set a sweet example of gospel love.

  • If they are not engaging in homosexual activity, why call oneself a homosexual? Homosexuality is a chosen action. We all choose our actions.

  • Want to enlighten me? Please point to the passage where it says heterosexuals that agree with same-sex marriage shall be fired from their jobs.

  • I don’t know, Edward. A lot of people disagreed, and they signed a petition. Did they threaten to fire anyone who disagreed with them?

  • So heterosexuals are’t straight when they aren’t having sex? What are they between times? Floating voters?

  • Why? For the same reason you call yourself a heterosexual. It doesn’t mean you necessarily engage in sexual activity. You might, if you’re married. But if you’re single, and celibate, you are still heterosexual, because you are attracted to the opposite sex. You can’t change who you’re attracted to. And homosexuality is not a chosen action any more than heterosexuality. What you do with those attractions is a choice, but those attractions are part of who you are (that is, who God created). I highly recommend reading Justin Lee’s book Torn. I found it immensely helpful.

  • Sandi, So is thievery – an action proscribed in the 10 Commandments, even to satisfy dire hunger.

  • I don’t refer to myself by my sin. Jesus said that He would forgive and heal us of our sin. Homosexuality is always a choice. Heterosexuality is normal as Christ stated in Romans 1:26. Thank you. I prefer God’s word.

  • Sorry Chriz…..Romans 1:26 states that heterosexuality is normal and homosexuality is abnormal.

  • Actually, it doesn’t. But it does suggest, wrongly, that homosexuality is a choice. Which, of course, it isn’t.

    I’m afraid poor old Paul was out of his depth on this one, as he was on other topics. Like his belief that Jesus’ second coming was imminent.

    I rather think poor old Paul is more than a little embarrassed now by the cr*p he…allegedly…wrote.

  • Where is this author’s coverage about the letter sent to POTUS by religious leaders and non-religious about religious discrimination on this same issue? Kudos for IV for their courage. We stand with you. This is not a “Witch Hunt.” As two church historians recently wrote, no where, by no one, at any point in church history has the Church taken the position now being pushed to normalize LGBT behaviors.

  • How about an actual quote from Jesus condemning homosexuality? All he taught was to show love for God and your neighbor. As far as I’m concerned, these “testaments” are guidances – word of mouth or “testimonies” of men and women that are prone to biases of their time. Otherwise, we should be protesting against multiracial couples (fabrics shouldn’t be mixed together, Israelites shouldn’t lie with Palestinians etc.) as well.

  • Sandi… You know the Bible was written by man right? Those new testaments are merely testimonies of God’s teaching. If that were the case, should we believe all witness accounts in court to be absolutely 100% true?

  • Yes, because homosexuality = pedophile. Grown man loving a young girl = homosexual. Grown woman fondling a young boy = homosexual. Two grown men kissing = pedophiles.

  • You want something from Christ on homosexuality… is what He had to say about relationships: I understand that you don’t know the Bible very well, so I’ve added some instructions to help you understand- Read John 1:1 and Genesis 3:22 with the understanding of who wrote the Bible from the point of view that it is the inspired Word of God.

    Matthew 5:17New King James Version (NKJV)
    17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.

    Genesis 2:24 – Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. –

    Deuteronomy 25:5 “If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the dead man shall not be married outside the family to a stranger. Her husband’s brother shall go in to her and take her as his wife and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her. 6 And the first son whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. (It is always male and female)

    Leviticus 18:22 – 22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.
    Leviticus 20:13 – If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

    Matthew 19:4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

    Acts 15:19-20New International Version (NIV)
    19 Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, 20 but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood.

    1 Kings 14:24 New International Version (NIV)
    24 There were even male shrine prostitutes in the land; the people engaged in all the detestable practices of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites. – what do male prostitutes do? Abominations.

    Acts 15:19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.

    1 Corinthians 6:9-11English Standard Version (ESV)
    9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

    New International Version
    Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.

    1 Corinthians 10:8English Standard Version (ESV)
    8 We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day.

    Jude 1:7 – In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire

    1 Timothy 1: 9-11 “ …. understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers,a liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.”

    1 Corinthians7 – Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.”

    Romans 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts.Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

    1 Corinthians 11:9 -neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.

    1 Thessalonians 4:3-8New International Version (NIV)
    3 It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; 4 that each of you should learn to control your own body[a] in a way that is holy and honorable, 5 not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; 6 and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister.[b] The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. 7 For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life. 8 Therefore, anyone who rejects this instruction does not reject a human being but God, the very God who gives you his Holy Spirit.

    Galatians 5:19-21
    New International Version (NIV)
    19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

    Ephesians 5:31
    New Living Translation (NLT)
    31 As the Scriptures say, “A man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.”

    Colossians 3:5
    New Living Translation (NLT)
    5 So put to death the sinful, earthly things lurking within you. Have nothing to do with sexual immorality, impurity, lust, and evil desires.

    2 Peter 2:6 if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7 and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked 8 (for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard);

    Ephesians 5:24-25 New International Version (NIV)
    24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
    25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her

    Ephesians 5:3 But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people.

    Matthew 15:19 For from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, all sexual immorality, theft, lying, and slander.20 These are what defile you.

    Revelation 2:20 International Standard Version (ISV)
    20 But I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet and who teaches and leads my servants to practice immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols.

    Revelation 22: 14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. 15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.

    My favourite: 1 Corinthians 11:11New King James Version (NKJV) 11 Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord.


    • A wicked act (Gen 19:7; Judges 19:23)

    • An abomination (Lev 18:22; Lev. 18:26; Lev. 18:27; Lev. 18:29; Lev. 18:30; Lev. 20:13)

    • Folly (Judges 19:23)

    • A vile act (Judges 19:24)

    • A vile affection (Rom 1:26)

    • An act against nature (Rom 1:26)

    • An abusive act (1 Cor 6:9)

    • A sin against one’s own body (1 Cor 6:18)

    • An act that defiles (Lev. 18:24; Lev. 18:25; Lev. 18:27; Lev. 18:28; Lev. 18:30; 1 Tim 1:9)

    • Those that practice it shall not inherit the Kingdom of God (I Cor 6:9-10; Jude 1:7; Jude 1:13; Rev. 21:8; Rev. 21:27)

    (many thanks to Adam in Christ for this excellent summary)

  • That makes as much sense as me quoting Ezekiel 23:20: There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

    Obviously this is a testament that all women lusts after men with big penises and have severe BO. Wait… actually…

  • I wish Christians would go out and protest and openly dissent against divorcers and multiracial families with the same fervor as they do with homosexuality. They’re all supposedly “perversions” under God’s eyes anyways – at least for the people who have testified so in the bible.

    This argument really comes down to whether you believe homosexuality is a choice. If you believe men are sleeping with men because they actively choose to be attracted to men, we can’t open up this discussion any further. If you believe homosexuality is something a person can actually be born with, then who are we to dissent against the law of the land – the one God put in place here mind you – that gives these homosexuals the same inalienable (and tax) rights of straight married couples? Let them be in a union under the law of the land and not in the eyes of God. Let God judge them – our job here on earth is to be a reflection of Jesus – to love God with all our hearts and our neighbors. It really is that simple.

