Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Selective Indignation Gone Wrong: Dialoguing with an unhappy gay rights advocate

The following is a partial transcript of an online exchange. A Christian mother was expressing to me how thankful she was to be able to home school her two daughters, in light of the godless philosophies behind government schools. For whatever reason, an advocate for the homosexual agenda needlessly and publicly accosted her. I felt it incumbent upon me to respond to this individual, not just in the mom’s defense, but to put forward a biblical worldview.

I share this with you because homosexuality and “gay marriage” is the hot button topic of the day, eclipsing even the problem of abortion. To our detriment, many within the institutional church are no longer standing on the authority of scripture. I pray this dialogue will prove beneficial to you in formulating your own biblical answers to this cultural dilemma. For clarity, his words are bold and italicized.

I'd rather my child be in a school…than be alone with a bigot for any length of time. Hate and disdain are not tolerable.
Well, then, you must find living with yourself nearly unbearable; for I find your speech to be both hateful and disdainful. (But I suspect over the years, you’ve developed a high threshold of tolerance for your own hate and disdain.)

Jesus himself offered this to the scorned, 'Blessed are you when people hate you, and when they exclude and insult you, and denounce your name as evil on account of the Son of Man.’"
Jesus did indeed say this. He was referring to the blessing of the godly being persecuted by the ungodly. Ungodly people often revile godly people. The Bible, in both Testaments, is filled with such occurrences.
And ungodly people hate and insult godly people to this very day--right here in the United States. For example, sometimes when a godly person quotes the Bible about a moral issue--say homosexuality for instance--ungodly people will often call them names and insinuate that there's no place for people like them in "civilized" society. [Some will go so far as to infer that godly folks are unfit for the company of children!]
Though such comments may be emotionally hurtful to the godly, Jesus says, paradoxically, the godly are blessed at such moments. This being the case--I have a feeling I may be very blessed today.

You can't change your race (and why would you want to??) a handicap isn't a personal choice, that is also the case with homosexuality.”
This is little more than a red herring. Choice has nothing to do with the matter. We’re not speaking of genetics. We’re speaking of ethics. Whether or not a person is born a homosexual has no bearing upon the question of morality. God defines--not man--what is moral. Morality is absolute and unchanging because morality is predicated upon the character of God, not the genes of man. Genetics and ethics are categorically disparate.

Hating people based on their color of their skin, or their sexual orientation is wrong.”
Here we are agreed. It is wrong to hate people based upon race or sexual orientation. But why do you equate biblical morality with hate? Why is believing homosexuality to be sinful [which the Bible, in no uncertain terms, teaches] virtually the same as hating homosexuals--in your mind?
The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin. I believe the Bible to be the authoritative word of God. This does not make me a homophobe. I do not hate or fear homosexuals. Neither do I condone what God condemns. I also believe fornication is sinful. God condemns it. Does this mean I hate or fear my next door neighbor who is living with his girlfriend? No.
I find the comments you have offered--the usual arguments marshaled against orthodox Christian morality--to be fundamentally emotional rather than rational. Arguments which appeal to one’s emotion rather than to one’s reason often become quite shrill; and consequently, they tend to be logically fallacious.

Self - righteous people make me sick. They are the ones who are calling out everyone else's sins, but never see their own filthy condition.”
Just a few observations. 1) How does believing homosexuality to be sinful [based upon the clear teaching of scripture--not personal opinion] make one “self-righteous”? Believing the Bible and submitting to it is not at all the same thing as being “self-righteous.” However, to hold one’s personal, moral opinion in higher esteem than God’s word is the epitome of self righteousness. Who could possibly be more self righteous than the one who elevates oneself to the position of judging God and His word?
2) Doesn’t the statement, “self-righteous people make me sick,” smack of self righteousness? I mean…how self righteous does one have to be to make such a mean-spirited, high handed blanket statement? How superior to others must one feel to write such a sentence? The blind hypocrisy of the “enlightened” is breathtaking! I am reminded of what was said to the atheist, Christopher Hitchens: “Your moral outrage against Christianity is almost puritanical!”
3) I notice you use the phrase, “filthy condition,” for those you deem “self-righteous.” To place someone in the category of “filthy condition” is to make a moral judgment. The question is: By what standard? By what standard are these people “filthy”? What is the basis for such a moralistic judgment?
You have no qualms of making moral judgments and pronouncing people “filthy.” What you reject is God’s word as the standard for making such moral judgments and pronouncements. You see, you make moral judgments all of the time. It is impossible not to. But when you reject God’s word and replace it with your own personal opinion, you lose the only absolute moral standard for making such judgments. “Filthy” then, is arbitrary; and morality is meaningless.

No comments:

Post a Comment