"While here in jail, I've fathered a child, so to speak. And here he is, hand-carrying this letter—Onesimus! He was useless to you before; now he's useful to both of us. I'm sending him back to you, but it feels like I'm cutting off my right arm in doing so. I wanted in the worst way to keep him here as your stand-in to help out while I'm in jail for the Message. But I didn't want to do anything behind your back, make you do a good deed that you hadn't willingly agreed to." Philemon 1:10-14
Lets avoid doing anything "under the table". Success in the ministry of life often requires a simple rule: "Except in protecting others, keep no secrets."
Now on to what I actually wanted to write about:
I thought I would bring up a theological question from a book that I have been reading by Dan Kimball called They Like Jesus but not the Church. This is a real life situation that we have to consider... and to quote Jason French's blog... "If your theology isn't practical, it doesn't work."
"Imagine an unmarried couple who are living together and are sexually active. They enter your church and tell you they aren't Christians yet, but are interest in God and are checking out your church. They begin attending your worship gatherings, and you are happy to see them there, hoping they will come to trust in Jesus. You know they are living together, and you see them respectfully showing their affection by holding hands in church and putting their arms around one another.
But what if a gay couple did the same thing?
How would you answer the following questions?
- How are these two couples different in Jesus' eyes?
- Theologically, what is the difference between the straight couple and the homosexual couple?
- How would your reaction differ?
- How would your church react?"
He goes on to state at the end of the chapter: "We can hold to a doctrinal position about homosexuality while moving from being known as a community that fears and even looks down on homosexuals to being know as a community that welcomes and loves them, yet doesn't affirm anything that the Scriptures don't." (Kimball, Dan, They Like Jesus but not the Church, P. 161)
An interesting thought! Your reactions?
Then after you react feel free to respond with this qualification:
I only want biblical answers to the questions posed by Kimball. Biblical answers in context to the passage you are bringing them from.
Or just reflect on this and how we treat sin and the unchurched differently that we probably should given the nature of who we were before we were saved. After all: "All have sinned and fallen short of God's Glory."
3 comments:
To paraphrase a recently infamous Creation Science Evangelist (and Kat, too), Romans 1 spells out that homosexuality is sin, and we should cling to that. But Romans 2 begins with, "You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things."
We can't preach against homosexuality and not against lust, adultry, and fornication. Our stand as the Church corporately and as Chirstian individuals should be against sin, OUR OWN SIN AS WELL AS OTHERS'. (In other words, preach agains all of it).
I have to say, though, this covers the attitudes of the adults, but what about the scripture that says, "If anyone causes one of these little ones to sin, it would be better for him to have a millstone tied around his neck and be drowned in the sea"? I question if it would be good for children to see homosexual couples in church. However, children are usually better at treating people like people, and it would be a good way to demonstrate Christ's love. "Come as you are, but don't expect to stay as you are".
Also, in agreement with your sentiments in an earlier post, Erik, we can't expect non-believers to live up to Christian morals and values (especially since we're so bad at it ourselves).
Interesting response Jason... but you didn't really answer any of Kimball's actual questions.
Also really your answer doesn't deal with how we can becomes a place that can welcome homosexuals just like we welcome every other (hopefully) form of unsaved person.
The root of the issue is (in Kimball's reasoning) that we do treat unchurched (and unsaved) people differently based on what visible sin they have and that theologically there is no difference.
Also I just have to note that Kimball never argues that homosexuality is not sin (as can be seen in his conclusion that I quoted). He argues how we respond to it.
I in a sense agree with him that we almost make to big of a deal out of homosexuality while we fail to do basics like feed the hungry and love the broken.
Homosexuality is sin, sure. But so is a ton of other stuff... we don't campaign against liars.
Come to think about it... If we are to say that because it is immoral that Gay people should not be able to be married... AND to campaign for this on a political level then we also should be campaigning for it to be illegal for people who are divorced for non-biblical reasons (everything except adultery)to not be able to get married either.
We pick and choose what sin we don't like.
If I was Gay I would not think that I would be welcome to come to a church.
Thats really not a good reflection on how we show the unconditional love of Jesus.
Post a Comment