Tuesday, December 12

Ultimate illusion

The New York Times comes out today with a story on homosexual Evangelicals. This must approach the ultimate slap in the face for the Christian faith. Most ironically, they quote absolutely no Scripture when that is the ultimate reason why evangelicals reject homosexuality. They also try and mix up the term liberal in the middle:

Gay evangelicals seldom find churches that fit. Congregations and denominations that are open to gay people are often too liberal theologically for evangelicals. Yet those congregations whose preaching is familiar do not welcome gay members, those evangelicals said.


The very essence of why a church has the label of liberal is because it has forsaken clear biblical teachings--I don't care which one. Contrary to this article as well, I know of no evangelical church in my area that would not welcome homosexuals, preaching the full gospel in all its clarity as to what is sin and the need for everyone of us to turn from it and seek repentance in Christ alone.

2 Comments:

Ben Brothers said...

The very essence of why a church has the label of liberal is because it has forsaken clear biblical teachings--I don't care which one.

Lucas, aren't you begging the question? Surely the difference between liberal and conservative theology is more complicated than this. Many liberal theologians have forsaken a conservative interpretation of Scripture, in favor of alternate interpretations which they feel reflect a more accurate understanding of the nature of God, or of his creation. It goes without saying that these interpretations may sometimes be right, and sometimes wrong, but can't we accept the fundamental good faith of those who advance the arguments? (*)

Do you really want to claim that Bonhoeffer, or Niebuhr, or Barth, wanted to "forsake clear biblical teachings"? That they are heretics or non-believers? I should note that I don't consider myself a liberal Christian; I'm an evangelical and believe in a literal interpretation of the Nicene Creed. But I would never think to accuse of heresy those who, e.g. have a different understanding of which commandments in Exodus are part of the Levitical code which doesn't apply to Christians, and which are part of the general moral code which does. Or as St. Paul writes, "I myself am not under the law, ... but am under Christ's law."

(*) I'm not talking about the random Anglican bishop who pops up every now and then to, say, deny the resurrection -- they aren't "liberal Christians". They are speaking for themselves, presumably as non-believers. I'm talking about the actual theological arguments advanced by mainline, non-fundamentalist Protestant churches.

Anonymous said...

This must approach the ultimate slap in the face for the Christian faith. Most ironically, they quote absolutely no Scripture when that is the ultimate reason why evangelicals reject homosexuality.

I've asked this before and I'll ask it again, so what about this scripture: Galatians 3:27-28.
My Bible says I'm no longer Jew, Greek, male, female, etc. So if once baptized in Christ, according to God one is neither male nor female, how can they be gay or straight? I just don't think it's what one is or who they are, I thinks it's what they do with it, which no one seems to get.