Gay Christianity Refuted Part 1

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now at 602 973 460 to or toll-free across the United States. It's 1 877 7 5 3 3 3 4 1. And now with today's topic here is James white.

Why This Response Focuses on Gay Christianity

And welcome to the dividing line a mega edition of the dividing line today two hours the first hour We will be providing a response To a video that I viewed just this. Well, I didn't view it. I listened to it just this morning.

It was directed to me. I was directed to it, I guess By a gentleman here in the local Phoenix area who said he did not want a hat tip. So you don't get a hat tip fine anyway, that's normally how I encounter such materials is someone drops me a line or an email or a tweet or something in channel and so on so forth as I listened this morning to this presentation.

I Decided that while we had planned a regular dividing line that I would add an hour. Because and we won't finish this today. I honestly think it would almost be oppressive To try to address this subject for two full hours.

It would be it'd be hard. But what we're going to do is for the first hour respond to a gay Christian presentation. Because last time we talked about Dan Savage who doesn't claim to be a Christian at all and just simply says the Bible is filled With bull on this subject.

That's one perspective. That's that's one direction that people go and Then you have this perspective and I think most Christians struggle much more to respond to this perspective and certainly it is this presentation that Has been extremely effective in Totally neutralizing liberal Protestantism in regards to homosexuality you know that your ELCA PC USA United Methodist Episcopalians, etc, etc, your liberals are as a whole Have completely collapsed and I think you will hear in this presentation exactly why as I listened I was struck by the Erudite speech of this young man.

Having written a book on the subject of homosexuality I Sort of felt like Standing back and and saying Sir, did it really take you two years to read John Boswell's book? Because I know the sources from which he's drawing his exegesis, which is in fact an eisegesis of the text but most people listening to this and I I know I posted on the blog so people could could watch it and could listen to it I think most people who've listened to it have listened to it within a Context of not so much listening to Hear what other people would hear?

And I think that's I should have put that into the blog article. Try to put yourself in the position of someone sitting in that audience and Try to understand why it is That on the basis of numbers, we're losing this war.

The next generation is buying.

Both.

Dan Savage and this fellow Even though they are giving completely Different argumentation They're buying them both. What does that tell you? It tells you that most of our fellow citizens Are not convinced by rational argumentation.

It is appearance. It is emotion. It's not a matter of truth. It's not a matter of consistency. And that's what's going on Around us. And so we want to launch into This particular section. And then we'll take a break at the top of the hour.

And then the second hour will be more a little bit more normal. And I'll be able to Mention a certain birthday girl out there. But I don't want to do that in this hour because it just wouldn't seem appropriate Attach these things to this particular subject.

So we're going to launch right into it like we always do. Listen, respond, interact, educate, hopefully prepare you. Because this is the kind of presentation That I think we need to be very quick To give a clear, compelling, biblically based Non-harsh, non-hateful response to.

So let's start listening.

Matthew Vines's Presentation and the Traditional View

...graciously agreeing to host the event. My name is Matthew Vines, I'm 21 years old And I'm currently a student in college Although I've been on leave for most of the last two years In order to study the material that I'll be presenting tonight.

I was born and raised here in Wichita In a loving Christian home and in a church community That holds to the traditional interpretation of scripture on this subject. Just to offer a brief outline for this presentation I'll start by considering...

By the way, I think that Matt's church Is not the church he's speaking at. In other words, the one he grew up in Is not the same one he's speaking at. Now, I think it was a different church. That would not exactly allow him to stand up front And explain why they're all wrong.

...some of the broader issues and divisions That are behind this debate And then I'll move to a closer examination Of the main biblical texts that are involved in it And then I'll offer some concluding remarks.

The issue of homosexuality Of the ordination of gay clergy And of the blessing of same-sex unions Has caused tremendous divisions in the church in recent decades. And the church remains substantially divided Over the issue today.

On the one hand, the most common themes Voiced by those who support changing Traditional church teaching on homosexuality Are those of acceptance, inclusion, and love. While on the other hand Those who oppose these changes Express concerns about sexual purity Holiness And most fundamentally The place of scripture in our communities.

