The phrase 'gay Christian' blends 2 incompatible truths

[Michie]

Focus on the Family recently posted on social media a clumsily worded post that, while honorable in its desire to communicate truth in love regarding homosexuality and salvation, sent something of a muddled message. The article was removed and a correction was made following widespread criticism, including from publications like Not the Bee.

Such criticism was warranted as it reeked of a slide into insidious Side B “gay Christianity” doctrines. Yet Focus responded well, replacing the article with a solid and faithful essay written in 2013 by Jeff Johnston. Those of us who once lived and identified among the LGBT are thankful that they have been, along with The Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity, faithful to the entire Gospel, championing the hope we have for transformation.

However, I believe the conversation needs greater clarity, especially for those wrestling not only with same-sex attraction but with questions of identity.


Continued below.

The phrase 'gay Christian' blends 2 incompatible truths

There is a difference between experiencing same-sex attraction and embracing a gay identity

www.christianpost.com

 

[Love365]

What if they have a voice that sounds gay ?

I don’t think straight people are lining up to date them.

 

[bling]

Can you be a Jewish Christian?

When I teach "gay" people, I am not trying to make them straight prior to becoming a Christian, since they do not have the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit. If we cannot allow "gay people" into the church building, how can we allow any sinner in?

 

[seeking.IAM]

Regarding the quote in the article:

"...Saying "I’m a gay Christian" isn’t just acknowledging sinful desires; it affirms a flawed, psychologized anthropology. It suggests that being gay is something God intended, or at least something intrinsic, morally neutral, and immutable..."​

​

I do not think the phrase suggests that at all. I think the phrase only suggests, "I'm gay" and "I believe in Christ." Anything other than that is the author's interpretation. The author's interpretation taken to its extreme equates to believing someone saying, "I'm a fat Christian," means being fat is something God intended and can't be changed (immutable).

 

[BobRyan]

Regarding the quote in the article:

"...Saying "I’m a gay Christian" isn’t just acknowledging sinful desires; it affirms a flawed, psychologized anthropology. It suggests that being gay is something God intended, or at least something intrinsic, morally neutral, and immutable..."​

​

I do not think the phrase suggests that at all. I think the phrase only suggests, "I'm gay" and "I believe in Christ." Anything other than that is the author's interpretation. The author's interpretation taken to its extreme equates to believing someone saying, "I'm a fat Christian," means being fat is something God intended and can't be changed (immutable).

If someone says " I am a bank-robber Christian" we say they "need to give up bank robbing, and we don't mean - give up just a little".

They may indeed have a strong streak of greed, lust for money, envy, covet, desire to steal etc... But no matter we say they must give it up.

Then if they choose Christ - "but they still have issues with coveting" - we don't say they are not a Christian - ---- but we also don't want them to claim to be promoting the coveting lifestyle for Christians.

When it comes to defective sinful natures - all humans have one. But that has never been an excuse for a saved born-again saint - to indulge in what the sinful nature demands.

Often it seems that the LGBTQ+ political trend tries to class that aspect of the sinful nature as something sacred and special.

Oddly enough the problem is not nearly so prevalent in nations that do not pander to that lifestyle as if it is to be valued and promoted.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Focus on the Family recently posted on social media a clumsily worded post that, while honorable in its desire to communicate truth in love regarding homosexuality and salvation, sent something of a muddled message. The article was removed and a correction was made following widespread criticism, including from publications like Not the Bee.

Such criticism was warranted as it reeked of a slide into insidious Side B “gay Christianity” doctrines. Yet Focus responded well, replacing the article with a solid and faithful essay written in 2013 by Jeff Johnston. Those of us who once lived and identified among the LGBT are thankful that they have been, along with The Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity, faithful to the entire Gospel, championing the hope we have for transformation.

However, I believe the conversation needs greater clarity, especially for those wrestling not only with same-sex attraction but with questions of identity.


Continued below.

The phrase 'gay Christian' blends 2 incompatible truths

There is a difference between experiencing same-sex attraction and embracing a gay identity

www.christianpost.com

Isn't the body a temporary dwelling? Why make their identity about something that isn't eternal?

 

[The Liturgist]

However, I believe the conversation needs greater clarity, especially for those wrestling not only with same-sex attraction but with questions of identity.

What questions of identity are you concerned about? Those who are confused about their gender (who misled into believing that gender is determined by biological sex, and that “gender reassignment surgery” does not actually change gender in a meaningful way, it merely deprives one, in cases where applied to the reproductive anatomy, of the ability to reproduce, by mutiliating the reproductive anatomy more severely than any other historical form of genital mutliation, short of castration. If we could actually give a man working female reproductive organs and vice versa, thus turning a male into a female, and vice versa, from a sex as well as a gender perspective, then it would be a purely moral question (and I would still be opposed to such procedures), but as of right now the elephant in the room that everyone is ignoring is ontological - it is impossible for a biological male to become a biological female and gender reassignment surgery is cosmetic, not functional, and often involves sterilization.

 

[Michie]

I think the op puts it best:

Focus’s article rightly says that temptation is not a sin. But I believe it falls short when it affirms the possibility of someone "being gay and Christian" without addressing the danger of making sinful desire a core identity. The Scriptures warn not only against sinful acts but also distorted self-perceptions. When the Apostle Paul says, "such were some of you" (1 Cor. 6:11), he speaks of a past identity that no longer defines those washed, sanctified, and justified in Christ.

