From: mls@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (mike.siemon)
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Christianity
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 00:35:28 GMT
Summary: the path of wisdom

In article <1992Apr10.191301.4386@en.ecn.purdue.edu>, muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu
(John Muehlhausen) writes:

> I think I am starting to see that arguing about homosexuality is not
> productive.  I still do not think this behavior is in God's plan for anyone's
> Christian life, but you are right in that I cannot take it upon myself to try
> and show everyone "the error of their ways".  I think I have been convinced
> that this causes people to be defensive and no one is going to change their
> mind based on what I think - I can only hope that they will change their
> minds based on what God thinks.

What you are missing is context.  I do not respond to every "attack" on
my position (why should I?), and any response will then be interpreted as
"defensive" if for any reason I disagree with the attacker.  The majority
of calumnies against gay Christians (or gay non-Christians) I bear in
silence.  And when I respond, I often pray that I can find some *manner*
of response that is not mere negation of the charges hurled against me.
It seems to me that, often enough, Jesus was in the same position.  And
He sometimes (not always) managed to recast the terms of the interaction
in a way that undermined a presumed initial "opposition."  I would that I
had my Lord's capacity to turn malice back on the attacker so that they
harm only themselves.  And I wish, even more, that I had the spritual
gift to turn it back to the GOOD of my attackers.

One thing you had better learn -- if I were being "defensive" I would in
some manner accept the assumptions you work from.  When I reject the entire
foundation of your remarks (as I do), what is going on is something other
than (and sometimes more interesting than) defensiveness.  It is a call
TO YOU to understand that you are building on sand, and not on the rock
of our salvation.

You MAY not -- with any legitimacy of argument whatsoever -- arbitrarily
claim that when I reject your assumptions I am ignoring what you say.  Or
that I am ignorant of your assumptions, their background, their inculcation
in you, or their consequences in human usage.  You had better grant me the
credit that in 46+ years on this earth I have come to some understanding of
both my OWN positions and those which differ from them.  Your adolecscent
enthusiasms may carry you away, but they are NO argument at all when con-
fronted with life, and with the slow working out of my interaction with God.
That interaction will not be complete until my death (and maybe not then);
I have some sense of its scope and its history.  You do not.  It would be
charitable to assume that my remarks have some foundation in my own life,
and are not easily assailable by your merely self-indulgent theorizing.

Unless you can SHOW me that your remarks have a spiritual validity I should
respect, you are NOTHING to me except another human voice.  This is not a
mean status -- but neither can you presume very much upon it, especially
when your statements do little but confirm your ignorance of life and of
scholarly study of the questions you so confidently think are easy.

> Let me just say that if I were a non-believer, I would still feel that
> homosexuality was inherently _wrong_, and I would not give any credibility

which is nothing but to say that you are a product of the society that
gave you birth.  This is not news.  It is also not relevant.

> someone who was trying to convince me of the nature of Christ's love but had
> this kind of perversion in their own life.  

> Ephesians 5:3 -

> "But do not let immorality or any impurity or greed _EVEN BE NAMED AMONG YOU_,
> as is proper among saints;"

and how, without begging the question, do you conclude that "immorality"
or "impurity" characterize my life or the life of an of those you think you
can dump on with impunity?  *What* impurity? *what* immorality? *what* greed
are you accusing me of -- you seem to be accusing gay Christians of an
indulgence in fleshly pursuits that brings froth to your lips.  I claim that
there is NO example of godly marriage which you would mindlessly praise in
your own congregations as "proof" of God's blessing which is not easily
paralleled in the commitments of gay couples.  This is what angers me; you
are a hypocrite.  You *will* (I confidently predict) say nice things about
average and above-average faithful heterosexual couples in your church on
the basis of NOTHING more than what you will REFUSE to praise a gay couple
for.  If you wish to exercise your sexual anger (not what I would recommend)
you might consider turning it to confront the things YOU are tempted by
that you think are contrary to God's commands (or are you indulging in this
topic because that IS what tempts you?  if so, I would suggest taking it
off-line and trying to deal personally, one on one, with YOUR problem.)

You *define* me and mine as "wrong" and no data need apply, and you *claim*
the Word of God in your defense, when you cannot show anything more than a
peculiar individual interpretation of it.  I think your reading of scripture
sucks rotten eggs -- but you are welcome to it, as long as you have the
humility and grace to acknowledge that YOU are human and subject to human
limits.  With THIS post, and your observation that the argument is futile
you are beginning to do this.  I can only pray that you will advance in 
humility and godly love as you get past your hormone-soaked and sex-ridden
adolescence.  Your obsession with OTHER people's sexuality can only reflect
a rather odd light on your own. Until you can see me clearly, in a mirror
that is not stained by your own testosterone-soaked brain, you are in NO
position to say a damned thing about me.


> Galatians 5:16-18,22-25 -
> 
> "But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the
> flesh.  For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit
> against the flesh, for these are in opposition to one another, so that you
> may not do the things that you please.  But if you are led by the Spirit, you
> are not under the Law ... But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace,
> peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control;
> against such things there is no law.  Now those who belong to Christ Jesus
> have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.  If we live by the
> Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit."
> 
> 
> I apologize for exhibiting somewhat less than the fruit of the Spirit in
> these matters.  It is my earnest prayer that the homosexual Christians on
> this board will at least take it upon themselves to _honestly_ decide if
> their lifestyle jives with these verses.
> 
> John M.


-- 
Michael L. Siemon		   "Oh, stand, stand at the window,
					As the tears scald and start;
mls@usl.com			   You shall love your crooked neighbor
standard disclaimer			With your crooked heart."
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:6458 rec.arts.comics:12497