Tony Campolo calls for for “full acceptance of Christian gay couples into the Church”

There are 10 Comments

Darrell Post's picture

From Campolo's post: "We believe that God intends married partners to help actualize in each other the “fruits of the spirit,” which are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control..."

If a fruit of the Spirit is self-control, and God has already said that homosexual behavior is an abomination to Him, then it stands to reason that any true believer who exhibits the fruit of the spirit would control self and not participate in something God has condemned.

Darrell Post's picture

Also, Mr. Campolo in his article actually compared Christians who defended slavery from Scripture to Christians who argue against homosexuality from Scripture. Wow, there is a stretch--but it goes to show what happens when someone is so determined to stay "relevant" regardless the clear words of God as revealed in Scripture.

Bert Perry's picture

It's worth noting here that either Campolo ignores, or does not know, the reality that if man is created in the image of God, and marriage is, per Ephesians 5 and elsewhere, supposed to reflect the reality of Christ and the Church--really you see this all through the prophets, too.  

OK, he's a smart guy, so I'm discarding the idea that he does not know about this, and this means that he's jettisoning a large portion of Scripture to get there.  In other words, Sola Scriptura and the first Fundamental are right out, and he's more or less a liberal in evangelical clothing.

Which, ahem, anyone who has watched Campolo's career, in particular his covering for Bill Clinton during l'Affaire Lewinsky, would have told you over a decade ago.  So in a way this is only making official where he was going a long, long time ago.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

TylerR's picture

Editor

The slavery analogy is right out of Matthew Vines' playbook from "God and the Gay Christian." If you haven't read it yet, just to understand how these attacks will be framed, then you need to. SI started a chapter by chapter response to it last year that has stalled; I need to get contributors to finish it!

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and an Investigations Manager with a Washington State agency. He's the author of the book What's It Mean to Be a Baptist?

Jim's picture

Some Evangelicals Take New Look at Bible’s Stance on Gays

LA MIRADA, Calif. — As a young, openly gay Christian activist, Matthew Vines considered it a victory just to get into a room at a conservative Christian university here with four influential evangelicals who disagreed with him over what the Bible says about homosexuality.

He ended up in a polite, heartfelt three-hour debate last month over Scripture passages about topics like celibacy, eunuchs, slavery — and the connections between sex and marriage.

“Every single system you have within your body — whether it’s your respiratory system, your excretory system, your muscular system — can be completed as an individual,” said Sean McDowell, a professor here at Biola University and a well-known evangelical author and speaker. “But there’s only one system in which male and female have half and become a united whole, and that’s in reproduction.”

...

The encounter at Biola was arranged by the Rev. Caleb Kaltenbach, lead pastor at Discovery Church in Simi Valley, who is part of a younger generation of evangelical leaders and pastors pushing the church to de-escalate the fight over homosexuality. “Not everything has to be a culture war,” he said.

...

At Biola, Mr. Kaltenbach sat in a club chair directly across from Mr. Vines. To Mr. Vines’s right was Frank Sontag, an evangelical radio host wearing jeans and cowboy boots, who said he would not pass judgment on gay people because he, too, was a sinner.

They all agreed that, in the Bible, God did not destroy Sodom and Gomorrah because of sodomy, but because the residents were guilty of arrogance and greed. 

jimcarwest's picture

Tony Campolo and his wife have been disturbing the Church about homosexuality since he 80's.  He was once tried for heresy by a panel that included J.I. Packer.  They found him "not guilty" of heresy, but naive about the issue of homosexuality.  Frankly, it's just dredging up muddy waters to discuss his views, IMO.  We are faced with more contemporary issues when it comes to homosexuality, e.g. how the Supreme Court will come down soon on the subject of gay marriage, how the Church will deal with the matter should it become unlawful for the Church to deny gay marriage someone who solicits its services, how Christians will respond when the law makes it plain that no person (Christian or otherwise) may deny services to gays when it violates their conscience, etc.  The Campolos set in motion this discussion over 30 years ago.  "Behold how great a matter a little fire kindleth."

Joel Shaffer's picture

Here is "an open letter" to Tony Campolo claiming that Tony disregarded the Biblical view on homosexuality and Same Sex Marriage 10 years ago, but didn't want it to affect his book sales.  Also states that its been his "intention and practice to try and lure evangelicals into accepting the liberal position on SSM, and it would be more effective for him to do so while pretending to uphold the traditional position. lure evangelicals into accepting the liberal position on SSM, and it would be more effective for him to do so while pretending to uphold the traditional position."

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/an.open.letter.to.tony.campolo/557...

Joel Shaffer's picture

jimcarwest wrote:

Tony Campolo and his wife have been disturbing the Church about homosexuality since he 80's.  He was once tried for heresy by a panel that included J.I. Packer.  They found him "not guilty" of heresy, but naive about the issue of homosexuality.  Frankly, it's just dredging up muddy waters to discuss his views, IMO.  We are faced with more contemporary issues when it comes to homosexuality, e.g. how the Supreme Court will come down soon on the subject of gay marriage, how the Church will deal with the matter should it become unlawful for the Church to deny gay marriage someone who solicits its services, how Christians will respond when the law makes it plain that no person (Christian or otherwise) may deny services to gays when it violates their conscience, etc.  The Campolos set in motion this discussion over 30 years ago.  "Behold how great a matter a little fire kindleth."

He wasn't found not guilty with his views on homosexuality back in the 1980's (because he still believed that homosexuality was a sin) but rather because of his belief that the presence of Jesus is found within every person within humanity.    http://articles.latimes.com/1985-12-14/local/me-486_1_campus-crusade 

jimcarwest's picture

Darrell Post wrote:

Also, Mr. Campolo in his article actually compared Christians who defended slavery from Scripture to Christians who argue against homosexuality from Scripture. Wow, there is a stretch--but it goes to show what happens when someone is so determined to stay "relevant" regardless the clear words of God as revealed in Scripture.

I actually heard someone on Moody Radio use the phrase -- "the cult of relevance" -- that gave me pause for thinking.  I think that is not a bad way to describe a lot of what is going on in our age.  Some, in a desire to stay relevant, are willing to deny the Word of God and accommodate all sorts of extraneous nonsense.

jimcarwest's picture

Campolo has been accepting of homosexuality for years and fully disposed to reach out to them since probably the 70s.  He makes it sound like he has been struggling with the issue for a long time and has finally, after much pensive deliberation come to a carefully thought-out decision.  Men like Campolo have been undermining the Christian faith for a long time.  What he thinks should long ago have been relegated to oblivion, in my opinion.