Former Ex-Gay Minister Recounts “Spiritual Rape” By Living Waters/Desert Stream
Growing up in a 1960’s conservative evangelical home, Scott Harrison not only knew homosexuality was a sin, he knew it was “the worst sin a person could do. It was worse than murder.” He described to the Southern Poverty Law Center the exorcism delivered upon him by a minister at Living Waters/Desert Stream [see edit below], a neo-Pentecostal ex-gay ministry. After a “very intense, dramatic” group prayer that lasted three hours, Harrison found himself “drenched in sweat” and “psychologically wounded.” Because of “how it happened and the incorrectness of the theology,” it “felt like a spiritual rape” to him. Harrison was the victim, but says it’s hard not to blame himself, even 20 years after the incident. When asked how he became involved in such a bizarre event, Harrison responds:
When you’re coming from a perspective that you believe God can give messages to people, words of prophecy, then it’s very easy to become prey. This guy got a team of people together. One of the aspects that is pretty strong in Vineyard, still, is that they believe that people can be “demonized.” Not meaning that a person is fully possessed by Satan, but that a person has given him or herself over to Satanic strongholds in his or her life, so that it may take an exorcism to release the various demons that this person has given over their lives to.
He adds that as an ex-gay minister,
I didn’t believe change was an easy process. People would have said, if you asked them in private, [that] the option was one of celibacy, as opposed to accepting oneself as gay and lesbian. When [ex-gay ministers] talked about change at that time, they were talking about behavior modification.
Not much about that has really changed, with Alan Chambers (head of Exodus International) claiming he’s never really met an ex-gay, and declaring that he wakes up every morning denying that part of his being that comes so naturally.
Harrison believes that legally, ex-gay ministries should be allowed to exist, but as faith-based organizations, not state-sponsored ones. Ex-gay ministries have no place in public schools, just like representatives of religious institutions are barred. And he says exposure to the messages of Exodus Youth (Exodus International’s ex-gay youth ministry) are downright dangerous:
I don’t think that’s healthy for anyone, but especially not for high school students. Teenagers are idealistic. They’re going to grab for that, believing they can actually change their sexuality, when we have plenty of evidence showing it’s not possible. What’s going happen when they don’t change? More youth suicides, more youths engaging in risky behaviors, feeling betrayed by the church and by God and giving up on their faith. If I’d heard that message as a teenager, I don’t know if I’d be here today.
Thank G-d he IS here today, to give us his valuable point of view.
Edit 1/3/2008:
Today we received an email from Scott Harrison with the following corrections to this story:
…the original interview had stated that the exorcism or deliverance occurred at the hands of the pastor of my church, the Vineyard San Pedro, not at the hands of leaders of Desert Stream or Living Waters, which were based out of the Vineyard Christian Fellowship congregations in Santa Monica and later in Anaheim, California. I understand that not all of these details appeared in the original interview and that it might have been possible to infer that the San Pedro Vineyard was somehow directly connected to Desert Stream or Living Waters.
The reality is that the San Pedro Vineyard supported the work of Desert Stream, but was not a host for ex-gay ministry. When interviewed, I cited the deliverance session as an example of how demonizing homosexuality (for example, referring to homosexuality as a satanic or demonic perversion of the “one true” sexual orientation of heterosexuality), which is the modus operandi of most ex-gay leaders, can open the door to all sorts of abuses such as what I experienced. I clearly stated this when I was interviewed and wish the SPLC article had been a bit stronger on this point.
Ben in Oakland
I had a good start addressing the Bibical views if you read my earlier postings but many of you did not appreciate them. Do you really want to see the view I hold of the Levical Law compare to the New Convient?
I’ll be open to anyones comments, but I don’t want to be accused again in doing sermons if I post the view. Guys let me know if I can really addess Ben in Oakland questions.
On a different Subject:
I’m not saying anything right now as being right or wrong down below.
Basically there are three groups of Churches. One group of churches will tell you that being gay is bad and there is not any hope of redemption. Then there is a middle group that say that acting out homosexually is a sin that can be forgiven. This group does not view Homosexuality as being the worst sin. And finally there is your group that believes being gay is not a salvation issue and its great in being in a commented reationship with the same sex that includes sex.
The church I go to belongs to the middle group.
I hope all of you are secure enough in your relationship in God without having to question your relationship with God when anyone tells you that you don’t love yourself. You seam pretty confident to me.
Well, then, john. there isn’t much else I can say, except these two things:
“Acting out homosexually is a forgiveable sin.” Where do they get the moral, scriptural, and godly authority to make that assertion? And who is doing the forgiving? Are they doing it, or are they making that claim on G’s behalf?
Have you ever tried going to one of these churches that doesn’t tell you to hate the best part of yourself, but instead, will allow you to experience G’s love without that particular piece of personal, cultural, and spiritual baggage? Would you be open to challenge your beliefs that being a happy, proud, and out gay man is somehow contrary to Love’s plans for you?
I belong to the Southern Baptist denomination, and they most certainly do not consider homosexuality a salvation issue. But I hope you are not putting SB in your third category, because I suspect they would disagree. When you start generalizing like that, you will almost always be wrong.
As to not making sermons; there is a difference between answering a question and posting three long comments in a row pontificating about an issue in scripture. I trust you can divine the difference and act accordingly.
Ben,
I gotta take John’s side in this one.
I unwaiveringly find the theological pinnings upon which that belief stand to be flawed, inconsistent with the overall message of the gospel, and based on the flimsiest of translation assumptions.
