Growing up in a 1960’s conservative evangelical home, Scott Harrison not only knew homosexuality was a sin, he knew it was “the worst sin a person could do. It was worse than murder.” He described to the Southern Poverty Law Center the exorcism delivered upon him by a minister at Living Waters/Desert Stream [see edit below], a neo-Pentecostal ex-gay ministry. After a “very intense, dramatic” group prayer that lasted three hours, Harrison found himself “drenched in sweat” and “psychologically wounded.” Because of “how it happened and the incorrectness of the theology,” it “felt like a spiritual rape” to him. Harrison was the victim, but says it’s hard not to blame himself, even 20 years after the incident. When asked how he became involved in such a bizarre event, Harrison responds:
When you’re coming from a perspective that you believe God can give messages to people, words of prophecy, then it’s very easy to become prey. This guy got a team of people together. One of the aspects that is pretty strong in Vineyard, still, is that they believe that people can be “demonized.” Not meaning that a person is fully possessed by Satan, but that a person has given him or herself over to Satanic strongholds in his or her life, so that it may take an exorcism to release the various demons that this person has given over their lives to.
He adds that as an ex-gay minister,
I didn’t believe change was an easy process. People would have said, if you asked them in private, [that] the option was one of celibacy, as opposed to accepting oneself as gay and lesbian. When [ex-gay ministers] talked about change at that time, they were talking about behavior modification.
Not much about that has really changed, with Alan Chambers (head of Exodus International) claiming he’s never really met an ex-gay, and declaring that he wakes up every morning denying that part of his being that comes so naturally.
Harrison believes that legally, ex-gay ministries should be allowed to exist, but as faith-based organizations, not state-sponsored ones. Ex-gay ministries have no place in public schools, just like representatives of religious institutions are barred. And he says exposure to the messages of Exodus Youth (Exodus International’s ex-gay youth ministry) are downright dangerous:
I don’t think that’s healthy for anyone, but especially not for high school students. Teenagers are idealistic. They’re going to grab for that, believing they can actually change their sexuality, when we have plenty of evidence showing it’s not possible. What’s going happen when they don’t change? More youth suicides, more youths engaging in risky behaviors, feeling betrayed by the church and by God and giving up on their faith. If I’d heard that message as a teenager, I don’t know if I’d be here today.
Thank G-d he IS here today, to give us his valuable point of view.
Edit 1/3/2008:
Today we received an email from Scott Harrison with the following corrections to this story:
…the original interview had stated that the exorcism or deliverance occurred at the hands of the pastor of my church, the Vineyard San Pedro, not at the hands of leaders of Desert Stream or Living Waters, which were based out of the Vineyard Christian Fellowship congregations in Santa Monica and later in Anaheim, California. I understand that not all of these details appeared in the original interview and that it might have been possible to infer that the San Pedro Vineyard was somehow directly connected to Desert Stream or Living Waters.
The reality is that the San Pedro Vineyard supported the work of Desert Stream, but was not a host for ex-gay ministry. When interviewed, I cited the deliverance session as an example of how demonizing homosexuality (for example, referring to homosexuality as a satanic or demonic perversion of the “one true” sexual orientation of heterosexuality), which is the modus operandi of most ex-gay leaders, can open the door to all sorts of abuses such as what I experienced. I clearly stated this when I was interviewed and wish the SPLC article had been a bit stronger on this point.
Wow. That’s quite an apt parallel between being “raped” and blaming oneself for the offense.
If you think you are bad when rubberbands and tennis rackets fail to change the direction of your gay libido, imagine how you feel when the exorcism fails?
Ex-gay ministries: “the practice where the patient is always blamed when the practitioner fails to produce a ‘cure.'”
