Ex-Gay Watch

I am also aware that you stated your position regarding Sodom and homosexuality the first time. But before I continued, I wanted to make sure that there was no ambiguity in that remark so that there wouldn’t be any room for you to back track later

You say “later” as if we’re going to continue this discussion. I’m sorry, but if you’re going to be disingenuous and put me through the effort of writing several paragraphs just so you can pull a “ha, got ya!” moment later on in a debate, I’m not game for that. I don’t deal with those kinds of manipulative tactics from people in real life and I refuse to deal with them here.

I would like to hear back from Trip, if he’s still reading, but I really don’t have time to deal with your disingenuous debate style, Tru. Have a nice day.

Jay,
I don’t like those gotcha moments either. Which is the reason why I cover my bases as I go. I’ve been engaged in too many conversations in the past where ones have backtracked to inadvertantly repackage what they already said. So If you see this “technique” I use as your opportunity to make a “staged exit” from what I can promise you will be an uncomfortable conversation for the postion that you hold, then it dosen’t give the belief that you hold the credibility it requires. Because I can assure you that I will most certainly highlight the fallacies and the unscriptural elements regarding the damaging belief you hold and share. And that’s a fact! If your position isn’t biblically strong enough to be tested in the same manner the Bereans tested Paul’s words, then it isn’t worthy of even being considered as true by any self respecting Christian, now is it?

I entered this discussion for one reason: to pose a question about the belief that homosexuality is approved by God, and to perhaps stir some curiosity among those still trying to answer that question for themselves, as I once was, long ago.

Dan, the purpose of XGW is not to provide you or anyone else with a soapbox to proselytize others. When appropriate and germane to the discussion, you are free to share your particular beliefs and understanding of the world but not in such a way that you denigrate or browbeat someone else concerning theirs. Your attitude throughout this thread is laced with condescension and intolerance, assigning motivations to others and to entire denominations. If you fancy yourself a prophet, please go elsewhere. If, on the other hand, you can discuss issues with others without such obvious disdain for all views but your own, you are welcome to participate. Please decide which is most important to you.

I am convinced that this is the message of the Gospel to men and women who struggle with homosexuality: deny your desires, and come to the foot of the Cross, in all your pain and sorrow at unfulfilled desires and submit your will to His, saying Thy will be done, not mine.

You are convinced, Jay is convinced, Tru Agape is convinced, and all of different things or of differing degrees. There will always be those who have different opinions on peripheral issues in Scripture, and those who deny it entirely. Again, it is not the purpose of this blog to declare one right and the other wrong, but only to deal with matters of faith as they intersect ex-gay issues. That is our common goal, the rest has its place elsewhere.

On the other end of the spectrum, it seems absurd that Jay is being pummeled for simply having a different opinion. And he only expressed it when asked, rather than trying to force-feed it to the rest of us. And while it seems perfectly acceptable to inquire about what and why he believes something, this rapid-fire baiting is not. He believes something and he is living according to it as best he can. He is not requiring that others do, nor is he a hypocrite to my mind. Short of completely homogeneous national thought, I don’t know how much more one could ask.

Let’s get back on track please.

Jay and Dan,
I’m sorry if I came across rather strong. As you can see, I am very passionate about this topic. And am even more passionate about calling out the religious positions commonly held about homosexuality that aren’t supported in Scripture or history. But behind every opinion is a beautiful and wonderful human being who has been created in the image of God. And I’m sorry if I in some way forgot that in regards the two of you.

Peace!!

Hi Jay,

I agree that God cannot be proven to exist. It goes into “airy fairy” for me. I don’t see Jesus the same way because he lived and was a tangible human being that taught unconditional love. Therefore I solely find the 613 laws in the five books of the Torah which contains Leviticus, were all laws set down by Moses, a man, to dictate ancient Hebrew behavior. Right on. He had people to create structure for, and like many today, he was homophobic and wrote law with an iron fist called “God”. Great strategy.
That today is illegal and for obvious good reason.

I know the gay sex thing in Leviticus was just a sex law put on the books of that time, just like the sodomy laws that were just struck down recently in our current society. But most people don’t know the idea of an unprovable God, and when “God” is tied into anything negative, it packs a severe wallop to beat down and fool the uneducated or potentially hypnotized.

