Oh great! Kirsten Powers gets saved just in time to help the gay Christian Movement!

Kirsten Powers, Fox News analyst and newly saved former agnostic/atheist has weighed in on the gay Christian issue (you can read about her conversion here).

Citing Michael Vines’ God and the Gay Christian, and James Brownson’s Bible, Gender, Sexuality, she thinks maybe the church should ask itself if God really intends for the church to reject homosexuality, and thus, gay Christianity.

Don’t get me wrong: I am happy that Ms. Powers has found Jesus, if indeed she has. But before Bible believing, traditional evangelical Christians go too far in their endorsement of her, they should realize that Ms. Powers is not an evangelical. Not if her article is any indication.

Her article shows no wrestling with the issue, not does it consider the traditional evangelical opinion. Instead, she offers up the usual gay Christian talking points saying,

“The Church has done this before on slavery, the solar system and divorce.”

Really? Have you studied this Ms. Powers? There is simply no meaningful parallel to be found in a comparison of the church’s stand on the four issues of slavery, the solar system, divorce, and homosexuality. Perhaps it is your liberal, Episcopalian roots that are guiding you in this case.

Powers simply takes Vines and Brownson at face value with their claims to a “high view” of Scripture. Funny, in the past a high view of Scripture, at least among evangelicals, meant that you believed it meant what it said.

Powers opens her article with a reference to,

“the emergence of conservative Christians who say orthodox believers can support life-long, monogamous gay relationships without undermining their commitment to biblical authority.”

Conservative Christians don’t support gay relationships in any form. If they did they, by definition, would not be conservative.

As I said before, I am glad for Powers’ salvation. But she is unqualified to speak for the church or to speak into this issue. You can read Powers’ article here:

Kirsten Powers: Christianity’s new look on gays.

You can also read here on Gay Christian Logic (surely the oxymorons abound in that title)!

Read about other so-called evangelicals that have failed the smell test recently.

The Juggernaut: The Progression of Homosexuality from Minority Status to Cultural Juggernaut

By Scott Fowler

It seems to me that President Obama played a key role in moving gay rights to its Juggernaut status when, on January 21, 2013, in his second inaugural address, he said the following,

We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths—that all of us are created equal—is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall….Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law— for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.1

With those sentiments, he officially elevated gay rights (Stonewall)2 to the level of a civil right, on par with women’s suffrage (Seneca Falls) and the fight for racial equality (Selma).  From that time, homosexuality has been “a massive inexorable force, crushing everything in its path,”3 namely the institution of marriage and the authority of the Bible.

In February of that same year, 278 companies filed an amicus brief in support of the woman whose challenge of DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, was to be considered by the Supreme Court later that year.4  In March, Bill Clinton expressed his regret over having signed the bill into law.5  Obama had already expressed his “evolution” on the subject in a 2012 ABC interview with Robin Roberts, indicating he no longer supported DOMA and that he was influenced by his conversations with friends and staff who were in “incredibly committed, monogamous relationships—same-sex relationships—who are raising kids together.” 6 A steady stream of public figures also stepped forward to declare their “love for love” and homosexuality.7 But perhaps Nicole Wallace (presumably a conservative operative who worked for Bush and advised the McCain/Palin campaign, but who also came out in favor of same-sex marriage in February 2013), captured the essence of the moment best when she said:

“If you are running for office and trying to court the vote of anyone under forty, you oppose marriage equality at your political peril.”8

On June 26, the Supreme Court struck down DOMA, declaring it unconstitutional, paving the way for the Federal Government to acknowledge same-sex marriages.

Juggernaut.

The April 8, 2013 issue of Time Magazine recorded that as of that date nine states and the District of Columbia had legalized same-sex marriage.9 At present that number has risen to seventeen states with seven more in the hopper, ready to fall upon appeals.10 Chronicling the surprising and rapid rise of support for same-sex marriage, David Von Drehle opined,

With stunning speed, a concept dismissed even by most gay-rights leaders just 20 years ago is now embraced by half or more of all Americans. . . . Exit polls in November showed that 83% of voters believe that same-sex marriage will be legal nationwide in the next five to 10 years. . . . Like a dam that springs a little leak that turns into a trickle and then bursts into a flood, the wall of public opinion is crumbling.11

Juggernaut.