I can definitely feel for Scott Harrison and his story. I went through something similar except it was with a man in New York City who claimed to have the tools to change my orientation. He used a form of exorcism as part of the process of his form of re-birthing called “Empyrian Rebirthing”. His name is Valnn Dayne Spears and his organization is called The Regenesis Institute. He did not have the authority to do counseling. He put a me in a deeply trusting position through his technique of breath work. He would have me yell into a pillow and scream telling Satan to leave, that homosexuality was a counterfeit life, a lie, etc. Valnn charged a lot of money for his beath sessions. The “intensive” was very expensive. He claimed he was helping a lot of people but I noticed that most of the people (most of them straight folks) were often dependent on him and on the organization for validation. That was how the whole thing was set up. Many of the aspects of the Regensis Institute are like a cult.
After my sessions with Valnne. I felt such intense inner conflict I nearly had a nervous breakdown. I had anxiety attacks off and on for months after that experience. I finally woke up to the fact that healing comes through self acceptance and through my relationship with myself not needing outside validation to feel good about myself. That need for validation often is what drives these organizations (especially fundamentalist religions) that keeps the money flowing. Fear is a very powerful motivator.
It took the work of a reputable counselor who respected my autonomy and my individual choices without coercion and without shame or being patronized to get me back on track to the point where I am today. I know that my same gender orientation is a gift and a blessing from God and nothing to feel ashamed of.
I never would have thought to put the word rape for an issue dealing a three hour session of confession, repentance and words of knowledge.. As a former Vineyardite, ex-gay leader and now Christian gay man I guess I see things a lot differently. Do I believe that God can speak through others “yes”, do I believe one can be demonized “yes for I’ve seen it” do I believe that they are wrong in their theology regaurding homosexuality, yes.
I totally understand when one changes their beliefs that a different perspective occurs. But to cry rape to me seems a little sensationalized for the sake of media correctness. Now I may not agree with everything they say and do but they do have a right to exorcise their beliefs and teach what they believe whether I agree or not. But hey how many things out their do I not agree with but I know they have a right to exorcise their rights as a faith based organization.
If one chooses to go the ex-gay route then one has to deal with the belief system that being “gay” is sinful. That is the fact of ex-gay ministry. I am by no means putting Mr Harrison down but I just see a word being used “rape” that is not justifiable in the situation that occurred.
This is precisely why religion (whether it be Christian, Islamic, Jewish, etc.) can be an extremely dangerous thing. Jeff gets the picture when he says that when one changes their belief system a different perspective occurs. Precisely. When one believes (because of their belief system) that he or she is helping another person when in reality they are actually harming that person then I think that some big time education and deprogramming is in order. Jesus said “by their fruits shall you know them.” What are the fruits (no pun intended) of the ex-gay movement? What has been the result? I have seen and experienced harm from this movement; however there sometimes is a secondary gain from the movement that some people have discussed. That gain is feeling more confidence, more inner strength, etc. I think that is because after searching, praying and turning over stone after stone and also going through the labyrinth searching for what is real these people look within and begin to see the miracle of who they really are. They see that God never makes mistakes in His creation. It is an incredibly liberating experience to finally be able to trust oneself and not feel a need for validation from his or her Pastor, parents, Christian friends, etc. The miracle of love is when Christian people can truly learn to love unconditionally and that is when the real healing begins. The change that needs to happen is change and healing in the Christian Churches. This change and healing is happening Church by Church, congregation by congregation and pastor by pastor. The process is often slow but it is happening.
I have seen Christianity do immense good and create tremendous opportunities for progress, growth and awesome love; however I have also seen Christianity be incredibly destructive, creating pain, disillusionment, sorrow and even death. The Christian fundamentalist is the Christian legalist who puts a particular formula on the price of salvation and they believe gay folks are outside of that formula.
Protestantism had their crusades just as Catholicism did and the result of their crusades has been fear, death and destruction. They believed they were doing God’s will. The fundamentalist cannot accept that he or she could be wrong because that would be tantamount to God being wrong. That is an extremely dangerous way of thinking. What we are required to do is to learn to love unconditionally and through this process allow God to do His miracle of bringing families and friends together within the sphere of their diverse creation.
