Category Archives: Homosexuality

no, it is not about sex; or, why the UMC should have more intercourse.

English: (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In a well-written post on the current debates regarding the pastors who are forsaking the Book of Discipline, David Watson writes,

Church law matters because it allows us to go about our work together. It is not always right, but it is a necessary way of organizing our corporate life.  Apart from this realization, the UMC cannot exist.

via Church Coffee: This is not about sex.

Intercourse, the title of this post, is not just about sex. Intercourse is about the exchange of ideas and the connection between people.  The Book of Discipline is our intercourse. It is how we exchange our ideas and form our connection. When it is broken, we no longer have a connection. A sexless marriage is a roommate situation. An intercourse-less UMC is a baptist denomination.

News is breaking almost constantly of UMC pastors who, in breaking their vows to God and to the rest of the UMC, decide to officiate homosexual marriages. This is against their promise to uphold the BoD. I wish news would break equally about UMC pastors who refuse to follow other rules, such as the social principles, but alas, no news exists.

You know my position on this. Whether it is achieved by Luther’s Two Kingdoms or through the 14th Amendment or because I believe it is right, homosexual marriage should be allowed. There are a lot of sins, but I do not believe this is one of them. Further, I believe the denial to the human the right to love is an abomination to Natural Law and is in of itself a sin.

If the BoD was unchangeable, then the avenues the pastors are traveling may be more acceptable; however, it can be changed while maintaining the proper place for Scripture. Therefore, I cannot follow these pastors who would break the BoD. After all, I don’t support the more conservative pastors who likewise break the BoD.

There are two comments on Dr. Watson’s blog I wanted to respond to, but did not feel his blog was the proper place. In one, a commentator decries bigotry but uses the ignorant phrase regarding pharisees. This is a self-inflicted wound, but it is one showcasing a lack of introspection. The other one is rather jumbled, more so than my usual lack of writing skill. To deny that homosexuality is a sin is not to change the authority of Scripture. Rather, it is to uphold the authority of Scripture in all matters of salvation. What we deny is the usual interpretation. These are the same arguments that once revolved around women ordination and segregation. Scripture is primary in the United Methodist Church and must remain so, however, we must allow that our opinions about it are not.

We need less sex in the UMC and more intercourse. We need that connection rather than momentary meetings, such as General Conference or Annual Conferences. Rather, we need to respect one another in our connection and try to resolve these tensions without ignoring the concerns of the other party.

Enhanced by Zemanta

My latest on @HuffPostRelig – Don’t read if you like me

Some, mainly Jim, will not like what is said. Of course, many will refuse to unpack what I’ve said and instead read it as a set-in-stone. Of course, Jim has sworn off reading Huffington Post, so whew… he won’t read it anyway.

Joel L. Watts: Finding a Christian Way Forward on Gay Marriage in the Things Unsaid.

The thing with theology… it changes. It changes due to time, information, context.

I am not ready to let loose our dusty old texts, but I would gladly limit them to the Christian sphere where they rightly belong. Indeed, I am convinced if we let loose these things that so fill our modern viewpoint, we would be groundless. But, that is another discussion for another time.

I am not convinced, given the advancements in understanding history, science, genetics, and the such, that we can continue to promote the idea that Scripture teaches against the modern definition of homosexuality. Just as there is a modern definition of marriage, there is a modern definition of sexuality. These things are different than what we read in Scripture.

New Game: What does the bible explicitly state?

So, the Southern Baptist Church is moving away from the Boy Scouts, because nothing says being like Jesus like moving away from children, even children you find vulgar, even children who represent what you consider the sickest of sins…

But, it is one statement in this that has caught my attention.

For Southern Baptist pastor Tim Reed, it was Scripture versus the Scouts. “God’s word explicitly says homosexuality is a choice, a sin,” said Reed, pastor of First Baptist Church of Gravel Ridge in Jacksonville, Arkansas.

So, let’s play a game. Explicit means “fully revealed  or expressed without vagueness.”

What does the bible explicitly state? Now… the rules are simple:

  1. If the stated view can be challenged by another verse, then it is not explicit.
  2. You cannot deny facts such as historical criticism, or even lexicons.

So, what does the bible explicitly state?


Enhanced by Zemanta

A question about biblical/human sexuality

Reading about this is what first made me step back and begin to examine human sexuality and Scripture.

What isn’t obvious is that I have a rare condition called androgen insensitivity syndrome, or AIS. I was born with XY chromosomes, the combination found in boys. With AIS, an XY embryo doesn’t respond to the crucial hormones that tell the penis and scrotum to form. At the earliest stage of life, my body missed those signals, and I developed as a girl, with a clitoris and vulva. But what’s inside me doesn’t match

Woman with AIS Disease – Women Has X and Y Chromosomes – Marie Claire.

As you read, you’ll note she had testes and an, um, pouch. Well, you’ll see.