The Inaugural itself was marked by a rejection of a well-known minister when the invitation to Lou Giglio was rescinded because of a twenty year old sermon he preached against homosexuality.12 The Inaugural Committee wanted someone inclusive, accepting of all Americans, and celebrating diversity. 13 In a letter to his church (which no longer seems to be available except through various articles that reported the incident), Giglio said,

“Due to a message of mine that has surfaced from 15-20 years ago, it is likely that my participation, and the prayer I would offer, will be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda a focal point of the inauguration. Clearly, speaking on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities in the past fifteen years. Instead, my aim has been to call people to ultimate significance as we make much of Jesus Christ.”14

And just like, Giglio was out, Luis Leon, an inclusive Episcopalian was in, and those who trumpet inclusion had excluded a potentially diverse and dissenting voice.

Juggernaut.

In the ten months since SCOTUS struck down DOMA, what began as the fight for same-sex marriage has evolved into a full-scale discussion in the evangelical church about gay Christianity, an oxymoron to be sure. But not everybody thinks so.

Those who have found it meaningful to be identified as evangelicals are being divided by the issue of homosexuality. The discussion began to round the corner between the subject of same-sex marriage and that of gay Christianity when World Vision decided and then un-decided to hire people involved in same-sex marriages. Since then, there has been daily evidence that the Juggernaut is dividing evangelicals (see Failing the Smell Test).

While many on both sides still couch the debate in terms of same-sex marriage, it is actually a question about the Bible’s authority and its ability to speak to contemporary cultural challenges. It is about gay Christianity. Dr. Albert Mohler captured the urgency of this historical crossroads when he wrote,

Evangelical Christians in the United States now face an inevitable moment of decision. While Christians in other movements and in other nations face similar questions, the question of homosexuality now presents evangelicals in the United States with a decision that cannot be avoided. Within a very short time, we will know where everyone stands on this question. There will be no place to hide, and there will be no way to remain silent. To be silent will answer the question. 15

Mohler is right. He wrote those words in response to a book by Matthew Vines entitled, God and the Gay Christian. In it, Vines concludes that

“It isn’t gay Christians who are sinning against God by entering into monogamous, loving relationships. It is the church that is sinning against them by rejecting their intimate relationships.”16

Ah! The familiar sound of the Juggernaut as it tramples over nature, history, Scripture, and the Church!

 

Dr. Scott Fowler is the founder of the Christ and Culture Initiative.

Footnotes

1 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/01/21/inaugural-address-president-barack-obama

2 Stonewall is a Greenwich Village gay bar in Manhattan where it is said “gay pride” began.

3 The definition of Juggernaut.

4 http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2013/0227/Gay-marriage-why-corporations-are-coming-out-against-DOMA

5 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/26/us/politics/bill-clintons-decision-and-regret-on-defense-of-marriage-act.html?pagewanted=all

6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQGMTPab9GQ&feature=player_embedded

7 http://gokicker.com/2013/03/26/same-sex-marriage-where-things-stand/#!GJ80e. See also David Von Drehle, “How Gay Marriage Won: The Gay and Lesbian Community Has Gone from Stonewall to the Altar in Two Generations,” Time Magazine, April 8, 2013, 18, 22.

8 Ibid., Tweeted by Andrea Mitchell.

9 Von Drehle, “How Gay Marriage Won: The Gay And Lesbian Community Has Gone From Stonewall To The Altar In Two Generations,” Time Magazine, April 8, 2013, 16.

10 http://gaymarriage.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004857 see also http://www.christianheadlines.com/blog/church-of-christ-sues-in-pursuit-of-same-sex-marriage.html. North Carolina becomes the first state where a pro same-sex church sues the government because it is denying them their religious rights to marry same-sex couples!

11 Von Drehle, How Gay Marriage Won,” 18.

12 http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/10/giglio-bows-out-of-inauguration-over-sermon-on-gays/

13 Ibid. See also, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/15/luis-leon-benediction-obama-inauguration-louie-giglio_n_2468824.html

14 Ibid., see also http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/louie-giglio-anti-gay-obama-inauguration_n_2448796.html.

15 R. Albert Mohler, God and the Gay Christian, (Louisville, SBTS Press, 2014).

16 Matthew Vines, God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same Sex Relationships, (New York: Convergent Books, 2014), 162.

