Yesterday I discovered a post on a popular pastoral blog that criticized a well-known evangelical pastor for not preaching more sermons on the topic of homosexuality. Their reasoning: since this pastor has a growing church in New York City, and ministers to lots of singles, it is sinful for him not to openly preach against “the wickedness of sodomy” (their words). The only reason for him not to, would be fear – fear of man and a desire to protect his own reputation.
At least that’s the argument.
This line of thinking assumes that there would be no other reason for a pastor to approach this topic with great care.
For many reasons, homosexuality has become the issue not only for contemporary culture, but also for the contemporary church – defining boundary lines and immediately sticking one in either the camp of “liberal” or “conservative” often depending entirely where they fall on this single issue. And sadly, it seems that the loudest Christians who receive the most publicity on this topic are the angriest; many doing everything short of waging war against the homosexual community.
So, should pastors never address the topic of homosexuality? Of course they should. In 1 Timothy 1, Paul contextualizes the Ten Commandments for Timothy’s current context. The only reason for him to bring up same-sex sexual acts under the overall heading of adultery or sexual immorality would be that it was a specific sin prevalent in 1st Century Ephesus. Paul was being a good pastor in using scripture to address the issues of the day. However, how did he do it? We can use the passage to mine some principles on how to talk about such an explosive topic.
1. Paul specifically mentions homosexual practice and not homosexual persons. It’s men who practice homosexuality (arsenokoitai).
As much as Paul says, however, he never says that being gay is a sin. Homosexual activity is clearly named as sinful, but not necessarily those that would identify themselves as gay or who wrestle with same-sex attractions. This is a small but important distinction.
This simplifies things. It means that when a staff member confesses to same-sex attractions, your first response is certainly not to fire him. It also means that homosexuals in our churches are called to the same grace-enabled disciplined abstinence that we would ask of any single person in our church attempting to walk in the light.
2. Paul talks about homosexuality in the larger realm of Christian sexual ethics. Homosexual practice in the New Testament isn’t a sin worthy of some sort of special censure. Any church that has people in it, is going to be a church filled with people who sin sexually in a variety of ways, whether its use of pornography, extra-marital affairs, or sex outside the bonds of marriage.
The church needs to be able to call people to repent and then to equip them, in loving community, to walk out of sexual sin of any and every type.
3. After naming “men who practice homosexuality,” Paul is quick to confess his own sin. Specifically.
He says, “the law is laid down for sinners. Sinners like me.” And then he names himself as the worst, chief, or foremost of sinners. Along with naming the sins of his culture, he names his own sin. This is unheard of in today’s evangelical climate.
What if every time a Christian wrote an article on the “wickedness of sodomy” they also had to say, “but, you know, I looked lustfully at a woman last night, spoke sharply to my children, and I’ve practiced a lifestyle of safely secluding myself from the needy in my area. I’m no better.”?
This would bring a level of humility to the subject that could really help defuse tensions.
4. In his “sin list” Paul does not discriminate. He weaves back and forth between classic “liberal” and classic “conservative” sins: immediately after “men who practice homosexuality,” Paul aims his guns at human trafficking.
This is one reason that use of the words “sodomy” and “sodomite” are particularly unhelpful when talking about homosexuality. Ezekiel 16 clearly indicates that the sin of Sodom was “pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease” along with a failure to “aid the poor and needy.” To use the word “sodomy” for one group of people but not the other is intellectually dishonest. A word steeped in fear is used only to shame and marginalize those we don’t agree with.
In the recent past, I believe conservative evangelicals have put too much emphasis on homosexuality. I think this has been done partly out of a love for truth, but partly out of fear and partly because the “gay agenda” makes for an easy target. Because of this, we are in danger of losing our “prophetic right” to speak to this topic. Any honest words are lost among the white noise of angry, hate-filled, homophobic jargon.
Evangelicals Christians have marginalized, attacked, and shunned homosexuals. The gay community knows that evangelicals think that they’re wrong. They haven’t heard, with nearly the same force, that we love them. Because maybe we don’t.
What do I want gays and lesbians both those inside my church and those outside of it to know more? That I disagree with their sexual lifestyle? Or that God’s true message is different than they’ve heard… that in the gospel, we find a surprising message of a God in hot pursuit of sinners and rebels of all types?
