Summary of Dialogue with a Gay "Christian" Man

On my pastor's blog, (MilesMcPherson, The Rock Church San Diego), I responded to posts written by a gay man named Tom. (For the full discussion click here: "Why Support Biblical Marriage, Part 1") Pastor Miles has a two part post on why this whole gay/heterosexual marriage debate is extremely important and I urge anyone who hasn't read it to do so. (Link available on my blog list - click "older post" for complete messages).

Tom did shatter my perceptions of "intense debates with Gay/Lesbian people" because with my past experiences, they all ended up with the person usually cursing at me. But Tom was different. Cool, calm and collected as well as intelligent. He presented a formidable challenge, but nevertheless, work had to be done.

To sum up all of Tom's posting, the following things were claimed:

1. Because of his never-ending struggle with homosexuality, he came to the conclusion that since God didn't take away his desires, then it was God's will that he is gay and to accept it as such.

   I had to learn that no matter how much I gave my life to God, and no matter how ridiculously good I strived to be in all aspects of my life, that He was unwilling to change my struggle, just as God doesn't take away Down's Syndrome. Instead, God shapes each of us uniquely, and it is our duty to honor Him by acknowledging those struggles and acting responsibly towards them. We can't (and shouldn't) change who we "are," but we can (and must) decide how we "act."
   

2. Because of the sad state of heterosexual marriages and single-parent families, then homosexual marriages should be considered for the stability of the family.

   With such high divorce rates and single parents raising kids, it could be argued that a stable, two-parent same-sex household with a stay-at-home parent is a lesser evil than a single working parent. At least someone is home with the children.
   
   The problem is that, with heterosexual marriage being such a tattered institution, we as a society need to decide whether or not we want to not only define it as a union between a man and a woman, but also one specifically designed to promote a well-nurtured family. If we all agree that a stable household with a mom and dad is optimal for child rearing, then we would have to go much further in legislation than just limiting the genders of married couples
   
   . . . .-- given that people will continue to be gay, some sort of legislation that encourages gays and lesbians to enter into monogamous lifelong relationships is surely better for society as a whole than to push people into the "closet"

3. Being gay is not a sin.

   I believe, however, that the notion that being gay may be okay in the eyes of God goes beyond the argument that it is merely innate. I believe it has very much to do with the more fundamental question of whether being gay is in fact a sin, as stealing, adultery, or pedophilia are, or whether the positive experience of monogamous love between any two committed adults is necessarily a blessing from God.
   
   Adultery, pedophilia, theft, murder, destruction, and lying, all physically or emotionally harm another person. Sexuality, when honored in the context of monogamous love, does not do this.
   

4. The Bible can't be trusted.
   

   . . . even though some churches will theologically believe that it is scripturally irrefutable that homosexuality is by its very nature sinful, a number of centuries-old Christian faiths are still debating this issue. Regardless of what side of the debate one is on, the mere existence of such a debate shows how, even though the Bible reflects the word of God, once it is in the hands of mankind’s subjectivity, interpretation, linguistic translations, and revisions, it becomes intrinsically influenced and affected by man’s nature.
   
   And so I believe that despite primarily scriptural arguments that same-sex attraction is sinful, all the goodness that I am blessed to experience in my same-sex relationship, coupled with God’s inspiration to treat that relationship with the same respect I would give a heterosexual relationship, in its totality cannot convince me that homosexuality is by its nature sinful.
   
   We should never presume that the Bible, with is many edits, revisions, versions, and translations over the centuries, has not been in any way affected by our imperfect humanity.
   

5. Homosexuality is just as innate as having an incurable disease (also seen in #1).

   If I were born with cerebral palsy, I would have to accept that I could do lesser things than a fully-functioning person, but I would never presume that I were not made in God's image, that I should pray for God to heal my condition, or that my life had less value than another. Similarly, I have had to learn to accept that God will not change my nature, that I will face limitations on the nature of any romantic relationship I enter into, and I may well face harsh judgment from those who don't understand the experience of being gay.

In my conversations with gays, including one very intense discussion with one of my favorite female cousins, the one thing that the church-going gays all have in common is a profession of faith in God but little belief that the bible was the infallible word of God. The only way it seems that they could perhaps feel comfortable with their lifestyle is to somehow deem God's word "questionable" so that their their sexual relationships are not considered sin.

As of this writing, the only thing that seems to have quieted Tom was the questions about his church experience. By claiming to be Christian, then the next questions posed to him was about church. Another gay person (did not identify if male or female) did post on this discussion and mentioned that they were members of a church. A fellow Rock Church poster (Bradley) looked up the doctrinal position of this church and discovered that this person belonged to a church that teaches the infallibility of the word of God.