  • I’m sorry again, for your lack of understanding. That particular woman discussed felt that way, not all women.

  • Daniel, you know that the Bible was written by the inspiration of God, eh? The New Testaments are mere eye-witness. Has nothing to do with court.

  • Wow, that is some Grade A Cherry picking – all without context to support your human agendas. I assume you’ve read the bible, so you know that the word of Jesus was highlighted in red in the new testament and I will assume you know why I’m ignoring your boilerplate copy paste bible verses from the old testament since we Christians live by the new testament and use the old testament as guidance.

    How do I know you are cherry picking for your personal agenda? The closest Jesus came to ever address marriage was that one passage in the new testament you pointed out:

    Matthew 19:4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

    However, lo and behold, as hateful Christians like you like to do, you do not give the context surrounding the passage and twist the word of the Lord, like the Pharisees, to your liking:

    Teaching About Divorce
    19 Now when Jesus had finished these sayings, he went away from nGalilee and oentered pthe region of Judea beyond the Jordan. 2 And qlarge crowds followed him, and he healed them there.
    3 And Pharisees came up to him and rtested him by asking, s“Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” 4 He answered, t“Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, u‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and vthe two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. wWhat therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” 7 They said to him, x“Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” 8 He said to them, “Because of your yhardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 zAnd I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”

    Yeah… That passage was about divorce, not what God had to say about homosexuality. Are you really that blind to the truth that you twist the word of the Lord to fit your own twisted ways? You can interpret the passage how ever you like – I interpreted that passage as man and women should never divorce because once they are unionized under the eyes of the Lord, they are forever inseparable.

  • My, my…..another “Bible expert” who doesn’t know that Jesus is God and that the Bible is the Word of God who pulls out the very, very old and worn out, “Cherry picking” when he cannot refute the information. Yawn..

  • GrumpySmurf, First off, the main objection I’ve read about the KJV amounts to judging a 1611 book by 2016 standards – hardly fair, I’d say since there’s almost 4 centuries time span between the 2. “… And secondly” I’d love to see some precise extraction of meaning from the text, instead of supplying your own meaning. What did the original readers/hearers garner from the passage?

  • Divorced people are not lying to the world that theirs is not a sin, Daniel. That is what you are missing. People are not going to Hell because of divorcees, as they are because of homosexual activists to lie and hurt children by telling them homosexuality is innate and immutable.

  • Exactly – eye-witness accounts. Are you saying we should hold any and all eye-witness accounts – even those from the bible – as absolute truths? Are you saying that mankind today and mankind then could never misinterpret or mis-account certain events?

  • How about you go about “Christianing” your way and I’ll go worshiping our Lord and loving my neighbors? Man, Jesus said it would be hard to love even the Pharisees like you :/ I guess that’s what the burden of being a Christian is.

  • But you are not loving your neighbour if you a helping him to go to Hell. That is my point.
    NB – Christ said to listen to the Pharisees.

  • Wait, are you saying the bible isn’t the absolute truth of all of mankind? (Absolutely SHOCKED!)

  • Yes, when they have been filled with the Holy Spirit and taught by Jesus. One would be silly not to

  • I’m sorry my understanding of the bible does not match your obviously superior and absolute truth understanding of the bible.

  • It’s okay, I’d rather pray for understanding from our Lord than learn from the misguidances of another Pharise… I mean another human.

  • “We all choose our actions.” So thievery is a choice, even thievery to satisfy dire hunger. That’s my answer to those people who say that being born with a desire – dire hunger – justifies breaking a commandment. We all “get” to “live under” the same 10 Commandments, don’t we?

    ‘Zat make more sense? If not, I’ll try again.

  • Looks like you’re in good company Sandi. “WordOfGod” and other people like you are why people either reject Christianity or seek out a more loving voice out there in the crowd (a voice that’s becoming increasingly quieter). It’s really a pity :/

  • So you believe homosexuals actually choose to be attracted to the same gender? Have you ever met a homosexual before, much less discuss the gospel with one? How sheltered are you to not have gone out like Jesus had and reach out the all of God’s creations?

  • I’m not sure if you’re a troll or a genuine fanatic whom I have the displeasure of associating with as a Christian, but at least try to engage in a conversation and release your all caps key.

  • That’s always good to know, in case I ever need to find out more about this godling “who so loved the world…”

    It’s a good recommendation for atheism.

  • Ahhh, and I fooled myself for a moment that you understood civility…..Romans 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;” Notice “exchanged”? Notice, “contrary to nature”?
    1;27 – the men likewise gave up natural relations with women….notice “gave up”? notice “natural relations”?
    all choices.

  • Oh my! All you are really saying is that he need prayer, my friend. I hope you are praying for him.

  • Tom Sathre, that argument is ridiculous on its face. It’s means we can reject everything if we aren’t cagey.
    And Sandy Luckins, actually, no, they don’t. The words used in the original texts don’t mean homosexual. They are used only twice in all of the entire corpus of the Greek language (that I’m aware of) and so no one really know what they mean. I have actually been told by a couple of sound Greek scholars (one edited several Loeb volumes, if I remember correctly) that it may mean “eunuch” or “temple eunuch” a far cry from homosexual. At any rate, there were plenty of commonly used words available, and Paul didn’t use them. That means something. It may mean everything.

    But it doesn’t fit conservative Christians narrative. So you ignore it.

    Your obsession with homosexuals is unhealthy. Perhaps obsess with the homeless. Or the poor. You know, like Jesus did.

  • Sorry Smurf, you are incorrect. Homosexuality, as we now call it, is what they were referring in the originals. I suggest you read Romans 1.

  • Not a single word from Jesus condeming homosexuals. Hmm. Could that be a clue?

    You are projecting, Sandi. Your biases into the text. Same with Paul, as I explained above.

    These folks are human beings. You will never, ever proof text one of them into the kingdom. Get that into your head. And our end game must alway be evangelism and love. This is not loving, no matter what you think. It is not your job to convict people of sin, it is the job of the spirit.

    So go love folks, including “the gays.” If God wants them to change, He will convict them.

    The arrogance of believing we know Gods heart about these things astounds me.

  • Absolutely incorrect. Do you read Greek? I do. You an keep throwing passages at me. It doesn’t change anything.

  • no. I was trying not to jump on the hate homosexuals bandwagon there, and wondering if adding scripture would seem like adding to the hatred.
    There are tons of things that Christ said about homosexuality and it being wrong. I’ve listed them elsewhere, countless times. You really need to learn a few things.
    We tell them they are sinning so that they know they need Jesus and we can help them into His blessings and a relationship with Him.
    You have a problem with that, speak with the Lord about the Great Commission and tell Him he was wrong.

  • Could say the same thing about you. Spent 4 years in seminary. How about you?

    I have presented you with facts. The Greek disagrees with you. Any Greek scholar will tell you that.