I will concur with the statement “love covers a multitude of sins” and that is at the heart of the Christian message whether one is gay, straight, black, white, brown, divorced, raped, orphaned… And I know I need to daily remember and remind myself of this truth and I hope and pray that the rest of the church hey even the world would follow suite.
Wait a minute. I was link up to this sight by a former Chrisitan Ex-Gay leader. We became good friends and even house mates through serving on a Chrisitian based ex-gay minsisry. My belief system never changed and I was sadden that the very core belief system that begain my friendship with this person had changed.
So in this case I did confront my friend about going back into the life style. However, when you talk about how it is wrong for Christian Groups or any other Religious groups to try to change our belief system; Isn’t the Former Ex-Gay Mininstries doing the same thing by discouraging devoted Chrisians who really think that homosexuality is wrong for them to give in?
Right now I’m not saying you are right or wrong, but don’t you think that the Former Ex-Gay Ministries are in fact trying to change the beleif systems of people who think that Homosexality is a sin?
The “former ex-gay ministries” or gay affirming Christian organizations don’t tell a person how to believe in Christ or how they should worship. They are supportive of a broad spectrum of belief systems. The only thing that makes these organizations different than the fundamentalist Christian organizations that are not gay affirming and who also encourage ex-gay therapy, is their approach. Gay affirming Christian organizations encourage you to embrace yourself, to stop beating yourself up, to learn to love that part of yourself that you have been practically brainwashed by your leaders, family and friends to hate. What are the results of affirming your orientation including the possibility of finding a life partner within the context of being a faithful Christian? That is the question you need to ask yourself.
Remember that many Christians once taught that a black person and a white person marrying was a sin. The reality was that they were wrong. Those who encouraged opposite sex couples who were of different races who were in love to marry were considered “liberal” and “encouraging sin”. Unfortunately sin has become a label to incite fear and division in the body of Christ. You might even say that Satan can use the label “sin” to his own devises and thus cause division and I think this has happened a lot in history. So you might even look at what the word “sin” really means. What causes “separation from God”? Self hate is one thing I believe causes separation from God and love. So isn’t homophobia and anti-gay theology that leads to this “inner struggle” as one struggling against what a gay “struggler” interprets as “the natural man” (because of what he or she has been taught in Church and by family) in all reality something that is about denying yourself? How can the ex-gay lifestyle of struggling on a daily basis against an innate part of yourself lead to real and authentic love and peace of mind over the long run?
In addition to this last thought, what happens when you embrace your same sex orientation as a gift of God?
Perhaps we should consider how successful ex-gay ministries have been at helping conflicted people become successful gay affirming Christians. Mr. Harrison is a good example, and I am sure several of the regular posters have been blessed with similar success. One could construct a study similar to the study of ex-gay ministries successes that has occupied so much of this site’s space recently, very likely with more concrete results. I do appreciate that there are more pleasant ways to come to terms with sexuality, but the prospect of Exodus’ and Mr. Dobson’s response to the information that might be generated is worth a considerable laugh.
The church regarding blacks in its time was wrong and very evil. However I would invite you to actually do a study on slavery in the Bible. What does the Bible say about how to treat slaves? Difiantly not like the Americans treated the blacks.
Paul gave instructions in living as a married person, a widower, a single person and even as a divorse person. He however does not give instructions for same sex marriage. Paul states if you were a slave when you became a Believer, you are to remain a slave. However regarding homosexuality he tells us to leave that type of life style.
I agree with you it’s wrong for the church to tell us when a white person marrys a black person it is a sin. The Samaritians were called half breeds. The Gentiles, us, who Paul taugh at his time were consider at being at a lower level.
