in Sexuality

Some (brief) Follow-Up Regarding the Blessing of Gay Unions

Well, I’ve been out of town for awhile, but hope to return to writing soon. Until then, I thought I should mention the extended discussion I’ve been having with a couple of Evangelical fellows on another blog, wherein one fellow wrote a response to the thoughts that I recently recorded about Gen 1-2.
Here’s the link:
Be warned — if you support gay unions, or are gay yourself, you might end up being rather offended but what some of these other fellows have to say, so read at your own risk. That said, feel free to jump into the trenches with me!

Write a Comment


  1. Hey Brother,
    I know this is pretty old, but I’ve been going back and reading some of your older posts that I didn’t have time to read when you wrote them. I followed most of the discussion you linked here and found it . . . interesting? entertaining? . . . all sorts of things. I’m not where you are with regard to the wider issue, but your arguments concerning Genesis 1-2 are strong. The one thing I was surprised not to see you highlight for them was that whatever Paul is or is not saying about homosexuality in his discussion of misdirected worship = sub-human society, and whatever he thinks of the typical Jewish denunciation of homosexuality that he employs, context makes clear that his aim is to set up his Jewish listeners Amos-style to face their own sinfulness. I believe his point, oversimply stated, might be something like, “You are every bit as bad (in behavior and therefore worship) as the people you hate the most, the people you consider to be the most sub-human, pagan, disobedient, idolatrous, etc.” He wants them to vehemently cheer him on, at which point he prophetically turns on them. At the very least, this should temper the tone with which we approach these issues. Even for those (of us) who do consider homosexuality “sinful,” our approach should begin with an admission that our sins are worse, our sinfulness deeper. Perhaps more specifically, in reference to a common form of homophobic foolishness, it is our greed and self-righteousness rather than their sexual identity that is “tearing our families and our society apart.” Anyhow, I appreciated your thoughts.

  2. Hey Michael,
    I appreciate your thoughts here, even if we are on different pages. In fact, it is this sort of understanding that should make genuine dialogue possible between people of with different convictions.
    I guess I chose to downplay that aspect of the flow of Paul’s argument in Romans precisely because I don’t think that homosexuality as we understand it, and as it is properly expressed in Christian marriage, is a sin. So, even though the point you raise is a good one, from my perspective, it risks confusing the issue. Know what I mean?
    That said, I did try to call some of the fellows to task a bit for the rhetoric they used. My efforts were mostly futile.

  3. I hear you. Given their way of responding to whatever points you did bring up, they certainly would have jumped on that one in the wrong way! My thinking and living on this issue were flat until I actually became friends with a homosexual person who (a) had been wronged by the church, (b) was not willing to let the church’s actions keep him from trying to love it, and (c) was more “spiritually mature” than a good portion of those who think he’s a nasty sinner – one of few truly able to mourn with the mourners, to say the least. Oh how much more complex life can be when we learn to be loved by those who are different from us…