But I also don’t see you giving this extended belief about the unprovability of the existence of God to your posters either, or even to me after you called me a “sinner” for having gay sex. It is fact that there was a law on the books criminalizing gay sex in the Old Testament, just like there was one today. Is it a sin against a God we can’t prove exists? Kinda maybe hardly. Nope! If Jesus teaches unconditional love, then his teacher would even teach greater things. If there is a God above Jesus in ability, I don’t think he would be much into tyranical sex laws with death for punishment.

You seem to stick to the airy fairy part of the “gay sex is a sin against God” fairy tale to pack your wallop against yourself and others regarding gay sex. Why not entertain the “fact” that is was only civil law now stricken from the books, inapplicable to American law, (we are not Hebrews) and leave the factless unprovable God stuff out of it? If you can’t God-prove what you believe around gay sex, then what’s the point? Why would you choose to live under a several thousand year old other country Hebrew Law anyway? You seem too bright to not see the oddity in that.

I think you could really gain by running the same sinness you have about gay sex, on left handed people for one full week. Or do a mach several times every day, relentlessly. Just walk up to them and look them in the eyes and say, ‘you know I really think you are great, but do you know you are a sinner with that left handed writing you do? God greatly disapproves of that’.

I think once you get the absurdity of this anti Jesus gay sex ponzi scheme you’ve joined into, you may become more palatable to yourself and the world around you.

I believe lies are as powerful in their effects as is the truth. And a lie always hurts. By calling me a “sinner” you have supported and projected a baseless unprovable lie. Trust me, I don’t take offense. I am well too educated in the art of control through shame. You would NOT BELIEVE my father’s antics with me some times!!! (laughing)

So Jay, I have a question for you, one I want you to please fully answer. (and the other questions above) Then I have to go meet Shane for our study night together.

Lets say hypothetically my sexually active gay-confused school friend Mark, (a real friend of mine) who came to you for advise, just committed suicide. Here’s the down:

Mark’s mother sees blood coming from under the bathroom door onto the hallway floor. She opens the door to find Mark partially blue and dead, laying in a pool of his own blood. Mark is her only son. Mark’s parents never had a problem with Mark being gay. Now he’s gone forever.

Mark’s suicide note reads,

“Jay who I trusted, said I was a sinner for having gay sex. It really hurt when he said that. He was the last straw. I feel so guilty, it’s killing me. You all are straight, I’m not. I feel so alien here. I can’t live in a world that judges me so harshly. Please don’t hate me for leaving. I can’t stay here any longer. Mom, dad, I love you and I’m really sorry. But I’m not welcome here and I just gotta go. Goodbye, Mark”

Now. His parents want to talk to you. I want to talk to you. We show you the note. You read it. You look up into our very sad eyes. What would you say to us?

Thanks for being here,

Trip

I think once you get the absurdity of this anti Jesus gay sex ponzi scheme you’ve joined into, you may become more palatable to yourself and the world around you.

Trip, clearly you have been beaten over the head with the sin accusation plenty in your life (your father) so I can understand your sensitivity to Jay’s view. But I just got done asking that we show more respect in this discussion and you write the above, among other things, which takes us back in the other direction again. Did you even read what I wrote?

Again, I understand how one can feel after being on the other end of judgmental people, but Jay is simply owning up to his own understanding of Scripture. Unless he is attacking you with it, he’s just being honest. You give him far too much power over your life with your inability to accept his opinion as just that.

Tru Agape,

I want to say how much I respect and appreciate your study of the different views of Scripture. While, I have come to a different conclusion than you in my own studies of pro-gay theology, I appreciate that you take the time to seriously engage with Scripture. Many people on both sides do not even bother to make the attempt at study of these issues. But, I can see that you have taken considerable time to thoughtfully think it through.

I read your linked article. I agree that Sodom has been taken out of context to focus exclusively on highlighting homosexual sin. I don’t think that Scripture necessarily precludes homosexuality from being one of the many different possible sins of Sodom, but the passage has certainly been abused to single out homosexuality.

As for arsenkoitai–I didn’t see you mention it in your article, but there is good evidence to suggest that Paul created a compound word from the Septuagint translation of Leviticus 18:22 which includes “arsen” and “koitai” which suggests when Paul is using arsenkoitai he is thinking of Leviticus 18:22.