But they are neither arbitrary nor without basis. If John’s interpretation of Scripture is to be accepted then his answer is clear: they get the the moral, scriptural, and godly authority to make that assertion based on the words of the Bible.
And, of course, God does the forgiving, just as he does for all sin.
Further, I doubt that John’s church “tells him” to hate the best part of himself, or any part of himself. It tells him to avoid temptation and not give in to sin.
Now I’m sure no one thinks that I agree with John’s interpretation of Scripture. But I don’t fault him for believing it.
Timothy: you are quite correct in all that you say. My only fault with his belief in it is that it does not appear to be making him happy or at peace with himself.
I was thinking of Ted Haggrd earlier today. Here’s a man who gave himself to G, started a very successful church, brought people to G, the who megillah, yet somehow, remained gay (until his 3 week conversion course–anothr matter entirely). Of course he repudiated that part of himself, at least for public consumption. And he said he prayed and prayed and prayed, yet somehow he couldn’t pray the gay away. and somehow, G didn’t see fit to remove it from him, despite all the praying and the good works.
If we are to divine G’s intention here, what are the conclusions? and what is the evidence for them?
One, he just persisted in his sin, and never truly repented. I’ll put words in john’s fellow church members mouths– that was it. Possible, but many ex-ex-gay people would say they gave their everything, and in the ned, it didn’t matter, because it wasn’t about sin, temptation, or brokenness.
From whgat i understood that john said, he knows he is gay and he knows he will never be straight. Maybe that is G’s intention, and G just doesn’t care as much as some men do.
that is another explanation for Ted Haggard that accords with my experience, and makes far more sense to me.
I feel sorry for John in his struggle. I hope he finds some peace.
I could be wrong but I suspect John is happy. At least he hasn’t said otherwise. Now, there is nothing wrong with wishing to ourselves, or praying to God, that John could come to an understanding that would allow him to love another man. But in the end, the important thing is that John feels he is doing what God wants of him and he isn’t hurting anyone else in the process.
Of course, the reverse is also true, than John must respect those same choices of others, here or elsewhere. I’ve encouraged him more than once to explain his role in this ex-gay ministry he has mentioned, and the name of the ministry itself. It is not fair that we are discussing these things without knowing whether John in fact does respect the decisions of others.
John, does the ministry you work for lobby against various civil rights for gays? Against civil marriage rights, the extenstion of bias (hate) crime laws to cover perceived sexual orientation, housing discrimination, etc? You have said you don’t agree with them on the idea of conversion from homosexual to heterosexual, but are they actively holding this out as a possibility to clients?
I’m not trying to browbeat you with this, but I do think you need to be accountable to the truth here. We can talk openly and honestly about these issues but only if you can be honest about your actions, as well as your beliefs.
David Roberts belonging to a Southern Baptist Church, the same denomination that I was saved in and remain in my first three years of my salvation, truly understands my take on how I allow the authority of the Scriptures to be the key element of my salvation. I know all things must be done out of love or the Truths and the Wisdom from the Scriptures that we receive only from the Holy Spirit will not be present to live out our salvation and to use our spiritual gifts for others in the church body. Even though I belong to a charismatic church for the last 10 years, when someone ask about my Christian faith I respond back in Scripture. Right here I’m talking about the well off educated population who has heard many views.
My Southern Baptist Church knew I struggle with homosexuality and they knew like any other sin, homosexuality was forgivable. They continue to accept me and love me but at the same time did not know what to do with me. That’s when I got involved in the ex-gay ministry.
Now I want to point out something here of interest to you. I’ve seen many straight men that act out homosexuality for years but after many months to a few years of prayer and healing have been set free homosexuality. These men were victims of sexual abused. It’s very hard for a man to share that he had been molested or even raped by a stranger or in most cases a family member however once they take that bold step then God starts doing a great work in their lives. Obliviously, these men will hold on to their beliefs of their ex-gay ministry experience.
Then there are some like me. They may have been victims of abused or never been abused, they never get over their homosexuality.
I am happy where I am at right now. More so when I was in my three year relationship with my lady friend who I mention in a earlier posting even though I miss her very much. I have close friends who I can be real with and belong to a church that helps many people of many types of struggles that I am able to be part of. My identity is not in the ex-gay ministry alone.
I even have friends who I minister with that I am able to be as honest with as you guys. Many times I find it easier to be more open and honest with people who don’t me that will. But now days that is not quite as true.
John H wrote:
I am not really familiar with any straight men that act out homosexually for years (unless we are considering prison populations). Even more shocking, I am not familiar with any gay person who was truely “set free” from homosexuality no matter what length of time they spent in “prayer and healing.”
I have serious doubts that John H. has really seen any of these mythical creatures of the ex-gay world either. To be fair, these people may have lied to John H., and he just took them at their word and believed them.
John,
I also seen God heal incurable diseases, provide finanes to ones who were in desparate need, saved people from being hurt and more. I witness these things in others and some of these things for me.
Child sexual abuse can drammized a person for a life time that some times includes affecting his sexual orientation. When I made my last posting I thought many would say that only the straight men and women benefit from the ex-gay ministry but if you are gay they could hurt you.
If you think I’m making up to what I am witnessing in the last ten years, it wouldn’t matter at all to what I am saying.
But I wasn’t abused as a child and I don’t feel diseased sexually or “unclean.” I feel human.