If you go to the Evangelicals Concerned website which I believe is linked here you can see a clear synopsis on the words of Paul regarding homosexuality. The Bible is an empty closet. There is no terminology in the ancient world for homosexuality. If you were to get into a time machine and go back to Paul’s day and ask him about his views on homosexuality he likely would have looked very puzzled. What he saw along the shores of Asia minor was something very different than men holding hands or kissing, etc. He saw men who were castrated in the name of a goddess (Dionysis) and who wore women’s clothing and veils in order to worship the goddess as a sort of priestess having nothing to do with one’s inner orientation. These are the things Paul is abhorring. This is a far cry from two people of the same gender who create a home together and who commit to one another and love each other.
I think that a more contextual and historically accurate interpretation of the writings and words of Paul within the context of the ancient world are in order in many Christian Churches. We need to look at the history and interpret Paul’s world more accurately otherwise we have wacko nut bar interpretations of scripture like the more recent ones I heard of on CNN about different American highways (according to their numbers) being foreseen in the Bible according to the scriptural reference. Those chapters and verses weren’t even given when the scriptural texts were originally written down. The chapters and verses were added to the scriptures many years later in order to make them more easily cited and referenced.
The Apostle Paul did not know what homosexuality was. There was no such terminology in the ancient world of Paul’s time. If you were to go back in a time machine and ask him what his feelings were about this issue he would very likely give you a puzzled look. The Bible is an empty closet. The things Paul witnessed along the shores of Asia Minor were far different than two men holding hands or kissing. What Paul saw along his journeys that he wrote about was men being castrated as temple priestess’s in order to worship the goddess Dionysis (sp). You can refer to the Evangelicals Concerned link from this website. The more historically accurate readings of these scriptures are very fascinating. The ancient world is far different than ours in many ways. If we place anachronistic interpretations on the ancient scriptures then what we do is project our own modern values, phobias and bias on the texts themselves. Paul had no Idea what sexual orientation was anymore than he knew or understood the scientific concepts of brain synapses or about hormonal changes that happen in the body. What he was concerned with was how people were treating one another and their humility and love toward the God of Heaven. His view of what is natural and what is not natural had nothing to do with two men who were in love with one another, who commit to one another and who live together which is a blessing to society. That “lifestyle” as you put it is vastly different than what Paul was writing about.
Paul (as amazing a Christian man as he was) also was subject to the norms and customs of Jewish society and some of his views were influenced by his upbringing and Jewish background such as women not speaking in the synogogues, etc.. Paul was steeped in Jewish legalism and custom throughout much of his life. Even he could not completely escape that. From my understanding of scripture I see Jesus Christ as the only being who was able to transcend those things and not let them influence His words.
What is most important is that you put your emphasis on what Jesus said about homosexuality which is absolutely nothing. He is silent on the issue.
Benjamine,
I had a long response but I tap my lap top that is ballancing on my lap and somehow it all went away. Is there a time limit to submit a request.
I’ll try to get back with you tonight. Out of curriosity, what City do you live in? I live near Anaheim CA in the Los Angeles area in the city of Placentia.
John H,
I would probably avoid “you are to remain a slave” as an argument point. Most folks will find that one to discredit you.
Further, I would be more informed before telling those on this site what Paul said. Many of us actually know.
Paul never at any time “told us to leave that type of life style”. Sorry, it just isn’t there. Paul did advise to remain single, unless you burn with lust. He did rail against sexual immorality. But if you were to talk to Paul about a “homosexual life style” he would have had no idea what you were talking about.
There are two new testament mentions that anti-gays claim have something to do with homosexuality. Frankly, their claims are based on the very flimsiest of evidence. Paul created a word that was not in existence and the anti-gays claim it means “homosexual”. I think they’re reaching.
You are certainly entitled to your opinions, but I think you need to do a little more research before you state them.
It’s no leap to see that religious belief can be abusive, if you happen to be of the group that those of Biblical times believed to be of certain social status.
As I’ve mentioned before, most religions believe women to be responsible for the troubles of the world and are therefore fair game for punishment or restriction. Or any people of gender variance.
I have to keep wondering though, at why such standards are selectively maintained against the gender variated. It’s as if to say GENDER is a part of determining MORALS or what a human being can contribute BECAUSE of their gender…and nothing else.