Now, for a serious question. This is not covered in Scripture (and some would argue homosexuality is not either) so what do we do? And, if this is the case – as has been revealed by modern medical science, what then do we say about the nature of homosexuality? Since this is an argument some use – against nature, or unnatural – what if it is a natural formation in the species? What then? Is the part of the person the defining characteristic of the whole of the person? In other words, if said part of a person is by nature useful for only one thing, but the nature of the full person is assigned to something else, what then?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Is The Christian Concept of Gay Conversion Therapy Fundamentally Flawed?

Following my earlier post on an upcoming Christian seminar pushing the validity of ‘Reparative Therapy’ or ‘Gay Conversion Therapy’ I received the following Tweet:

This set off a lightbulb within me and a chain of thoughts.

If Christians regard homosexuality as a spiritual issue – and the practice as a sin – then why turn to ‘gay conversion’ psychological therapy.

Is it that some Christians believe homosexuality to be a mental disorder that can be treated? This explanation is the only reason I can think of to advocate psychological therapy.

If not a mental disorder, then continuing this line of reasoning, if psychological therapy is appropriate for this particular ‘spiritual problem’ then why not all spiritual issues?

Why is psychological therapy not advocated for all sinful temptations?

Could it not be equally argued that all sinful temptations are environmentally produced – as opposed to hard-wired – and in need of rectification through psychological therapy, as is posited for sexual orientation.

If sexual orientation is a mental disorder to be ‘cured’ through therapy, can we confidently even consider the practice of homosexuality as sin any longer?

Are sexual orientation temptations in some way qualitatively different to any other temptations of the flesh?

Of course, the irony is that those Christians pushing for Conversion Therapy are usually to be found most ardently in the anti-psychology camp.

These thoughts have only just occurred to me and so I’m thinking on the fly.

Feel free to chip in.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Yeah, Micah Cobb gets it.

I see no reason to believe that homosexuality is the main culprit in the destruction of the family. Homosexuals are not destroying American families; sinful heterosexuals are. Statistics show that many people in involved in the traditional family are doing their fair share of destroying the family. The number of affairs, divorces, abusive parents, addicted parents and neglected children is enormous.

This was written (found on FB) by Micah Cobb in a news letter sent out recently. But he tackled his issue before. We can, if we want, blame the gays, but that’s just stupid.

The Big Gay Queen James Bible

I don’t know how to feel about this. On one hand, it is going to irritate a laundry list of people such as inerrantists, Little Honey Tee Tee, KJV Onlyists…

But on the other hand, maybe someone will read it.

Sure, the use the KJV text – why in the world I don’t know except that it is not copyrighted here in the States. Also, I don’t know who the scholars are, but it would be nice to know.

Also, they really like to point out that King James was in fact gay. Very gay. Even had a verse inserted into the bible to mention it.

This is the Genesis 19.5 rendering:

Genesis 19:5

Genesis 19:5

And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them. (KJV)

We side with most Bible scholars who understand the story of Sodom and Gomorra to be about bullying strangers. Strangers were not well-treated or well-regarded at the time of Bible (hence so much of the Word urging the love and acceptance of others).

We know Lot asks that the men do not “know” the angel visitors “wickedly,” (Genesis 19:7), in other words “brutally,” which we understand to mean “rape.” We know from Leviticus that one is not allowed to have sex with a beast, and angels are not human. Plus, the passage mentions the men of the city; Obviously women and children aren’t going to be invited to a dominating and public rape, but we know there were women and children in Sodom because Lot had daughters. Rapes such as this one are common between men in prison; they aren’t sexual acts, they are power-dominating acts.

Therefore, we changed the verse to the following:

Genesis 19:5

And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may rape and humiliate them. (QJV) (Page 21)

I think somethings are fine, but I would really like a real, honest to goodness, discussion on meaning, instead of things like this. But hey now, what do I know?

You can see more of the rendering philosophy here.

oh Nathan… you silly little homophobic man

Forest and trees and the what not…

Nathan Cherry urgently rushes to bring us this exciting news that certain segments of the population are more prone to domestic violence than others. He concludes,

This is just one of the many reasons why we don’t advocate for homosexual adoption. If studies show increased levels of domestic abuse among these couples then placing children in the environment is not what is best for the child, and there is no evidence that children reduce levels of domestic violence.

Here’s the big issue…

The study finds that bisexual women are more at risk of “experiencing intimate partner violence compared with heterosexual women, lesbians and women who have sex with women.” The report also notes that in 95 percent of the intimate partner violence incidents reported by bisexual women, the “perpetrator was a male intimate partner, indicating that the violence occurred outside a same-sex relationship.”

Note, lesbians and women who do not identify as lesbians, have a lower rate while women who are bi-sexual have a higher rate. But, who are the ones committing the domestic violence? Straight males. As for the males, the report is a bit garbled, but it looks like it is saying that males who identify as gay are still abused by gay, straight, and non-identifying gay males. But, why? Because of psychological duress. We see this, actually, in other population sets as well. We also know that domestic abuse is a diseases often times passed on throughout generations until someone is able to stop the cycle.