If one is gay, professes to know Christ and goes to church, then naturally we want to know what kind of church they attend. Tom was so sure of himself with no apparent conviction about his lifestyle, I couldn't help but to think that someone, or some group was making him feel quite comfortable. I came to these conclusions about Tom and others like him:

1. He goes to a church with a with a gay perspective (Gay churches such as the Metropolitan Community Church system).
2. He goes to a church that teaches the inerrancy of the bible but the church allows homosexuality.
   
3. He goes to a church that teaches the inerrancy of the bible and homosexuality as a sin, but no one knows of his homosexual lifestyle, thus no discipline.
4. He doesn't go to church but leaves his spirituality to himself and those close to him only.

Well, there were a few of us Christians that posted to Tom and my prayer is that some seeds were planted. It was an interesting debate, but a discussion that helped me to really dig and prepare more for future discussions with those who practice homosexuality.

We as a church should be ashamed. The issue of homosexuality is grown to where it is and could we be to blame? The church as a whole I see is getting away from the word of God with many pastors buckling under Political Correctness and admitting homosexuality within their churches (thank God, Pastor Miles is not one of those). And many churches that do teach the word are very lax in practicing church discipline. In the mega-churches (such as the Rock) it is impossible for the pastor to know who is doing what, so much of the discipline is delegated to the small groups, the heart and soul of the large churches. It is within these small groups that people can get to know one another for the encouragement, emotional and spiritual support combined with discipline that's needed. The smaller churches it becomes easier to get to know people thus making it more possible to establish discipline.

What can we do as soldiers for Christ? The sin of homosexuality is one of the few sins that is organized and being flaunted as a non-sin. We don't see adulterers, polygamists (maybe soon though), bigamists, pedophiles (with the exception of some of these boy/man groups) and any other sin you can think of, forming to announce their legitimacy.

If our writers of the Independence could have forseen the potential for the traditional marriage being undermined by the rise of homosexuality, perhaps there would have been laws created to protect marriage at that time. But it wasn't even a thought and thus the problems that we are experiencing today. Not only is homosexuality affecting the state of marriages, but has infiltrated our schools, and in some cases, one's freedom of speech is threatened if their stance against homosexuality is considered "hate speech."

Here in California, we must take a stand and in November and vote for the Gay marriage ban. As Christians we must hold that the bible is true and pray for a spirit of meekness to share the word to not only those who practice homosexuality, but any thing that is considered a transgression of God's law!

We are all ministers of the gospel of Christ and must heed the words of the apostle Paul as he spoke to Timothy:

"Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry."
--- 2 Timothy 4:2-5

Name Change: Back to Christocentric

Because I'm dealing with topics that cover a spectrum of things pertaining to Christianity, I've renamed my blog back to a name I had given it back in January of 2007 - Christocentric! I created that name originally from by christocentric.com website as it's explained below. My ministry is primarily to refute Afrocentricism, which is a practice I feel extremely detrimental to blacks and is more divisive then helpful. We witness this with a church such as Trinity United Church of Christ which tries its best in attempting to be relevant to blacks by adopting afrocentric teachings such as Black Liberation Theology.

Dangerous, dangerous, dangerous!

But in addition to debunking afrocentricism, my blog will be open to ANYTHING in defense of the Christian faith. An example of that is the discussion on homosexuality.

Anyways, here's a rehash of my previous post on the meaning of the name Christocentric.

Now, flashback:

_______________________________________________________________

I've finally settled on a name for my blog - Christocentric. Kind of easy because it's the same as my website. But what in the heck does it mean?

Let's see, straight from the Webster's dictionary:

Christocentric
\Chris"to*cen"tric\, a. [Christ + centric.] Making Christ the center, about whom all things are grouped, as in religion or history; tending toward Christ, as the central object of thought or emotion. --J. W. Chadwick.

Why did I go against all the rules of choosing a domain and blog name by making it long and difficult to pronounce? I chose it to counter the name of "afrocentric," a way of thinking that in my opinion is detrimental to a black individual's relationship to God AND to society.

That opinion in itself will get me into a lot of trouble with mainstream "African-Americans." I won't use the term African-American in my primary writings because to me, that is an afrocentric term. I prefer to just use the term "black" to describe Americans of African ancestry. Most of us conservative blacks prefer that name anyway and conservative I am.

But what does afrocentric or afrocentricity mean?