    Who is actually hiding from truth?

    Pro tip: it’s not me.

  • Christ spoke about the sin of Homosexuality from Leviticus to the Book of Revelation. I suggest you find a Bible and read it.

  • “As two church historians recently wrote, no where, by no one, at any point in church history has the Church taken the position now being pushed to normalize LGBT behaviors.”

    Let’s imagine what science would look like if we rigidly restricted our thinking, beliefs, and procedures to the content of a collection of writings from several thousand years ago (or even just several hundred years ago). In 2016, scientists would still be expected to attend weekly meetings where those writings would be repeatedly rammed down their throats as the source of authority for absolute scientific truth. Anyone with the courage to talk about microorganisms causing disease, DNA, the possibility of antibiotics, or pain medications would be branded a heretic. Any person attempting to change thinking or beliefs based on reason, experimentation, evidence, logic would be denounced for not being a TrueScientist.

    And yet, that is exactly where we are with religion. The written words of ignorant/delusional ancient people are fully accepted as absolute unwavering truth while any proposed change in thinking/beliefs based on reason/evidence/logic is automatically dismissed . . . because reason, evidence, and logic are viewed as irrelevant trivialities which must not be allowed to pollute holy thinking.

  • Christ’s actual words? Nice try.

    Again, I’ll stick to loving people. Whatever the hell you think this approach will accomplish is up to you.

    I do know if people like you treated me like this when I was struggling with my alcoholism when I was getting sober and meeting Christ for the first time, 33 some odd years ago, I would be dead. You lot who think all this is so black and white need to remember this is not all theoretical, but about real, actual people.

    Honestly, since you are more concerned with being right, and the purity of your doctrine, than actual people, you should be ashamed.

    Good day.

  • It is black and white. Homosexuality is a sin. Good day. BTW, did you also miss the class where they taught that Christ is God? Try John 1:1-10 to start.

  • I don’t accept your “religious people are stupid and backward” and “science is enlightened and reasonable” defense. I have no issues with the scientific method – its strengths or limitations. Your intellectual hubris is stunning. My brief comment said nothing about “rigidly restricting thinking.” Ancients were not all “ignorants/delusional.” They represent some of the greatest intellects of any time. Your “chronological snobbery” and historical ignorance of the history of ideas betrays a lack of education and knowledge.

  • He does love the world. He died to save the world, Ben – you included. You just keep rejecting Him.

  • Genesis 38 is a story about what it looks like to contribute in a way that will exclude others. It is a story about what it looks like when a man acts out of fear of losing who he thinks is the last of those would donate. In this story the right ones are the wrong ones and the wrong one is the right one. It looks one way but turns out another. It’s one of those stories that shows how the coming story of Christ moved from one generation to the next. If I had to sign a piece of paper affirming I agreed with others what this chapter teaches to save my job…I could do that. Birthing purging? It has worked out in the past.

  • Hey Sandi, try 1Timothy 2:12: I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.

    So as a woman, you must shut up and let the men around here do the talking. Your gender has no place to voice her opinions on these forums. It is black and white and crystal clear, as the bible preaches.

  • Dear Sandi, how’s this for civility: 1 Timothy 2:11-14:

    11A woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man; she is to remain quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. 14And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman who was deceived and fell into transgression.

    Shut your heathen, sinning, woman mouth.

  • You never made the effort to reach out to indigenous tribes in Africa and therefore, you are not loving your neighbor since you’re helping them all go to Hell.

    Kind of the same logic. And no Christ never said to listen to the Pharisees.

  • Oh lookie here, Sandi, who thinks she’s Jesus, all-knowing and omnipotent, knows that Ben is going to hell because “he keeps rejecting Him.” What did the bible say about playing the role of God?

  • Daniel, if you need to resort to making silly comments, you realize that you’ve lost the argument, eh? Just a tip.

  • Dan, if you need to resort to making silly comments, you realize that you’ve lost the argument, eh? Just a tip.
    Matthew 23:1Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2“The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3So you must be careful to do everything they tell you

  • Absolutely true, and if this were a church, it would be applicable, Dan. What more does have to say?

  • Sandi, you do realize if you have to grasp at random bible verses to supposedly make a point, you’ve lost the argument, eh? Just a tip.

    1 Corinthians 14:36-38:
    36Did God’s word originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached? 37If anyone considers himself a prophet or spiritual person, let him acknowledge that what I am writing you is the Lord’s command. 38But if anyone ignores this, he himself will be ignored.

  • Sandi, If you don’t have an actual counterargument and just attempt to draw up random bible verses without any actual supporting evidence, you realize you’re grasping at straws and lost the argument, eh? Just a tip. 😉

  • Daniel, when you grow up, and are capable of adult conversation, please, contact me. Until then….blessings.

  • Charles Davy, You haven’t demonstrated, yet, that Christians were unlimited in, say, handing out tracts whereas Muslim students were so limited.

  • Sandi, how about dropping the condescending tone and actually come to think of it, hold your tongue you heathen women. Practice what the bible says and keep your mouth shut you baby producer. Many blessings 🙂

  • The word literally means “man-bedders.” Simple enough. And Paul probably didn’t use the “commonly used” words because they were too specific. The word derived from Lev 20:13 pretty well covers it all.

  • How does someone’s views on same sex marriage effect their job performance? This sounds like employment discrimination to me.

  • Sorry, but that is simply untrue. The word in Greek appears nowhere else in Greek. So no one knows what it means. The scholars I’ve read say it almost certainly doesn’t mean anything remotely resembling that. You are letting your desire for an outcome over ride the persuit for truth.

  • This situation makes a great argument for eliminating publicly funded subsidies for religious institutions. Tax money has strings, which tend to get twisted into knots by well-meaning souls who inadvertently forget about other people’s civil rights, accidentally trespass onto their equals’ equally sacred beliefs, and unthinkingly expect those other-believing strangers to pay for the privilege of being infringed upon. Then the faithful souls get hamstrung by the government’s interest in ensuring equal treatment under the law. That’s the ungodly problem with strings: Even when we don’t deceive / A tangled web such strings still weave…

  • He needs to find a better class of messenger. Or at least a better class of personnel manager.

  • I don’t remember from the article whether any appreciable number of present staff disagreed, but certainly substantial numbers of alumni did so.

  • Sandi, those scriptural passages you offered as proof-texts actually relate to the author’s own time, not to ours.

    First-century Christians firmly believed in the imminence of the Parousia: Christ’s second coming. There is evidence for this belief in the writings of Paul and Peter.

    Elsewhere on this blog I said that certain people were reading into such passages their own agendas. You recall? Well, you’re a prime example of this.

  • Sandi, sexual orientation is not a choice, but is biologically determined. This is something that first-century writers, like Paul the Apostle, did not know. Hence the anthropological guesswork on homosexuality Paul wrote in Romans.

    Paul had an excuse, Sandi: he lacked modern knowledge and understanding of the psycho-sexual nature of humankind. But you have no such excuse, because this knowledge is available to you. If you reject it, this shows not superior awareness, but stubborn and outdated homophobic prejudice. This cannot serve Christ.

