Do you suffer from homophobia?
Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s recent remarks that he would rather go to hell than to worship a God who is homophobic have challenged many Christians. Tutu was quoted as saying he feels as strongly about the issue of the discrimination of gays and lesbians as he did about the discrimination of black people in the old South Africa. Connecting the discrimination of homosexuals with racial discrimination is a very interesting tactic on the part of gay and lesbian activists.
- Advertisement -
The abhorrent oppression of blacks is something that is still fresh in the minds of most South Africans. The discussion about racial discrimination invokes painful memories in the minds of many black people and some white people are also overwhelmed with feelings of guilt regarding their complicity or inaction during the apartheid years. In other words none of us are unaffected by racism.
However racism and homophobia are not the same. Racism deals with the unfair treatment of people who belong to a different race. This “different” race is born different and God is the one who can account for that difference. In other words black people have not chosen their pigmentation and the same applies to white people. Homosexuals however have chosen their orientation because there is no biological factor that leads a person to become gay or lesbian.
There are other factors that lead to homosexuality but space here will not permit me to discuss them. The issue I want to raise is the fact that people who disagree with God tend to malign or denigrate Him. In other words if God will not endorse their lifestyles and beliefs then they will not honour Him. This is basically what Tutu is saying. I respect the Arch as a human rights campaigner but not as a representative of God.
- Advertisement -
Tutu is at best trying to form a god after his own kind and at worst questioning God’s integrity and commitment to the human race, of which homosexuals are a part. Accusing God of homophobia is sidetracking a very important issue and that is the one of sin. God’s hatred of sin is well documented in Scripture and this is why in His own volition He sent Jesus to deal with the sin problem. God has never given the sin of homosexuality special attention as if to say He has an axe to grind with homosexuals.
Whether a person’s sin is sexual deviancy, theft, or murder, God demands all of us to repent. Repentance is approaching God on His terms and not our own. What Tutu seems to suggest is that homosexuals should be given preferential treatment and not be required to repent. What the Bible teaches is that homosexuality is a sexual sin just like fornication and adultery. Accusing God and Bible-believing Christians of homophobia is a deliberate distraction.
Homophobia is actually described as a strong dislike and fear of homosexual people. God definitely does not hate homosexuals and neither does He fear them. God does not fear anybody or anything. The basic problem with those who campaign for the rights of homosexuals is that they think they can have rights with God. Creation does not have rights with the Creator because we were created for God’s pleasure and not our own.
God is a sovereign lawgiver and His laws do not need the endorsement of the UN or any other body. I for one think homosexuals need legal protection like any other human beings but I do not think they should have special privileges under the law. If the law has to protect us based on our orientation and beliefs then we will never be equal before the law. Crimes against homosexuals should be strongly dealt with and punished as should all other forms of lawlessness in this country.
God will never smile when a homosexual person is ill-treated or violated. Christians are not in cohorts with people who violate homosexuals or other LGBT individuals but we need them to see God for who He really is. He is not for or against anybody but is against sin. We can’t make our own God like the feminists would tell us about “Mother-God” or the racist who thinks God endorses his myopic views.
We found God as He is and it is not in His interest and neither is it in ours for Him to be like us.
Afrika,you hit the nail on the head. I am a former homosexual. People are not born homosexual. Change is possible. The gay issue should never have become a civil rights issue. See “Former Homosexuals do exist in South Africa http://www.learntolove.co.za/index.php/advocasy-and-same-sex-attraction/former-homosexuals-do-exist-in-south-africa
Thanks Andre. I had a look at your website. I am glad people like are sharing these insights.
Homosexuality has really taken a political slant. Criticising this lifestyle is seen to be politically incorrect.
Thank you Afrika. It is so true.
Another well written article. I particularly like the essence of this issue in that it is not the homosexual person that God and even believers condemn. It is the act of homosexuality which is condemned as sin. As believers we are often referred to as homophobes. This is not true and is merely a tactic to place us, as believers, on the defensive. God bless and greetings to Andre who I see has also commented on this article.
Thank you Stuart. Blessings to you
Thanks Stuart. Indeed sin is the issue and not homosexuality. Homosexuality is one type of sin amongst many others. This type of sin is not going to be put on a pedestal and be given preferential treatment by God.