I sensed that we had already accepted your happiness on your self being and secure in what constitutes your sexuality. What I do not get, why do you keep justiying ex-gayness?
Many of us are not ‘straight men acting out homosexuality for years’ or had been ‘sexually abused’. May I ask you, do you believe there is such thing as homosexuality in humans?
Even if you do manage to notice many straight men acting out on homosexuality that was sexually abused, do remember there are many many more homosexual men that are not.
Hold on to those ex-gay beliefs if you wish to. Perhaps it just feels nice to slide into one’s comfort zone. Sadly many would not relate to your version of homosexuality, or life stories.
Emily & YukiChoe,
Please read the one posting I made before the one you had responded to. The posting you were reading was my response to John who thinks I’m making the whole thing up.
I’m sorry for the misunderstanding on this dedicate issue. Rignt now I think David Roberts and Ben in Oakland are only the two who is keeping up with all of my postings in which I thank them very much for their time.
All of my postings are still posted. It’s only been over week, but there are quite a few.
I also want to thank Timmothy Kincaid, and to include him with David Roberts, and Ben in Oakland for their time in reading all my posting and taking the time in responding.
I’m not very familiar with the phenomenon of heterosexual men acting out homosexually. That really isn’t a population that overlaps much with my life.
But I don’t doubt that such persons exist or that they find their way to ex-gay groups. And I wouldn’t be surprised at all to find that they are indeed survivors of childhood molestation. Or even that ex-gay ministries are helpful in healing their emotional wounds and provide the framework for changing behavior patterns.
I think that perhaps these heterosexual folks may indeed be the “former homosexuals” that such ministries like to proclaim.
John H, you bring up an interesting point about the divine intervention of God. I too have seen healing and other forms of evidence that seem impossible without the presence of God.
I do believe that God is perfectly capable of working startling changes in us. I was raised by pentecostal preachers who prayed for the sick and I have seen response. (For those who don’t believe this, I don’t present it for argument or ridicule, simply this is what I have personally observed)
But I don’t know personally of any credible person who God changed from having a homosexual orientation to having a heterosexual orientation. And that, to me, brings into question whether such “healing” is elusive because God doesn’t wish it.
Now I know that not all prayers are answered “yes”. I’ve seen people insistently rely on God’s divine healing only to die in pain and know that God is not some genie in a bottle to command. But surely, if God so very much wants His children to be heterosexual, he would be inclined to answer the prayers of at least SOME of the strugglers and miraculously change the into heterosexuals. But he doesn’t.
Ah, but now I’m rambling. I’m not trying to convince you of anything – though it probably seems that way. Just sharing some of my thoughts.
John H.
I too am keeping up with your postings. To date, I have never seen any convincing evidence of sexual orientation change, despite the fact that the ex-gay movement likes to claim that people are changing orientation “by the thousands, tens of thousands,” etc. I don’t think you are making the whole thing up, but I also do not believe your ex-gay colleagues and their claims of change.
Your sexual orientation didn’t change, and I am sure that it wasn’t due to a lack of trying. I thought your acknowledgement of this would allow you to more clearly see the ex-gays around you in a realistic light.
I guess if that was the case, you would have moved on with your life. I wish you all the best, John H. Good luck.
Shalom,
Spiritual rape feels like an accurate description to the pain and suffering you have survived. I believe the heart of Jesus is deeply grieved when non-heterosexual love happens and those experiencing this gift are told it is an addiction, not love, an incarnation of evil, a slip in sexual sobriety….It is frustrating to read the words of Joe Dallas and his encouragement to have glbt people flee from “sexual immorality” when what they express is natural for them. Sexual immorality is not a GLBT issue alone….I also believe that survivors of sexual abuse receive some healing from Living Waters Desert Stream, but if they are GLBT, it is more wounding and not about integration and wholeness. Rather, codependency is fostered as well as confusion around orientation versus how sexual abuse harms someone. If sexual abuse were the cause for GLBT orientation, there would be a lot more GLBT people. Wendy Maltz does a nice job at helping survivors out. I feel Living Waters/Desert stream has a person repeat the abuse cycle-”give this up for me and I will love you, you can be in this family”. Sexual abuse is about a denial of a soul. Sadly, I believe this ministry program adds to this soul loss and creates wounded hearts along the way. I pray you will find continued healing dear soul.
Jennifer understands how Sexual abuse done to you as child can really damage a person psychic for his or her life. The younger the child is the worst the affects are.
The rest of you have a different paradigm than me. Right now I’m not asking you to change your views or your agreement on homosexuality but I would like for you to be open to maybe to broaden your paradigm that includes heterosexual men who continue to act homosexually after they were sexually abused. I will write it like as one of you who agrees in Christian Homosexuality but only in my culture that I now see is a little bit different than yours.
I don’t know if you are familiar with Mel White. He’s a known pro-gay minister in my area. Mel White main argument is that he was never abused and had very loving parents because the main core reason for homosexuality that the ex-gay ministries are using for a man to act out homosexually is because he had a passive father and a very aggressive mother. For women and men he points out the ex-gay ministries blames sexual abuse as being behind the reason why one is acting out homosexually.
The ex-gay ministries never give anyone an identity as being a gay person. Most of them believe when one act out homosexually or are in a gay relationship they are acting out of their brokenness. The ones who do claim they have change are either bisexual or were not even gay in the first place. If they were truly gay many have personally witness that any church, ex-gay ministry or any organization cannot change them. So in my world no one will ever assume that they were gay unless they first went through many healing ministries for many of years. So in my culture for one to come to a conclusion that they were gay is usually done after a very long hard process that only a person who know without a shadow of a doubt is able to go through.