Since, I know this is probably not the place to get into a theological discussion on this particular thread, I am wondering if you might be willing to dialogue with me on the various scriptures on my blog. I just recently finished about four posts pertaining to my reflections on pro-gay theology and reasons why I have landed where I am so far. I would welcome your thoughts. I always learn best from those who see things differently than I do. My first post in the series begins here: http://pursuegod.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/jesus-on-homosexuality/

In C.S. Lewis’, The Great Divorce, he describes a character who is being harrassed by a lizard on his shoulder.. The lizard represented sexual lust. An angel came along and offered to kill it for him, but the man was reluctant at first to allow the angel to do so. Finally, the man agreed to let the angel kill the lizard because he was so harrassed by the evil thing. The angel grabbed it, broke its neck, and as it lay on the ground dead, the man transformed into this luminous being and the dead lizard transformed into a beautiful stead onto which the man mounted and rode away toward heaven. For years after reading this, I believed that my homosexuality was that same lizard of lust that needed to be killed. But no angel came along to do that for me. I prayed, begging God to free me from my homosexuality. I read and memorized scripture hoping that its influence on my mind and heart would cleanse me from my homosexuality. I submitted to many sessions of exorcisms, hoping to have that lizard cast off my shoulder. All along the way, it whispered hateful things into my ear. I believed I was someone less because of this lizard on my shoulder. Finally, an angel came to me ( cancer) and as I struggled to live, this angel destroyed the lie that I was somehow less of God’s Child because I was gay. The angel destroyed that lizard, and what came from that was a renewed sense of my worth in God’s sight. The lizard died–and my sexual compulsion transformed into something beautiful. My love for God and my wonderful life partner are a testimony to that

Karen K,
Thank you for response. And thank you for your invitation to dialogue with you on this topic matter. I would like to particpate and look foward to doing so. Since this particular blog isn’t the place for such a discussion, i won’t respond to your comment about arsenokoitai and its proposed relationship to Lev.18:22 via Paul here. But I will repost a portion of the article that I already wrote that addresses your prespective by default. But my comments about it and the other pats of your post (your use of the word “precludes”) will be made on your blog. Again thanks for the invite!

below is the excerpt:
Carelessly, anyone attempting to justify ‘arsenokoitai’ being changed or even compared to homosexual, male or female, has first failed at recognizing the cohesive relationship the Scriptures maintain, and then, simply put, failed to translate! The first red flag should have been the fact that ‘arsenokoitai’, unlike the word “homosexual”, does not bear any reference to females. That’s interesting, especially when one considers that so-called Christians try to co-relate Romans 1 with the 1 Corinthian passage to support their erroneous claim. But despite such an unscriptural effort, a glaring omission inadvertently arises. Because while the Romans passage uses a Greek word translated by most as “likewise” to compare the rebellion of “both” sexes, addressing those women who ‘exchanged’ the natural use of themselves, it’s actually only the men whom the passage records as being ‘burned out’ with lust after one another after ‘leaving’ women. More importantly, however, is that the account in Romans never once uses the term ‘malakoi’ or ‘arsenokoitai’. And by the same respect, neither 1 Corinthians nor 1 Timothy utilize the wording found in Romans 1. Yet, coincidently, the same writer, Paul, wrote all three of these books! In fact, it’s worth noting that not even the early “Church Fathers” used 1 Cor6:9 or the two words found there in conjunction with homosexuality or Romans 1. That dishonest practice had yet to formulate, and it wouldn’t become a part of “Sacred Tradition” until centuries later. All the while, not even the structure of the words themselves ever allowed for such a comparison, this fact even being realized by “modern translators” as early as the penning of the Latin Vulgate which literally interprets ‘arsenokoitai’ as ‘liers with males’.