Accusing people of being homophobic is just a destruction
Thank you Man of God for bringing this up. We cannot be silent or keep quiet at a time such as this whereby we hear God mocked and ridiculed everyday at various platforms. It is Not that God cannot defend Himself but one speaks up, lest a sin of omission is upon one’s head. We cannot keep quiet in the light of these blasphemies we hear everyday from people we never expected to.
Coming straight to the issue of homosexuality…. I have noted it with concern that the campaigners for homosexuality deliberately made homosexuality to be viewed in the same light as if it is a disability whereas it is not. If homosexuality was not sin, God would have not listed it in the bible as sin. Why didn’t He also go further to list blindness and other disabilities as sin then?
Homosexuality is expressly listed along with other sins from which we are subject ti REPENT from in the bible…
(1 Corinthians 6:9, 10 ESV)
Verse 6…Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
Why is then that some fell into homosexuality?
The word of God explains it like this:
Rom 1:18
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.”
(Romans 1:18, 21-25)
God is no God of confusion…
When God created man and woman he made it so distinct that even if one may be confused, a woman will further be identified by having a “WOMB”… case closed.
As for God being “homophobic” … Oh! please! ….. God is not fazed… He loves a sinner but abhors the sins, so do His sons to hate sin.
Lately there is this NEW phenomenon whereby people preach “psuedo-TOLERANCE and LOVE”… This type of Tolerance and Love is one-sided, it is notably a rule imposed upon Christians by non-Believers. It is strange that non-Believers do not want to tolerate Christians when Christians preach to them about sin, instead they toyi-toyi against all that says “God”. God is not a man; He cannot be voted in He cannot be voted out … that is why He is GOD, HE RULES SUPREME.
It is a pity the church will not be silent and TOLERANT. God warns the church about TOLERATING sin…
In Revelation, God says to this church…….
Verse 20…..Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. (Revelation 2:20-23 NIV)
All I can say, people should thank God for the dispensation of grace, really.
Thank you Roma. The ESV version makes things clearer doesn’t it. I wonder someone who reads that and is a homosexual, what does he or she says? Do they attack the translation? The New Kings James says the same thing and so does the NLT, Amplified. The NIV says “men who have sex with men.” Clear again!
Really the issue is about attempting to create a god who agrees with our lifestyle choices. What is next? People may one day tell us that there is actually nothing wrong with adultery or paedophilia.
People are just abusing God and silencing Christians by labelling and accusing them of intolerance.
Dear Afrika, I consider you to be one of the our region’s wisest and most respected Christian leaders and I seldom can fault anything you write or say. In this article you have really stated nothing new that is not the typical Christian response and line. But your rebutting of the archbishop is very interesting, and is long overdue. Tutu may be a national icon and a great humanitarian, but he is also a liberal humanist posing as a Christian leader and is therefore a false prophet.
I do however have an issue with your lack of a more holistic approach and response to homosexuality, and can only put this down to your lack of experience and also your lack of research outside of Christian rhetoric. In my 35 years of befriending and counselling homosexuals, and through research, I have found that it is extremely ignorant and naive, let alone unhelpful for ministry purposes, to stereotype all homosexual behaviour together.
1) Sure, there are those who choose to follow their perverted sexual urges and practice it despite knowing it is neither natural or right.Paul does a fine job of addressing this in Roman’s chapter one. No doubt, Paul had the infamous Roman orgies in mind when he wrote this, and his concern was that this had become so much a part of that culture that even Christians were being falsely influenced by it. This is a serious concern for our time as well, and it is right that Christian leaders like you address it to other Christians. Remember that apartheid was also a part of SA’s white culture, and we Christians literally had to be delivered from this mind set and terrible heresy (So much for Tutu’s confused understanding of the two issues). When Paul opposes sodomites and catamites (arsenokoitai and malakoi) in 1 Corinthians 6:9, the average naive Christian today may see this as a reference against homosexuality. Truth is that sodomy is not the sole domain of homosexuals, and disturbingly, it is extremely popular among young heterosexual couples.