So the analogy to rape, or abuse, is an accurate one. Closer to the analogy of rape, than homosexuality is to sin.
My frustration is how religion is used so selectively when so MUCH progress is made, or OTHER aspects of religious teaching that really test the commitment of it’s practitioners is ignored. You know, likethat inconvenient nugget about treating a neighbor as you’d want to be treated.
Also forgetting in the mix how gay people ACTUALLY treat their heterosexual peers. This is in and of itself and VERY important component.
Why do those who demand to make the decisions on gay people’s lives NEVER LISTEN to gay people?!
All of this discussion and industry is rooted in what heterosexuals want, and not what’s actually NEEDED or NECESSARY.
They are TELLING not asking, they are DICTATING the terms of gay lives, not acknowleging what gay life really is.
And try to frame gay lives in profoundly negative terms as if gay people are already doomed and dying or dead, rather than the reality of potential for full life and salvation without having LESS access to sexual bonding or identity as gay.
I’ve always seen ex gay intervention as abusive. And I can also see where there is no concern about homosexuality being normal and how. Because as I’ve also pointed out often, the normality of being black and female isn’t respected either and conformity to an ideal inappropriate for blacks sets up blacks who don’t meet those standards for bitterness and failure.
So it’s really not about being gay, so much as when are these people going to accept what IS normal anyway? Or will they care?
If they don’t care how very much alive gay people are. That gay people are exceedingly patient, kind and loving regardless of the animus towards them OR if they don’t care to know REALLY what and how gay people feel….then how can you convince them of reality when they don’t want to believe reality, but fantasy?
I just happen to see this behavior as very strange. One can believe that slavery is still proper, not only against just blacks but human beings in general. But as we know, in THIS country it was exclusively blacks who were enslaved and generationally.
So it strains the credibility of a person’s belief in their Bible that rights and freedoms shall only be accorded those who are heterosexual, because of that belief. Or will they work just as hard to assure that OTHER discrimination is in place against EVERYONE based on those beliefs.
Consistency is truly difficult isn’t it, depending upon what minority you can get away with doing it to.
It’s true. Considering the animus we have suffered, we are EXCEEDINGLY kind.
Ok, more about about myself. I’m 43 and never been married. I just came out of the only serious relationship with a woman because I could not love her as she wanted me to. We try for three years and I loved her very much and she was in love with me. I really hurt her when we broke up because the lack of my physical attraction towards not just her but with women in general.
In Pau’s teachings he emphasized in finding contentment through God’s grace regardless what trials we may be in. I beieve there is a supper nature Peace for those who remain strong in the Lord during the battles of life which are different for everyone.
My battle is not having any desire to have any physical connection with women. With men I find myself having more intimacy even without the sex.
So when I was talking about the slave earlier, my point was that even in the most crulest situations that we can ever be in that are out of our control, we can find peace and contentment with God.
I believe what the Bible says about Homosexuality in its face value. If I tried reintrepret for my own self gain I would lose that perfect Peace and Contentment that God can only bring and give me.
John H. said:
Is it your contention that the Bible directly addresses every situation we may ever face?
Then I suggest you live your life accordingly, but I don’t see it that way myself. Would I be willing to live a celibate life if I believed as you do? Absolutely, but I don’t.
The point is, you are interpreting what scripture says – this is by no means a clear-cut issue. Then again, if you want to take Leviticus literally (at its face value), you will have a rough life ahead of you, most of which will probably be spent in jail. Do you really follow the Levitical laws faithfully?
Actually, not everyone here is a Gentile.
Though I don’t understand why you would have dated someone for so long when you knew you had no physical attraction for women, at least you didn’t marry her. For that I have to commend you.
You’re right David, I should had phrased differently in us being all Gentiles. I was only trying to make my point that it was wrong and some places is still wrong to condemn Mixed Marriages.
But please don’t quote more than I actually say. I am addressing what Paul was teaching, not the Levical Law.
