RESPONSES to "Applied Theology"

This column took four views of sin common today applying them to homosexuality, challenging readers to examine their own view of sin in a believer's life -- implying that if the reader was uncomfortable with applying their view of sin in their own life to homosexual sin, they may need to examine their present view of sin in a believer's life. OK, I was baiting you. Some prominent (publishable) responses:


From: [email protected]
The best I can tell, the issue facing the church is not so much how to respond to a person who is homosexual and believes the practice of homosexuality is a sin. The issue is whether homosexuality is a sin. The trend seems to be moving rather quickly to the position that homosexuality is not a sin, or at least within Gay marriages.

From: [email protected]
The questions is, if we applied our view of homosexual sin to other sins would we have to change positions? And conversely, if we applied our view of "normal" sins to homosexuality would we have to change our position on homosexual sin? It is OUR NATURE that needs to be changed. Not only our actions. Our actions will flow from a heart cleansed of sin. "Clean the inside of the cup and platter that the outside may be clean also." A message for us all. Thanks again for asking the hard questions. Your Brother and His servant: John (Jack) Leach

From: [email protected]
[as a church planter] the challenge has been to win and hold families who will be the core of the church. Most of our visitors are professing Christians who come with the "Sinners in recovery" or "Sinners already forgiven" mentality. (A mentality that is very descriptive of the Bill Hybels approach). We preach Romans 8 "Deliverance from sin" theology and they can't get away fast enough. A few who come believe in "Victory over sin" but they are not convinced that "Deliverance" is possible. I keep wondering why these people are so repulsed by the possibility of "deliverance from sin!" I suppose C. S. Lewis's "red lizard" analogy fits best. Recently one of those who doubt the possibility of deliverance prayed, "Lord, help me with my temper." At the close of the prayer I suggested that he begin praying, "Lord cure me of my temper." In his mind he wanted to pray that prayer, but in his heart, his passions, he did not really want "the cure." It has been a revelation to me to realize how much this "deliverance from sin" theology permeates our preaching, singing, and testimonies. We still sing "Victory in Jesus" and believe that victory is real not simply forensic. I am coming to this conclusion, that while many doubt the possibility of victory, those who read the Word and see the possibility of victory are immediately confronted with the price. It is an unwillingness to "be crucified with Christ," that is at the root of the problem. Please accept my apologies for the length of this note. It was cathartic for me to write you. -- Pastor Rick Jones Faith Community Church St. Louis, MO

From: Brian King ([email protected])
As the battle rages in the Presbyterian church (USA) over the ordination of homosexuals, this writing is timely. Much of the argument made in support of their ordination is based on #1-- We're all sinners in need of God's grace.... Then again, some of the arguments take sin completely out of the picture... We Presbyterians who were historically so learned in the Scriptures have had the tendency to scrap the Scriptures in exchange for some kind of experiential, self-created understanding of God and His purposes.... Anyway, other arguments for gay ordination remind me of "You're ok. I'm okay..." I've heard of ministers who compare the sins of practicing homosexuals with the sins of indulging in gluttony or giving in to greed... In other words, they write something like this: "I'm overweight and I obviously give in to the sinful urge to overeat...so, will you come after me next to challenge my ordination!??" Perhaps those who are called to the ministry should strive to live a life above rebuke. Perhaps we ought to take good care of our bodies (living temples of God). Perhaps we ought to model a life of simplicity, generosity, and good stewardship. Perhaps we ought to be faithful in heterosexual marriage or celibate in singleness. Perhaps we ought to model for our congregations what sanctification can be. We must be honest that we are not perfect nor will we ever be - this side of heaven. We, like all humanity, are, to use Calvin's term, "totally depraved." But, we are also being sanctified. And the Spirit of God can do amazing things when we yield our will. May the Lord help us to love one another... especially those who are on the other side of this heated debate... and especially those who need His love. Shalom, M.M.K

From: "Johnny Pope" ([email protected])
... Let's face it, you can't just write [homosexual sin] off into the same category of other sins such as gossip. Ask yourself which you could handle better. Scenario: "Dad, I've got a problem...it's gossip" compared to "Dad, I've got a problem..." There is an incredibly big difference, even God categorizes differently, i.e. :"For this cause God gave them up... On the other hand, I think [the column] took a bold attempt to let those involved in this sin know that they can be saved, can be forgiven! Johnny Pope Prestonwood Baptist Church Houston, TX

From: David Drury ([email protected])
The immediate problem is not that we don't theologically think in the realm of 3(Victory-over-sin) and 4(Deliverance-from-sin)... We do. If you wanted to codify the Evangelical standard of what we believe about Homosexual Sin your comments would be accepted. In fact, most of your readers probably responded in earnest support of 3 and 4.