2) Among those who choose to practice homosexuality in rebellion to God, are a fair amount of those who were brought up under very strict and tough authoritarian fathers (occasionally controlling mothers) , who often use the Bible as their reasons for their extremely strict and often abusive disciplining. The result is that the children learn to oppose authority of any type at a very young age, and they will oppose the authority of the Bible and ultimately God as well. Either that, or they will also become strict and tough disciplinarian fathers themselves and possibly inflict their own children with anti-authoritarian tendencies.
3) Quite a fair amount of homosexuals were actually sexually abused as young children, often not by homosexuals or strangers, but by married and ‘heterosexual’ people they knew. This will often start a vicious cycle of confused identity and sexual orientation. The trouble with the way we Christians stereotype these particular victims and label them with the first perverted group, is that we just end up dealing with the symptoms and not the cause. Very often these young boys are sodomised by ‘heterosexual’ males not so much for sexual pleasure, but as a form of male domination (think of dogs). If only we knew, we would be very surprised how common this was, and how close to home it happens. To break this cycle (of both 2 & 3) one has to show compassion to the victims (who often become perpetrators themselves, and/or homosexuals), win their confidence and trust, and guide them through forgiveness and deliverance and into their healing. No amount of condemnation or pointing of fingers is going to allow us any influence over this group, and the church has done a very good job of driving these people even further from God, and even making them hostile towards us. Forgiveness and deliverance should be a gentle but effective process, not to be confused with shouting at demons (which some call deliverance) or the mind reprogramming which some Christian centers offer for homosexuals (and for which they call inner healing). Many young girls who are raped either end up living a life of drugs and prostitution, or consider themselves fortunate to have escaped that lifestyle by becoming lesbians.
4) The last group is just as sad – it involves the effects of modern chemicals on the hormones of pregnant women. There is enough scientific and medical research done by experts in their field (including many Christian experts) to show that the forming and shaping of an unborn baby’s body takes place in the first half of the pregnancy, while the gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) takes place in the latter half of the pregnancy. It is also well researched and documented that sexual differentiation of the brain is affected by hormones, nutrients (or lack of them), medication and other chemical substances from the mother and the environment, and can bring about permanent changes in brain structures and or functions. This means that pesticides, herbicides, hormonal treatment, steroids, some medications and antibiotics, steroids pumped into beef cattle and other animals we eat, hormones pumped into dairy cattle, antibiotics pumped into pigs and other animals we eat, some common home detergents and chemicals etc. etc. etc., can enter the baby’s circulation and nerve cells via the placenta, and interfere with the unborn child’s gender identity. See http://www.shb-info.org/sexbrain.html , which is just one of many medical and science papers written by experts in their field. Worse case scenario is that a boy or girl finds themself trapped in a body which they cannot identify with. But as one friend, who is a medical specialist and a devout Christian missionary, wrote to me and said, there are so many different grey areas regarding the effects of hormonal imbalance and abnormalities on unborn babies that we have to be very, very careful before judging people’s sexual orientation and just labeling it as sin. I have personally met and counselled quite a few people who range from feeling trapped in the wrong body to just being effeminate (without necessarily being sexually attracted to the same gender), and who all believe they were born like that. Also, many of them came from loving Christian families. The extreme may be the transgender cases, but we have absolutely no clear evidence to disprove that hormones may also be affecting many less extreme cases that claim that they were born that way. No amount of forgiveness or deliverance can help these people, let alone condemnation, typical Christian rhetoric, or the pointing of the finger at them. Only the true unconditional love (not the “love the sinner but hate the sin” type) and compassion which Jesus gives through us can help these people. A miracle is needed, and most if not all of Jesus’s miracles, were the result of compassion being released in and through Him. So it will be with us.
One last point, sympathy and compassion are not the same thing. Sympathy is the counterfeit of compassion, it pities and gives correction and advice from afar, while compassion releases one to do something, even if that something is just to be a loyal, faithful and trusting friend and mentor who stands with them.
Hi Radical Middle,
Thanks for the compliment on my writings but I don’t agree that I am this region’s “wisest and most respected leader”. I know that you are expressing your own view but I am uncomfortable with the characterisation.
Moving on, the points you are raising are important in furthering debate and understanding on this important matter. You are right when you say I lack experience and research in this area. People like yourself who have operated in this space help to increase my understanding and this is why I appreciate your input.