One of my favorite Books in the Bible is Hebrews. I know better not to follow the Levical Law.
The Sermon on the Mount is the Magna Charta of the New Covenant. It is the most comprehensive of Christ’s sermons. Addressing sexual morality, Jesus says:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell” (Matthew 5:27-30).
In this passage, Jesus is primarily concerned with the heart, as He is throughout His ministry. He not only maintains the Old Covenant’s prohibition on fornication, adultery, and other sexual sin: He deepens it to demand not only purity in external actions, but also purity of heart. Here, as in other parts of the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus sets a seemingly impossible standard of perfection. However, He is able to demand a deeper obedience because His own sacrifice on the cross will free us from sin, and He will send the Holy Spirit to strengthen us.
After condemning several forms of sexual sin, the Apostle Paul writes, “Do you not know that he who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, ‘The two shall become one flesh.’ But he who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Shun sexual immorality. Every other sin which a man commits is outside the body; but the sexually immoral man sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own; you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body” (I Corinthians 6:16-20).
Those who sin sexually defile the temple of the Holy Spirit within them. Sexual sin thus has unique power to cut us off from life in the Spirit, and enslave us to life in the flesh. Because “the sexually immoral man sins against his own body,” cutting himself off from the life of the Holy Spirit, in which alone salvation is possible, Jesus exhorts His audience that “it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.”
Jesus’ dialogue with the Pharisees concerning divorce (Matthew 19:3-12) illuminates a key element of His sexual ethic. A group of Pharisees approached Him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?”
Jesus answered: “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female (cf. Genesis 1:27), and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’ (cf. Genesis 2:24)? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.”
Some have argued that the creation stories in Genesis are just stories, that they describe the origins of the human race in a sort of mythical way, but they don’t have any prescriptive force—that is, they don’t tell us the way things are supposed to be, they just tell us the way things were. It seems to me, however, difficult to avoid the conclusion that Jesus appeals to Genesis precisely because they did have prescriptive force, telling us what God intended sexuality to be “from the beginning.”
It seems that Jesus is arguing that marriage, like the new birth itself, comes “not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:13). It is God who joins husband and wife together in marriage, and “what God has joined together, let not man put asunder.”
Once again, we see Jesus strengthening, rather than weakening, the commands of the Old Covenant. The Pharisees would allow divorce and remarriage, but Jesus says, “For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another, commits adultery.”
Why would Jesus be so strict about marriage? I believe the Apostle Paul this when he refers to the two becoming one flesh, and then observes: “This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the Church” (Ephesians 5:32). Christ is deeply concerned with marriage because it is intended to be an image of His love for the world.
This should remind us of a point that comes up over and over again in both the Old and New Testaments: the close link between sexual immorality and idolatry. If the one flesh union of husband and wife is an image of Christ’s love for the church, then a distortion of that union also distorts our image of Christ and the church. False sexual union, then, has an organic connection to false worship.
I have to confess I’ve been studying on this for years. However the exgay mininistry that I am in doesn’t like to debate. I’m the only one who really did lots of Bible research on this except my friend who went into your train of thought because in my oppinion it became too hard for him. The same sex battle is a very dificult one to have. The people we help in the minisry that I am in come to us wanting freedom from homosexuality. I’ll quit posting if you all think what I am doing is opposes love. Please let me know.
God Bless You
You didn’t answer my question John, at least you didn’t mean to. We allow comments for the purpose of debating and discussing the topic of each post, not standalone sermonettes. Whether or not homosexuality is a sin is not the topic, nor is it likely to be.
Thank you, however, for illustrating so beautifully the tortuous way some can twist and tangle scripture into saying that homosexuality really is the greatest sin, causing the loss of one’s salvation itself.
Even the most egregious I have run into haven’t yet been able to do that – quite amazing indeed. But it does apply to the topic, as Scott Harrison was terrorized by just such nonsense in his youth:
If you are officially with an ex-gay ministry, John, please identify it.
he knew it was “the worst sin a person could do. It was worse than murder.