And this question is so important, because if I lead with the first message, it will most likely eliminate any chance I have to communicate the second. As Jochem Douma says, “The direction of our moral argument(s) should be from love to law, not from the law to love.”
This is why any pastor reaching into his community would want to approach this topic with great care.
See, one message comes in sound bites and is easily printed on a bumper sticker. The other message takes incarnation. It takes life. A grace-saturated life that disarms and breaks through defenses, loving despite differences and labels.
Tags: church, culture, homosexuality, leadership, preaching
I like the love agenda. We have to have something to offer that speaks well of the one we serve. Otherwise we’re just noise-makers in an already loud world. Great post!
Thanks for this, Jon. So many Christians need to hear a reasoned approach to homosexuality. What you’ve written is very helpful, especially for me in college ministry.
The subject of homosexuality looms large for students and it doesn’t take long for it to come up in conversation, especially how Christians talk about love and then seem to actually hate homosexuals. So many students may not be gay but don’t see anything wrong with it and don’t understand why the church comes out so strong against one particular sin. You’re right that this falls alongside all other sin and should humble us as we approach the topic. So many in the church miss this and their message falls on deaf ears.
Good article. Why is this so difficult for people to get? I wonder how many people know about the Ezek. 16 reference. What if we warned comfortable middle-class Christians that they were in danger of (or committing) “sodomy.” That would get their attention!
excellent.
Threaded the needle on this one. I will be honest and say I was concerned with where you were headed with this, initially. But that is more to do with major sin I have sin on either side of the issue. Thanks for putting the work into this.
Thanks Jon, excellent article.
This is issue is such an important one for us to get right. Rather than further engagement in culture war, we need to embody the Love of Jesus to people who desperately need him. Great job on the distinction between practice and person… puts some actual flesh on the often quoted but seldom heartfelt maxim “love the sinner, hate the sin”. Talking about the difference between practice and person-hood seems to be a much healthier way of communicating the truth about God’s view on sexuality.
Don’t forget also that in Romans 1-2, Paul lists a multitude of sins alongside homosexuality and then in 2:1 says “YOU (the CHURCH) are also guilty of these things, therefore, how dare you pass judgment? Or do you presume…” etc. Truth without Love is abuse. Love without Truth is neglect. We have to preach both truth with love all the time. No pressure.
Thanks for this timely post. I’m preaching on the topic this weekend (but my text is Romans 1-2 if you couldn’t tell) and was informed that the audience will include some who are currently living in the lifestyle. I was going to make the claim that this is THE issue in contemporary culture in the EXACT same way you did, but now I can quote you on it to back me up! Thanks!
Thanks for the feedback.
Good thoughts on Romans 1&2, Brad.
Alex – someone on Twitter brought out the irony that overeaters are sodomites. Interesting, for sure.
Crazy awesome post! Thanks Jon… Hope all is well at Christ City in Memphis.
Nicely written Jonathan. Am following your church plant in Memphis with interest. Grace an peace friend.
Thanks for this I have been getting alot of questions from new believers at my work about homosexuality being a sin. They came to Christ out of the love He showed, then all they hear is other believers coming off as hating certain types of people. I will pass this along to them. Thanks
Jonathan, this post is a service to the church at large. I trust it will be seen by a larger audience–it needs to be. I believe the evangelical church in North America has currently lost the right to speak out about homosexuality, and wonder if the Father is saying, “just give it a rest for a year or two.”
Jon, One of the problems many Evangelicals have is that they forget that they too are sinners much in need of grace. It makes it easier to have a us verses them approach.
I struggled for over a decade with a sin that I was sure would completely ruin me in ministry if anyone knew what it was. So I kept it buried inside of me. It was a cancer of the soul. God finally just spoke to me and said go tell that guy. I was pretty certain doing that would seriously mess up any chance to be friends with the guy. I had attempted to do it before and the other person just abandoned me and never spoke to me again. It was worth the risk I needed to be free and confess.
I think a lot of self professing evangelicals do not preach a doctrine of grace for sinners. They don’t really believe that God loves sinners before they clean themselves up.
Sexual sin in the white church is considered by many to be the worse of all and homosexuality is the cardinal sexual sin by many conservative evangelicals. I know churches that have excommunicated members who have confessed to sexual sins.