... missing the point entirely...

...because the immediate problem is that we may think theologically in the realm of 3 and 4 but we minister practically in the realm of 1(Sinners-in-recovery) and 2(Sinners-already-forgiven). With all of the sins you listed in your column pastors usually act in accordance with the 1 and 2 responses. So, it is not a matter of correct doctrine of Homosexual sin, which we have, it is a matter of consistent practice of our entire doctrine of sin, which should be, if we are biblical and reasonable, along the lines of your Victory(3) and Deliverance(4) practical theologies. -- Dave Drury

From: Lynn Olibrice ([email protected])
I would be inclined to go through "door #4" with this one: 1. God can change us inside - and He does - if we are earnest in our desire to be changed. 2. When someone accepts Christ they are born "again", therefore who cares how we were born the "first" time. 3. We should all dedicate our lives to God on a daily basis. This is the best way to keep those old "urges" away (and believe me we all have them in some form or another). 4. I refer to certain people as having "self-abusive" sin (people who abuse themselves through the use of drugs or alcohol etc., homosexuals fit into this category also) -- they should be admitted to the church under the condition that they receive regular counseling. If they are not prepared to do this, they are not ready for attendance yet. 5. All sin separates us from God; however, a long-lived "self-abusive" sin keeps us separated from God for a much longer time and the only way to work through it is with the assistance of Divine Intervention. --Lynn Olibrice

From: Terry ([email protected])
Many years ago I had to sit down and prayerfully consider what I believed about homosexual sin. After a long period of time I landed on Victory over Sin. My reasoning went that sexual sin was sexual sin. We would accept a forgiven, non-practicing adulterer into our fellowship, so should we accept the forgiven, non-practicing person that is pulled by homosexual desires. -- Terry

From: [email protected] (Donald M. Joy)
[the] assumption that gossip and homosexual practice are equally condemned by God doesn't wash. The "image of God" was not invested in the human capacity of speech, but the human gift of sexuality. So ALL sexual variations from exclusive Trinitarian "one"ness with one exclusive life partner--as per both Creation Gospels constitute blasphemy--not sin. I am uncomfortable that any variation--such as homosexual practice--is singled out for special attack. The call to all sexual variations except celibacy while single and exclusive mutual-respect based Trinitarian union are symptoms of life distorted. ...So broaden the question to explore all sexual variations from the Creation and Redemption Design, and I'll be glad to celebrate the dialog you generate. Blessings! Don Joy, Director, Center for the Study of the Family Wilmore, KY

From: Pastor John Moyer ([email protected])
It's interesting that you bring this up this week. I preached last week on what carnality looks like, and I got attacked for preaching that there is victory over carnality. In the argument that one couple brought to me, I asked if he were to go out and commit adultery would he still make it to heaven. And he said yes, which contradicts the Bible which says no adulterers (and others) will be in heaven (Gal.5:21). He kept talking about the fact that we are all "saved sinners". I made two points. First, the Bible calls Christians "saints" not sinners throughout the NT. And second, to say we're saved sinners is like saying I'm a saved homosexual or a saved adulterer. It's a contradiction of terms, but old religious sayings say a "long good-bye" (Nancy Reagan).