  • Oh? What does “metrokoite” mean? How about “doulukoite?” “Polukoite?” Funny how we don’t have any trouble translating those but supposedly arsenokoite presents some big mystery. And as for any “desire for an outcome,” I have none. I’d be perfectly fine with homosexual behavior not being a sin if there were any plausible scriptural case for it. There is none.

  • The Greek doesn’t “disagree” in the slightest. We know the operative word comes from Lev 20:13, and we know from ancient commentary what Lev 20:13 meant. There are scriptural mysteries but this isn’t one of them.

  • Good question. Why don’t you call and ask Marquette University, which fired a professor for NOT supporting same sex marriage?

  • Just one of many ridiculous bible passages. So parents should kick gay kids out of their house is what you believe in. Religion sucks.

  • You miss the point. Its not about handing out tracts. Its about access to facilities and services every student pays into and federal money which is given on an entitlement basis only. Every other campus religious group was willing to abide by the measures which IVCF tacitly rejected. From Mainline Christian organizations (Including Catholic and Orthodox student organizations) Muslims, Jews, Hindus and even Wiccans.

    Only the Evangelical Christian one was so beholden to discriminatory actions and rhetoric that it was disqualified. This is not Government or Academia vs. Religion. This is discriminatory Christians wanting special privileges nobody else has.

  • Sigh. It absolutely does. Your obsession with hating homosexuals is unhealthy. And unChristlike.

    Don’t kid yourself, it’s not loving in the slightest.

  • Are you talking about McAdams? Of course you are. This what the university says.

    The university, in a statement, said this is not about freedom of speech, academic freedom or McAdams’s political views but about his conduct toward a graduate student:

    Dr. McAdams has been blogging for more than a decade, publishing approximately 3,000 posts, and the university administration has never disciplined him. He has the right to talk about controversial topics on his blog, and to disagree with and debate Marquette-related positions freely. Where Dr. McAdams crossed the line is when he launched a personal attack against a student, subjecting her to threats and hateful messages. Dr. McAdams continues to use the student’s name on his blog, even recently identifying where she is currently studying, leading to more hostile and threatening messages.

    A university spokesman also said by email: “We welcome this issue being addressed in court, where the public will hear a comprehensive account of Dr. McAdams’s mistreatment of our former graduate student, rather than the select details he has handpicked to promote his false narrative. Once all the facts are made clear, Marquette fully expects that the decision to suspend him will be upheld.

    “Dr. McAdams continues to reject the judgment of his peers on the Faculty Hearing Committee. The committee unanimously concluded that he violated his core obligations as a tenured professor and that he should be suspended.”

  • We find our selves in a difficult situation. Do we defend the right of God to have and convey his morals. Or do we cave and let the heathens kick us to the curb.

  • Heterosexual identity is the normal mindset. Not just a behavior. We CHOOSE to engage it, or not. Just as the pedophile chooses to not rape children.

  • What about choice number 3? Keep your purely theological concerns in your own church, your own marriage, and your own family, and out of the lives of other people, including religious people, who don’t share them?

  • Sandi, it isn’t Jesus’ wisdom, but Paul’s ignorance.

    Paul wasn’t Jesus. Haven’t you worked this out yet?

  • It’s good news that so many are aware of how discriminatory those policies are. Policies based on a few cherry-picked, poorly translated verses are a very poor hook to hang an organization’s figurative hat on.

  • Hedonists? Who are they? When are they coming into your church, your family, and your marriage to make you do things you don’t want to do?

  • OK let’s imagine what politics would look like if we rigidly restricted our
    thinking, beliefs, and procedures to the content of a collection of
    writings from several thousand years ago (or even just several hundred
    years ago).

    Democracies would not exist. Nations would all be theocratic dictatorships like Iran and governance under the Taliban or ISIS. Whatever government would exist in the Americas would be autocratic and genocidal. Massachusetts Bay Colony on steroids. Fact of the matter is plenty of Fundamentalist Christians in the US have no problems with either autocracy or mass murder. They even try exporting such ideas abroad.

  • Chris, Paul learned from Jesus for 3 years in Arabia. We are discussing Jesus’ wisdom.
    Also, Paul was a Pharisee of Pharisees and a student of Gamaliel – he knew his stuff.

  • They are still not selling it as a non sin as the homosexual activists lie about homosexuality. The one thing they both have in common though, Ben, is they hurt children.

  • Good that you understand this finally. So, as circumstances, change, Jesus still remains the same.

  • No dear. you just said that if a heterosexual commits a sin, its ok with you.
    You also said that divorce hurts kids– wrong on so many accounts. Sometimes it does, sometimes it makes their lives better.
    You said that homosexuality hurts kids. Another one of your self serving lies. Homohatred, especially when disguised as sincere religious belief, is what hurts kids. And hteir families. And their churches.
    But oyu odn’t care about that, either.

  • Here Ben….prove your lie…..where do I endorse heterosexual sin? Then, if I’m not busy, we’ll look at the others

  • There is no evidence for what you say. Yet even if (for argument’s sake) we assumed it true, it would not mean that Paul’s witness to the Father could be perfect, as was Jesus’ witness to him. Jesus, not Paul, revealed the Father’s nature perfectly, as only Jesus knew him fully. Therefore we should not expect Paul’s contribution to Scripture (and I accept it is both considerable and significant ) to be comprehensively reliable and exhaustive. To do so would be blasphemous, since we would then have made Paul Christ’s equal.

    Besides, Sandi, your comment (that Paul learned from Jesus for three years in Arabia) presumes that the glory of God can be made known through formulaic teaching. God is so much greater than the words we struggle to express him with. And thank God he is!

  • “People are not going to Hell because of divorcees.”

    They are if they are getting divorced for any reason but adultery.

    They are is they get remarried, or marry a person who is divorced.

  • No….but with Paul’s extensive background and further teaching by the Lord – through revelation, Paul got it right
    Lots of evidence of what I say, or I wouldn’t have said it. I’m not coming here to lie and mislead people.
    Scripture is the Word of God, Criz. It is God breathed – seems that may be what you are missing.
    No formulaic teaching – revelation.

  • Where did I say this, Ben….now don’t lie.
    And upon confessing their sin, being forgiven, they still will not go to Hell. There is only one unforgiveable sin Ben…it’s what you do – refuse Jesus forgivenss. Now tell me, where are these comments?

  • Sandi, you’ve contradicted yourself. On the one hand, you accept that Paul’s witness could not be perfect; on the other hand, you say that “Paul got it right”, which implies that it was perfect.

    Paul, from today’s perspective, said some pretty horrid things about women, for example, that it was shameful for a woman to speak in church, and that it was shameful for women not to cover their heads while there. These weren’t divine revelations, but Paul’s own value judgements, his opinions. This was not the word of God, but the word of Paul. So Scripture is not “God breathed”; at least, not all of it. As Archbishop Desmund Tutu said: “Scripture is the word of God through the words of human beings.” And therein, Sandi, lies the obvious margin for error. Not God’s error, but humankind’s.