I hope the Church is becoming more grace-saturated in word and deed. I’ve only personally seen glimpses of it. When a sinner reverts to their sin will the Church be there for them? I hope so. Most of what I have seen is that grace is only incarnated until the moral superiority separates themselves from the really vile sinners.
I hope you and your Church begin to set a new pattern for all God’s offspring. Glad to see you show that the Bible offers a third way called grace between the twin errors of legalism and antinomianism. Good and timely exegesis.
Thanks Jonathan. Excellent words.
As Paul was quick to point out his own sins, so should we be…and I could learn a lot here. One of the books I read for Re:Train was “Respectable Sins” by Jerry Bridges. Excellent word in regard to how we often treat some sins as “respectable” when in reality, sin is sin & all of it is an affront to God.
Another point I appreciated was the “love to law” quote. I just finished Piper’s, “Brother’s We Are Not Professionals,” and in one chapter, he clearly identifies that “We must taste the pleasure of knowing God before we will experience the God-honoring pain of remorse for sin.” (p.124)
This is so important to remember in our preaching as well as in our one-on-one conversations. People need a taste of God’s love (and glory) before they will have a desire to move away from sin.
I think there were some good points made here, but also some very bad ones. Jude 7 states that Sodom’s sin which brought fiery judgment was sexual immorality.
Secondly, it is not conservative evangelicals that continually make homosexuality an issue but rather homosexuals and their supporters. They frequently have nothing but hatred and intolerance for Christianity, primarily because they, unlike many neo-evangelicals, understand the two lifestyles are mutually exclusive. I do not think many of you realize how diabolical their agenda is.
I hear in this article much concern for not offending people and a desire to be accepted by the culture. Was this Jesus’ admonition to us? Please read Matt. 10. This article in many places sounds more like patronization and “convenience driven love” rather than biblical and historic Christianity and the love of Jesus. Please reconsider some of what you are teaching, I am afraid it will do more harm than good.
Jason,
You are a brother in Christ concerned in keeping interpretation of God’s word sound and true. I, therefore, appreciate your comments on Jon’s blog post. You did not “bandwagon” with the crowd above. Saying that, allow me to make a few friendly comments.
Yes, Jude 7 states Sodom and Gomorrah’s sinned in the area of sexual immorality and unnatural relations. But these sins do not necessarily institute a greater punishment of eternal fire than any other sin. The wages of sin is death, and those who break one law is guilty of it all, for he who said “do not steal” also said “do not murder.” According to Jesus, it’ll be better on the day of judgment for Sodom (sexually immoral) than for the Pharisees who kept the entire law (like Paul did before God called him).
The subsequent verses in Jude further shed light on the sins of Sodom, Israelites, and fallen angels. They “defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones.” And, as Jonathan points out, Ezekiel 16 also characterizes the sins of Sodom as “pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease.” These may further be added to the definition of “Sodomy,” leaving the term rather ambiguous.
Sir, homosexual acts, like any other sexual acts, or any other sin for that matter, and Christianity are two mutual exclusive lifestyles. Without God’s intervention, we would be no better morally (in our sense of the term) than any other “Sodomite” (in the general sense of the term).
Indeed, I appreciate your deep concern to for not wanting the gospel to be diluted. But, when we preach or teach against sin and single out homosexual acts, we give the impression that this sin is greater than any other sin.
I am against same-sex marriage and would vote against it because I do not believe it constitutes any biblical definition of marriage. Yet, no matter your persuasion, how come American evangelicals are so adamant at opposing same-sex marriage when the divorce rate has skyrocketed? It could be argued divorce has done more harm to our impression of the family than any sort of “gay agenda” (what exactly is that anyhow?). I highly commend American evangelicals for fighting against abortion, but why not also add divorce reform? If we are gonna pick and choose, why not pick something more practical to the Christian community? Divorce is just as high among (so-called) “born again Christians” than nonbelievers.
One thing I have and am currently struggling with is treating nonbelievers the same who sins I know as Jesus treated taxpayers. Somehow my brain malfunctions and treats a person I know who practices homosexuality and other certain sins apprehensively. If indeed, as Matthew 10 says, a disciple is not greater than his master, I should treat all people the same way Jesus ate and fellowshipped with both Pharisees and taxpayers.
Grace and peace to you all,
Jacob
Ha. Excuse my typos and incomplete thoughts. It’s late, and I still have 35 minutes remaining of RA duty at the dorms.