So, let us suppose Nathan has a valid point and let us say that we need to exclude adoptions to population sets with high domestic violence rates. Who would it be? Two possibilities arise. First, it is possible we exclude adoption privileges from straight or non-identifying gay males. Or, we exclude adoption privileges from non-marrieds, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.

Or, maybe there is a third option… Anyone?

Oh, and Nathan is pretty darn homophobic. There is a huge difference between saying homosexuality is a sin and blinding hating da’ gays. Blind hate reveals something hidden deep inside the person who blindly hates.

Enhanced by Zemanta

How to read reparative therapy “studies…”

I have a confession. Nathan Cherry is a Calvinist – full five pointer too… and yet, he believes people can change their basic nature. So, when he reads of so-called studies about reparative therapy – therapies akin to Nazi Germany medical procedures – he just gets giddy.

First, not the highly scientific method of this study:

People Can Change conducted the study by sending a survey to those on the organization’s email list who are seeking or have experienced “sexual-orientation change,” as well as to therapists and ministry leaders that support these change efforts. In all, 474 people from 19 countries responded to the survey.

Second the survey (survey does not equal study) comes out when California is scheduled to vote to do away with reparative therapy on minors. Parents, if you engage your children in reparative therapy, you are sick yourselves.

Third, while they love the 55% who said they could see a difference in SSA, they said that the 17% who felt harmed in the process was just too high, too wild to be considered accurate.

And yet… it goes from a survey conducted via email to a study as if it actually was. And then… even those who used survey monkey (because, nothing says scientific survey like survey monkey) discount a sizable portion of the results.

News articles like this serve two purposes. First, the obvious political, and second… it helps those struggling with SSA to further hate themselves and believe that if they just found the right doctor, they could cure themselves.

Ain’t that right, Nate?

Methodists in Northeast Approve Pro-Gay Resolution – I disagree with this #umc #wvumc

This happened in Charleston this past week:

Meeting in Charleston, W.V., nearly two-thirds of the 227 delegates at the Northeastern Jurisdiction of United Methodism approved the resolution on Thursday.

“…while bound to the Book of Discipline, [Jurisdiction leaders] are also bound to exercise their consciences and are bound by Jesus’s commandment to stand with the marginalized and the oppressed in our midst when called upon to enforce unjust laws, policies and procedures to the detriment of gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender individuals wishing to participate fully in the life of The United Methodist Church,” reads the resolution.


I have a few structural problems with this.

  1. The Book of Discipline supersedes our individual consciences and interpretations. There is a reason we covenant together in an episcopal style church. We are not Baptists – we are not individual churches in union, but a universal church under a covenant. We cannot decide to simply ignore that covenant because we disagree with it. We work with it and in it, but to suggest that because we disagree we can ignore it is dishonest in my opinion. It is dishonest to the covenant and to one another. And I remind you that the covenant is made to one another before God.
  2. Where is the prophetic friction? Prophets are not kings, rulers, and bishops. They aren’t the elites and the leaders. They are the rabble rousers, the dirty, the psychotic, the war torn, the abused, the homeless. They do not force justice upon the people, but call them to justice, show them justice, and die for justice. When elite groups in safe havens push prophetic messages, it is, sadly to say, little more than a collective pat on the back. Further, something could be said that such an event actually causes injustice. Indeed, how many will be positively affected by this resolution? A few, perhaps, but only with personal edification. But, how many will be affected worldwide in a negative manner? A great many more, and many of those are the very ones this resolution is designed to protect. Prophetic friction comes not from kinds, but from the oppressed. Liberty given is a disaster, by the way, but liberty won builds justice.

I think that we should be called to covenant, obey that covenant, and if that covenant needs to be changed, be forced to do so, but not by the elites, the powerful. Several theories of ethics show that those who do these things are no more free of guilt than those who oppose such measures. This resolution, but a select few that has no real bearing on the everyday, is worst than a measure that would push these people further in the closet.

But, I am a Methodist and tomorrow, I’ll go to my Methodist Church. We are, after all, God’s people.

Personal insight into the gay agenda

I attended this meeting this afternoon. It was met with no protest and all those who attended seemed to “the choir” which I assume is the super secret gay code word for those who do not believe it is okay to kill the gays.

The discussions were friendly enough, until we retired to the sanctuary. There I learned the secret radical gay agenda.

If I suddenly disappear in the next day or two, you’ll understand why – because I am sharing with you these secrets.

They are attempting to love. That’s right. Their battleplan includes appreciation of the other person’s viewpoints as an equal standing as theirs. They are focusing on trying to see others as people first and viewpoints second. This is scary stuff. They preached loving those with different opinions and bodily functions than their own. They are preaching love.

I don’t like it. They want to force love upon the fundamentalists, as if all you need is love… of if we are to be known by how we love one another.


I’ll keep you updated.