  • -Sandi Luckins
    Who has no rebuttal and resorts to a three letter acronym to save face. Must be tough being a bigoted “Christian”

  • no. I didn’t contradict myself, but thanks.
    Paul allowed women to leave their husbands.
    Yes it was the Word of God.
    Scripture is God breathed.
    Tutu is an airhead.

  • Archbishop Tutu may or may not be an “airhead”, but he was right about the composition of Scripture. You can’t reasonably take that away from him.

  • Did you read the passage? It doesn’t say anything about kicking a kid out of the house. (I much prefer the treatment of a wayward teenager described in Luke 5:11FF to kicking a kid out of the house!)

  • Sandi, Archbishop Tutu doesn’t condemn homosexuals, because he knows that they are as capable of self-sacrificing (or Christlike) love in their relationships as heterosexuals are in theirs. Tutu, therefore, does “support” Jesus because he honours him in this kind of love WHEREVER it may be found.

  • God turned homosexuals over to a reprobate mind to do that which is not good (Romans 1:28) because they rejected Him and His teachings….Tutu can love them all he wants, just lead them to Christ and tell Tutu not to follow the idols they follow. These people need Christ, not Tutu

  • Yes, “these people ” need Christ, just like everyone else. And they find him in self-sacrificing love for one another, just as everyone else can.

    As for Paul’s unscientific anthropology (about the origin of homosexuality), Sandi, this was Paul’s best guess. He couldn’t account scientifically for its genesis, so like many of the ancients attempting to explain natural mysteries, it was put down to divine intervention , either good or malign. It is why epilepsy in the ancient world, at least among the Jews, was attributed to demonic possession.

    Like other statements in the Pauline corpus, this one simply isn’t credible. And this shouldn’t surprise anyone. Like the rest of us, Paul wasn’t a perfect witness to Christ; he wasn’t infallible.

  • There is no love in sin, Chriz.
    No, Paul probably had it revealed to him through Christ. He always made it clear when he spoke for himself. Paul is credible

  • And there is no sin in love, Sandi. Homosexuals are as capable of this in their relationships as you and I.

  • Nope. There is no love in sending the person you are having sex with to Hell. That is not love. That is selfishness and using a person.
    Another note for you about Paul….Paul was chosen by Jesus to bring Christ’ word to the Gentiles. The disciples were for the Jews; Paul was for the Gentiles. What he taught had to be accurate. Also, what Paul taught was endorsed by Peter at the 1st Jerusalem council.

  • You are being judgemental of others, which Christ expressly forbade.

    You have no window on a person’s soul and, therefore, have no right to say who is and who is not damned. Nor had Paul for that matter, and yet he did, disobeying that express command of Christ.

    As for Christ’s choosing Paul as a disciple, Christ did not, simultaneously, free him from the capacity for error, both moral and doctrinal. To imply otherwise (as you did…”What he taught had to be accurate”) is blasphemy, because it would put Paul on a par with Christ himself.

    Paul, in his own writings, acknowledged this very real capacity for error in himself when he proclaimed himself “wretched” through his propensity for sin.

  • I’ve been judgmental of no one. Christ wrote twice that homosexuals will not see the Kingdom of Heaven – actually three times.
    Christ would have assured he said the right thing. As I said before, scripture is breathed by the Holy Spirit.
    We all sin. There is only One who did not, but that did not disqualify Paul from teaching the Gentiles for Jesus.

  • Show me precisely where CHRIST, not Paul, made those comments on homosexuality. And yes, you WERE judgemental. (“Woe to those that call evil good…” because they cannot repent of sin they will not acknowledge as sin).

    Christ would have assured nothing of the kind. You’re as bad as Paul with your guesswork! Show me precisely where CHRIST gave Paul the assurance you’ve assumed.

    I agree with you that sin did not disqualify Paul from teaching the Word, BUT it did disqualify him from teaching it perfectly; in other words, he was not, like the rest of us, above error. And boy! Did he err on occasion. (And how!)

  • Look, I’ve presented arguments. You aren’t interested. So I’ve presented my conclusions.

    And I’m right. It’s not Christlike, what you’re doing. Because you people aren’t Christlike. At all. So regardless, it’s wrong. Tell yourself whatever you like. I’m right.

  • Even if the Greek compound term “arseno-koites” (apparently coined by Paul himself) had a sexual meaning (I accept this is likely), it doesn’t necessarily follow that Paul was alluding to sex between loving and committed homosexual couples, but to fornication.

  • -Sandi Luckins
    Who has no rebuttal and resorts to a three letter acronym to save face. Must be tough being a bigoted “Christian”

  • OMG. Yet another profit of a porkIips. 2000 years ago, they coulda swore they was in the last days.

    How your world must be completely upended by the thought that gay people exist, have lives, and aren’t asking your permission to do so, let alone caring what you think your particular and peculiar version of god thinks about it,

    It really must be the end of the world, or at least your world.

  • I don’t accept your assertion that your “brief comment said nothing about “rigidly restricting thinking.”” You certainly showed great respect for the idea that “no where, by no one, at any point in church history has the Church taken the position now being pushed to normalize LGBT behaviors,” and then adding, “Kudos for IV for their courage. We stand with you.”

    In other words, “we must not allow advanced reasoning, evidence, and enlightenment to challenge a position on homosexuality that was established thousands of years ago” . . . by people who had little more than ignorance to work with, and often claimed to be speaking for a god.

  • You are wasting your time with sandi. Arguing with her is like mud wrestling with a pig. You can’t pin the pig down, you only get dirty, and the pig loves it. She is obsessed with homosexuality.

  • Ben, thanks.

    But you know what? I like her. I don’t agree with her (well, that much should be obvious by now), but I sense something better and greater in her spirit.

    Besides, I’m a born fighter, a growling dog with a bone,?

    All the best. (And to you, Sandi.)

  • You must have a mighty small god, Chriz….He cannot even assure that people get His intents and words correctly….Mine created the heavens, the earth and the seas, and all that’s in them, and assured that people conveyed His intent. Perhaps you need a different church….

  • Sandi, there is only ONE God. And he is not “small”, but “mighty” through the inexpressible magnitude of his non-discriminating and unconditional love.

    It is a love that embraces all, even homophobic bigots.

    Learn to see the good …not the perceived sin… in others. If you don’t, you’ll find yourself perpetually hostile to them, perpetually preaching an endless diatribe of smug and repelling vitriol.

    We are not called by God to be judges of others, but lovers of others.

    It is love that draws.

    Look for the good in others.

  • So, you finally can see that He is big enough to assure that people got what He wanted to convey properly. Good for you!
    Are you now saying that Christ is a homophobic bigot? lol He’s the One who condemns homosexuality – all over the Bible.
    Also, I don’t have to see sin as good, my friend. I would rather that people go to Heaven.