All along, however, it was the original biblical setting of the Romans 1 passage itself that provided the framework and dimension to Paul’s words found there to give it its perspective; because even history contextualized this passage in association with rampant orgies, bestiality, and idolatrous sexcapades. In fact, even within the Mosaic Law, the Levitical Law Code remained contextually accurate regarding the Canaanite culture of its day by addressing the idolatrous sex rituals its male priests engaged in. Hence, the absence of any reference to females. And the explanation of the Law, also known as the book of Deuteronomy, emphasizes this idolatrous theme by this time warning all of Israel against becoming temple prostitutes and cross-dressing, inturn, keeping itself apart from the pagan practices that lay ahead. So fittingly, Paul’s denunciation in Romans for their ‘passions of dishonor’ is something all Christians, gay, straight, or transgendered, agree with! All of this, however, presents a sharp contrast to the reaction Jesus had towards the faithful centurion who asked that his ‘pais’ be healed; or the interaction between the Gospels and the Ethiopian eunuch (or as some presume to hastily finalize: “court official”)………………

Tru Agape,

Great! Looking forward to the dialogue over on my blog. I would be interested in what you think of the premises in the four posts I have written thus far. I will look forward to seeing your comments there. Thanks for engaging!

If I get some time today, I would like to address this issue in depth. but for now, I will say this. The bible means what you think it means, nothing more and nothing less. Some things are clear– no divorce except for adultery, plus the Pauline exception. Except that we frequently ignore them because they are inconvenient, like divorce, or contravene any basic sense of decency.

Some things are completely unclear– the so called absolute prohibitions against homosexuality, which are absolute or prohibitions only if you have already decided that they are. The evidence for that is questionable, and frequently circular in shape.

Some things appear to be clear, but they are not. “Don’t work on the Sabbath” depends on whether you think Saturday or Sunday is the Sabbath. And for Americans, whether Wal-Mart is open or not. “Judge not lest ye be judged” also seems to be clear, except for the good “Christians” who think they are only reporting, not judging. Convenient.

And some things– slay all the unbelievers, as in Deuteronomy– we flat out ignore– because we don’t give authority to ancient texts that contravene any basic sort of morality that doesn’t involve telling other people what’s right in the eyes of the lord, or doesn’t have to do with sex.

All of that ambiguity alone– and there is a great deal more– should be sufficient to inform any thinking person, whether believer or not, that the bible’s applicability to modern life may have much to do with faith, but very little to do with morality.

JC said nothing at all about homosexuality, but he did say “feed the poor”. How many children died in Darfur while good Christians were attacking my marriage as sinful?

Some months ago, I had an online conversation with a pastor on these very pages. He claimed that the bible was quite clear on the subject (it is not) and that Jesus himself condemned the sin of Sodom, which was homosexuality. How did he know this? Because he could cite a passage where Jesus condemned the sin of Sodom. Because it was “well known at the time” that the sin of Sodom was sexual in nature, and that the sin was homosexuality. and how did he know this? Not from the bible, because Jesus NEVER MENTIONED THIS OH SO IMPORTANT subject.

So how did he know it? Because some other writer, whose name and time he could not or did not cite, said it was. Well, so much for biblical authority on this subject if you must go to other books that are not the authoritative bible in order to prove biblical authority. Circularity upon circularity.

In short, he pulled it, as we say, out of his ass. and like all things that come from there, it stank– of corruption and at least moral rot. He already knew what he believed to be true. all the rest was just a detail.

and so it goes for a good deal of what passes for authority on moral matters from those who would cite their bibles as incontrovertible truth that their beliefs are the incontrovertible truth. Circularity upon circularity.

Those who would condemn gay people, claiming that they speak for G when they only speak for themselves, used to burn witches with exactly the same moral certainty. But we no longer burn witches, because we know that they do not exist, and because, as I already said…

…we don’t give authority to ancient texts that contravene any basic sort of morality and decency, that doesn’t involve telling other people what’s right in the eyes of the lord, or doesn’t have to do with sex.

more to follow if I have time.

David,

I hold similar views as Jay, however my interpretation of a side B Christians halts me from verbally calling anyone a sinner for having gay sex. I take side B as my own views that hold only to me. Otherwise I would just be another Rick Warren throwing gasoline on the fire.

Trip’s posts are pretty benign from my viewpoint, especially with Jay calling him a sinner for having gay sex. He demeaned Trip’s relationship, does that bring anyone closer to unconditional love? In Canada, public hate speech is a criminal prosecutable offense of up to 2 years in prison short of it being religiously based. When it comes to separation of church and state law, emotions really don’t give a rats ass.