I disagree with you when you say “no amount of forgiveness and deliverance can help these people.” Taking nothing away from the various “causes” of homosexuality you listed I do not believe that there are types of people that cannot be helped through God’s power. I am not referring to the gimmicks and mind games you alluded to but a real divine intervention. I have seen God intervening in many people’s lives including my own.
I have never been homosexual and so I cannot speak as someone who has been personally delivered from homosexuality however I was sexually abused as a child but that did not lead me into homosexuality.
Your definition of unconditional love is problematic for me. Do you mean we should love both the sinner and the sin or that you don’t consider homosexuality to be sin? Or do you mean that there are “types” of homosexuality that are not sin? Please explain.
Thank you.
Hi Afrika, regarding your question “Your definition of unconditional love is problematic for me. Do you mean we should love both the sinner and the sin or that you don’t consider homosexuality to be sin? Or do you mean that there are “types” of homosexuality that are not sin? Please explain”. Afrika, your question refers to my last point in particular. I believe that sin is sin, and no matter what one has experienced in their upbringing, or even if they are the victim of hormonal imbalances through our meddling with science, we don’t justify or excuse sin. And that includes sodomy, and homosexual acts. Why should we anyway, the cross of Jesus is more than a sufficient for any sin, so why deny them ?
The issue is when people claim they are trapped in the wrong bodies, when men are effeminate, or women are masculine (like one of our top female athletes), when people say they struggle to have any attraction to the opposite gender. I am not talking about any sexual acts that were committed. People can be or feel inclined that way years before they get into any kind of relationship, and some of them never have a relationship. No sin has been acted out and it would be improper and judgmental for me to accuse them of perhaps sinning by their wrongful sexual thoughts when I don’t know that for sure. In fact, in many cases they are not sexually attracted to the same gender, they just long for a relationship with the same gender. For example, when I fell in love with my wife it was an overwhelming desire to spend my life with her, not to have sex with her, although I did experience those temptations from time to time before we were married.
So in this statement I am not talking about the thought or act of sex, therefore I am not talking about sin. I am talking about nonsexual desires, be they as a man for things that our culture usually typifies as a feminine desire, or be they for a desire to have a lifelong close relationship with the same gender.
If a young person in our church had to confess such thoughts, such feelings, such desires, and state that they were born like that,we would not know what to do or how to respond. We haven’t properly thought through this. We are so opposed to science because of their general attitude to creation, that we don’t want to believe them when they tell us that they’ve messed up when it comes to interfering with hormones, and that people’s sexual identification has been affected, maybe even permanently.
As a church, we only have one reaction to anything that sounds, feels or smells like homosexuality, and that is “love the sinner, hate the sin”. It’s like a tape recorded rhetoric that fits everyone. It might sound Biblical, and it might feel safe, but is it really what Jesus would have said, and is it what the Holy Spirit is saying today ? We’re not living 2000 years ago, today there are nuclear bombs, television evangelists and chocolate.
The trouble is, after confessing their thoughts, feelings and desires to us, and hearing our awkward and fumbled religious liturgical response, these young people will walk out of church for good, and probably end up having a relationship that will result in homosexual acts and therefore sin.
Why else would some of the Bible translations that we use translate the word ‘malakoi’ in 1 Corinthians 6:9 (which means catamites, or one who willingly allows themself to be sodomised) as ‘effeminate’? It’s because we, as a so-called Christian ‘culture’, have already accepted that any effeminate man must be homosexual, and therefore committing must be sinful homosexual acts. That is just not the truth, but when we react wrongfully to such people, we can end up turning it into the truth.
God’s love is so powerful, so awesome, that we haven’t even begun to fathom it out. On the other hand, sin is the result of satan’s lies and guilt inflicted on us. We understand it, and we’re all guilty of it. To therefore come up with a non-Biblical cliche “love the sinner, but hate the sin” where we take God’s love and equate it almost equally with sin, is extremely inadequate. Sure God hates sin because He loves us so much, but His love for us a billion times billion times more than His hatred of our sin. Jesus died on Calvary not because He hated sin so much (which He did), but because He loves us so much. Big difference, and we as Christians have to make sure our love for sinners also far, far outweighs our hatred for their sin. Sin is not the opposite of love, in the same way as satan is not the opposite of God, like they are kind of equal opposites like jing and jang. If that’s our thinking then we are much further away than I thought we were regarding our comprehending what is the breadth and length and depth and height of God’s love.