“1. Paul specifically mentions homosexual practice and not homosexual persons. It’s men who practice homosexuality (arsenokoitai).
As much as Paul says, however, he never says that being gay is a sin. Homosexual activity is clearly named as sinful, but not necessarily those that would identify themselves as gay or who wrestle with same-sex attractions. This is a small but important distinction.
This simplifies things. It means that when a staff member confesses to same-sex attractions, your first response is certainly not to fire him. It also means that homosexuals in our churches are called to the same grace-enabled disciplined abstinence that we would ask of any single person in our church attempting to walk in the light.”
is there anyway to unpack this further? i kinda feel like the existence of the distinction was stated, but not actually defined. is the point here that we aren’t what we do? isn’t a stealer a stealer because he steals?
i’m saying that it seems a little tautological to say that “being gay” means to “identify oneself as gay”. i don’t really understand why we must say that homosexuality is sinful but not necessarily the homosexual…? to me that’s kind of how it reads.
i understand completely that sin is sin is sin; quality and quantity don’t matter when christ’s redemptive work is applied.
maybe you are saying that practicing sin is wrong, but identifying yourself as as a sinner is not. that would make sense.
It’s easy to criticize the church’s approach over the past two decades to homosexuality, and easy to criticize those who will openly call it sin from the pulpit and their methods. This is because we as a church have made so many mistakes.
But the fact remains that few pastors I know seem to be willing to confront this issue head-on, particularly those in urban centers, because they will feel a very negative impact.
I agree with the idea that many young, urban pastors are not willing to call it sin from the pulpit, for fear of a backlash, and are therefore not preaching the whole counsel of God.
It’s much cooler to be friends and have a beer together I guess.
Great article, Jonathan. You make some very important points, especially in regards to how we talk to people about the sin versus the person.
When talking with my homosexual friends, I’ve found that this topic comes up a lot (especially in MA, where gay marriage is legal). Christians have really screwed things up when it comes to showing love to the homosexual community. Knowing how to talk with gay and lesbian friends about the Gospel is a major challenge, as the conversation usually comes around to the question, “What do you think about homosexuality?”
I like saying, “I love homosexuals just like all other people.” And I feel like I’ve made a lot of progress in my relationships by talking like that, and meaning it. The kicker, though, is having to honestly explain what I actually think about homosexual acts. I’ve found that saying, “I believe in the Bible, which teaches that homosexual acts are sins” is also helpful.
I think we have to care more about a person’s identity than their sins, keeping a transformational perspective. Are gays and lesbians finding their identities in Christ, or in being homosexual? I would be very careful to talk about people being naturally born gay though; I think that “gay/lesbian” identity has to be put to death in conversion, with a recognition that it’s conditioned through nurture or consciously chosen. Admitting to having those temptations is one thing (and okay/honest), but keeping that as your identity (I know many gay pastors and church leaders who sinfully claim it as theirs) is another. Thoughts?
phenomenal jonathan. one of the most lucid and cogent takes on this issue i’ve read..
This is an issue I have wrestled with for quite some time, as my dad is an openly gay atheist, while I have been a Christian for nearly 13 years.
I first want to thank you, Jonathan, for such a love-filled and Biblically-based article.
Let me respond to a few points made throughout the comments…
1. Saying “love the sinner, hate the sin” does not fly for a lot of gay people, especially those who do not identify as Christian. As my dad says, “What you call my sin, I call part of my identity — it IS me.” That being said, there’s no reason we should be focusing on a non-Christian’s sexuality as their primary sin, as I fear we often do. Rather, their broken relationship with Christ needs to be the primary issue.
2. Re: Jason: “…it is not conservative evangelicals that continually make homosexuality an issue but rather homosexuals and their supporters. They frequently have nothing but hatred and intolerance for Christianity… I do not think many of you realize how diabolical their agenda is.”
It’s clear that you care deeply about the Word, and I appreciate that. However, I fear this perception of homosexuals is in direct contrast to being able to love them deeply. Yes, my dad has a negative view of Christianity — which started when a local church picketed the gay pride parade where he lives with signs like “GAY – God Abhors You.” He is not particularly offended by the Christianity he’s seen at our local church — he fully knows that we believe homosexual practice is a sin, but he also knows that we don’t believe it’s a sin larger than any of our own individual sins.