Here's the definition by noted black afrocentric scholars and Institutions:

Wade W. Nobles
"Afrocentric, Africentric, or Afirican Centered" are interchangeable terms representing the concept which categorizes a quality of thought and practice which is rooted in the cultural image and interest of African people and which represents and reflects the life experiences, history and traditions of African people as the center of analyses. It is therein, the intellectual and philosophical foundation which African people should create their own scientific criterion for authenticating human reality."

Molefi Asante (1987)
"Afrocentricity [African centered] as the placing of African ideals at the center of any analysis that involves African culture and behavior."

Maulana Karenga (1994)
Afrocentricity can be defined as a quality of thought and practice rooted in the cultural image and human interest of African people [and their descendants]. To be rooted in the cultural image of African people is to be anchored in the views and values of African people as well as in the practice which emanates from and gives rise to these views and values.

Kean College Africana Studies
The African centered perspective rests on the premise that it is valid to position Africa as a geographical and cultural starting base in the study of peoples of African descent (Keto 1989). The objective therefore is to view the world from the perspective of the people studied. The Afro-centric comprehensive model for the teaching and learning of knowledge about African peoples makes possible an understanding of, and appreciation for the social, institutional, cultural and intellectual patterns of African people.

These are just a few that I dug up from this website: http://www.afrocentric.info/AfricanCentered/Definitions.html..

On this same page is the following which is the thrust of the afrocentric thought. It is titled, "Some things to consider."

1. "African Centered" is a thought (philosophy) not continent or appearance.
2. African Centered is a "how process."
3. Cultural heritage provides the lenses by which we view and the foundation on which we interpret the world.

The last one, #3 is the clincher: cultural heritage encompasses an afrocentric's world view. That one "thing to consider" is a reason why many blacks take celebrations like Kwanzaa so seriously. Their heritage is providing a way to view their world!

So with these definitions and explanations, I begin to truly give more direction to my blog here. I'm dedicating this blogosphere to refuting afrocentricity as a way of life for the black man, woman or child and introducing the BEST way - the way of Jesus Christ - "christocentrically" speaking!

Obama: The WRONG Reasons to Leave His Church

Barack Obama gave all kinds of reasons for leaving Trinity United Church of Christ and none of them reasons that should of had him high-tailing it out of there 20 years earlier! This is some of his reasons that he stated in his resignation letter to the church:

. . . our relations with Trinity have been strained by the divisive statements of Rev. Wright, which sharply conflict with our own views

. . . because of my candidacy and membership at Trinity, these controversies have served as an unfortunate distraction for other Trinity members who seek to worship in peace

No, Obama did not leave the church because it was becoming spiritually detrimental to his soul, but because it was harming him politically. This is disturbing because many of us can see why he should have had nothing to do with that church from the get-go. Many black and non-black Christians who love the Word of God know that believers in the Trinity United Church of Christ must not be practicing "Berean Christians" like those Christians in Acts 17:11:

"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."

Did Barack do as the Bereans did and see if what was being taught is true? There is much heresy in that church from what I've seen already not only with Rev. Wright, but TUCC teachers like Dr. Dwight Hopkins. Even Barack couldn't seem to understand what the scriptures plainly wrote about topics such as the sin of homosexuality (Barack "sayings" coming in another post).

What are the warning signs Christians need to heed when choosing a church? Here are a few warning signs that Barack Obama should have heeded to warn him to run as fast as he could away from that church!

• Unbiblical teachings (Trinity's teachings on homosexuality, Black Liberation Theology, Womanism)
  
• Focus on ethnicity instead of the Bible (Black Value System, Black Liberation Theology)
  
• Acceptance of those whose lifestyles are contradicting God's word (Gay ministers, approval of Gay marriages)
  
• Using the pulpit more for entertainment than expounding of biblical doctrine
  
• Sin is celebrated rather than condemned (Barack's condemnation of black churches that teach against homosexuality and praising Rev. Wright for his acceptance of that perverted lifestyle within the church)
  
• Practicing of pagan ceremonies within the Church (such as Kwanzaa)

I truly wanted to vote for Barack Obama before the political firestorm. My reasons for doing so? I thought he could be a very good uniter of all people of different racial backgrounds. But now not only is he a person that can't be trusted by Whites, but Blacks too! How can I trust a man to be president and gauge the character of others to make his decisions for the best of our country when he can't even see the bad character until too late -- of his own pastor? That is one of the questions being asked over and over again.

That was troubling to me, as I even had a post titled how I can accept some of Barack's mistakes and still vote for him. Eeewwee! Yes, I was blind...but now I can see! (That post has since been deleted).