Hi Radical Middle,
Now I understand where you come from. When you make the example of an SA top female athlete who looks masculine I now get the point you driving.
You are right that we cannot ignore and brush off such abnormalities but we need to try and understand them and happy people who caught in that situation. You are also right in separating the sinful act of engaging in homosexual sex and feelings or predisposition towards homosexuality. I see that you are passionate about this subject and I thank you very much for your contribution.
Sorry “help” people and not “happy” people.
Hi Afrika
I do apologise for this further and late comment, and I do realise that this conversation should have come to a close by now and moved on. However, I have not been in a position to access this website since Friday and so I have just this moment read your last reply to me. I have one last thing to say about this subject right now, and it is in response to something you shared in an earlier comment to me.
There is a book called ‘The 5 Love Languages’, written by Gary Chapman, which has been a tremendous help to Christian pastors and counsellors around the world. In it, Chapman convincingly shows that because we are all uniquely made by God, we all respond very differently to love and abuse. For example, this will explain why a child who’s dominant love language is ‘touch’, is always more traumatised by sexual and physical abuse than say a child who’s dominant love language is ‘words of affirmation’. That in no way lightens the severity of any abuse, it just shows that we all respond differently.
I was never sexually or physically abused myself, but my counselling experience has shown me that some children who have suffered from abuse can develop such severe post traumatic stress, that their protection mechanisms can develop or help to create Dissociate Identity Disorder (DID) or Multiple Personality Disorder. To further complicate this tragedy, for many years the church has thought that these were demons which need to expelled, which in turn only exacerbated the victims trauma and suffering. Thankfully, in recent years a very large part of the world wide Christian church has come to realise that these are not demons, and that inner healing and not deliverance is required.
But this once again shows the danger of forming ‘uneducated’ opinions (whether it be through medical, scientific or Biblical naivetés), stereotyping, judgement, or making stupid clichés when it comes to the immense complexities of the human psyche.
Radical Middle, your participation in this debate has been very informative for me. Don’t apologise that we are still engaged in it. I have read the 5 Love Languages book and it is one of my wife’s favourite books. It helps her to show me what she means when she says I don’t understand her love language. Indeed our love languages are different. I am not the “spend time with me” type and yet my wife is. There are many other books by Gary Chapman here at home. All of them purchased by my wife. I have been helped by exposing to them.
We need to be informed so that we can render a better service to people.
Thank you for helping to better my understanding on this subject.
Blessings
This is an insightful reading, thank you Afrika. I, however, can’t find the logic behind homosexuality being a “choice”. I have a sister and many of her friends who are homosexuals. She’s been molested and gang raped by the so-called corrective rapist. Surely, the logical thing would be to abandon her “choice”. I just can’t see how one would chose a life of being continually persecuted. Why would they do that, I ask. I’d also like to know if we chose to be heterosexual… I’m really puzzled by this “choice” thing. Please elaborate…
Mxolisi can I refer you to this website. http://www.mygenes.co.nz/index.html. The issue is that our biological make-up shows that we are born heterosexual. This is not a choice just like being black is not a choice. Homosexuals do not have biological mechanisms to justify the argument that they are born that way. When it comes to sex the Bible says a person who sleeps with someone of the same sex does something that is “unnatural” (Romans 1:27). I am saddened however by the corrective rape and abuse of your sister. Such things should not be done regardless of a person’s choice or orientation. I am sure one of the things you noticed when you were overseas is that women dress any way they like and no one rapes them because of how they are dressed. The idea that someone asked for it is an attempt to justify evil. Your sister may not know how to deal with the feelings she has and therefore cannot just “abandon” homosexuality. It is not as simple as that and this is why the are counsellors and people who work to help people who want to free from homosexuality. I am not equipped in this area but I know a couple of people who have completely changed into fully fledged heterosexuals. Check more info about such at http://www.learntolove.co.za
On this topic Ruthi made this point on my Facebook page:
Ruth Thembani Odigie I don’t believe any phobia is Godly. There is no phobia or fear in love, and love is the only commandment Jesus gave us.