3. Finally, to respond to Stephen — There is a biological/genetic predisposition to alcoholism, but you’d never use that to say it’s OK. The fact is, our genetics are broken as a result of the fall, and my suspicion is that there are a number of factors, some biological, some environmental, some experiential, that result in homosexual feelings. That being said, if I’m not married and have attraction to someone of the opposite gender, you wouldn’t call that sinful — you’d tell me to abstain. I think it’s the same thing with homosexuality — you can’t necessarily ask them to willfully change their feelings (though we can work with them to do so), but we can ask them to prevent sin by abstaining from entertaining or acting on those feelings.
Sorry this is so long! I’d highly recommend reading the Musings On blog if you’re interested in this topic. It’s a very unique perspective on homosexuality and the church: http://moremusingson.blogspot.com.
One more thing re: Stephen — I completely agree with your statement on all identities but that as a Christian needs to be put to death at conversion — regardless of what the particular identity was beforehand.
I appreciate the thoughtful responses to my post.
I agree as some have stated that it is a false dichotomy between “homosexual practice” and “homosexual persons”. Many gays equate this with their identity as a means of insulating their behavior from criticism. We should not allow ourselves to be fooled by such. We can express our love to homosexuals, letting them know we care deeply for them while still speaking strongly and unequivocally regarding their lifestyle. I have found that in the long run, most will have greater respect for us by doing such.
I also think there is a greater issue that is ignored in this discussion. Yes we have a responsibility to show the love of Christ to homosexuals (which can include a firm reproof) but we also have a responsibility to love those who may be seduced into this lifestyle. Many homosexuals on the campus’ I minster on recruit aggressively. Many Christian high school and college students I know at these schools confirm this. If we are not “exposing the unfruitful works of darkness” Eph. 4 and intelligently refuting the deceptive propaganda espoused by many “gay” churches and LGBT representatives we will share in the responsibility of those enticed into the lifestyle.
We need to be compassionate, speaking the truth in love, but we are also called to be watchman….let’s keep a healthy and biblical balance.
Interesting thoughts Jonathan yet you’ve assumed an incorrect meaning for arsenokoitai which is not supported by actual usage of the arsenokoit stem.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Define-Arsenokoites.html
I hope you and your readers will do more study instead of simply assuming that your personal belief is supported by scripture rightly divided.
Whew! A lot flying around in here. Loved the article Jonathan- a great kick in the pants for me! I really appreciated how you practiced what you preach in Florida last week- you breathed life into the otherwise polarizing notion of kids sorting out whether or not they really know Christ! Wonderful stuff! I can’t stop thinking about it!
I think you have a well researched article here. I am gay and my boyfriend and I have been together (and worshiped together) for almost 4 years. We fully enjoy your ministry and the preview worship service this past Sunday.
Justifying life and sexuality is a struggle for all gay Christians, and the way I have done it is through love. I agree that homosexuals are granted the same “grace enabled-discipline” as everyone else. I do think, however, that there comes a point when two flesh can become one, even if both members are of the same sex. Look at the story of Jonathan and David, who “loved [each other] more than a woman”. This wasn’t an act of sin, but love. Every other reference to homosexuality in the Bible deals with rape (Sodom and Gomorrah) or something outside of love. As far as New Testemant examples, I think that they are misinterpreted. The list of sinful things given in Romans INCLUDES those acts commited with other men – that is to say adultry, etc. is wrong, INCLUDING if it’s with another man. As far as the “unfruitful works of darkness” in Eph., this could include sex outside of procreation, even if you’re a heterosexual couple.
Homosexuality in the Bible is a cultural thing I think Christians today choose to hold on to, while letting other things go. What about women being “silent in the church”, or the stigmas against women in the bible who wore “gold and pearls”?
I justify myself and my sexuality in the love I have for my partner, and the love God has for me. I understand the argument against “love the sinner, not the sin”, but I don’t understand why I would be created to never be in a meaningful relationship.
The difference between homosexuality and other sins is that those who commit the other sins aren’t generally trying to get the church to condone and bless their sinful practices.
Ezekiel 16 was part of my daily reading yesterday. This very verse struck me between the eyes. It sounds exactly like the suburb where I live. It sounds a whole lot like me. Then I read your post. I wrestle with this issue of how Christians should think about and address homosexuality. Thanks for the thoughtful, helpful insight.