Now, one of the things that Was at least somewhat to be appreciated In this presentation It's not a fair presentation. An unbiased presentation, obviously. But it is. Well, let's just compare it to Dan Savage.

And it'll look like it's the model Of fairness and balance. But one of the issues That we will be addressing Repeatedly In this conversation Is what is love? What is love? What is Christian love? Is love defined biblically The same thing as love Defined by our society?

And most assuredly We recognize that it is not. But notice the contrast It was just made One side being concerned about love The other side concerned about purity. I am just as concerned about love. And in fact One of my greatest criticisms Of Matt's position Is that he never defines what love is.

And he insists And will within the next few minutes Insist that the love that exists Between two homosexuals Is identical to the love that exists In a married relationship Between a man and a woman. And that's exactly where I was On North New River Road This morning In the middle of a 70 mile bike ride When he said that.

And thankfully there's nothing out there But coyotes and lizards. That heard me yelling. No it isn't In between breaths As I was climbing a hill At that particular point in time. So this will be central To the discussion.

Are we continuing to uphold the Bible As authoritative. And are we taking biblical teachings seriously Even if they make us uncomfortable. I want to begin tonight By considering the traditional interpretation Of scripture on this subject In part because its conclusions Have a much longer history within the church And also because I think that many Who adhere to that position Feel that those who are arguing For a new position Haven't yet put forth theological arguments That are as well grounded In scripture as their own.

Well as an individual Who has written on this subject And who has unfortunately An entire section of pro-homosexual books In his library However I will admit Let's see the same sex controversy here Is copyright 2002.

It's 10 years old. And if I had had to keep up With what has been published In the past decade It would be three times Four times the size that it is. I was amazed even during the writing Of the same sex controversy.

How many books came out Even during that time. And I'll be honest with you I haven't kept up with a lot of this stuff. Because as I listen to people like Matt today They've not come up with anything new.

There isn't anything new here. And well As we'll see It's the other side That very rarely. But seriously The refutations that have been written Of material Starting with John Boswell And others that have come since then.

John Boswell's book Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality Is probably the main source For most of Matt's presentation. And certainly the books That have been spawned by it All look back to Boswell As the scholarly rock Upon which they stand And refute Boswell.

In which case The most biblically sound position Should prevail. The traditional interpretation. In summary form is this. There are six passages in the Bible That refer in some way To same sex behavior And they are all negative.

Three of them are direct And clear In the Old Testament. In Leviticus Male same sex relations are prohibited And labeled an abomination. In Romans Paul speaks of women Quote, exchanging natural relations For unnatural ones And of men Abandoning natural relations with women And committing shameful acts with other men.

And so according to the traditional interpretation Both the Old and the New Testament Are consistent In their rejection of same sex relationships.

Now I would want to add As we did in our book The fact that If you think That the issue of the Bible's teaching On homosexuality Is solely Or even primarily Based upon The negative texts Genesis 18 and 19 Leviticus 18 and 20 And then Romans chapter 1 1 Corinthians chapter 6 And 1 Timothy chapter 1 Those six texts There are others Some of the male temple prostitutes In the Old Testament Things like that.

But those are the primary texts. If you think that the Biblical argument Relating to homosexuality Is even primarily based upon those You've missed the boat. Because the primary Biblical argument Is found in Matthew chapter 19 In Jesus' own teaching Drawn from Genesis As to the nature Of the negative decree The role Of men and women.

And you must understand That those who Like Matt Consider themselves to be Gay Christians Do so. They take their position Fundamentally through An overthrow of scriptural authority. Now he's not going to Specifically get into those issues.

But.

There is a text.

That in the slightest bit Demonstrates an understanding Of the consistency of Biblical teaching Especially in regards to The positive Biblical teaching In regards to marriage. I've just never seen it.

But it's not just those three verses As well as three others That I'll come to later. It's true that six verses Isn't all that many Out of scripture's 31 ,000. But not only are they all negative From the traditional viewpoint.

They gain broader meaning And coherence From the opening chapters of Genesis In which God creates Adam and Eve Male and female That was the original creation Before the fall Before sin entered the world.

