jQuery Slider

You are here

The Morphing of Homosexuality in the Church

The Morphing of Homosexuality in the Church

By David W. Virtue, DD
November 17, 2021

There was a time when homosexuality was considered "the love that dare not speak its name." Then, over time, it was paraded as a behavior that demanded acknowledgement.

Then it became an acceptable behavior, and anyone opposing the behavior was considered homophobic and should be called out and shunned.

Then homosexuals demanded that they should not just be heard and accepted, but ordained and consecrated to all levels of the Church.

Then came the coup d'etat. If you didn't applaud and bow down before a small, shrill, strident group of homosexuals and believe that homosexual marriage was blessed by God then you should leave. Be gone from the Church, you are clearly homophobic, there is no place for you in the Church. Oh, and leave the keys and check book under the bright red doors; the church building does not belong to you, even though you built and paid for it.

And thus, it came to pass. As a result, the Episcopal Church saw the birth of the ACNA; the United Methodist Church is about to split, with other mainline churches losing members resulting in the formation of new Lutheran and Presbyterian church bodies.

But now there is a new twist.

A headline in one newspaper ran: Evangelical Christians Who Disagree on What the Bible Says About Human Sexuality Need to Coexist for the Sake of the Queer Community.

Spokane columnist Kurt Queller who wrote the piece, advocates that evangelical Christians accept openly homosexual Christians in the church by using a Bible interpretation methodology homosexual non-affirming Christians claim to use for their convictions: comparing Scripture with Scripture.

Queller uses his voice to argue that sexual orientations are part of God's beautiful design and creativity and something to be celebrated.

Mark Yarhouse, "a clinical psychologist who specializes in conflicts tied to religious identity and sexual and gender identity," according to his Wheaton College Faculty profile, runs the Sexual & Gender Identity Institute. He defined Queller's view as one that comes through a "diversity" lens. In other words, God created them just as he intended and their sexuality should be honored.

The other lenses he defines are "integrity," which sees God's sacred design for marriage as between a man and a woman, and "disability," which views sexual orientation outside of heterosexuality as products of the Fall, essentially a corruption of God's original intent.

Queller sees the issue through two lenses, yet respects (maybe) those who see through the diversity one.

The argument goes like this: there are so many different ways Christians--who are affirming or non-affirming, whether in part or in whole--read and interpret sexual ethics in Scripture. Further that unnuanced and binary "camps" really don't express the full community and limit what could be profitable conversation.

Another resource comes from Jason Thompson executive director of Portland Fellowship who argues that "Differing Views on Christian Doctrine, Identity and Homosexuality," with a chart that breaks down the differences between Christians on this topic into four categories, admitting there may be overlap between them.

He goes beyond the Side A and Side B nomenclature, which was popularized by Justin Lee, the founder of Gay Christian Network (now known as Q Christian Fellowship). Homosexual Christians who affirm their sexuality and believe God calls them to live it out in monogamous, marital relationships would be defined as Side A, and Side B Christians would identify as gay but believe God is asking them to remain celibate.

Thompson's definitions go further. They are Revel (gay partnership), Resist (gay identified but celibate), Renounce (no longer identify with being gay and are celibate or in mixed orientation marriages), and Rebuild (God can heal your queer sexual orientation into a heterosexual one). He identifies with the Rebuild position.

Queller when he encouraged Christians, who may disagree with his interpretation of Scripture, to see that most affirming Christians (also known as Side A or Revel Christians who see through a Diversity lens) arrive at their convictions not because they are accommodating "to currently fashionable liberal norms, but [instead to] a responsibly held, biblically grounded evangelical perspective."

A number of churches, and we think the bishop of the diocese of the Church for the Sake of Others (C4SO), Todd Hunter, skirts the line with this statement; "My vision is that C4SO churches would create communities in which gay and/or same-sex attracted people are not left to make sense of their sexuality alone. Rather, we want C4SO churches to be places where we all can share our stories, find community, and seek support on our journey of transformation into Christlikeness." Is that an explicit condemnation of homosexual behavior?

Is this holding the view inviting homosexual persons and families to full participation into their faith family, no matter where they are in their convictions about how to live out their sexual orientation before God?

Christian faith is a journey, not a destination, at least this side of eternity, and God can and does use a variety of churches to meet the needs of his children where they are in their faith. Bu can the queer community, be both affirming and non-affirming at the same time. The Law of Non-contradiction says otherwise.

The coup d'etat, the radical redefinition of Christian sexual ethics which has been accomplished by the queer mafia, exists only because they propose that evangelical Christians with various interpretations in this area can coexist with one another, and must for God's glory and for the good of the queer individuals he loves.

WRONG. First, there is no evidence of a gay gene. None. Hence you cannot be born a homosexual.

Second, if evangelical Christians give up on Scripture's binary interpretation, they are saying that God, in some measure approves of homosexual acts, and that "male and female" can be schmoozed or twisted to mean something it doesn't mean.

Third, homosexuals believe they can change God's mind for Him.

Fourth, that 2,000 years of biblical interpretation on human sexuality can be ignored or changed to suit a handful of homosexuals in the 21st century.

Fifth, Judaism is the first civilization that expressly forbade homosexual acts. Neither the Romans nor Greeks did. Christians have taken their cue from the Jews not the Romans, Greeks or barbarians.

Sixth, the Church has never embraced fornication or adultery or homosexual behavior. It cannot now change its mind on the latter however coerced it is now being asked.

The churches can only grow and love their children--to heal, guide, and direct them uniquely and perfectly toward His desired haven if they stay faithful to scripture. Love requires us to tell the truth even when it hurts.


Get a bi-weekly summary of Anglican news from around the world.
comments powered by Disqus
Trinity School for Ministry
Go To Top