Grace and Truth in LGBT Engagement
This is from the transcript (at the link, above), where the interviewee describes the time when he finally convinced his lesbian mother to accompany him to church one day:
I kept on trying to convince my mom to come, and she came one Sunday. And our church attendance spiked to 26. It was a huge one for the books. And the next Sunday when I showed up, two elders were waiting for me and took me in the back room and said – this is all before the sermon – “If you want to keep preaching here, don’t ever bring somebody like that again. We don’t like those people.”
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
From the transcript:
And I think also, at the same time, Darrell, I think that we need to understand people from their perspective. If a missionary goes overseas and is gonna share the Gospel with a particular culture, they have to do contextualization. They have to learn culture. They have to engage culture – not as a means to water down the Gospel, but as a means to use culture as a vessel to share the Gospel, to communicate it.
And I think that a lot of Christians are not, for one reason or another, willing to do that when it comes to certain people, including the LGBT community. I remember a conversation that I had with my mom one time. And this is awkward; nobody wants to have this conversation with their mom. But somehow she told me, “You know, Caleb, Vera and I, we were not intimate the last several years of our relationship.”
And that blew me away. I said, “Well, then why do you still call yourself a lesbian? You’re not a lesbian.”
And she said, “Well, sure I am. That’s my community. Those are my people. I have acceptance; I have relationships. I’m part of a cause and a movement.”
And I said, “Well, Mom, you just described the church.”
And she said, “No, I didn’t. Why would I go somewhere that would make me feel less about myself?” And it really dawned on me then that the biggest issue – and I think the biggest cultural issue that we have in our society today – and maybe we always have had – is the issue of identity. That’s why we have Bruce Jenner to Caitlyn Jenner, and that’s why we have the leader of the Northwest NAACP who was Caucasian, but she still says she identifies as African-American.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
I do alot of marketing, and I see this message quite frequently. We are no longer primarily connected by our neighborhoods, but by our interests. People go to meetups, and join clubs and online groups to find meaningful relationships, and share understanding based on similar interests and experiences. They are looking for their “tribe”. The attraction of the LGBT community is, among other factors, that sense of unconditional belonging.
The reality, however, is much different. People are, underneath all their labels, still human beings. Even in the LGBT community, there are still folks jockeying for position and power, and there are horror stories in their ranks, just as there are in any group.
IMO, the way to reach people is to think of them as people, instead of trying to label them by whatever obvious behaviors they exhibit. Whether someone has committed a crime or is confused about sexuality and gender, they still feel joy, sorrow, pain, compassion, envy, pride, ambition… and they still want the same things as all of us do—to be cherished, to know one’s place and purpose, to find meaning, to be part of something important. I think we’d be much more successful in reaching people with the message of salvation if we tap into that, than painting targets on people committing a particular sin or holding to other beliefs.
But washing feet is not nearly as fun as shooting fish in a barrel.
So if two men love each other and don’t engage in intimacy or have sexual relations, are they gay? (Added) What if they lived together?
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
David and Jonathan’s relationship is often used as an example of a deeply loving relationship between two men. Or how John was physically affectionate with Jesus at the Last Supper. IMO, the line would be sexual attraction, not love—or showing physical but nonsexual affection.
[Ron Bean]So if two men love each other and don’t engage in intimacy or have sexual relations, are they gay? (Added) What if they lived together?
Probably better to use the word homosexual instead of gay, and really, the answer to your question lies in the very word used to describe it. If it’s not sexual, it’s just David and Jonathan, Lincoln and Joshua Speed, etc..
Now they might describe themselves as homosexual, per what Tyler notes and the original writer noted, but I would argue that a “genuine” homosexual must at least have that same sex sexual attraction.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
I am increasingly realizing that many people frame the Gospel much differently than I do.
I frame it as the Good News which saves us from ourselves, and brings us into right relationship with God through repentance from rebellion, and faith in who Jesus is and what He’s done. We’re forgiven, adopted into His family, and made citizens of His coming kingdom - and we live and exist to serve Him.
The author Bock interviewed frames it in the context of community relationship and “belonging.” The author described his conversation with his lesbian mother, about why she still “self-identifies” as a lesbian:
And she said, “Well, sure I am. That’s my community. Those are my people. I have acceptance; I have relationships. I’m part of a cause and a movement.”
And I said, “Well, Mom, you just described the church.”
I don’t think a congregation is primarily about community, acceptance, relationships and a “movement.” It includes those things, of course, but I’m not at all convinced the Scriptures frame it that way. The Apostles didn’t frame it that way in the Book of Acts. Jesus didn’t frame it that way. Did He?
I’m truly looking for some insight. This way of framing the Gospel is very, very popular. I believe it contains elements of truth, but it’s missing the big picture, stumbling around in the dark. God is the big picture, and we’re saved so we can serve Him. It’s about Him, not us.
Peter told Christian slaves God saved them so they could do right, and suffer, and endure it patiently (1 Peter 2:20-21). This is a perspective that’s missing today.
This “new-fangled” way to frame the Gospel seems very selfish to me. Am I off base?
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
What if two women/men live together and genuinely love each other but have no intimacy or sexual relations? How do you label them? Can they join your church?
