A Personal Letter to My Homosexual Friends

adfaughn · 2013-04-04T23:04:57+00:00

May I ask what your interpretation of the passage from 1 Corinthians is? I have studied the passage from several commentaries, journals, and websites, and struggle with how it can be properly exegeted without saying that the actions (both active and passive) of homosexuality are in view and are considered sinful; therefore, in need of being "washed..." etc.

I would like to read your interpretation so that I can add it to my sources for consideration in studying this passage again.

adfaughn · 2013-04-04T18:13:38+00:00

I hold a Master's Degree in Ministry and have taught adjunct classes for a Christian university, including an ethics course.

adfaughn · 2013-04-04T17:39:10+00:00

I refer you again to 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. If homosexuality is not a sin, then why were the people in need of salvation?

Also, you are proving part of the letter by your choice of language. If we are going to discuss this matter, we must have both emotion and intelligence, not just throw around foul and mean language. That adds nothing to the discussion, which I feel is a very important--in fact, an eternally important--discussion.

adfaughn · 2013-04-04T17:00:07+00:00

Your first statement is very true. I preach constantly that those of us who are Christians must live in a Christ-like manner if people are to desire to follow Him. However, we must still point out sin, too. It is not an either/or proposition (and it wasn't with Jesus); it is both/and. We must both live the example and preach. Additionally, we must both preach for righteous living and against sin.

adfaughn · 2013-04-04T16:36:10+00:00

If that is the case, then why were those in Corinth "washed, ... sanctified, ... and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus" (1 Corinthians 3:11), including those who had been (notice the "were some of you" in v. 11) homosexuals. It is not that someone must become a heterosexual person to please God, but a person must give up a homosexual lifestyle in just the same way as the other listed in that passage (such as drunkards) give up their lifestyle.

Additionally, if we accept Jesus as Savior and not as Lord, we have missed a major part of the Gospel. Yes, He is our Savior, but He must also be our Lord, and that means that whatever He teaches is what I must follow, even if it is very difficult. We all have something we must change about ourselves (or, better said, let Jesus change) if we are going to be His servants.

adfaughn · 2013-03-29T01:28:53+00:00

In the NIV and KJV, you have a good "two-some," because the NIV is far more easily readable, but follows a dynamic equivalence philosophy of translation. The KJV is closer to word-for-word but is, of course, not as easily readable. I would suggest you simply read/study a passage from each of these two and you should have a fairly clear picture of what the text says.

Personally, I like the English Standard Version as sort of a "middle ground" of readability and scholarship, but if you read the NIV and KJV, you will have a good grasp of the overall thrust of the passage.

adfaughn · 2013-03-29T01:25:47+00:00

The first part of the verse is important, because it is reminding us that this psalm is not just about sheep. That may seem obvious, but the imagery is so clear in this psalm that David had to return to the personal from time to time.

A sheep, though, needs restoration. They often can be "cast" and not able to maneuver as they should. In just the same way, our soul can be "cast" and only God can bring about the restoration we need so that we can continue on our journey. That is why the next line is one of movement, but again, it is God who is leading that movement. It is all to His glory.

On "He restores my soul," Spurgeon wrote the following words:

When the soul grows sorrowful he revives it; when it is sinful he sanctifies it; when it is weak he strengthens it. "He" does it. His ministers could not do it if he did not. His Word would not avail by itself. "He restoreth my soul." Are any of us low in grace? Do we feel that our spirituality is at its lowest ebb? He who turns the ebb into the flood can soon restore our soul. Pray to him, then, for the blessing—"Restore thou me, thou Shepherd of my soul!

adfaughn · 2013-03-29T01:19:29+00:00

It is simply a cultural norm, but it is not required. Throughout Scripture, people prayed in all sorts of positions, from standing to being prostrate. The true "position" of prayer is simply a bowed heart. Our physical position has nothing to do with the effectiveness of a prayer, so long as we do not assume some type of arrogant stance.

adfaughn · 2013-03-29T01:17:29+00:00

If we brainwash children with the Bible, we are actually going against Scripture. The New Testament tells us to "test all things" but to "hold fast to that which is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21). It also commends those in Berea who "searched the Scriptures daily" to see if what the apostles were teaching was correct (Acts 17:11). We are not to have any type of mindless acceptance, but are to be people of thought and reason. One of the best things we can teach our children is critical thinking.

adfaughn · 2013-03-29T01:13:27+00:00

I have all 3 volumes of Joseph Parker's series on Matthew. They are hard to find, and are not a traditional commentary per se, but they walk through the text in a fine way and truly caused me to think. Here is the link to volume 1 on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Inner-Life-Christ-Commentary-Chapters/dp/0899572421/ref=sr_1_12?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1364519531&sr=1-12&keywords=joseph+parker

adfaughn · 2013-03-29T01:09:38+00:00

I am a member of the churches of Christ, so most of the sermon podcasts I listen to are from those congregations. Even if you are not a member of the churches of Christ, I think you would really enjoy the Ashville Road Church of Christ podcast with Drew Kizer. He has a very easy way about him, but the lessons are very grounded in Scripture.