That was the way That things were supposed to be. And so according to this view If someone is gay Then their sexual orientation Is a sign of the fall A sign of human fallenness And brokenness. That was not the way That things were supposed to be.

And while having a same-sex orientation Is not in and of itself a sin According to the traditional interpretation. Acting upon it is Because the Bible is clear Both in what it negatively prohibits And in what it positively approves.

Christians who are gay And attracted to members of the same sex Are thus called To refrain from acting on those attractions To deny themselves To take up their crosses And to follow Christ. And though it may not seem fair to us God's ways are higher than our own.

And it's not our role to question But to obey.

Now.

I'm not sure I would have put it quite that way.

But.

I think it is absolutely fair. It is absolutely appropriate Throughout the course of this examination To replace Same-sex attraction With other.

Sinful.

Attitudes and actions. That the scriptures represent to us. And see.

If.

The argumentation That Matt presents.

Is not.

Perfectly designed To overthrow the entirety Of biblical morality. People Shut you down When you immediately make connections. And they've been taught to do this by example Not because they've thought through Why there's actually no connection.

But the reality is That today If you're familiar with the historical development Of the arguments for homosexuality Over the past 50 years.

Then.

You know That those who are promoting Intergenerational love Are using the exact Same arguments that were being used By homosexuals 50 years ago. If you don't know what intergenerational love is. Intergenerational love Is pedophilia.

Adults engaging in sexual behavior Which of course they will say is Loving sexual behavior With minor children. That's intergenerational love. And we already have Those within the psychology Psychiatry community Who are drawing the parallels Making the arguments That this needs to be removed From the DSM.

And It needs to be seen As the way these people were born. These are natural proclivities. The same thing with polygamy The same thing with bestiality All of these things. We just need to grow past And recognize that these things Are acceptable.

Everybody gets to define Their own moral plane.

Except That.

You know. Maybe stealing or something Because I don't want you to take my Mac from me. Or something along those lines. It is absolutely fair To point out That especially toward the end of this presentation As Matthew Vines Is berating Christians for Adding suffering to the life of Gay Christians That that kind of argumentation Is already being used For almost every kind of Moral overthrow Of God's commandments.

And that needs to be kept in mind. And then you need to examine Is there a foundation For differentiating The homosexual argument From these others who are using the same argument. And if so, what is it?

And is it just a Because I've heard homosexuals say I'm offended when you do that I imagine you are. But what's the basis for your offense? Can you provide. They're not young enough To make that kind of decision.

Or they're not old enough To make that kind of decision. That sounds like a rather arbitrary thing. And so keep that in mind As you listen to this As it develops And we'll see that.

Within this framework Gay people have a problem And that is that they want to have sex With the wrong people. They tend to be viewed as Essentially lustful sexual beings. So while straight people.

Now let me just mention Again, one of the reasons we need to hear this Is that Matthew Vines Is presenting The monogamous Long-term committed concept Of homosexuality Which is almost Never experienced By a homosexual.

While sadly Long-term monogamous marriages Are now in the minority. We all know Those glorious cases Those glorious couples we see Who've been married 50 And 60 And 70 years.

But.

The vast majority Of homosexual expression In our society And historically And this will even be substantiated By some of the arguments He himself makes later on But the vast majority of homosexual experience Is not monogamous It's not based upon long-term commitments Or anything of the kind.

And unfortunately Once again All one has to do Is do just a little bit of digging On the internet to see The real public face of homosexuality Which is not the face That Matthew Vines is putting on here Which means it is a multifaceted movement.

And he may well say I'm not talking about that kind of homosexuality But if he's going to say that Then he needs.

To condemn.

That kind of homosexual behavior. But the problem is.

On what basis Are you going to condemn it?

Because once you start Making those kinds of judgments What's the foundation upon which you're standing? Et cetera, et cetera.

Fall in love Get married And start families. Gay people just have sex But everyone has A sexual orientation About sex. Straight people are never really forced To think about their sexual orientation As a distinctive characteristic.

That's because there is a natural Sexual orientation And there is an unnatural one. And oh, he's going to go through Paul and does not even nature Tell you long hair. And try to get away from the fact That the Bible can actually talk about the fact That because God has created In a particular fashion That there is a necessary Natural function Of the male and the female He's going to use that way To get around that.

