I was very saddened to hear recently of two different Christian music artists who had "come out". One young female singer was 'hooking up' with other girls while on tour singing Christian music, and another left his wife and kids to move in with his boyfriend. The latter was quoted giving the usual blather about how he was "living a lie" and how free he was now that he was not denying who he was. In fact, he was working on another "Christian" album, which was going to include a song that basically asked 'who are you to tell me who I can marry?'. Vows? Superfluous. Loyalty to family? What lie was he living? Evidently that he was a person of personal integrity. Yecch!
I'm sorry, but this is stupid. Nobody with *any* integrity can justify this and claim to be following the Word of God. Puhleeeze! It is a very sad thing, but it exposes a larger problem that is afflicting our culture - a completely bankrupt way to determine morality and values that affects our society (and our churches) more than you might think. Many years back, now, a song from a major movie was on the charts for a while titled "you light up my life". This particular song was a decent example of the simple, sweet sounding love song that is so prevalent today, but one line from the song always bothered me (even more so because the singer was a well known Christian that should have known better). The line was "it can't be wrong if it feels so right". (Incidentally it is similar to another line in a the popular hymn which gives having "a feeling like this" as proof that God loves us. Uggh.)
Anyway, this ethic is now the moral imperative of our day, and it is the MAIN and ONLY real argument given for justifying homosexual behavior. Really. Other than that LaVey guy who occasionally makes it into the news by measuring finger lengths and other silly studies, what other justification is given? I believe that the American Psychological Association (I may have the name wrong) used to consider it a pathology to be treated. At some point, a certain number of their members called for a vote, and it went from a pathology to something natural. By a vote? Instead of trying to help people deal with it they all switched to "you were born this way" and "no treatment works". Now we have at least five genders in the world (including one created by surgery) and the culture war has moved on to polygamy, polyamory, bisexuality, body modification, same-sex marraige, pedophilia, bestiality, etc. Homosexuality? Nah, if you think it might be wrong you are a combination of a "flat earther/global warming denier" and a "KKK member filled with hate". Now someone with any problems along that line is herded away from anyone who might try to help them have victory over it and toward a big crowd of cheering supporters who can pat them on the back and give them the sad news that they can never change "but that's okay - celebrate it instead!"
The gospel, on the other hand, is a message of hope. Read Romans 7 and then 8. Look at the transition from Paul's frustration through justification and then hope. Chapter 8 is filled with hope, including hope for those in bondage to sin and habituated, frustrating difficulties. We are saved "to hope". We don't have to sin. Now we have Christians falling prey to the deterministic fatality of the world and calling it "freedom". How heartbreaking! How do they deal with passages like Romans 1 ("God gave them over", "not natural", "dishonor themselves") and the lists of those who are not in heaven ()? Evidently they are told that Romans 1 refers to those who were born heterosexual and *switched* contrary to that nature to doing homosexual acts, and that those who are born homosexual are not being referred to, because they are not "abandoning" their natural function. This is what passes for an argument in this post-modernist world. We must weep for these people, whose teachers "promise them freedom while they themselves are slaves of corruption."
So what is wrong with this ethic? Next time....
No comments:
Post a Comment