From: "Eugene A. Glendenning Ph.D." ([email protected])
The exercise of applying our theology to the issue of homosexual behavior may force the church into a more definite definition of conversion and its impact on the total person. I believer hat Christ came to deliver those in the chains of sin. For any person, homosexual or not, to be whole is it necessary to be born again, and filled with the Holy Sprit. I don't see any more conflict in our theology regarding homosexual behavior, than I do with the addictions of chemical, sex and gambling. Pastors need to be open, caring and patience when working with any sinner saved by Grace. God made man with will power, the ability to feel and express anger, and sexuality. He will not change or remove this innate characteristic. He pronounced everything He created as God, which included man. Gen. 1:31. The changing of these characteristics by God would be to change what He had created. I don't think we need to change our theology, gut we do need to be less global in our application. --E.A. Glendenning

From: [email protected]
All sins are sin and separate us from God. But the Bible and the church have never said that all sins are equal in the harm they do to the sinner or to other people. Pastorally, the Christian church has never treated all sins as equal. Speaking sharply to my spouse may be a sin which I should make right and not repeat, but it is not in the category with murder! To treat all sins as equal inevitably means that we treat more heinous sins as no worse than lesser and thereby condone sin and dismiss church discipline, or else we establish an unreasonable standard. The basic premise that all sins are equal and should be treated the same way has no support in the Bible or in tradition and is seriously flawed! --Gary Cockerill

From: [email protected]
Thanks for the recent homosexuality/theology column. It is timely for us here at Pathway as just yesterday the state of Maine held a referendum to overturn a recent law which placed homosexuality in the realm of basic civil rights. The referendum vote was 52% to 48% in favor of overturning the law. The opponents of the referendum including the Maine Council of Churches framed the debate to be a matter of simply not being allowed to discriminate against people who couldn't help the way they were born. --Eric Hallett

From: [email protected] (Joan B. Watkins)
[The] #2 choice has taken one side of the problem of sin as expressed by Paul in Romans. Simply put since Sinners have been forgiven, sin all the more. More sin...more grace abounds. He covers this pretty thoroughly and emphatically with a blunt, NO! If we continue to sin, once forgiven, we actually lie. Continually feasting in our particularized genetic-environmental sin proves that the TRUTH is NOT in us. It is true that once my sin is forgiven because of the blood of Jesus which paid for it, God doesn't see my sin because Jesus stands between me, my sin and a just God with his out-stretched hands and God sees his son's sacrifice for my sin. #2 is NOT applied theology. It is MIS-applied theology. Keeping my eyes on Christ moves me into #3 & #4. In those kinds of churches there is room for ALL -- homosexuals included. Do you know of any churches like this???? [email protected]

From: Tim Elmore ([email protected])
While I was at Skyline, our young adult group received and ministered to at least two dozen homosexuals, many of whom were a part of the group, as regular attenders. We even had a support group for gays who were coming to Christ, and didn't know what to do about their lifestyle. My response was a synthesis of what you described in your four scenarios above. I believe homosexuality is a sin, but it is the practice of it, not the inner drive that is condemned in scripture. Therefore, I didn't make them feel any worse for their sinful bent than I did for gossips, or adulterers for that matter. I also believe, however, that God delivers from that kind of bondage--and I watched him do it a number of times. I did not see anyone healed of AIDS (although I know God can do that), but I did see many become heterosexual, and sexually pure, following a lifestyle of promiscuity. One former intern of mine now ministers with EXODUS and has a wonderful ministry to ex-homosexuals and current homosexuals. All of this forced me to think through my theology and my practice. Fortunately, in this case, I saw a wonderful blend. Our group was very kind and receptive to these folks, and even heard them share testimonies of there struggles--and prayed for them. (Keep in mind, this was in southern California). --Tim Elmore

From: "Mark Otero" ([email protected])
This hot potato forces us to deal honestly with issues of sin, responsibility and atonement . Every Christian must reckon with these questions: (1.) Do I define sin consistently? (2.) Do bad genes exempt me from personal responsibility? (3.) How strong is the atoning blood of Christ? Trendy moral debates challenge the church to apply theology with integrity. Without it, the church has no authority to speak on the moral issues that plague our society. Thanks for provoking the mind and heart again. --Mark Otero

From: Obrad Nikolic ([email protected])
This column Is the best practical argument for holiness (entire sanctification, second blessing) doctrine I have heard in years. -- Obrad Nikolic Nis, Serbia

So what do you think?