As if, well, if the Bible ever once Uses the term nature In some other way Then there cannot be any transcendent use. There cannot be anything That flows from the fact That one of the biggest themes In all of scripture Is the reality that God's the creator of all things.

And therefore he determines What is natural and right For all things Through his creative decree. But that needs to be That really, really, really Needs to be kept in mind.

But it's still a part of them And it affects an enormous amount Of their lives.

By the way, I forgot What I was going to comment about there Over and over again In this presentation. Again, you know It's easy to say Well, you could do that If you wanted to. But you see, due to the nature Of the created order There's only one way to do that Two men cannot start.

A family.

I mean, would there be Any meaningful argumentation To someone who is complaining And saying God isn't treating me correctly And I'm not able to truly fulfill My true desires Because I want to be married To my German Shepherd And I want to start a family With my German Shepherd But I can't.

Well, why can't you? Well, because God didn't create it.

To work that way.

That's why.

And two men together Cannot create life. Two women together Cannot create life. That awesome and wonderful thing That results in the creation of life That requires A male and a female Not two men Not two women.

To complain about that Is to complain About the sun in the sky Or the moon at night. That's just the way it is. Now he's going to say Well, but there's an overarching Biblical teaching That it's not good for man.

To be alone.

And that Biblical teaching Has found the context Of God specifically meeting The need for that man. By creating what? Another man? No, by creating a woman. And that woman Who is different than him Is his helpmate.

If God had created Another man Then God might have just Done his well to create a mirror. And as I said One of the key issues is What is the nature of love? The love that exists Between a man and a woman Is not a mirror image love.

It is the love of one Who is different than I am. Homosexuality does not.

Offer.

That kind Of relationship.

What sexual orientation is For straight people Is their capacity for romantic Love and self-giving. It's not about sexual Attraction and behavior. It's because we have A sexual orientation That we're able to fall In love with someone To build a long-term Committed relationship with them And to form a family.

Family is not about sex. But for so many of us It still depends upon Having a companion A spouse.

It's not about sex. If you're going to talk about family Then you have to bring that in. It is essentially Self-centered. It is essentially Focused upon Me And my desires And my wants. That's what homosexuality is.

When you marry another Who is different than you. Not the same as you. Different than you. That begins The process Of quite literally Ripping the selfishness Right out of you. And the more you're willing To give of yourself To that other person The more that's going to be Your experience.

And then When the little ones arrive Every little one comes into this world Absolutely self-centered. Me, myself, and I My needs, my wants And talk about The most effective way Of removing Self-centeredness From an individual.

And then they start going Through that process Where the design of the family is To remove self-centeredness.

From them.

And to make us look to others. And to serve others. That's why I think the great tragedy Of homosexuals Adopting children Is all about. Because the only love That that homosexual couple Can demonstrate Is mirror image love.

There are no male and female. Oh, I know somebody. Well, we all can tell. And not those lesbians. Which one's the man. I know, I know. But that's not the same thing. When two women adopt a child. That child does not have a father.

That child does not have a mother. That's the reality of the situation.

And that's true for gay people As well as for straight people. That is what sexual orientation Means for them, too. Gay people have the very same capacity For romantic love And self-giving That straight people do.

The emotional bond That gay couples share The quality of love Is identical to that of straight couples.

There. Or that's where I have to say.

No.

That is not true. You can talk all you wish.

Matthew.

About.

The depth of feeling That one has. But it is not. And since you call yourself a Christian It is not Christian love. Because it's not defined Within biblical parameters. Within the parameters That you have designed.

You may not like those parameters. You may have given yourself. You say you didn't choose this. But you have chosen To let it define who you are. And so when you say That it's identical I say to you, you are wrong.

It is not. It cannot be. It cannot be. It's impossible.

Gay people. Like almost all of us.

Have too long.

To build one of their own. But the consequence Of the traditional interpretation Of the Bible Is that while straight people Are told to avoid lust Casual relationships And promiscuity Gay people are told To avoid romantic relationships Entirely.

That is not That is not the result Of the traditional interpretation.