As I have said before, I have had other conservative Christians tell me the same thing. How they figure that loving someone of the same sex is worse than taking a human life is beyond comprehension. I guess the reason I don’t understand is I don’t have their mentality. Thankfully.
So are you saying that if anyone does not take the bible literally word for word and come to the same conclusion you do they are not in that perfect Peace and Contentment from God? I have heard this from other Christians as well but worded differently. Also, because we are happily gay we are interpreting Scripture differently in order to, what others of your ilk have said repeatedly, justify our sin? Sorry, to tell you that is not the case. But I rather not go ranting on with a long sermon because, as David said, it is not the topic at hand. 😉
Considering all the ex-ex-gays out there finally coming forward and telling people the harm they received while in an ex-gay program, I think it would be best for your ministry John H is to tell those wanting freedom the truth. That the best most can hope for is life-time celibacy. Most of the testimonies I have read over the net the past year is either from ex-gays that changed only their behaviour, are celibate, and constantly struggling with SSA’s or ex-ex-gays that have reconciled their sexuality with their beliefs. I know I couldn’t take the ex-gay route. I cannot chant the constant self-loathing and “I’m going to burn in hell if I don’t change” mantra.
And John H, perhaps your friend realized that it was a fruitless attempt to change his sexual orientation and finally accepted himself as a gay person of worth?
No I’m not saying that homosexualiy is the worst sin. I’m saying like any other transgretion, homosexuality is not Bibical to endorse.
I’ve seen many sexual abuse victims who had acted out homosexually then stop after they received lots of prayer and healing. Then there are like those like me who has been in the mininstry for years and has not received any increased desire for woman. However my friendship with men and women are very strong and supportive. My current house mate and I are developing a very strong friednship that we are able to share anything we want to with each other because of the trust that has been growing between us. We also love each other uncondtionally, but there is no sex involved.
Yes I know you may not agree with me, but for myself I know I never can be in a sexual relationship. However to be honest with you I am still a sexually being. This may mean I might act out by allowing my mind to wonder and M….., but these are the times that I know that God is faithful to forgive me.
Not everyone in my Chrisitian Exgay Minisistry agrees with me when it becomes in changing your sexual orientation. My sexual orientation did not change so I won’t mension their name because I’m not representing them. However, my church who does the programs from this Christian Ex-Gay Ministry does agree with me about the topic of homoexuality and change.
I attend the Vineyard Christian Fellowhip in Anaheim CA. By revealing my church some may know what program that I am in. Right now there are various views in this Christian ex-gay ministry regarding in actually changing your sexual orientation as being the number one key element of being successful.
John H. said:
I’m sorry John, but it really does seem that you did:
Perhaps you mean all sexual sin, but considering the context of the discussion that’s splitting hairs.
Again, if you think this is what God is saying to you, then you should abide by it. Violating your own conscience would not be good. But be very careful what you saddle those people who come to your ex-gay ministry with. From my vantage point, ex-gay ministries have been more effective at destroying the faith of Christians who are gay than they have anything else.
At worst, I don’t believe homosexuality is a salvation issue, so I leave it up to those who sincerely seek God and His Word, and I’m not going to tell someone, including you, to think in a way other than what they find there. I simply have no business doing so, and neither do you.
You are welcome to participate here, but please do not take every comment as an opportunity to preach. If you do that too much, I will moderate your comments. We keep the discussion civil, and as on topic as possible. There are occasional open threads where you can stray from the topic more. I would encourage you, however, to be open about the ministry you work for as a way of being accountable here.
John H
One of the things that never ceases to surprise me is when an ex-gay expresses amazement at having friends. That is to me so very sad. The words you used above exactly explain the relationship I have with my roommate and my close circle of friends and I did not have to “change” in any way to have such a close connection.
But on to the topic:
John, please don’t think that we wish to change your opinion on the meaning of Scripture. You can definitely believe whatever you wish. But also don’t assume we are not familiar with Scripture.