  • Citations to Bible verses are the laziest form of discussion when the subject is Christian faith. Without explication on the verse and your own interpretation of it, it is easily rebutted by, “well that was certainly your interpretation of it”.

  • Sandi, God is, of course, “big” enough to present his message to people. But are people “big” enough to receive it? Historically, the answer is often “no”.

    I am Catholic, yet the history of my church and its record of human abuses is, at times, appalling…as are the histories and records of other churches.

    People sometimes will NOT listen to the Lord, will NOT obey him.

    When the woman caught in adultery was ignominiously hauled before Jesus by a baying band of mysoginistic killers (they already, in their hearts, had formed the intent to stone her to death), Jesus rebuked them and shamed them into backing down, making clear, at the same time, that this brutal penalty for adultery was NEVER in God’s plan for humanity. And yet, it appears in Leviticus. How come…if Scripture is “God-breathed”? Truth is that it is not ALL God-breathed. And this is so because people are not “big” enough to hear God’s word as he intended it to be heard. It is why Jesus became incarnate, to show people the perfect way to the Father…because he WAS “big” enough to hear God’s word. So “big”, in fact, that he became that word: the word made flesh.

  • Paul was big enough. He was a Pharisee of Pharisees, taught by Gamaliel – so he had a good foothold. Christ taught him in Arabia for 3 years by revelation – so I’m sure Christ got through to him. Christ chose him for His mission on the road to Damascus.
    Paul wanted to do what he was doing – calling himself a slave of Christ – so, he would have listened to the Lord. Romans 1:1 – English Standard Version
    Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God,” He would have obeyed the Lord.
    So you are basically trying to lead people into fallacies, Chriz.
    I see you rewrite the Bible also. Stoning stopped when Christ came. lol…..they even tried to stone Him! Christ took the penalty for our sin. It is through His grace that we are not punished sin, by sin today. In case you didn’t know, Jesus is God in the flesh. The second member of the trinity. John 1:1 will help you with that.

    Back to Paul:

    Galatians 1:11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. 14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to[e] me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus”

    Blessings to you Chriz

  • You are here, where you are rejected and not wanted. It screams your psychopathic need to be accepted as normal . Go live you life among your own kind.
    I now do for you that which you can NOT.

  • On his own personal blog McAdams criticized a fellow instructor for refusing to allow a discussion (or at least the “con” part of it) of same sex marriage in a PHILOSOPHY class because such an argument in opposition to it is supposedly “homophobic.” Of course, that instructor was not disciplined or even reprimanded in any way for shutting down perfectly philosophical legitimate debate on a topic that she herself had suggested, in direct contravention of their own vaunted policy of complete academic freedom.

    In most states the law has little to say about what private employees may say about each other, as long as it is not demonstrably false as per defamation law, and in the absence of such defamation no one is responsible for someone else’s illegal activities in response. A university may have some professional guidelines on the subject, and perhaps Marquette does NOW, but they obviously didn’t then. InterVarsity, however, DOES have a belief statement and an official position.

  • spuddie, I think that refutation style only works if one side hasn’t (or more sides haven’t) done their homework. For example, “Did Jesus claim to be God?” Well, what does the Text say? John 8:59 says that the Jews there then certainly understood that claim, going so far as to attempt murder. That’s an example of “doing your homework” – in this case answering the question, “What did the words mean to the original audience?” rather than to a 2016 reader.

  • All a blank chapter/verse quote shows is:
    1. You probably don’t get the concept of biblical interpretation. Expecting only one reading possible (a failing of fundamentalists in general)

    2. You can’t be bothered with supporting your own argument in your own words

    3. You were probably taught that such a response was some kind of “zinger”.

    Your last response was much more useful to discussion. 🙂

  • spuddie, Did you look up the text cited and lay it against your 3 points? (I’m glad my “last response was much more useful to discussion”! It was meant to show what fruits can be had by looking below the surface.) Discuss away!

  • When someone is going to be that lazy, I don’t bother. However I did read your follow up post and you made an interesting point from there.

  • Love does not turn fornication into non-fornication. And anything outside of the legitimate union of husband and wife IS fornication from a scriptural standpoint.

  • “Love does not turn fornication into non-fornication.” Er, who said it does?

    “And anything outside of the legitimate union of husband and wife IS fornication from a scriptural standpoint”. No, anything outside LOVE is fornication. Don’t you know that even married couples can fornicate?

    A religious wedding ritual does not make a genuine marriage: it takes LOVE to do that.

  • No, it does not take “love” to do that — at least not the kind of love the world understands. What it takes is a not-otherwise-prohibited covenant of fidelity made before God. Whether loving feelings are present at the outset or develop later is immaterial, for the kind of love that scripture is concerned with is not an emotion but a choice of how to behave toward another.

    We know from Josephus that Herod Antipas loved Herodias. And John the Baptist lost his head for telling him openly and honestly that it was not lawful for him to have her. Love does not a valud union make.

  • There is no poor translation in, “You will not sleep with a man, as with a woman. It is an abomination.” Pretty clear.

  • It’s “pretty clear” in absolutist Sandyworld. In the rest of the world? Not so much, and for good reason. But you’ve been very clear Sandy, that you refuse to consider any contradictory information. Enjoy your world.

  • Would you be content to be “hitched” to someone who, merely from a sense of duty, stayed loyal to you? Is that all relationship means to you? Someone’s feeling drawn not by YOU (the person) but by some legalistic and perfunctory abstract principle.

    Are you an automaton or a human being?

    By the way, we’ve moved on a bit since biblical times; we are not obliged to do or think as they did. It’s called “progress”. Or don’t you believe in that?

    By the way again, Herod Antipas did not love Herodias: he loved himself. It’s called “self-interest”.

  • If love is all merely a matter of feeling “drawn,” Chriz, then God would not have bothered to COMMAND us to love — either Him, our spouse, or our neighbor. You can’t command warm fuzzies. You can only command action for another’s good.

    Who says Antipas didn’t “love” Herodias? You? “Feeling drawn” can co-exist with “self-interest.” In fact, nowadays it’s usually one and the same — precisely because we have lost the “perfunctory” concept of loyalty that you are sneering at.

    How old are you, anyway?

  • How old am I? Old enough to vote, but too young to die.

    God may have commanded us to love, but he didn’t command us to cease being human. Ever heard of Thomas Aquinas? He said that grace builds upon nature.

    Thomas A. was known for being a clever Dick, and that remark is one of his wiser insights. Yes, grace does build upon nature, which means, in terms of personal relationship, that the element of human love must first be there so that God can build upon what is entirely natural here: mutual human attraction. (No, I’m not speaking of “warm fuzzies”. How did you come to be this cynical?)

    As for Herod Antipas, how do I know that he didn’t truly love Herodias? If John T. B. was right in his moral denunciation of Antipas’ “marriage”, (and we must presume he was since Antipas had him beheaded), then Antipas would have walked away from that relationship for the good of Heriodas’ soul.

    And no, love and self-interest cannot co-exist as equals since they are mutually contradictory. If there is self-interest in a marriage (and , of course, there always will be), it must be subordinate to love of other…otherwise that relationship is doomed.