It’s not that differnt in the “secular” or even “non-christian” side of things. I’m perpetually questioned how I can “know” that I’m gay because I never once hooked up with a guy and didn’t need to experiment with my sexuality to come to the conclusion. I know because I just KNOW. You FEEL it. Still, for someone who has never been gay and never will be, that response can nonetheless be baffling.
The problem with theories about a certain kind of early life experience being at the root of homosexuality is that there is no common thread. Gay people have basically the same variety of experiences with family as anyone else, save perhaps those caused by the realization that they are gay and how the family does or doesn’t deal with that.
The need to find a cause, as though homosexuality were a disease or a disorder, has driven many to see patterns that just aren’t there. And when the majority of professionals realize this and stop treating homosexuality as a disease or disorder, a few with other agendas call foul and blame that shift on special interest groups, politics, or even Satan.
Like a fortune teller, questions worded carefully can elicit all kinds of familiarity from a subject. And some gay people will actually have had strong mothers, weak fathers, or have been molested. But still others have not. The need to put a cause behind homosexuality tells us more about the desires of those behind the endeavor than the lives of those they devalue in the process.
Just for this post board enough of me,
There is a theory that gay people had problems with their families and in their in neighborhoods because they were gay. i.e. The father did not know how to relate to his gay born son. The family issues between the son and his father were prexistant causing some dysfunction to happen.
I am friends with Mel White. I am currently working on a book called “The Rude Awakening” that highlights what the coming out process in the context of fundamental Christianity was like. The catalyst for the discovery and awareness was falling in love with an ex gay minister. I know the sexual and relational brokenness theory of Living Waters Desert Stream. I do not agree with it. The brokenness word does not feel comfortable for me. Perhaps this is because all of us have brokenness and sexualizing it seem more like a sexual addiction rather than a loving, same-sex bonding.
One more thought before I go into work and take an advantage of a quiet office today.
It’s been my experience that anyone heavily involved in an ex-gay ministry that chose to leave the ministry with a change mindset that God would ordain his gay relationship with a other Christian man would mostly come out believing this for himself. Not necessary doubting anyone who claimed that the ex-gay ministry did not help others nor would believe his work in the ex-gay ministry was done in vain.
He would come to the conclusion that it is God’s personally leading in his life at the present time. Many ex-gays were addicts in their teens and twenties when they found Jesus. So when they do leave the ex-gay ministry they feel there over their addiction and only desire intimacy in a same sex relationship.
Unfortunately, again this is only what I’ve witness, one choses to leave after having a period of having sex outside of a commited relationship. It’s in this state of mind afterwards when that person leaves.
Jennifer, I just now saw your posting. It came on while I was posting mine. Right now I’m only trying to make others understand the ex-gay ministry, not necessary make anone agree with them. I have to go to work now but wanted to acknowlege your posting for now.
John H,
Sorry to be joining this so late.
Here, in your above statement, is the crux of the problem for many who wish to espouse your brand of Chistianity and find themselves thus (i.e., attracted to the same sex). I don’t mean your particular interpretation of the bible, it seems such things can be disputed ad infinitum, eh? I mean your honest appraisal that you are still a sexual being. You have the task of fitting that into your particular beliefs. Many here were not able to line the two up.
You quote the apostle Paul, who acknowledged that “burning” with sexual desire is not a great choice, so rather than do so, get married. By my read, Paul didn’t consider marriage such a great thing either, but it’s better than “burning.” Paul seems to indicate that only those who are gifted with the ability to be celibate should forego the institution of marriage. So either all gays are so gifted or, those who are not, should just “burn?”
John,
You are 43 years old, at what point do you expect that you will be “free from [this] sin.” Or, at what point will the “Holy Spirit…strengthen [you]” to not “M.” You believe that Jesus has set a standard. You endeavor to follow this standard, yet by the first paragraph I quoted, you fail. To quote some more apostle Paul. “…that which you would do, that do you not…and that which you would not do, that do you do…”? And, “…wretched man that [you] are, who will realease you from the body of this death…?” “…I thank God, through Jesus Christ….” As I read you, being gay is not the sin, but acting out on it is? Yet you do indeed act out on it. And by the standard that you believe Jesus sets, if you do so in your heart (as you do when your “mind wanders and you M”), then you are indeed a practicing homosexual. By the standard you quote, are you any different in ‘God’s eyes’ than the person actually having sex with another person?
What you promote then, is not ex gay, just a different ‘gay lifestyle,’ repleat with the same ‘practice of sin’ that separates from the God who is any minute now going to deliver you. And this you call “perfect Peace and Contentment”. Do you really wonder at those who listen and observe this and say “there is no God?” At least, not the one you describe.
Since the principles used by Paul the Apostle are being mentioned, I thought I’d chime in a bit here.
Paul is well known for his exceptional logic in many writings. But in I Corinthians 7, he begins to almost ramble. At one time, I thought he’d lost the strong logic flow (as many writers do in long letters) and was simply being human, answering a set of somewhat-related sticky questions.
Now, I’ve come to view the chapter as Paul working through several principles and situations, and showing that the interactions defy singular logic that is applicable to everyone at all times.
That is to say, when Paul writes about ‘justification by faith’ in the Book of Romans, Paul’s singular logic is applicable to all mankind at all times.