And I know that.

As it's found in Genesis He didn't mention And I could be wrong about this I'll stand corrected If I am. But I don't think That he made mention Of Jesus' reaffirmation Of the specific teaching Of Genesis In Matthew chapter 19.

And that says a lot to me. It is unfair to say Would it be fair For those who promote Intergenerational love To say that it's due to the Well of course the Bible Doesn't even mention that. It's an abomination beyond Even the imagination Of the scriptural writers.

But would it be fair for them To blame the Bible And the traditional interpretation Of the Bible For their inability To publicly celebrate Their intergenerational love. If you think it's too wild And crazy To imagine A push someday By intergenerational lovists For public recognition Of their relationships In a marriage context Then you haven't been Paying attention To what's going on in our world.

Straight people's sexuality Is seen as a fundamentally.

Irresponsible.

It can be used in sinful Or irresponsible ways But can also be harnessed And oriented toward A loving marriage relationship.

It's called discipline It's called controlling The urges that are ours And limiting yourself To monogamy For the glory of God And the love of the person To whom you are committed.

That will be blessed. But those relationships That are just as important to them Are told that for them. Even lifelong Committed relationships Would be sinful.

They would be.

Because it would involve A fundamental denial Of the created order A fundamental turning inward Of oneself Rather than outward Toward that which is other And it would be a fundamental Defined as being In opposition To God's truth.

And so again. There are so many sins That we could plug in here And put into Matthew's Argumentation And then fault The Christian community For being so narrow minded As to not see the pain That we're causing To these individuals.

Because we will not.

Celebrate.

Their.

Consummation of their Sinful desires. It is an amazing thing To listen to.

Because their sexual orientation Is completely broken It's not an issue of lust Versus love.

Now by the way.

He will say that sexual orientation Is really something. That's a trans-biblical category. So. They couldn't have understood it. Back in the days of the Bible. Of course. Which fundamentally says what.

About the Bible and its origination. Because if.

If.

Gender and sexual orientation. And all this stuff. That has come into.

Vogue.

If that's true. If it really does. Represent something about humanity. Does God know about it. Even back when he Inspired the Bible? Remember we're talking to someone Who claims to be A gay Christian.

Which means I would think That scripture is normative. And that scripture is inspired. But what does that inspiration mean? Well we'll see a little bit more. As we continue on. I've only gotten through.

How far have I gotten so far?

How far have I gotten so far?

Or of casual versus committed relationships Because same sex relationships Are intrinsically sinful No matter the quality And no matter The context.

Quality and context.

Quality?

What does that mean? Are there quality thieves adultery? Is high-quality adultery less sinful than low-quality adultery? How about high-quality bestiality versus low-quality bestiality? How is that relevant to its violation of God's standards?

Gay people's sexual.

Orientation is so broken, so messed up, that nothing good can come from it. No morally good, godly relationship could ever come from it. I agree. I agree completely. And so they are told that they will never have a romantic bond that will be celebrated by their community.

They will never have a.

Romantic bond that is defined by their perversion of the sexual decrees of God, the created order. It sounds like these terrible, horrible people are denying to them something. No one's denying them that if they will but repent of their sin, recognize the sinfulness of it, confess it, and turn from it, and seek restoration and healing, which of course is the very thing that most of the folks in the homosexual movement, if you want to see a homosexual get angry, tell them it's possible to be an ex-homosexual.

The results will be absolutely amazing to you, but if they will turn from those things, they can experience those relationships. But the point is, by definition, those relationships are defined by the creative decree of God.

And that's the whole issue. They are told.

That they will never have a family. Philippians 2 verse 4 tells us to look not only to our own interests, but also to the interests of others. And in Matthew 5, Jesus instructs that if someone makes you go one mile, go with them two miles.

And so I'm going to ask you, would you step into my shoes for a moment and walk with me just one mile? I really don't think either. Text. Actually.

Had anything to do with exhorting us to try to understand what it is like to be a sinner who is so defined by one's sin that you will actually define the entirety of your life thereby. I don't think either one of those texts really.

Can be stretched that far. Even if it makes you a bit uncomfortable, I am gay. I didn't choose to be gay. It's not something that I would have chosen, not because it's necessarily a bad thing to be, but because it's extremely.