  • This is typical Sandy. Mind closed, locked, surrounded by concrete. This is why you don’t influence people. You just chastise, mock, and dismiss others. That’s not witness; it’s arrogance.

  • “information” contradictory to the Lord’s word, is trash. That is good witness. I’m sorry you are unable to understand that.

  • “If John T. B. was right in his moral denunciation of Antipas’ “marriage”, (and we must presume he was since Antipas had him beheaded), then Antipas would have walked away from that relationship for the good of Heriodas’ soul.” Ah, and isn’t that exactly what first Israel and then the church has expected of the same sex attracted for 4000 years?

    After all, what was standing in the way of their “love” except a “perfunctory and legalistic abstract principle” of fidelity to a previous husband that she was no longer “drawn to?”

    “If there is self-interest in a marriage (and , of course, there always will be), it must be subordinate to love of other..” You just said that the emotion itself is what makes the marriage a marriage. Yet following your emotions is an act of self-interest in and of itself. So whence the subordination? Sounds pretty “co-existent” to me.

    “The element of human love must first be there so that God can build upon what is entirely natural here: mutual human attraction.” Do you think the “element of human love and mutual human attraction” was present in one of the only recorded biblical marriages arranged by God Himself — the 40-year-old Isaac and the 15-year-old Rebekah who had never seen each other prior to their wedding night? Pardon me but it appears that the only thing present in that case was the free and uncoerced consent of both parties. Was it any less a marriage?

  • Oh, Shawnie5, you’re (as it were) talking when you should be listening.

    The “church” hasn’t been around for 4000 years: its inception was at Pentecost, some 2000 years ago.

    As for “first Israel”, God gave us two ears and one mouth for a reason: that we should listen more than we speak. As I have already informed you, the condemnation of same-sex intercourse in the OT does not necessarily reference LOVING, COMMITED HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS. There is absolutely no evidence that it does…beyond your homophobic desire to construe it so.

    I NEVER said that emotion makes a marriage. Tell me: have you a penchant for storytelling? Because you appear to have a tendency to make stuff up.

    As for Isaac and Rebekah, this isn’t necessarily history, Shawnie5, but a biblical literary form, like Noah and his ark, not historical chronicle. Are you a biblical literalist? Because it sure sounds it.

  • Learn to read–then add. I said first Israel (2000 years), THEN the church (2000 years).

    “I NEVER said that emotion makes a marriage.” Your words: “A religious wedding ritual does not make a genuine marriage: it takes LOVE to do that.” And you went on to further assert that covenant-based loyalty is merely “perfunctory” and unworthy of our so-called “progress.” So, which one of your assertions is false?

    “The condemnation of same-sex intercourse in the OT does not necessarily reference LOVING, COMMITED HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS.” We have already seen from scripture that neither the emotion of love nor a purported commitment turns a prohibited heterosexual union into a permissible one. There is no logical reason why they should change a homosexual union into a permissible one, either.

    “As for Isaac and Rebekah, this isn’t necessarily history” Is it your position that Isaac didn’t exist? Jesus spoke of him as not only real but alive in God’s presence. If you believe that the scriptures are merely a collection of “literary forms,” why do you bother to argue about their meaning at all? Perhaps you should leave that to those trying to follow the One who opened His ministry with scripture, closed it with scripture, taught from scripture every moment in between, and upbraided the people for not knowing scripture.

  • Oh, I read correctly. Your comment said 4000 years ago. Learn to express yourself better than a fourth grader (and learn a little humility while you’re at it).

    Yes, I said it takes LOVE to make a marriage. Learn to understand better, too: love isn’t an emotion. (How old are you, anyway?) God is love. Is he an emotion? In your desperation to win this debate, you’e starting to sound absurd and immature.

    You still cannot make a reasonable counter-argument for my claim that loving, committed, homosexual unions are not referenced by those condemnatory scriptural passages. We have seen absolutely nothing from Scripture of what you claim we have seen. Show me the passages that actually and EXPLICITLY condemn such unions and then I’ll believe you. But you can’t, can you? They don’t exist…except in that twilight world called “Shawnie’s mind”.

    You are a biblical literalist after all! You actually believe that Issac and the rest existed. Adam and Eve, too? No doubt you do.? Biblical literalists make the worst exegetes…and you’re the worst I’ve come across. Congratulations! And goodbye. (Anyone REASONABLE want to continue this debate with me?)

  • Homosexuality cannot be proven, so they must self identify. The pride with which they self identify, would be akin to someone defining themselves as a fornicating Christian. The sin is placed first and Christianity is of course second.

  • LOL! You can’t even remember what YOU’ve said, let alone what I’ve said.

    I’m hardly desperate to “win” any debate. Thorough knowledge of scripture makes these exchanges quite easy. I’m quite open to any plausible and consistent scriptural case for accepting same sex practice within the church but so far I’ve heard none.

    Your particular take on this subject is more notable for what it says about young people’s misconceptions about marriage in general than for anything it says about same sex practice. After you’ve lived a bit and seen more people mess up their lives and their kids’ lives you might better understand (MIGHT, because some people never get it) that the ONLY thing a marriage commitment really means, stripped of the fanfare and stained-glass language, is that you will continue to be there and act in each other’s best interest even if and when one or both of you no longer wants to. Even if and when you’re no longer “drawn” to each other. That “perfunctory” loyalty you’re so contemptuous of — that’s what it’s all about.

  • “Show me the passages that actually and EXPLICITLY condemn such unions and then I’ll believe you.”

    Leviticus 20:13 tells us quite matter-of-factly that a man shall not lie with a man as with a woman. A man lies with a woman in a sexual manner, and obviously that may be with or without love and with or without commitment. Therefore, a man is not to lie with a man in a sexual manner either with or without love, or with or without commitment. While most of the Torah is not given to the Gentiles, the prohibitions on sexual immorality in all its forms were brought forward into the church by the Jerusalem Council — quite sensibly, as Leviticus tells us that God judged and rejected Gentile nations for these practices long before there ever was a Torah and therefore they predate the Torah.

    Why do you not know all of this?

  • Humans are born with all sorts of orientations, we are born into sin. Sin requires action, behavior. There is no gay race, in fact no such thing as gay people, just people who define themselves as gay. They must define themselves, because its not a provable fact. I think Miley Cyrus just defined herself as pansexual.

  • Sure, if I ask Miley Cyrus, she’ll say she is pansexual. These are merely ways people self define. If I ask Cynthia Nixon she defines herself as bisexual.
    Calling oneself a gay Christian or a bisexual Christian or a pansexual Christian
    is no different than calling oneself a fornicating Christian, how bout a foot fetish Christian? Humble yourself, ask forgiveness, turn from your sin and ask God to purify your mind and heart.

  • Let me spell this out for you: I SAID ASK GAY PEOPLE. Pansexuals don’t claim to be gay. That’s why they refer to themselves as PANSEXUALS. Good grief!!

