What Christians should understand about homosexuality and gay marriage

I would like know what you think of this sermon about gay marriage by Bruxy Cavey, a pastor of a church geered to the younger generation, and to those who are deeply wounded by church. What Christians should know about the gay marriage issuesI post it because I feel that we as Christians need to take time to learn more about the issue in order that we can respond effectively and Christ-like. Do you think Pastor Bruxy is leading us in the right direction?The actual title, "Is gay marriage a step in the right direction?" makes it seem like the preacher is engaging us in a non-negotiable debate. He is not, however, he is engaging us to think more deeply about many things surrounding it. You will be amazed!Diane (PS. I chose to revisit this topic with a new title hoping this time to avoid confusing impressions)

I think he is mistaken in saying that a homosexual orientation is the same order of problem as a man's 'non-monogamous' orientation. The first is an aberration of 'nature' and is labeled by Paul as un-natural. “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:” (Rom. 1:26, KJVS) The second is an abuse of a God-given natural instinct. His linking of mutual compassion/commitment with 'aspects' of homosexual orientation is similarly mistaken. "No one is ridiculing deep, heart felt compassion that can be had between two people of the same sex. Deep, heart felt, compassion, romantic attachment, are all partnered with sexual desire. Some of the deep compassion can be very touching and very genuine and no-one is trying to dismiss that. But is it love to act on that?" I am uncomfortable with these sentences. What does 'partnered with sexual desire' mean in this context? Sexual desire is part of what God made us to be. It requires 'revelation' to use it appropriately. But is he saying that 'homosexual desire' is part of what God made us to be? In what context could it ever be appropriate? If the 'revelation' is to be believed 'God' has given a desire that must be forever frustrated in every conceivable circumstance.There is a fundamental difference between heterosexual sin and homosexual sin. Neither homosexual desire or practice is never condoned by God. There is no Song of Songs to mirror the relationship between Christ and his Bride. There never can be. Heterosexual desire has it place as a metaphor in the Song, but homosexual desire could never mirror God.I have difficulty too with the assumption that homosexual orientation will continue unchanged in the 'Christ follower'. And if God does change it, why? If it is essentially no different to heterosexual orientation? “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1Cor. 6:9-10, NKJV) Would we not expect the Spirit of God to change the orientation of the thief, the covetous, the drunkards etc? Why not the 'homosexually orientated'?I am not anti-homosexual or homophobic. I think the thrusting forwards of any sexuality is unpleasant but I do not see the homosexual as 'worse' than another. According to Romans 1 the orientation and the practice is the ongoing consequence of a determination to alter revelation. To 'change the truth of God into a lie'. My gospel offers 'freedom' for the homosexually orientated. I am convinced that Paul's did too.