I think if you are going to come down on Trip, a similar message needs to go to Jay to stop throwing that age old sexual belief dagger. It does not help anyone to get closer. If you see calling someone a sinner for having gay sex as some little ‘ol off the shelf belief with no fire in it, well that would be surprising. You may not react but thousands do, like the ones protesting Prop 8.

I’m sure if Jay is put off by Trip’s post he will let him know. I personally have found a lot to think about from Trip’s words. He sounds very rational and grounded. I certainly hope you haven’t scared him away.

I hold similar views as Jay, however my interpretation of a side B Christians halts me from verbally calling anyone a sinner for having gay sex. I take side B as my own views that hold only to me. Otherwise I would just be another Rick Warren throwing gasoline on the fire.

This is my view as well, though I am not side B and do not agree with Jay on that issue.

Trip’s posts are pretty benign from my viewpoint, especially with Jay calling him a sinner for having gay sex. He demeaned Trip’s relationship, does that bring anyone closer to unconditional love? In Canada, public hate speech is a criminal prosecutable offense of up to 2 years in prison short of it being religiously based.

“Anti Jesus gay sex ponzi scheme” is not a benign way to refer to another commenter’s beliefs. Jay answered a question and went out of his way to try to be honest and not offend. He didn’t demean anyone, he simply stated his own beliefs. I have no idea what Canadian law has to do with it unless you suggest that what he said should actually be illegal. I find that notion absurd, even for those who really are haters.

I think if you are going to come down on Trip, a similar message needs to go to Jay to stop throwing that age old sexual belief dagger. It does not help anyone to get closer. If you see calling someone a sinner for having gay sex as some little ‘ol off the shelf belief with no fire in it, well that would be surprising. You may not react but thousands do, like the ones protesting Prop 8.

Again, he didn’t throw anything. It is apparently the fact that he believes something which is causing all the fuss, because he certainly hasn’t pushed it on anyone (if he did I would ask him to stop). There is a presumption here that we are adults and can discuss things with which we disagree in a civil manner. Prop 8 is not about what others believe, it is about rights which are being denied. The Mormon church already thinks I am lost because I’m not a Mormon, so why should I care what else they think of me?

I certainly hope you haven’t scared him away.

Are you serious?

I don’t agree with Jay’s beliefs on homosexuality. I don’t think I’ve ever told someone they were sinning, and I don’t think it would accomplish anything good if I did. But then he only said that when he was asked what he believes, so what should we expect, that he lie? If you want to know why he thinks that way, ask him (but don’t get mad at the answer). If you don’t care, then don’t.

In the mean time, he’s a great example of someone who has the same beliefs concerning his sexuality as those at Exodus, but has taken what seems to me a much more authentic course of action. He doesn’t worship heterosexuality, he doesn’t believe if he works real hard and prays that he will become heterosexual and he hasn’t devoted his life to an ex-gay program detached from reality and calling everyone here “gay identified.”

Instead, he is just celibate. It’s his life, and he has that right just as we expect the right to live with the person we love. It is a far more honest answer to my mind, and I don’t see why anyone should have a problem with it. There are going to be people whose beliefs will not let them accept their homosexuality, even 100 years from now I suspect. I would rather they emulate Jay than Randy Thomas.

I was put off by Trip’s post, not because I was offended, but because of the hypothetical suicide situation which was just a tad over the line of reasonable discourse. I don’t usually use such appeals to pathos when I debate, because it’s awfully hard to respond to it rationally.

I think it’s important for you to realize how my conversation with Trip started before you insert yourself. I made a comment (in response to one by Emily K) about how tolerance among people with different beliefs is likely a generational thing. I didn’t say anything about homosexuality or sin in it. Trip responded to that comment by bringing up issues that I have written about on my own personal blog. He essentially asked what I thought about homosexuality and sin, and I answered honestly. Perhaps I answered a little too bluntly, but I wasn’t throwing a dagger; I was just answering a question. For that matter, I was answering a question that that he already knew the answer to, since my blog has about two years of archived posts in it, and anyone is free to read it and find out more about my beliefs.