But here in this section of Corinthians, when Paul writes about stations in life (marriage among believers, engagement, marriage with a non-believer, slavery, etc.), the singular logic yields to an individual application.
This is one of the points in the New Covenant wherein the corporate conscience must yield to the individual conscience. This concept is also shown in Romans 14, Galatians, and Colossians.
When does the corporate church determine that you, the individual, “burn in lust and should marry”? They don’t get to make such a determination. The individual determines if he or she is ‘burning in lust’ and therefore should marry.
When does the church say that “you are called to peace” and that such “peace” is defined as this action or that action? They don’t get to define what is ‘peace’ or ‘conflict’ for the individual. The individual determines what is “peace” to his own (or her own) self.
When doe the church define someone as a “slave that needs freedom”? They don’t get to make that judgment. The individual determines what is “slavery” and what is “freedom” to serve Christ.
I’ve come to believe that this chapter 6 is more beautiful as a tapestry of principles interacting with individual consciences than I ever thought. Paul the Apostle is holding up one piece of the tapestry at a time, giving principles for the interlocking threads, and then allowing the individual artist to continue the weaving according to the conscience of that individual artist. It is a tapestry of truth, with wildly divergent and colored threads.
To some, such freedom of choice is a horror! They need an agency to set limits on their selection of choices, a government to define ‘marriage’ as only ‘between one man and one woman’, and a ministry to help in their self-condemnation by defining all avenues (except one) as “sexual immorality”. They need a counselor to recast their past as ‘abusive’, ‘abandoned’, or ‘sexually broken’, and even to recall ‘lost memories’ that may have never existed before.
But to my friend that was born male and lives as female, her conscience has escaped the ‘slavery’ of male-acting and walks in the freedom of a woman that serves Christ. To my own wife that has chosen to stay with me – a man-now-legal-female – her conscience senses peace of continuing a marriage. Yet another friend lives in consensual slavery to her Dom; yet another lives as a young gay man dating and exploring whom to marry for life. Yet another is homosexual in orientation, and has chosen to deny himself and live with his heterosexual wife rather than ‘burn in lust’ towards men. Yet another is celibate.
These latter ones are “no longer children, tossed to and fro and carried about by every wind of doctrine….” [Ephesians 4:14]. These latter ones are making hard choices, listening to their individual consciences, considering the principles listed by the Spirit of God through Paul the Apostle, and creating a tapestry that they hold before the light of God’s mercy, with some regrets (for they are indeed human), but without guilt (for even more importantly, they are forgiven). These latter ones have thanked the agencies, governments, ministries, and counselors – for they were ‘mentors’ needed at a younger time. But they no longer need the ‘mentor’. They are not children; they are now adults.
What does your conscience say?
Caryn,
Yes, children love rigid rules and have a hard time with principles and concepts. If you watch children at play, often they create games that are little more than a series of steps and requirements.
We as people are comforted by the simplicity of rigidity. At work we are frustrated by inexact explanations and want to scream, “just tell me how you want it”. We don’t want to view things conceptually, but just not have to think about it.
And we love rules and laws about faith. We don’t want to think about whether something really applies or if one behavior is demonstrating care to another more than another behavior. We want RULES, especially those that are easy to follow.
And to play our games – and to make us feel that we are on the right path of faithfulness – we want to see illustration of others that aren’t playing the game by the RULES (or by the Law). And we condemn them.
I think this is what Paul was talking about when he said:
I think Paul was explaining that his certainties, the teachings of The Law that answered all the questions, the childish love of rigidity had to be put away. Now he’s faced by uncertainty and only partial understanding.
So he has to cease with Law and Rules and Truth and Games and instead has to apply the principles of faith, hope, and love.
The Law may say one thing – be it about slavery, or women, or creation, or homosexuality, or circumcision, or diet – and that’s very comforting in its simplicity. And we can rail against the greeks or asians or romans who don’t share the values and traditions of The Law and insist that they change. And follow the rules.
But what do faith, hope, and love say? Applying those principles is much much tougher. But we as adults need to set aside childish simplicity.
Though I have not been able to read all the posts I am the person that John H was talking about that he confronted and I was the one who mentioned this post/thread. Though most Christians will not say this openly for I have asked several of my evangelical Christian friends, there is the belief that gay men and lesbians will go to hell.
Their retractions tend to be well I’m not God but then I ask if you did not believe that then what is the big deal. For if I as a Christian gay man can enter into the kingdom of God then all this worry and need to get it right is of no use. And usually silence is the answer.
As one who was a leader in an ex-gay ministry for many years most of the issues tend to come from the side of addictive behavior for gay men and emotionally dependent behavior for women. One of the undoings for me several years ago was this whole dominant mother passive father theory that was exposed my Dr Elizabeth Moberly in the 80′s. I came from that so it was a perfect belief perfect set up for me and fro many men in the ex-gay movement could relate to it. But I discovered that there are many who have come from loving homes where there is more equality in the relationship. You as well have many coming from two thirds world countries who happen to be gay and that western thought/belief will not can not fit for them and their gay identity. And if one looks into the foundation of the ex-gay movement starting in Anaheim in the later 70′s you discover that the men came from addictive behaviors which was/is not congruent with their Christian belief system. So this gets back to the belief that two members of the same sex can not will not be able to have meaningful relationships for look at our lives and the lives of so many we know. This as well is backed by misinterpreted passages in Rom I Cor 6 etc.
