this was just going to be about gays but it evolved into my worldview.


SO, I just finished watching the 30 days episode about homosexuality and it started me thinking about my opinions on homosexuality. I've been brought up in a fairly conservative Christian home by parents who love me and have instilled the morals of the bible in me from a very young age.

When i was very young i accepted Jesus as my personal savior, not really knowing what that meant, and as i grew older i became more and ore aware of my relationship with him and what it meant. I've alwasy been taught, and believed, that the Bible, as it is, translated literally, word for word, is the word of god and to be treated as such. The only basis for morality, at least in my life, comes from the bible.

While it may sound as though i've drunk the Bible-Belt kool-aid, but in reality i disagree with most conservative Christians on most issues that don't affect my faith. Politically, I consider myself to be a moderate libertarian. My belief that there is no basis for morality but the bible has, by natural progression led me to embrace the libertarian philosophy that as long as the water turns on and i'm not being shot at, we don't need an more laws.

This philosophy is one thing which i think really separates me from a lot of Christians. Most christian seem to embrace a set worldview unquestioningly, simply because it is handed down to them from James Dobson and Billy Graham. They think that christians should support the republican party, the war in Iraq and gun rights and oppose Gay rights, marijuana and the word fuck.

This is not me. While I do believe in the Bible as the source of absolute morality according to my worlview, I dont support the legislation of that morality. In a society of people with morals which agree exactly, i think that the legislation of said morals would be acceptable, because the denizens could all agree that a breech of the law was morally wrong.

All this to say that because of my faith in the bible and its literal translation, i believe that homosexuality is a sin. I do not think that homosexuality is a worse sin than any other sexual sin. I struggle with lust. A lot of people do. I don't think that my struggle with lust is any less of a sin than any of my gay brothers/sisters struggle with homosexuality. Homosexuals are people just like everybody else and i hate the way that christians have demonized them. In Western-Civ/Worldviews class, we watched a video of a man with a mustache telling us that the decline of american youth culture was due to commercialization of immorality and homosexuals. Seriously. he said that. The reason the crackwhore is dying after being beaten by her pimp is because of rap and gays? the reason that the fourteen year old kid is being knifed in an alley in detroit for wearing the wrong bandanna is because of gays?
i beg to differ.
I will say that the reason for 328 killings in 2006 is patently obvious. It's you Mr. Mustachio. You and your mustache and your hate and your ranting and your unaccepting heart. Can't you see that gays are sinners in need of a saviour not a plague destroying our culture?

Fuck you.

Signed,
A Compassionate Sinner

Good post.

I agree with your views on homosexuality, you hit it right on the nail. I'm still pretty republican in my political views. I support war, not necessarily this war that is dragging on so long.. I think it should end, we took out the tyrant, and we should let Iraq grow by itself. Basically though, I don't just vote for one party, I vote for who I agree with, and that is generally conservative. A party is just a name.

Very interestingly written, Daniel, thank you for that, and it's also nice to see your tongue firmly positioned in your cheek.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, that Christians are gravely mistaken in believing their morality can be legislated by law. For one thing, the whole concept is absurd. You can enforce a law to prevent homosexuals from marrying and women from obtaining abortions all you want, but all you've done is address the end result rather than the heart that led anyone to make that decision. Furthermore, it's quite ridiculous (and very sad) that a good many American Christians have come to believe that one single political party is the prophetic voice of their faith. What an insult to God, what a slap in the face to His Word, to presume that any man-made institution will act as the divine voice and the means to establishing God's will.

I personally feel, that many Christians would do well to return to the meaning of the "Gospel" they feel inclined to preach to other people. What is the Gospel, for example? One of the most popular definitions we hear is "accept Jesus Christ as your Saviour and you will be granted eternal life/salvation from Hell/etc." I challenge anyone to find any vague wording of that definition within the Biblical records of Jesus' life. They say that Jesus Himself preached the Gospel. Did He gather the multitudes and say to them "If you believe that I am the Son of God, I will give you eternal life," or "I am going to die for your Sins as long as you believe in my power?" I think you'll find He didn't. What He did say was this:

"Repent and believe the good news, for the Kingdom of God is at hand..." (Mark 1:14-15, Matthew 4:17)

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour." (Luke 4:18-19)

Emphases are my own. At this point, though He does mention it to His disciples later on, Jesus is not concerned with His own death and triumph over the grave, as essential as that event was to be. At this point, He is concerned with explaining what the "good news" (Gospel/evangelion) is, and it is, quite simply, that the Kingdom of God is at hand. A political term, used by the Roman Empire and associated by the oppressed Jewish masses with the concept of revolution. A revolution is at hand, a new Empire is here, and it doesn't survive by war, violence, uprising, or the sword. It is instead characterised by the forgiveness of sins, the cleansing of lepers, the casting out of demons, the recovery of sight to the blind, the restoration of dignity to the poor, and liberation to all those who are oppressed. Similarly, this Empire's citizens are not governors, soldiers, or mighty kings. They are the poor in spirit, the meek, the hungry for righteousness and justice, the peacemakers, the mourning, and the persecuted.

Jesus' Gospel, His good news, is that God is here, and He is at work to restore all things to what they are meant to be. The forgiveness of sins by the atoning death and resurrection of the Son of God was the demonstration in power and triumph to seal that truth and gather in all who take it to heart. But of itself, is not the entirety of the Gospel. The Gospel is, and always has been, about healing, liberation, and the saving power of God in all levels of existence, both physical and spiritual.

How that relates to legislating morality? Quite simply, no one party has the hold on this power, because this power quite plainly don't need it. The Kingdom of God is exactly that - a kingdom, the kingdom, the new reign which subverts all others on earth and will eventually shame them for their injustice, greed, and arrogance.

How that relates to abortion and homosexuality? No doubt our views all differ, but we should not forget that we are called to love our neighbour, and to bring comfort and liberation to those who are marginalised and oppressed. We don't need to enforce a law to show love and compassion to those who are considering abortion, and neither do we need to admonish the homosexual lest we become an oppressor ourselves. Is the Gospel not about liberty?

The Republican party has been a bandwagon for fundamentalist Christians for far too long, and while the Church needs healing, dialogue, and understanding, these individuals are also in need of returning to the Gospel for what it is, and reaching the realisation that it can never be hijacked by the agency of an earthly power, nor will its ways ever be established by the sword or the gun. I would sooner have a Church that encouraged its brothers and sisters in government office, the military, and police services to repent than one which obsessed over the tired debate of gay rights.

Anyway, these are all quite thought-provoking points you've written here, thank you for sharing them.

Dan, I'm in pretty much the same boat you are. Thanks for writing it out.

And Adam, well said. There's a lot of people I wish I could say that to.