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
I agree that the salvation message itself is primarily Christ, and not us. But I think where we as Christians often err is that when we share the Gospel, we somehow make it about us, and not about them or about Christ. Which is why, IMO, we get into labels, as if sharing the Gospel with a homosexual/transgender is different than when we share it with Joe Sixpack or Suzy Homemaker. If it’s all about Christ, what difference does it make if they are gay?
[TylerR]I don’t think a congregation is primarily about community, acceptance, relationships and a “movement.” It includes those things, of course, but I’m not at all convinced the Scriptures frame it that way. The Apostles didn’t frame it that way in the Book of Acts. Jesus didn’t frame it that way. Did He?
I’m truly looking for some insight. This way of framing the Gospel is very, very popular. I believe it contains elements of truth, but it’s missing the big picture, stumbling around in the dark. God is the big picture, and we’re saved so we can serve Him. It’s about Him, not us.
Just an observation: the outline of Romans flows from the “gospel” (1:16) through sin (1, 2, 3), justification by faith (3, 4, 5), hope for the future (5), hope and transformation in the present (5-7), more eschatological hope (8)…and then gets down to issues of Jews and Gentiles, the idea of belonging to God’s people, and then flows into issues of transformed living, unity amidst diversity (14).
Ephesians 1-2 do something similar: the unity of God’s people flows from God’s plan to redeem them and unite them under Christ.
In 1 Peter 2, the purpose of the “peculiar people” is to proclaim the praises of the one who called them out of darkness into marvelous light. It is God’s mercy that moves us from being not-a-people to a-people.
In short: I don’t think you can get to a proper understanding of “community” without a proper understanding of redemption, reconciliation with God, etc.
Michael Osborne
Philadelphia, PA
Andrew T. Walker, in his excellent book God and the Transgender Debate, said all of us have to wrestle with finding Identity (Who am I?) and Community (Who will accept me?)
This was tremendously helpful to me in understanding the individuals involved in the LGBT lifestyle.
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
[Greg Long]Andrew T. Walker, in his excellent book God and the Transgender Debate, said all of us have to wrestle with finding Identity (Who am I?) and Community (Who will accept me?)
This was tremendously helpful to me in understanding the individuals involved in the LGBT lifestyle.
It’s certainly true that with any other kind of sin I can think of (theft, adultery, gossip), it’s rare to have the sinner object, “But this is just who I am.” Calling a sinner to repentance is one thing when they already have a notion that it’s sin; calling a sinner to repentance is another thing when they think the sin is part of their identity.
Michael Osborne
Philadelphia, PA
[Susan R]If it’s all about Christ, what difference does it make if they are gay?
Theologically, yes, sin is sin and the gospel is the gospel. But a person who is thinking in terms of identity may hear the call to repentance differently.
Michael Osborne
Philadelphia, PA
To echo M. Osbourne’s comments, above, the Apostle Peter tells us a Christian’s most fundamental identity is as a priest for God (1 Pet 2:4-10). We’re individual, living stones who have been taken out of the world and placed into His spiritual house. He did it so we’d be priests for Him, representing Him and making Him known to the pagan world we live in. Peter quoted Hosea 2 for a reason; we weren’t a people, but now we’ve become God’s own people, and we wear His royal insignia as we go about our daily lives.
This is the sense in which “community” is an accurate way to describe a church, but that’s not at all what the author was referring to. We’re a community of people allegedly united in our mission to represent Yahweh to the world, by preaching the Gospel. We’re should focus on that aspect much more than the horizontal (i.e. friendships, “belonging,” etc.). These are important (and biblical) but they flow from our mission as God’s priests first.
Whatever “self-identity” people want to take, the only one which matters is the one Peter talked about (1 Peter 2:4-10). That is who we are - nothing else matters. Any other “self-identity” construct is wrong, and should be cast away. And, if you’re not a Christian, the only “self-identity” construct you really have is that of a terrorist insurgent (i.e. a rebel sinner).
Now, there is a more winsome way to put this, but you’ll have to get down to it eventually. The trick is to show love and compassion, without compromise.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
I would argue that identity is not as unique to LGBT issues as we might think. All of us justify our sin to a greater or lesser extent by saying some form of, “Well, that’s just who I am.” (Now the reasons a person thinks they are who they are vary from biological to environmental to cultural to parental, etc.) An alcoholic excuses his sin by saying “that’s who I am.” A person prone to anger says “that’s who I am.” And so on.
Yes, the LGBT situation is unique in some respects because the sexual revolution is fighting for rights and recognition for sinful behavior based on the idea of identity, so I will grant you that. But I’m simply saying that although homosexuality is shameful, vile, and unnatural (Rom. 1), it’s still sin. Sin is sin and sinners are sinners (when Paul describes in Rom. 1 how God’s wrath is revealed against all ungodliness, he doesn’t culminate with homosexuality, but rather with a laundry lists of sins on which we can all find ourselves). We are all searching for true identity and true community, and so that should make us somewhat sympathetic to the LGBT person rather than rejecting them as somehow more broken than any other sinner. True identity can only be found in Christ, and true community can only be found in the body of Christ.
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
Discussion