    If you could just train yourself to listen, you’d discover the truth about gay people, that they AWAKEN to their same-sex attractions; they don’t choose them, anymore than you chose your (presumably) opposite-sex attractions. Good grief, again!!!

    Er, what sin would that be?

  • Just imagine if your argument had been used in 1860. “Churches who support abolition are going to dry up and lose members.” This is not an argument on the merits of the case. This is an argument about marketing, and strikes me as utterly hollow. And btw, evangelical churches (and Catholics) are losing members too–despite their traditional views on this question.

    I’ll add, what about divorce? From Merritt’s article in the Atlantic: “InterVarsity’s 20-page position paper also prohibits divorce in most cases. So if an employee doesn’t believe divorce to be sinful, will they also be terminated?”

    Or if one doesn’t agree with what others call the clear scriptural mandate for men to be the head of their households — are they out too?

  • Asking anyone is only about garnering opinion, since gay is not fact, its only self defining. There is no test and proof is only based upon behavior and then behavior can be variable.

  • I wonder if you also support banning Christians who support a serial sexual predator like Donald Trump?

  • The question they wrestled with is this (imo) – is “traditional marriage” a central part of the Gospel witness to the world? IV is saying it is, unlike the other arguments you cited (divorce being a marriage necessity outlined in the Bible for dealing with sinful people). Those that disagree say that “traditional marriage” is not a part of the Gospel witness. If the latter are saying because they “fear for the future” of IV rather than from a theological position, is not that marketing 101? If they do have a theological agreement and believe that this policy marks people, why stay? Why stay with such hurtful bigots? Why stay with a “rouge group” of worldwide “Christians” that took 4 years to study and took input from those outside the Western world? That compromise is not good for any group – eventually tensions are resolved.

  • I support shunning any Christian who engages in/supporting any form of lawlessness and/or perversion which has been proved true. You perverts can no longer stalk we normal folks. Move on or be blocked.

  • I’m sorry, I really don’t follow your point.

    Simply put, your first post: “if we open up the question of marriage, we’ll lose members,” is the weakest argument one can make. IMO.

  • Members is not the argument – faithfulness to the Gospel witness is.
    Will IV lose members in North America? Yes
    Will they gain in other places because of this? Yes
    Is that the issue? – No – it is being faithful to the Gospel witness (John 6).

    My original post stated that those who waived on the Gospel witness attacks of the day by opening their theological tents are no longer an effective Gospel witness to the world, numbers not being an example of God’s favor or faithfulness (see any property gospel church).

    Some (not the majority) that will leave are those that Jude warned us about…

  • For the same reason a celibate person might still call themselves heterosexual. It isn’t about activity it is about attraction.

  • Really Sandi, you made a choice about who you would be attracted to, when you were 13? Your first crush was a choice? I understand that why you did then was a choice, but the feelings that arose in you were not.

    I really want to respect other people’s thoughts on this, but we aren’t dealing with different facts. Have you really never had a conversation with someone who is gay, to understand what that means for them?

  • What is truly ruining the reputations of a certain sort of fundamentalist is their willingness to go in .3 seconds from any conversation about lgbt people to pedophilia. People who have friends and family members who are gay –whatever they think about lgbt relationship, can barely stand to listen anymore.

  • “The pride with which they self-identify,” boy, do I wish this were tempered by any sort of first hand knowledge of someone who is gay. A friend, a co-workers, a neighbor with whom you may have shared some of life. As long as we remain apart from other people, they can be a “they.”

  • What you are talking about is the very reason why homosexuality has gained greater acceptance. Because knowing someone, makes it more difficult to stand up and say they’re wrong. I know people who define themselves as gay, yup, I love them, yup, they’re funny, yup they’re great to be around. No, I don’t beat them up about their sin, cause I am a sinner. That doesn’t change what I said.
    I’ve looked at gorgeous girls with lust, you betcha, but I don’t define myself as
    a lustful Christian. I humbly ask forgiveness, knowing its wrong.

  • Sorry gapaul – heterosexual is normal. Homosexuality is a sin.
    Christ said that He will forgive and heal us of our sin.

  • You’re wasting your time debating Rob. He’s posting from fantasy land, traditional home of the self-deluded.

  • I don’t mean to be rude, but really? Jesus said “Same-sex attraction is a choice” I must reread all four gospels this afternoon, because I totally missed that.

  • “Christ said that,” — again? Is it possible you haven’t read the gospels but someone told you that? Because Jesus never mentioned the subject.

  • Maybe I’m wrong Rob, but that self-satisfied, “the pride with which they self-identify,” gives you away as someone who doesn’t really know many people, or many stories, well.

  • do you know Who, Christ is? Do you know that He is God, and He is the Word of the Bible, and that the Bible is the Word of God?

  • You will find it in Romans 1. I’ll post the scripture:

    Romans 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts.Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”
    Pay special attention to “exchanged” and “unnatural” in verse 26 and “abandoned natural relations” in verse 27. You’ll find your answers there.

  • Sandy, I’m sure you know Paul wrote Romans. That is not a gospel, that is not straight from the mouth of Christ.

    Moreover, such well respected, evangelical writers as Jack Rogers (once president of Fuller Seminary) and Paul Achtemeier, would disagree with your conclusion about what that means about gay people living in our time. What seems perfectly obvious to you was not obvious to them. We have differences of opinion, even in the evangelical world.

  • I’m not interested in Paul Achtemeier, and I’m not even interested in Jack Rogers. I told you what Christ said. Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever and His opinions don’t change over a matter of time, my friend.
    Also, you do realize that Paul spoke for Jesus, eh?

  • Back in the 19th century, slaveholders had scripture on their side.

    Plenty of examples of its occurrence, and even “slaves, obey your masters.” That should give all evangelicals pause, before we simply reel off scripture without careful thought and understanding. Christians who defended treating human beings as chattel would not listen to their more “liberal” colleagues who asked that they consider the whole of scripture, that they understand how important it is to interpret, and to weigh the whole of scripture in the face of their brothers and sisters. I think we’ll look back on this day and see that many of us have made the same mistake.

  • No….they didn’t have scripture on their side, or slavery would not have been overturned by Christians.

  • You do realize that not all Christians were in favor of overturning slavery. This is why we have the denomination of the Southern Baptist Church, after all. Countless preachers and people in the pews thought they were being absolutely faithful in condemning some part of humanity to lifelong servitude.

    See Mark Noll (evangelical historian), The Civil War as Theological Crisis

  • I’m sorry, I don’t open links from people that I don’t know.
    Christians were the driving force that ended slavery. It began in Great Britain.

  • That leaves the Christians living in most of the south out of the picture.
    If you’re interested, you could google Mark Noll, The Civil War as Theological Crisis for a description of the full conversation, across the church, about slavery.

  • Thanks, but I already know that the Christians were the force that stopped slavery. blessings to you.

  • Statistically, more paedophiles are HETEROSEXUAL. So it’s fair game to say: “scratch ANY heterosexual (including you) and you’ll find a paedophile.”

    When’s the last time YOU abused a wee boy, “lady”?