For many people particularly church gay men are viewed in light of their sexuality or should I say sex with another man. What is seen is gay men having sex and getting into all kinds of fetishes. Which is sad for one doesn’t view heterosexual men and women in the same light. Truthfully as a gay man I do wrestle with all the so called sexual liberties that many in the gay community expose and express. And the reallity is that addiction is larger in the gay community than in the straight community. But I realize that most can not comprehend two men or two women supporting and loving one another for their beliefs say that can not be.
What I think is paramount to the movement is that men and women coupled and singled be-friending others in the community particularly those in the more conservative church and let them see us for who we are. Let them get to know us strength’s and weaknesses, flawed human beings being redeemed by the tender mercy and grace of God. In this way change will truly occur that affects a nation. As we know law never does affect or change the heart. And as it is written, “love covers a multitude of sin” so how do I, how do we love others espcially those opposed to us gay, lesbian and transgendered human beings.
As well I might add that many people believe gay/homosexual etc. is a choice. Now if you were to ask anyone in the ex-gay movement they would tell you their desires were not a choice but they do have a choice on whether to “act out” sexually which I will agree. But for many people they still think it is a choice you choose to be gay as if you can really change or even help who you are attracted to. And for me I knew I did not want to be celibate any longer after 20 plus years of it and I wanted to love and be loved which I think is a very divine thing
It seems Christians and Jews aren’t so different here. Jews will make the argument that it’s acts, not thoughts, that are sinful. But how can love be a sin? In this context, many LGBT frum Jews choose to abstain from certain sexual behaviors.
Wow Paul left a strong posting. We are all human and most men in our forties, married or in a same sex relationship, or single still masturbates from time to time it’s just part of being human. Our failures in living a righteous life will never stop here on earth. That type of living would only begin on that day when we do see Jesus face to face. When I do fail I don’t beat up myself, I go to God for His forgiveness. However, even going to God right away fail at some times as will, but when I do finally come His forgiveness is always there.
I have friendships that I’m in that I cherish very much that are full of commitment, grace, and unconditional love. I really do feel the intimacy there without the sex.
I’m going to reverse Paul’s question, because I have a tendency to lust for men rather than women does that make my sin any different? Just like a committed Christian man who doesn’t have a same sex attraction who may lust after women because he is human his sin is like my sin who can ask God for His forgiveness before taking his sin of lust to the next level
Maybe I’m being too open and honest on my short time on this board that I’m acting improper. I’m not saying you men and women are not, but I am only to expose truth here.
John H,
First I want to comment that the official position of Exodus is that masturbation is a big no no. Unless I’m mistaken, there’s generally a whole seminar on masturbation at the Exodus Freedom Conferences. So I’m glad you have found your independence on that matter.
And I don’t think you are being improper. You aren’t being crude for crudeness sake, you are just being very direct and honest. And I respect that.
Paul (the apostle, not the commenter) talked about how he could eat meat offered to idols. Considering that idolatry made the top ten list of “though shalt not”s, this must surely have seemed a bigger sin to the followers of the Law than pretty much ANYTHING else he could have done.
And Paul recognized that. And he said that if your faith won’t let you eat meat, then don’t. So I say, if your faith won’t let you fall in love with a man, then don’t. Further, Paul didn’t fry it up in the pan and wave it under their nose.
Which I fear I may be doing with the following, but I hope not.
I sincerely believe that if Paul were confronted with your situation today, he would say that it is better to marry a man (or commit within a relationship if marriage isn’t legal) than it is to burn with lust. I sincerely believe that he would think it best for you to have a sexual outlet that is devoted and intended solely for you than for you to objectify or fantacize.
Above all, Paul was pragmatic. If the Law stood in the way of sharing the Good News of Christ, then – as devoted to the Law as he was – he was ready to put the gospel first. In fact, I think much of Paul’s railing at the churches to straighten up was in some way to counteract the fact that he threw out the covenant (circumcision), the ritual purity (bathing and diet), and even the promised land. What Paul tossed out of the Law was far far FAR more central to Jewish faith than were the commandments about homosexuality.
If confronted with gay Christians (had he known what orientation was) I don’t think Paul would have hesitated a second.
And we know from Scripture that heterosexuality was not a requirement for Phillip’s evangelism. Nor did Jesus require heterosexuality. (Whatever you think eunechs were, they certainly weren’t heterosexual)
But I dont’ say all this to impose my beliefs on you. And you most certainly do not have to come to the same conclusion as me.
So Paul of Tarsus declared that ifyou’re human and you sin by engaging in an “immoral” sexual act, there’s always forgiveness. But since when does love need to be forgiven?
Bishop John S. Spong actually made the argument that Paul despised the Torah because he was actually a closeted homosexual, one who constantly had to bring his “members” in line with his mind, and had to live with a constant “thorn in his flesh.” And considering Paul espoused celibacy so much, and claimed he was GIFTED at being celibate, and that not touching a woman was a good thing, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch.
Paul, I have to take what you said one more step further. I know many men who got married and are still married and still are burning with desire.
As I read all of this, especially john’s responses, I jyust come back to what I said before. People come from one of two positions: either gay is good or gay is bad. All else– ioncluding beliefs, actions, and churches selected– comes from that. It is not the other way around at all.