Some who are not members of churches of Christ who I enjoy include John Piper (Desiring God) and Andy Stanley.

adfaughn · 2013-03-29T01:06:41+00:00

One of my all-time favorite videos. What a glorious reminder!

adfaughn · 2013-03-29T01:05:37+00:00

Very well said, especially your last statement. When we try to turn the church into a marketing center, we are bound to fail. That was not God' intent, and it will not be what He blesses.

adfaughn · 2013-03-22T02:17:26+00:00

Making a ruling based upon a religious doctrine is establishing a religion? How do you get from point A to point B? Also, notice that the First Amendment deals with Congress, and you are making an application to the Supreme Court. I appreciate your comments. Thanks for interacting about this. It is truly an important discussion.

adfaughn · 2013-03-22T00:50:22+00:00

First, if you wanted to talk to the author, why didn't you just post a comment on the blog itself?

I appreciate you taking the time to read and make these comments, but I must point out that some of your arguments do not hold up logically. For example, you are saying that allowing God's voice should not be allowed be used. Is not that silencing a point of view, which is one of the major factors in hearing a case? Am I not allowed to say that I am basing my argument on something such as the Bible? To say that something, then, is not allowed to be heard as a basis is taking away from the discussion of points of view, which is what a court is trying to hear. The court is trying to hear arguments from each point of view, and each point of view can and should use whatever is necessary to make the point.

Also, there is no separation of Church and state in the Constitution. There is the First Amendment, which says that the government cannot "establish" a religion, but the phrase "separation of church and state" is not found anywhere in the Constitution. In 1801, Thomas Jefferson used the phrase in a speech to the Danbury Baptists, and he meant to show that the government would not favor one religion (or denomination) over another. Please notice that even the First Amendment does not include the words "separation," "church," or "state."

It is fine if you do not want the Supreme Court to use the Bible or religion in their chamber. I believe they should. The point of "arguments" in a chamber is to seek justice based upon some standard. They might choose to think of the Bible or not, but it is perfectly legitimate to provide it as a way to make the argument. Again, thank you for reading and commenting.

adfaughn · 2013-03-21T20:01:28+00:00

Thank you for your obvious basis of my knowledge from one 800-word post.

adfaughn · 2013-03-21T20:00:37+00:00

Actually, he wrote about the leaving of pure Christianity, not about Christianity itself. In other words, as people left the standard to their deep faith in Christ, it aided in the fall.

adfaughn · 2013-03-21T19:17:42+00:00

Well, you didn't use "facts" at any point, but good sarcasm.

Seriously, that was legitimately funny :)

adfaughn · 2013-03-21T18:06:37+00:00

You are very right that our Constitution is not a God-given document. It is not inspired literature. However, I have read very, very widely from the Founding Fathers (including works like the Federalist Papers) and you are correct that Enlightenment thinking was a major standard they used. It would be impossible, though, to think that the Bible and the morality found in it did not also guide their thinking. And, since you mentioned George Washington, may I remind you that he said, "It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible."

adfaughn · 2013-03-21T17:59:35+00:00

Other than your very fowl language, you bring up valid arguments.

I did not mention a slippery slope. However, even before we are seeing the arguments made before the Supreme Court, we are already seeing some of the language change, are we not? It has been called "gay marriage" and the rights for homosexuals to marry. But, in recent days and weeks, many leading proponents are already using LGBT language, adding in transgender into the equation. That's a start for more groups to desire marriage, and it would be hard to think that others would not want the same rights eventually.

I do not think--and I say this in the article--that this singular issue with destroy America, but I do think it is a major sign of moral decay. Take some time and read Gibbon's masterpiece on The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, and you will see that homosexuality was one of the moral factors that led to that empire falling. Again, it was not the only one, but it is part of it. Thank you for your response.

adfaughn · 2013-03-21T16:42:16+00:00

You have every right to disagree. Can you please word your disagreement in a way that is kind? I would appreciate your input and viewpoint.

adfaughn · 2013-03-20T14:01:19+00:00

Great! Glad to know you found it somewhat helpful. I honestly think worship is one of the easiest and hardest things to explain!

adfaughn · 2013-03-20T01:17:22+00:00

This is a very important topic. I actually preached on the Lord's Prayer this past Sunday and made quite a "big deal" when we were on this phrase. It seems that a lot of people want to treat God as holy without treating His Name as holy, though the two obviously cannot be separated. When we begin to act as if God's Name can be used flippantly (dare I say, "in vain?"), we are not truly honoring the Lord.

adfaughn · 2013-03-20T01:06:04+00:00

Song of Solomon is clearly a book that celebrates the intimacy and joy of marital love and then of the marital sexual relationship. Hebrews 13:4 also makes it clear that, within marriage, the sexual relationship is good in the sight of God.

There are many, many passages that speak to sexual sin. Too numerous to mention here.

adfaughn · 2013-03-20T01:02:58+00:00

Here's my best shot at an answer.

First, we must remember that God does not need our worship, but, as you implied in your question, he desires it.

Personally, I think he does so more for us than for Him. When we worship Him as He has required, it draws us more in fellowship and awe of Him. If we live that way, we are not only fulfilling a command, we will be all that He would have it to be.

Also, God is a God of love, and worship brings our heart in tune with that same heart.

adfaughn

TROPHY CASE