Rom. 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. Rom. 1:24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. I agree with Brother Ron concerning this type of relationship. All men are without excuse, God has given all the witness of the eternal power which calls out to all in the gates of the city and on the mountain tops. When one continues to rebel against God's eternal power, there comes a time where God removes that which preserves and their conscience is seared. The conscience is seared because God has removed that which enables depraved man to know Him, Therefore in rebelion man degenerates into something that can never coexist with the influence that God has given to all men, The Scriptures teach that those who are given up by God will have their hearts hardened by sin, Man has no hope without God no matter how one might appeal his case before the Lord.The religion of Humanism has many ways, the road is broad and appealing, but it leads to destruction, Prov. 7:1 My son, keep my words,\tAnd treasure my commands within you. 2 \tKeep my commands and live,\tAnd my law as the apple of your eye. 3 \tBind them on your fingers;\tWrite them on the tablet of your heart. 4 \tSay to wisdom, “You are my sister,”\tAnd call understanding your nearest kin, 5 \tThat they may keep you from the immoral woman,\tFrom the seductress who flatters with her words. 6 \tFor at the window of my house\tI looked through my lattice, 7 \tAnd saw among the simple,\tI perceived among the youths,\tA young man devoid of understanding, 8 \tPassing along the street near her corner;\tAnd he took the path to her house9 \tIn the twilight, in the evening,\tIn the black and dark night. 10 \tAnd there a woman met him,\tWith the attire of a harlot, and a crafty heart. 11 \tShe was loud and rebellious,\tHer feet would not stay at home. 12 \tAt times she was outside, at times in the open square,\tLurking at every corner. 13 \tSo she caught him and kissed him;\tWith an impudent face she said to him: 14 \t“I have peace offerings with me;\tToday I have paid my vows. 15 \tSo I came out to meet you,\tDiligently to seek your face,\tAnd I have found you. 16 \tI have spread my bed with tapestry,\tColored coverings of Egyptian linen. 17 \tI have perfumed my bed\tWith myrrh, aloes, and cinnamon. 18 \tCome, let us take our fill of love until morning;\tLet us delight ourselves with love. 19 \tFor my husband is not at home;\tHe has gone on a long journey; 20 \tHe has taken a bag of money with him,\tAnd will come home on the appointed day.” 21 \tWith her enticing speech she caused him to yield,\tWith her flattering lips she seduced him. 22 \tImmediately he went after her, as an ox goes to the slaughter,\tOr as a fool to the correction of the stocks, 23 \tTill an arrow struck his liver.\tAs a bird hastens to the snare,\tHe did not know it would cost his life. In ChristJeff

Just curious, Rookie, have you heard the message? So, Philologos, Do you think that by equating homosexuality and adultery, Bruxy is implying that adulterers are less sinful than homosexuals? What difference would these degrees of sinfulness make to their potential salvation? Do homosexuals deserve a greater punishment - less mercy? Are they less salvable?Correct me: Do I sense that you feel Bruxy's message is not what Jesus would have said? Do you think that he is not leading the sinners to repentance ie Christ? Funny, I sensed the opposite. Funny, it seems to me that Jesus was actually harshest with the religious leaders - those who were morally upright and knew the Torah very well. They were the ones most resistant to Christ. Funny how people can hear different things from the same message. I do not get any impression that Bruxy is condoning or excusing any aspect of homosexuality, but is showing them that they need Christ to rule their lives, and that a homosexual life style conflicts with that.Here is another thought: Why not check some of the testimonies of recovered homosexuals on the Exodus site? These people have great insight for us, since they have walked where we never have - and they have found Christ!!!!! Diane

Would we not expect the Spirit of God to change the orientation of the thief, the covetous, the drunkards etc? Why not the 'homosexually orientated'?Amen, Philologos! Amen, brother!

I think we can safely assume that in this forum people understand that a homosexual life style is a sinful pattern of living. But that is not the end of our responsibility to God. We must not only desire that they repent, we must also be as Christ to them, no matter how we may feel or how disturbed we feel by them. Don't we have a role in that?Would we not expect the Spirit of God to change the orientation of the thief, the covetous, the drunkards etc? Why not the 'homosexually orientated'So how do we respond to those who, after surrendering to Christ, still struggle with aspects of their old nature, or do you feel that this should not happen? Other Christians struggle too: overeating, materialism, fear of man, reliance on man, alcohol. Perhaps some are instantly transformed, but not all are. Or some are healed of one thing (cigarettes) but still struggle with anger. Is is not admirable for a redeemed homosexual to CHOOSE not to engage in such activity, even though his bent may still linger?

roadsign wrote:Have you ever checked some of the testimonies of recovered homosexuals on the Exodus site? These people may have some insight for us, since they have walked where we never have - and they have found Christ!!!!! DianeInsight for us ?I have all the insight i need in the Word of God, and by the Holy Ghost,(not from thier testimonies) along with the love of the Lord for thier souls to find Christ!

I have all the insight i need in the Word of God, and by the Holy Ghost,(not from thier testimonies) along with the love of the Lord for thier souls to find Christ!This is great! Do you mind sharing some of your insight - as it relates to the sermon?Yes the Bible contains everything we need to know in order to live right. Yet, I think that we all have to admit that, historically, unbelievable atrocities against humanity have been done by those who claim to believe every word in the Bible and believe that they are defending the cause of Christ.I think it is alway prudent to examine our own hearts - and grow in spiritual insight and love.