The fact of the matter is that no matter who you are, there will always be someone who disagrees with you. For instance, I’m a Calvinist. Non-Calvinists can say some pretty nasty things about the doctrinal beliefs that I hold dear and that I see as central to my being. Should I tell them to stop throwing daggers at my spirituality, or that their rants aren’t helping me reach “unconditional love?” No. I should respect their opinions as just that — opinions. As long as they don’t try to keep me from practicing my faith (just like I don’t support measures like Prop 8), we can have a reasonable discussion. It doesn’t really matter how anyone chooses to respond, either. They can ignore me, and I can ignore them, or we can both learn from each other and move on. In any case, people should be free to say what they wish.

And like I’ve said several times, Trip and I disagree on what does and doesn’t constitute a particular sin. That does not mean I have made any sort of judgment about his relationship with God. If he says he believes in Christ, that’s good enough for me. I’ll still speak my mind but I see him as a Christian friend.

Now, aside from that, it’s always good to meet another Side B guy. Feel free to comment on my blog or e-mail anytime. Trip, you too, for that matter. Adios.

The Mormon church does not believe you are lost because you are not Mormon. Evangelicals believe you are lost if you are Mormon. Get it right!

David,

I respect your comment, however my father has never called me a sinner. I used the ponzi scheme (pyramid programs) as an analogy. If you can get enough people to buy into a product, in this case sexual shame, the guy at the top makes out, in this case with a free ticket to heaven.

Jay wrote: “I consider you a Christian brother, but I think that this particular thing you’re doing is sinful,” which is what I’m saying to you.

I’m no so much concerned with my own sensitivity towards being slammed as a sexual sinner, but that of the sexually abused, particularly ones who take their lives over Jay’s brand of religious sexual interpretation. Because one may boast within their self perceived righteousness, that does not mean they are clear. I would direct Jay to the new post made today on your web sight. Thanks for putting it up, it really smacks of rational thinking and could be helpful to many.

Denny,

You are right on and I appreciate your ability to walk within yourself on this issue.

Jay,

You have skirted almost every question I have put to you. It is unbecoming and does not speak well of your character. In light of this, the invitation to your blog seems trite.

I ask that while you are in your sexual war against yourself i.e. your “brokenness”, that you publicly refrain from calling others broken like you through your sexual, I’m a sinner you’re a sinner, mentality. Like myself, others are sexually balanced and would no longer try to cut off our sexuality than cut off a foot or an arm. They are all physically equally important. Like I would say to Rick Warren, your personal “Christian” sex war is your issue, noone elses.

My gay friend Mark, who is vulnerable and does have suicidal thoughts at times, read your posts here. It took us hours to calm him down. Your lack of response to my mach shows me your compassion is mostly caged within your intellect. I’m uninterested in cleaning up your imbalanced sexual fallout, but I will do so with those that present themselves to me, as that is my job as a student of Jesus and a compassionate human being. Think as sexually negative as you like, just don’t think it on others who think more clearly than you do about sex. If you continue anger and conflict will continue to follow. I urge you to make “I, me” statements, instead of “you, them” while in your “sexual brokeness”.

Like an obstinate child, until you evolve to refrain within and shore up your boundaries, I am leary of welcoming you at my table, as I would not want a “scene”. We are adults here. I ask that you at least attempt keeping your meat and potatoes on your own plate while visiting others, and keep your fork and knife held tightly to your own hands.

I wish you the best in your recovery.

Good day,

Trip

I respect your comment, however my father has never called me a sinner.

I apologize, I misinterpreted your earlier comment about your father.

I used the ponzi scheme (pyramid programs) as an analogy. If you can get enough people to buy into a product, in this case sexual shame, the guy at the top makes out, in this case with a free ticket to heaven.

I didn’t hear anyone describe such a concept and I don’t think it’s fair to characterize what Jay said he believes as such.

This is becoming a personal discussion between Trip and Jay, so I’m going to do something I rarely do and ask you to take it off the blog if you wish to continue. Trip seems to know how to contact Jay if he wishes.

I am uncomfortable with the implication that this discussion is connected with the well being of your friend. If he indeed has suicidal thoughts, you should make sure he is taken to professionals immediately. It is unreasonable to assign such a Sword of Damocles over what is said here.

Since everything germane seems to have been said, I’m going to close out this thread to further discussion. Thanks to everyone for your participation.