I will pray for Barack Obama to now choose a church that will be strong in the teaching of God's word and not afrocentric, but Christ-centric. A church where anyone who visits will not be racially offended, but whose only offense will come by the gospel of Christ!

cm

Homosexuality and Being Black - Not the Same Thing!

Recently, a college official was fired because of her column explaining why being black was different than being gay. Crystal Dixon wrote in response to an article in the same publication by an author who equated gay rights with black rights and the rights of the physically disabled. She took issue with the claim that they are civil rights victims. She explained by writing that, "I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a Black woman. I am genetically and biologically a Black woman and very pleased to be so as my Creator intended." (Gay Rights and Wrongs: Another Perspective, by Crystal Dixon.)

Living here in California, that issue is very much front and center now that gays can legally be married. Article after article I'm reading how gays are declaring to have the same rights as blacks and women. But I also take issue with the Gay/Lesbian movement and the claim that they should have the same rights as all others.

They shouldn't - plain and simple! As Crystal Dixon wrote that she cannot wake up and NOT be black, THAT is the major difference! One can CHOOSE whom they want to have sex with and they can even CHANGE that lifestyle as Ms. Dixon points out in the many organizations dedicated to Gays/Lesbians who do change and go straight.

As a Christian, I could never support laws that legislate "sin." That's why I'm very happy that court systems such as the one here in San Diego will allow their county workers to be excused from gay marriages. County Assessor-Recorder-Clerk Greg Smith says that, "I'm trying to strike a balance. I want to show dignity and respect to my staff and equally I want to show dignity and respect to the couples who want to get married,”. Now that's awesome! If gay marriages are going to be allowed, then yes, leave it where workers don't have to participate if it's against their consciousness to do so!

It is not a sin to be black. That's not changeable. TV actress and talk show host Ellen Degeneres lost a girlfriend, Ann Heche, when she decided she wanted to be with a man. Ann Heche woke up and decided one day to go from being a lesbian, to being straight (or bisexual...who knows.) What black person or female person can wake up and one day and change to being something else? Being black and/or female is whom God made us to be and not based upon anything we DO. A gay/lesbian is whom they are based upon a specific action - a sexual action at that!

I mention Ellen because she's one of those who declares that she is no different than being a black person. She says on her show today to her guest Senator McCain, "We are all the same people, all of us. You're no different than I am. Our love is the same."

The feelings of love may be the same, but the ACTS are not. For the Christian, homosexual acts are despised by God and that is made evident in both the Old and New Testaments. God's approval of the sex act is what determines the love that one can have for the other. God made it evident that marriage between a man and a woman is what He designed for the good of what He calls "family." And as Ms. Dixon wrote, deviations from God's norm are met with serious consequences.

Of course, there are many homosexuals who don't believe in God and many who do believe in God, call themselves Christian, and still practice the homosexual lifestyle. That fact alone will never change what God has written in His word that determines the true "rights" of His created beings. His true meaning of marriage, with the creatures He calls "man" and "woman."

Obama Clearly Supports Gay Marriage

The following passage was taken off of Barack Obama's campaign website:

Obama's Church is A Warm and Accepting Church Where All Races are Welcomed

November 12, 2007

Trinity United Church Of Christ Is Rooted In Chicago's South Side And Is The Largest UCC Congregation

Trinity United Church Of Christ Is The Largest UCC Congregation, A Liberal Denomination That Was The First To Ordain An African American, Woman, And Gay Man. "However incongruously, Trinity became the largest congregation in The United Church of Christ, a predominantly white denomination known for its liberal politics and steepled churches in small New England towns. The UCC, or Congregational church, as it is also called, was the first mainline Protestant church to ordain an African-American (1785), a woman (1853), and an openly gay man (1972), and the first major Christian denomination to endorse same-sex marriage (2005)." [Christian Science Monitor, 7/16/07]

This church is proud of ordaining an openly gay man? And the first to endorse same-sex marriage? Wow. . . talking about an apostate church if I ever heard one. So now not only does this church have the Black Liberation Theology, but issues with homosexuality acceptance to the point of ordaining ministers who still participate in the homosexual lifestyle. Blatant and completely uncaring of what the scriptures teach! Obama is obviously proud of his church's stance on gay marriage and homosexuality, otherwise he wouldn't have this article pasted on his campaign website!

Now, I'm just back to where I started, not knowing who I really want to vote for. I may do as the poster Pamela has stated she might possibly do - not vote at all! But, I will weigh very carefully what I must do. I may have to vote for McCain just to keep the dangerous possibility of people voting Obama in office with his gay marriage proposals lingering around.

Now if he should denounce homosexuality as he has done Rev. Wright, then that will be a different story!

Geesh, I hate politics!