 

“Oh, THAT Chestnut!” Gay Christian Logic

I believe the day has past when the answer to homosexuality was simply read them the “clobber” texts (the seven or so Scripture passages that condemn homosexuality). It’s not that the Bible does not have power. It does. The problem is that the so-called gay Christian community completely reinterprets those passages in a way that supports their lifestyles.

So, if a simple reading of the Biblical texts is not working, what are we to do? That’s a great question. I will let you know when I have a definitive answer. In the meantime, my conviction is that the battle for our culture (and not simply where it concerns homosexuality) is being waged on philosophical, academic grounds. Accordingly, I have for some time now been cataloging the logic on display in the many, many books, articles, and videos available from those who are pro-gay, pro-abortion, pro-evolution, etc.

With that in mind, I want to share some of the underpinning gay Christian  “moral logic” (as James V. Brownson, author of Bible, Gender, Sexuality, is fond of referring to) that I have encountered in recent weeks.

Ancient Means Sinful, Contemporary Means Righteous

This particular chestnut of wisdom says that the Bible, where it condemns same-sex activity, is not talking about loving, monogamous, committed same-sex relationships like we see in our world today. This has become a defeater belief (click here for an excerpt from D. A. Carson’s book, The Intolerance of Tolerance, where he defines what a defeater belief is). Essentially, a defeater belief is one that, when believed, rules out any belief to the contrary. If A is true, then B can’t possibly be true. Therefore, since I believe A, I can discount B altogether. The gay Christians can therefore dismiss any assertion that the Bible is against homosexuality by claiming that it is only speaking of unhealthy same-sex activity, i.e., temple prostitution, etc. No matter what may be said about the Biblical texts that prohibit and condemn homosexuality, the final salvo fired is, “That passage is not addressing loving, monogamous, committed same-sex relationships.”

Good Tree/Good Fruit

Based on the Jesus’ “good tree/good fruit, bad tree/bad fruit” teaching, Dan O. Via writes in Homosexuality and the Bible, “If the heart is loving, the acts that flow from it cannot be evil….The inner nature of a homosexual relationship does qualify the acts (Quoted by Brownson in Bible, Gender, Sexuality).” Matthew Vines, currently a rising star in defending homosexuality and gay Christianity, explains,

Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. . . . Good teachings, according to Jesus, have good consequences. . . . Good teachings, even when they are very difficult, are not destructive to human dignity. They don’t lead to emotional and spiritual devastation, and to the loss of self-esteem and self-worth. But those have been the consequences for gay people of the traditional teaching on homosexuality. It has not borne good fruit in their lives, and it’s caused them incalculable pain and suffering. If we’re taking Jesus seriously that bad fruit cannot come from a good tree, then that should cause us to question whether the traditional teaching is correct (From a manuscript of Vine’s video sermon).

As they love to say here in New York, “You can’t make this stuff up!” If your self-esteem and self-worth are founded on a sexual orientation that is forbidden by Scripture what do you suppose will happen if someone comes by and informs you of that? So, if I help someone commit suicide, or if I commit adultery, or pederasty for that matter (look it up), I am not sinning as long as I am loving in my heart towards that person. Amazing that we have not yet seen fire and brimstone falling in America!

The Exchange

I don’t care what anybody says, this next one is very creative! In Romans 1:26-27, Paul says,

Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.

The key word is exchanged. According to gay Christian logic, Paul was talking about heterosexuals engaging in same-sex activity, which violated their God-given nature or orientations. However, gay persons are “naturally” attracted to people of the same-sex, thus not violating their natures or orientations when they engage in same-sex behavior.

One must accept the premise that homosexuals were born that way for this to make sense, which I don’t. If they were not born that way, then they have indeed “exchanged” the normal for the abnormal whether they were conscious of the choice to do so or not. The onus is upon any of us: when we realize we are out of the way before God it is up to us to present ourselves to Him and allow Him to dictate how we will live and how we are to proceed.

The “Jesus never said it!” Approach

A transgender person made this statement in a comment on one of my blog entries, Why the Focus on Homosexuality . . . 

Jesus said that if a man look at a woman with lust in his heart, he had already committed adultery. He did not say the same if a man look at a man.

The utter nonsense of such a statement should be obvious. If we took this statement as true, we would have to assume that Jesus’ was saying that it is not OK for a man to lust after a woman but it is OK for a man to lust after another man!

Any thoughts?