Saying "I’m a gay Christian" isn’t just acknowledging sinful desires; it affirms a flawed, psychologized anthropology. It suggests that being gay is something God intended, or at least something intrinsic, morally neutral, and immutable. False pride says one must declare one sin as a core identity to prove one’s honesty. We should not fall for that shaming claim. Genesis teaches we are made in the image of God, male and female, and that our sexuality, when rightly ordered, reflects His design. Our desires, though real and not voluntarily chosen, are not who we are, as they can and will be transformed as we grow in maturity in Jesus Christ. They are shaped by beliefs, and those beliefs will be conformed to the mind of Christ.

 

[ozso]

 

[RileyG]

What if they have a voice that sounds gay ?

I don’t think straight people are lining up to date them.

They don't have to act on their feelings. They can be celibate or marry someone of the opposite sex.

 

[RileyG]

Focus on the Family recently posted on social media a clumsily worded post that, while honorable in its desire to communicate truth in love regarding homosexuality and salvation, sent something of a muddled message. The article was removed and a correction was made following widespread criticism, including from publications like Not the Bee.

Such criticism was warranted as it reeked of a slide into insidious Side B “gay Christianity” doctrines. Yet Focus responded well, replacing the article with a solid and faithful essay written in 2013 by Jeff Johnston. Those of us who once lived and identified among the LGBT are thankful that they have been, along with The Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity, faithful to the entire Gospel, championing the hope we have for transformation.

However, I believe the conversation needs greater clarity, especially for those wrestling not only with same-sex attraction but with questions of identity.


Continued below.

The phrase 'gay Christian' blends 2 incompatible truths

There is a difference between experiencing same-sex attraction and embracing a gay identity

www.christianpost.com

I agree. Our identity is in Christ, not our sexual orientation.

 

[Fervent]

I don't find much use in creating barriers to belief, each will give account to their own master. Jesus didn't go around telling drunkards and prostitutes to give up their sins before He would dine with them. So why do we as a church allow ourselves to be defined by what we disapprove of, rather than being known for our boundless love? Why are we not known by the whosoever, but instead constantly try to define who can and can't call themselves by the name of Christ? The Spirit will lead those who are willing to repentance, and those who are not will give their own account.

 

[RileyG]

I don't find much use in creating barriers to belief, each will give account to their own master. Jesus didn't go around telling drunkards and prostitutes to give up their sins before He would dine with them. So why do we as a church allow ourselves to be defined by what we disapprove of, rather than being known for our boundless love? Why are we not known by the whosoever, but instead constantly try to define who can and can't call themselves by the name of Christ? The Spirit will lead those who are willing to repentance, and those who are not will give their own account.

Jesus did say to the woman caught in adultery, go and sin no more.

 

[Fervent]

Jesus did say to the woman caught in adultery, go and sin no more.

Only after telling her that he doesn't condemn her either.

 

[RileyG]

Only after telling her that he doesn't condemn her either.

Correct!

 

[Fervent]

Correct!

Godly encouragement for repentance is a far cry from what most of the messaging regarding homosexuality and Christianity involves. Having engaged with homosexuals on these kinds of questions the messaging they hear is not a message of desire for repentance, but one of animosity and hatred for them as people. It's not a simple topic to deal with, in part because while we as Christians may not recognize the issues of personal identity involved the cracks run deeper. More often we are known by our hatred than by our love, despite Jesus' words to the opposite effect.

 

[RileyG]

Godly encouragement for repentance is a far cry from what most of the messaging regarding homosexuality and Christianity involves. Having engaged with homosexuals on these kinds of questions the messaging they hear is not a message of desire for repentance, but one of animosity and hatred for them as people. It's not a simple topic to deal with, in part because while we as Christians may not recognize the issues of personal identity involved the cracks run deeper. More often we are known by our hatred than by our love, despite Jesus' words to the opposite effect.

That’s entirely fair.

 

[The Liturgist]

I don't find much use in creating barriers to belief, each will give account to their own master. Jesus didn't go around telling drunkards and prostitutes to give up their sins before He would dine with them. So why do we as a church allow ourselves to be defined by what we disapprove of, rather than being known for our boundless love? Why are we not known by the whosoever, but instead constantly try to define who can and can't call themselves by the name of Christ? The Spirit will lead those who are willing to repentance, and those who are not will give their own account.

St. Paul made it clear that certain sins such as fornication, homosexuality, adultery, murder and other transgressions could jeopardize our salvation.

 

[The Liturgist]

Godly encouragement for repentance is a far cry from what most of the messaging regarding homosexuality and Christianity involves. Having engaged with homosexuals on these kinds of questions the messaging they hear is not a message of desire for repentance, but one of animosity and hatred for them as people. It's not a simple topic to deal with, in part because while we as Christians may not recognize the issues of personal identity involved the cracks run deeper. More often we are known by our hatred than by our love, despite Jesus' words to the opposite effect.

While that’s true, it doesn’t provide any justification for the liberal mainline churches which are actively promoting sexual perversion by flying “pride” flags (the very idea of a church celebrating a month encouraging any form of pride, which is sinful in Christianity, is sickening; especially since part of June usually falls within one of the four major fasts of the Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Christians, the Apostle’s Fast, which starts the Monday following All Saints Day (which is on the same day as Trinity Sunday in the West, because in the Byzantine Rite Pentecost Sunday is celebrated as the Feast of the Holy Trinity as well as the descent of the Holy Spirit, which is additionally commemorated on the Monday following Pentecost Sunday), and continues until the Feast of the Holy Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul on June 29th, so for many Orthodox on the Revised Julian and Gregorian Calendar it ended yesterday, but for others it will continue for another 12 days.

 

[Fervent]

St. Paul made it clear that certain sins such as fornication, homosexuality, adultery, murder and other transgressions could jeopardize our salvation.

Those lists are questionably comparible to the modern institution of homosexuality, especially considering that there are at least two different practices that have been placed under the umbrella term despite possibly refering to more specific violations like pederasty.