So, Philologos, Do you think that by equating homosexuality and adultery, Bruxy is implying that adulterers are less sinful than homosexuals? What difference would these degrees of sinfulness make to their potential salvation? Do homosexuals deserve a greater punishment - less mercy? Are they less salvable?No.None, because they aren't.No.No.Having just listened to the one message it would be unfair of me to comment on this except to say that from what I have heard the preacher seems to find some commendable aspects of a homosexual orientation. I am still unsure what he means by saying that acts of compassion and romantic attachment 'partner' sexual desires. I can see how romantic attachments would do so, but compassion? What is he saying, that every act of compassion was motivated by a sexual desire?Actually, I think I probably do know what he is taking about but he doesn't say it. I think he sees a certain sensitivity and gentleness of character as being a particular outworking of a homosexual orientation. (I may be wrong in my guess, but I am really trying to 'hear' what he is saying.) I know that this is stereotyping but people with 'homosexual orientation' are often of a more artistic temperament. But I think this is a question of the chicken or the egg. Is it the 'homosexual orientation' that disposes someone to a aesthetic sensitivity OR is it the sensitivity which opens someone to the particular sin of homosexual behaviour?I suppose I do not believe that people are born 'thieves' or 'adulterers' or 'homosexuals'. I believe they 'become' these things and I believe that every 'thief/adulterer/homosexual' knows that their first 'action' in these things is wrong. I do believe in 'congenital/original sin' as the set of the heart to disobey God but I do not believe that 'congenital sin' reveals itself in a congenital disposition to acts of homosexuality. Somewhere along they way they, and we, make our choices.No, I do not get the impression that he is condoning the act of homosexuality but I do get the impression that he is saying that 'homosexual orientation' is congenital and I disagree with him for the reasons expressed.I have friends who have had 'homosexual orientations' and have seen them changed. They still have their sensitivity to beauty and are naturally gentle characters but they don't have their 'homosexual orientations' and their finer qualities are not the spin-off of an homosexual orientation.

I don't think Bruxy said that he feels homosexuality is congenital. He makes the point that even IF one were born with it, is is still no reason to remain in that life style. One can be set free through Christ! Bruxy is dealing with the objections. My eyes were opened when I read some testimonies on the Exodus site. I suddenly realized the depth of pain they endured for a long time, even from a very young age and how their orientation developed early on, and how they hated it, but at the time had no way of dealing with it. When I read the testimonies I wept over these people, and also because of my own calloused heart towards homosexuals. There are many sinful life habits that develop very early in life, due to troubled upbringing or tramatic events or whatever. Unhealthy patterns get ingrained as a means of coping with life. If we can grieve for the pain, shame, ridicule these people suffer with at an early age, in the schoolyard etc, then I think we are a step closer in the right direction. The problem seems to be this: We all know that alcoholism, overeating, crime, and permiscuity are harmful way of dealing with life (that is why they are sinful), but it is harder for many to see that homosexual activity is also harmful, just like it is hard for us churched folk to see the damaging effects of hypocritical religiosity. I don't think that Bruxy was saying that compassion sprung out of homosexual orientation. Let's admit, just because a person has a bad orrientation, doesn't mean he has no positive quaility in his personality. Just a thought: Compassion in some may have developed through their past hurts. They know what it is like to be shunned, and so are sensitive to others who hurt. Others become hardened in their hearts. Unfortunately these are the ones who irritate and offend us intensely. They get the attention because of their aggresive behaviors.