* I wrote a little something about this just recently
http://unravelling-place.blogspot.com/
There is one thing I agreed with this author on – God does not make any big special deal about homosexual sin, just sin.
In short we are not homophobe but against sin and rebellion
Spot on Ruth and Ntobeko. Thanks
Well said, God has made a way from dysfunction to function. He is our completeness and the truth, we must simply choose to take Him at His Word.
That is interesting way of putting it Vincent and you are right. We don’t have to live with our dysfunction and insufficiency.
Thank you
What do you mean by ‘biological mechanisms”?
So, exactly which points do we differ on again?
(1) I believe and trust in God the Father our Creator
(2) I believe and trust in Jesus Christ our Saviour and Advocate
(3) I believe and trust in the Holy Spirit our Guide and Sanctifier to renew our minds over time
(4) I believe that the Bible is the Word of God, is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness
(5) I believe man is fallible, sees in part (not yet fully), doesn’t naturally think as God does (his thoughts are not our thoughts), has a sinful tendency to lean on his own understanding, can misunderstand the Bible (2 Pet 3:16),
(6) I believe that many who trust in God for their salvation, in good faith interpret many Biblical passages differently and obviously everyone feels their way is the best
(7) I don’t believe that these differences ought to divide the Body of Christ or cause disunity, strife and breaks in fellowship where people agree on the fundamentals of the faith
(8) I believe that occasionally we may change the way we understand passages in the Bible but that this requires very sound reasons
(9) I believe we need to be open to growth (good change), the renewing of our minds and not simply and boringly rehashing the same old mantras over and over like a brainwashing machine – which means we need to hear prophetic voices which challenge us in new ways from time to time in our lives
(10) I believe the Bible presents marriage as between one man and one woman before the Fall
(11) I believe the Bible gives other alternatives such as celibacy and polygyny with various degrees of approval after the Fall
(12) I believe that Gay Marriage is never explicitly mentioned or addressed – not in a positive or negative light
(13) I believe that the issue of wearing contact lenses is never explicitly mentioned or addressed
(14) I believe that every example of a blade deliberately being stuck into a man’s abdomen, whether it results in murder or just injury, is negatively portrayed in the Bible (including the blade which pierced Jesus’ side)
(15) I believe that no Christian church condemns open heart surgery despite the fact that this involves a blade piercing an abdomen (admittedly Scientologists and Jehovah’s Wittnesses might but they are a bit nutty!)
(16) I believe that every mention of actual homosexual activity mentioned in the Bible is portrayed in a negative light
(17) I believe that the context for each explicit mention of actual homosexual activity mentioned in the Bible is fertility cult prostitution (which necessitated idolatry, adultery and/or fornication, promiscuity, exploitation, unsafe sex and deception). [12 separate verses explicitly refer to this practice].
(18) I believe that Gay Marriage has none of these sinful components and in fact breaks no law (as summarized by Jesus’ Great Commandments and Paul’s summary of these (Gal 5:14))
(19) I believe to condemn all homosexual activity on the basis of these specific prohibitions is
(a) to throw the baby (or our brains) out with the bathwater
(b) to fail to take the Fall into account – nor redemptive measures to address the Fall
(c) to unnecessarily alienate gay people from the gospel message and the church
(d) to make life unbearably difficult for fellow Christians who are family of gay people
(e) to alienate friends and supporters of gay people who highly value human rights and equality and thus making witnessing more difficult and place hindrances in the way of unbelievers
(f) to create schisms and strife within the Body of Christ
(g) to nurture a legalistic spirituality, judgementalism, superiority and hypocrisy rather than a life-giving spirituality promoting transformative love and acceptance
(h) to create pastoral dilemmas re excluding professing believers and their offspring
(h) to cause young Christians to question their salvation and to experience their religion as being irreconcilable with their sexual orientation placing them in a hopeless and sometimes fatal position.
So which numbers did you identify as points of difference … and are these important enough to exclude someone from fellowship with you?