Inconvenient. Now it's interesting. Bigelow and Channel, I guess, has found a transcript to this entire talk. And he's posting it in Channel as either that or he made it. I doubt that. But I guess there is a transcript online someplace.

I'll have to get the URL and attach that to the blog article. But I didn't choose to be gay. How do you respond to that? I suppose it could be said that there are people who did not choose to experience particular sexual desires.

I did not choose to be impatient. I mean, I look at myself and there are some people who think I'm very patient, but no, not always. No, no. Ask my kids. There have been times I've not been a patient man.

I'm not overly patient with people in traffic, for example. One of my favorite lines in the car is, it's the long one next to the brake. You know, that's a little bit of a sarcastic type thing, but it's the long one next to the brake.

And yeah, Bigelow just said the transcript. I guess he's got a matthewvines .tumblr .com address so you can find it there. I didn't choose to be impatient. I didn't choose to be angry. I didn't choose to be lustful.

I didn't choose to list any of the sins that we might experience. And certainly we recognize that there are certain sins that we, as individuals, recognize are besetting sins. You know, I mean, people who have been given great physical talent as athletes, it's very easy for them to look down upon other people, to experience arrogance, pride, until that torn ACL brings you back down to earth.

But none of us chose those things. But does that make you gay? If a person has a tendency toward anger, does that mean they were born a murderer? And I'm not talking about Jesus saying, if you hate your brother, you've killed him already in his heart.

There are a lot of us who have experienced anger on a level like that that never killed anybody. But are you born a murderer because of that? Are you born a fornicator? I've had guys who said, I can't help it.

I've just got to have sex with every woman I see. And what do we say to someone like that? You're a human being for crying out loud. You're a man. Keep it zipped. Show some discipline. Demonstrate that you have a mind, you have something between your ears that can control the urges of your body.

That's what being a human being is about. The Bible says, don't be angry, therefore control your anger. It's a part of being a human being. In the same way, if you have lustful desires for the same sex, you repent of them and you don't act upon them.

You recognize that they do not come from God, just as I recognize that any of the temptations and desires and lusts of the flesh that trip me up are not an excuse for indulging in that activity, let alone defining the entirety of my life.

So much so that I can then go around blaming others for denying to me the ability to have a family. Because I won't, well, I won't toe the line as to what a family is. I demand everyone change the definition of family so I can have one.

That is petulant childishness. So when someone says, well, God just made me this way. Well, I do not deny the existence of the desires. What I deny is that as human beings we must be mastered by them.

There is a giving in. There is a point in time when you stop the struggle and that's when someone quote-unquote becomes gay.

It's stressful. It's difficult. And it can often be isolating and lonely. To be different. To feel not understood. To feel not accepted. I grew up in as loving and stable of a family and home as I can imagine.

I love my parents and I have strong relationships with them both. No one ever molested or abused me growing up and I couldn't have asked for a more supportive and nurturing childhood than the one that I had.

I've never been in a relationship and I've always believed in abstinence until marriage. But I also have a deeply rooted desire to one day be married. To share my life with someone and to build a family of my own.

Again, do.

You hear the emotion? Do you understand why this kind of presentation has far more impact in a society such as ours today than anything I will say in response? Now, if we're pragmatists, that's why we give up on this.

And one of the reasons I chose to take this hour was because of my viewing of that Andy Stanley clip that Al Mohler mentioned yesterday or the day before. Where Andy Stanley, in a sermon, talks about a situation in their church where there is a man, there are actually two men, who are married to women.

One left his wife, they were in the church, and entered into a relationship with the other man. And they left that campus of Stanley's church, went to another campus of Stanley's church, and became leaders in it.

And Stanley found out from the former wife that they were now at the other campus, but that the other man was still married. The divorce wasn't final yet. And the amazing thing is, the church said to them, you can't be in leadership because he's still married, not because of the homosexual relationship.

And by the end of this story, up on the screen, you know they don't have pulpits and things like that, but up on the screen you've got two guys, then a little girl, then a woman, and then a man, and then a little girl, and that's the new family.