I'm happy with this. I was unhappy because I perceived that Bruxy was equating 'homosexual orientation' with 'original sin'. I don't believe it is, although as I said earlier I am quite sure that personal 'soul characteristics' can make one man vulnerable to temptations that would not trouble another.On another theme from the same message, I was hoping he might do some digging into the whole concept of marriage. He said that "marriage, by definition...is..." I don't dispute any of the things he said but there is no 'definition' of marriage biblically, although we often assume that there are.I don't oppose Bruxy for reaching out to the homosexually orientated, nor for challenging Christians on their selective judgementalism. I just think we have to tell the thief that he will steal no more, and will not be tormented through life by a thieving orientation. To become a 'Christ follower' the hearer will have to turn from his homosexual practice and I would want to tell him that if a man be in Christ he becomes a new creation. Old things pass away and all things become new.To the thief, I would say you're not even to think about the possibility; its over. I would want to say the same to the 'homosexually orientated'.

To the thief, I would say you're not even to think about the possibility; its over. I would want to say the same to the 'homosexually orientated'.Would't we all like to say this about any sin? Then we would not need AA. We would never have to excercise mercy, patience, and compassion with each other. We would all have arrived. We would be polished saints in the churches. An example: ANGER can cause untold devestation. We should not be filled with anger. However, scripture does not say: Never be angry. To preach this either consciously or unconsciously encourages repression, hypocrisy, shame, guilt etc and leads to countless emotional disorders. It is far better to admit it and work with that reality. Then we can move on. I like the way Bruxy diffentiates between ACCEPTANCE and APPROVAL. They are not the same thing. He does not say that orientation means craving to sin or necessarily means sinful desire. Surely you must respect those who remain celebate in order to please the Lord, those who refuse to act on their orientation, if it didn't go away. That is FAR MORE DIFFICULT than it would be for those completely healed. Do you know the story of the musician, Tchaikovsky. He ended up taking his life because he could not live with the pain caused by his homosexuality. Of course, we could easily say, Well he should have trusted Christ", but sadly, everyone in his life was too busy condemning him and driving him away rather than SHOWING him the love of Christ. So the responsibility is not only theirs, but ours too, and I think we have failed miserably to be the light of Christ. These people, whether or not they admit it, already know that it is wrong in God's eyes. If that's all we tell them over and over again, we don't get anywhere. I do believe that to the extent we are aware of own brokenness - that we too are poor, naked, blind, and wretched - we will be able to help the sinner.As I write this, I am wondering: Is a bit of tolerance with true love more effective than rigid condemnation without love? Maybe the latter is less likely to lead anyone to Christ. Diane

How do you then pick words to discuss lingering homosexual desires and the ending of homosexual relationships?Would you insist on the ending of the emotional/friendships between homosexuals?Would you encourage the 'new creation' to think of himself as heterosexually aligned, now, even if he has no inkling of such feelings in experience?OK, it's time for me to come clean on this one. I don't believe that lingering homosexual desires can survive an authentic experience of regeneration."I" wouldn't insist upon anything but as the old Puritans used to say "there is little point in saying 'lead us not into temptation' and then taking the route through the orchard". Please note that I would distinguish between 'temptation' and 'lingering homosexual desires'.No, I wouldn't encourage heterosexual desires in an ex-homosexual. I have known 'ministers' who have taken this route in counselling to the destruction of themselves and their families. To try to encourage 'natural desires' is an impertinance and only shows the arrogance of those who try. Let God do his own work, would be my counsel.

An example: ANGER can cause untold devestation. We should not be filled with anger. However, scripture does not say: Never be angry. To preach this either consciously or unconsciously encourages repression, hypocrisy, shame, guilt etc and leads to countless emotional disorders. It is far better to admit it and work with that reality. Then we can move on. Are we moving into 'Christian' psychology here? I preach that the sinner must leave his sin. He must acknowledge it before God and receive cleansing; that is the only 'reality' I would want to work with in this sense. I fear we are slipping into psychotherapy rather than faith to see Christ change lives.When you say that Bruxy differeniates between ACCEPTANCE and APPROVAL, what is he accepting or approving? God neither accepts nor approves of 'homosexual orientation' nor practice. God accepts us because of what Christ has done, and our acceptance of each other is to be on the same basis. But Christ says 'Come as you are' with the clear understanding that you cannot remain 'as you are'.I feel no animosity towards the homosexual. I do not reject him. I am not even curious as to sexual orientations. I would tell him that he must be prepared to put away immediately all known sin. Christ will never pat us on the head and say 'there, there'. It will always be 'neither do I condemn thee; go and sin no more'. I could not say this to a person because I do not have the power to enable his obedience, but Christ can because He does have such power.