John has stated, as far as I can tell,that he is not hetero. He has admitted that he doesn’t follow every last proscription of his anti-gay church. He has admitted that some portion of what they tell him doesn’t seem to be true, and some of it is slanderous.
for myself, if i knew the emperor had no clothes, I wouldn’t be complimenting him on the pattern of his tie.
My point is this. Because o much of what the exgay crowd says is bogus, relying on lies, distortions, and half-truths, why should I believe that the “moral” position is suddenly “true” in a way that all of the other points supporting this position are not?
The perfect example, especially for this thread, is :”Drs.” Jones and yarhouse. There are more distortions and half-truths around these two than can be ocunted. They trumpet that their study says “CHANGE IS POSSIBLE”. It then appears that change is possible for only 15%, and that the exact nature of the change is AT BEST complicated and ambiguous– just like you being ex-gay. Exgay doesn’t mean “not gay.”
The exgay ministries then trumpet totally bogus figures based on this totally bogus “research”. If i recall, they came up with a 67% figure (Corrrect me Timothy). Tens of thousands of people have changed, they say, but J&Y could only ocme up with 100 who were willing even to be studied, and only 15 who had changed.
Why would you trust someone whose ability to tell the truth, let alone distinguish what the truth may be, is so severely compromised? One thing (among many) that I admire aobut Timothy, Jim Burroway, Daniel dirito, and David is their willingness to go to any length to make sure that what they say is true, and stands up to factual and logical analysis and consistency.
Paul,
I wasn’t only talking about gay men. I’m talking about heterosexual men who still lust after other women after they got married. I’m sorry I didn’t qualify what I last posted.
(Moving on)
I was thinking today while I was cleaning up the flower bed this morning regarding how many here on this site find it hard to believe that a heterosexual man could act out homosexually in his brokenness. I know that’s something unusual to ponder about but nevertheless I remember a other place besides the ex-gay groups that you will find men who would also make such a claim. And those are in your 12 step SA or SAA groups.
The SA and the SAA groups have shared that there addiction to sex became so strong that they left their natural desire for women and had sex with men to fulfill their sexual needs. The words what Paul use in Romans fit so will here.
So as far as our different views, if all of you and I can come to an agreement that it is possible for a heterosexual to act out homosexually in his brokenness because of his depraved mind what SA and SAA try to address a very strong conclusion could be bring about regarding what Paul was talking about in Romans.
The conclusion would be this. That the men that Paul was referring were not really gay. What they were are men who just wanted to have sex just for the purpose to have sex. They had no desire for relationship.
Perhaps today these men maybe called Sex Addicts
YES!!!! Abosolutely heterosexual men can behave and act out homosexually. This is the kind of sex that sex addiction is all about. Joe Kort has a wonderful article on this very topic. Heterosexuals can act out homosexually just as homosexuals can act out heterosexually. What I do NOT appreciate about Living Waters/Desert stream or ex gay ministry programs is that they do not support non-heterosexual orientation and put homosexual, same-sex eroticism in a sexual addiction box or the box of “it is the relational brokenness that tempts one to get legitimate needs met in illegitimate ways”. There is no room for non-heterosexual orientation. This I believe violates the message of Christ. The Bible is a book, or rather, a library of 66 books, that is a mirror of the context and time the authors of it lived. The Bible is a love ethics book, not a sex ethics book. Our focus needs to shift and our respect for proper interpretation sof the scriptures must grow so that more Christ Consciousness, integrity, and truth can be brought to all relationships. Our God is a God of diversity and rainbows.
I was thinking today while I was cleaning up the flower bed this morning regarding how many here on this site find it hard to believe that a heterosexual man could act out homosexually in his brokenness.
John H,
I’m confused. Who found it hard to believe that some heterosexual men act out homosexually?
I think we all know about situational same-sex behavior. Prisons, the sexually compulsive, those dealing with abuse, drug addicted persons, even some who think they cannot find opposite-sex partners. And perhaps ex-gay groups are helpful for them. But these folks are very few and far between. And they are not in any way indicative of gay people.
But your point about Romans is a good one. Perhaps Paul was speaking about the sexually compulsive.
I tend to think he was talking about idolatry. But your argument has merit. I’ll think about it.
Timmothy Kincaid,
Your posting on December 27th and other posting around that time gave me the impression that except in the pision population, that you and others found it hard to believe that hetrosexual men do sometimes act homosexually in their brokeness.
So if we can come to the conclustion that some hetrosexua men who do act out homosexually get the help they need, a change for the better is possible.
Are you still with me?
John H
I suppose that a heterosexual may engage in homosexual activity for any number of reasons, but I don’t agree with the ex-gay concept of brokeness. Therefore, I wouldn’t say that they were acting out of their brokeness. I don’t think I have ever seen or heard non-ex-gays using the word brokeness. It seems to be another example of the ex-gay neologisms.
Also, when talking about sexual addiction or other compulsive disorders, it doesn’t strike me that the problem is the homosexual activity. The problem is the compulsive behavior that leads to any destructive activity.
I really think that you are making quite a stretch by pushing for some sort of declaration that heterosexuals might engage in homosexual activity. I am not sure why that is so important to you. If a heterosexual engages in homosexual activity in prison, or for money (prostitution, porn, a place to stay, drugs, etc), or for lack of some heterosexual outlet for some compulsive behavior, their underlying orientation is still heterosexual. I can’t imagine why any of them would go to an ex-gay group for help. These people wouldn’t be gay to begin with and only engage in same sex acitivity for some secondary gain.
