Dan wrote, in part, as follows:
"God wants me to look beyond myself to him, to other people who differ
from me ... and to his truly diverse world. On one level this would call
me to reach out to gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgenders, and others,
yet on another level it would tell me that they don't comprehend (or
aren't able to embrace) the beauty of unity-in-diversity that is so
wonderfully symbolized in monogamous heterosexual marriage."
I do not see any conflict at all between these two ideas. On the second,
you may, indeed, be right. In the same sense, then, those who are
unmarried (never married) are similarly missing out on the diversity
thing. That does not make them 2nd class people.
Dan continues: "I'm not trying to make homosexual behavior out to be
worse that other sins cataloged by Jesus (see Matt. 15:19) or Paul (see
e.g. 2 Cor. 12:20). American culture, and the evangelical subculture in
particular, should welcome artistic men and strong-minded women,
challenge abusive
machismo, encourage open dialogue, and show love and compassion to all.
Yet as a general principle, I would at this time at least hold that
heterosexuality is God's "Plan A." "
At the beginning, you say "homosexual behavior" as if it were a
monolithic thing; I claim, of course, that it is not. As to your last
sentence, on what basis do you argue this? Would you argue this if the
world were 96% homosexual and 4% heterosexual rather than the other way
around? I would agree that heterosexual marriage is "plan A" but it
clearly does not apply to 100% of the human population. But I expanded on
this idea in a reply to George.
Dan: "As Karl Evans quoting David Myers seems to indicate, the default
position is grace, humility and love. I suggest, though, that
short-circuiting the discussion would leave us with unchallenged
assumptions and frustrated, even violent partisans. There is truth to be
spoken in love (cf. Eph. 4:15), although grace knows when to keep
silence."
Yup. There are a number of people in the evangelical camp, even on this
LISTSERV, who would like to see discussions of this sort cease. I
sympathize with them, but my leading is definitely otherwise.
Dan: "Once the school year is underway and a couple of projects are
finished, I'll look for the Geiss and Messer book that Burgy recommends."
I found an internet site which argues the homosexual issues both ways,
and have just put a link to it on my own web site. It takes the form of a
debate between Tony Compolo and his wife.
Dan: "Meanwhile, another book challenges those who revere "preference"
and turn "tolerance" into equivocation, relativism and compromise of
important principles, when it says, "…let God be found true, though every
man a liar…." (Romans 3:4)"
And the gut issue is, of course, does my claim counter that book. Show me
that it does, and I'll recant. Insist that it does, and I'll suggest you
are reading into that book what is not there.
John Burgeson (Burgy)
http://www.burgy.50megs.com
(science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
humor, cars, God's intervention into natural causation, etc.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 10 2001 - 17:52:28 EDT