I guess I picked a bad example to explain that struggles with sin don't magically disappear as soon as one turns to Christ. (If only!!!) As I understood: Approval means: "I approve of your choices, (and so does God)' Acceptance means: "I accept you, I accept the fact that you are homosexual (or whatever sin), but that doesn't mean that I approve (or God).Conflicts arise because the difference is not recognized. All people, including homosexuals, need acceptance, and they mistakenly think that they can only receive it if they also have approval for their lifestyle. Those (ex some churches) who think that they must approve of the sinner's life style in order to love them are mistaken. That's what I got from the message. Does that make sense? I can relate because I used to believe that in order for me to be accepted, I had to be approved. I didn't think I could be loved if people saw my faults. That locked me into a perfectionist bondage, and a hypocritical pattern of life. Essentially I lived a lie, though I was greatly approved by my church for being a very good Christian. But Christ says 'Come as you are' with the clear understanding that you cannot remain 'as you are'. Exactly! That seems to be the focal point of the message. From what I read of your words, Philologos, it seems that you agree with Bruxy in the critical aspects. It's good to try to clarify terms and usage of words before making a final judgment of someone's message. You took the time to wrestle through this and I admire you for this. I fear that far too many prefer to merely stick with their mindsets and not consider any other thoughts. Diane

RonB's

But Christ says 'Come as you are' with the clear understanding that you cannot remain 'as you are'.Exactly! That seems to be the focal point of the message.

Thank you, Philologos for your words of mercy. “Mercy triumphs over judgment”. Shouldn’t this mean that the majority of our dialogue about homosexuality should be expression of mercy rather than judgment? I sense that not many Christians are eager to learn how they can practically reflect Christ’s mercy – the path to salvation. I think of the parable of the unmerciful manager and wonder, to what extent am I like that?“Blessed are the merciful for they shall be shown mercy” Matt. 5:8To the extent that we face our own depravity, that like Paul, we are “the greatest of sinners”, we will see our own need for mercy. To the extent that we know (experience) God’s mercy, we will express a heart of mercy towards the homosexual community. We will then see our prejudices, the destructiveness of protest marches, the cruelty of ridiculing gay jokes, etcPS: The horrors of the Katrina disaster expose far greater ethical issues that threaten our existence – materialism, competition, greed, distribution of wealth, global warming, looting, exploitation, defending the cause of the poor …. etc Some of these hit close to home, I must admit. “Blessed are the merciful for they shall be shown mercy” Maybe it’s time for many of us to put down our Bibles and practice what we know, to love the world as God does. “For God so loved the world…” Jn. 3:16 May God help me, for I have failed to measure up in many ways.Here’s a word I just made up: Philohomosapiens

I feel no animosity towards the homosexual. I do not reject him. I am not even curious as to sexual orientations. I would tell him that he must be prepared to put away immediately all known sin. Christ will never pat us on the head and say 'there, there'. It will always be 'neither do I condemn thee; go and sin no more'. I could not say this to a person because I do not have the power to enable his obedience, but Christ can because He does have such power.Would that be Luke 1:37? No rhema from God is without power? When God 'says' you 'can' and you 'must'?

I could not say this to a person because I do not have the power to enable his obedience,Amen,amen, brother! It is never our authority to absolve anyone of guilt before God. Let the Holy Spirit do this. (Rom. 8:16) If all religious leaders would accept this then we would not have so many false conversions and pseudo-Christians - those who have never really experienced God's mercy. I suspect that these are the ones inclined to want homosexuals to give up their life style above anything else. We should desire that they, like any unbeliever come to know Christ first and foremost? Who are we to know how long God takes to work within their hearts to change them, to erode their faulty beliefs, convict them, and draw them to himself? It's no different for anyone.