“I was thinking today while I was cleaning up the flower bed this morning regarding how many here on this site find it hard to believe that a heterosexual man could act out homosexually in his brokenness.”
Well I’m one who finds it hard to believe.
Why?
Heterosexuals are attracted to the opposite sex. I find it hard to believe someone would be just so consumed with desire for sex, or be so “broken” (whatever that means) that he would generate a false or psuedo attraction to other men, and maintain it long enough to have sex.
Why else?
Because this is one of the various lies I used to tell myself when I thought I was straight. “Oh I’m not gay, I don’t even like these guys, I’m just doing it because It’s an easy lay.”
Was I screwed up in the head? Yes, but it was my justification for my behavior that was screwed up, not the sexual attraction itself.
For women, maybe. Women’s sexuality, either by nature or societal approval, is more fluid and less rigid than male sexuality.
But for men? Nope. It’s too much of a taboo for men. For a man to have homosexual contact with another man it would have to involve prison, liquor, large amounts of money, and or a combination of those elements.
Or he could be bisexual. Why are the bis always tossed to the side? Granted they are few and far between, but why is that never an option?
I agree.
If a heterosexual engages in homosexual sex, most likey he is having fantasies about someone of the opposite sex much like when gay men who engage in sex with women fantasize about men. In both cases I would conclude that the sex to be a mere physical experience and not so much a spiritual one nor an experience that involves love. It’s just done to get physical pleasure and not to build a relationship. I believe that is why Christ accused people of “lusting in their hearts” even if they did not in fact act upon their thoughts. it goes back to intentions. When you have sex with someone, is your intention to unite with them in a spiritual and loving relationship, or are you just using them to satisfy your lustful needs? If a guy is making love to a woman and yet has to fantasize that he is making love to a man in order to get any pleasure out of the experience, is not that true brokeness?
Like I said before right now I’m not trying to change anyone view of homosexuality but I want others to understand the basis where the ex-gay ministries are coming from. If you read my friend’s Jeff most recent two postings on 12/28/07, mainly the first one, he explains that many addicts who do act homosexually go to the ex-gay ministries for help shortly after they find religion.
Some Men do have a homosexual orientation and some of them don’t who go into the ex-gay ministry for help. I believe some heterosexual men were lacking love for such a long time they would do anything to get love and acceptance that they would include puting on a gay identity to get it. I’m trying not to get too preachy, however when they allow God to fill those places in their heart that God could only fill, not any other man, a change happen for these men. Here I’m only talking about heterosexual men.
Now for me who really has a homosexual orientation, the change of my sexual orientation did not happen for me. Maybe Paul ,in the Bible, thorn was homosexuality, no one really knows. I would like to think it was so I could relate to him and know that God’s grace is sufficient for me.
That’s a possibility. Could be another explanation of Romans 1. The fact Paul may have been gay and because of his upbringing in Jewish Law, he could have been self-loathing and in turn spoke out against the very things he himself desired internally. That is not unusual considering recent events of Ted Haggard/male prostitute and other evangelical ministers coming out of the closet. Crying out against homosexuality, but on the inside desiring to be who they truly are.
And John H, the word “broken” is offensive to me. When conservative christians and ex-gays use that word to describe gays it makes it sound like we are toasters or T.V.s in need of repair. We are not objects. We are people with feelings.
Guys I used the word brokenness when I am explaining the ex-gay ministries approach,. If you been reading my postings, you will see that I may not agree completely with the ex-gay ministry approach but do find however some good that they do have on a certain group of people.
By now I hope you realized that I am not here defending ex-gay ministries but only viewing my own life experiences in the view of Scriptures. I have to admit there is a self motivation here why I’m posting my views here. I DON’T WANT TO LIVE MY LIFE WITH ANY DOUBLE STANDARDS.
The last two weeks here have been very healing for me. Even though you may not agree with me on everything, I appreciate your feed back that does challenge my belief system , in return make me make new adjustments, then live my life accordingly.
I don’t know how much longer this blog will go on but I do want to thank you all for taking the time in posting all of your posts.
John H,
I’m not sure why my 12/27 post made you think I disagreed with you. I thought it said I did agree to some extent. But, nonetheless…
I must say that some of what you are saying here is encouraging. The “official” position of the ex-gay movement is that there is no such thing as orientation and that everyone is heterosexual. So I am glad to see that – at least in your case – this is not just automatically accepted as Truth.
And please don’t go away if this thread peters out. There are always new threads and your perspective is good to hear.
Agreed, please do stick around.
John H.
I understand what you are trying to say in that God fills us in a way that a person could not. But as an Orthodox Christian, my understanding is that God fills us with his love through others such as the Virgin Mary and the saints, and within the Christian community, with one’s family and with one’s partner. In other words, whereas the source of our life and grace comes from God, it can be channelled through others to get to us. So, for example, my partner is a channel of grace for me because my love for him and his love for me is God’s love manifested between us. It is unfortunate that the ex-gay ministries fail to see this, that love between two persons is a reflection of God’s love for us irregardless of gender.
In your journey John H., I pray you come to an understanding that God loves you … period. Not – God will love you if, but God loves you. Although it is not included in all Christian Bibles, one of my favorite versus comes from the Book of Wisdom:
You, oh God, love all things that are and hate none of the things which you have made, because you did not appoint or make anything hating it. How would anything have endured if you had not willed it? How would anything have been preserved had it not been called forth by you? You spare all things because they are yours, O Lord, who loves souls.
(Wisdom 11:25-27)