For example, within in the segments you referenced (Matthew 19:3-12) we find Jesus discussing eunichs. Some have taken a deeper study into the context and meaning of that word and have stated that the concept of eunichs included same-sex attracted men. When coupled with the first convert of Philip, some see that Christ was making a statement of welcome to gay people within the body of believers.
You need not accept that interpretation. But there is no question that he was welcoming non-sexually-conforming people, even if you don’t think that he specifically meant same-sex attracted.
Further, you should accept that others do have ears to hear this understanding, and do not do so out of ignorance of wishfulness. The sincerity of your study does not disqualify the sincerity of those who disagree with you.
Ultimately, you have to live in accordance with your conscience. If you feel a same-sex relationship would be sinful for you, don’t enter one. But also keep your mind and heart open for the leading of the Spirit.
And be generous with how God may be leading others. Just because we are all His children, does not mean he leads us all the same.
I agree. Sadly, when gay Christians go to ex-gay ministries, far far more lose their Christianity than ever lose their same-sex attractions.
I think that each one of us have a right to determine for ourselves what is morally acceptable or not. If John H feels that acting on his homosexual feelings is immoral, then it is appropriate for him to refrain from such activity.
I, on the other hand would find it morraly unacceptable to lead some woman along for three years despite the fact that I wasn’t physically attracted to her. I would also find it immoral to encourage others to lead people along despite a complete lack of attraction.
Unfortunately, this sort of activity/encouragement seems to be all to prevalent in ex-gay groups, and the high profile ex-gay leaders who flaunt their wives and children contribute to this sort of harm.
I suppose that one could point to some sort of moral harm for homosexual sexual activity based on this line or that line of the Bible. But I think that the harm caused to the people who have been led on by these ex-gays is pretty concrete.
John above states
” I, on the other hand would find it morraly unacceptable to lead some woman along for three years despite the fact that I wasn’t physically attracted to her. I would also find it immoral to encourage others to lead people along despite a complete lack of attraction.”
I agree, and had confess what I had done as being sin. That’s when I came to the conclusion that it be wrong for me to ever be in a sexual relationship.
Like I said before I do not agree with all the leaders in the exgay ministry that I am in. However, my beliefs are in harmony with my church that I attend that does use the exgay materials.
Then maybe, john, you should find a new church, one that doesn’t require you to give up sex love and romance to be accepted by god. EC-USA, Unitarians, Disciples of christ, and UCC come to mind.
Ben in Oakland,
Thank You for your reply. However, if you read my earlier postings, you see I can’t do that.
I did read them. That’s why I said it. you are choosing religious beliefs which tell you that you are not one of God’s children, that you are less than, that God does not want you to have what he wants the rest of his children to have, that god so loved the world etcetcetcetc, but not so much as to give his gay children surcease from persecution.
I have the choice of being Jewish, thus totally rejecting christian belief, but no one but the most bigoted of religious bigots would ever tell me that god hates me for being a jew. Why is this different?
If you really think that God is going to send me to hell for not buying the Christian line, then your belief in gay=sin is entirely consistent, though from my point of view, slanderous toward a god who who so loved the world that etctecetc.
If you really think that buying the ex-gay line is what God wants you to do, when these people clearly know nothing aobut being gay and are so enamored of the darkness in which they exist that they will tell ANY lie about gay people to prove that gay is bad, no matter how vicious, untrue, illogical, or contra-experience– if this is what you CHOOSE to believe, then I can’t hep you with it.
I will point out to you that 300 years ago, good Chrisitians knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that there were witches, and that the witches needed to be eradicated, because that was what god wanted.
these days, torturing and murdering people for a sin we now know DOES NOT EXIST… well, that’s just considered impolite… at least.
You have a choice as to where you align yourself. I hope for your sake that you will stop choosing to align yourself with people that believe that they have been appointed to tell YOU what’s wrong with your life.
Ben, your comments to John illustrate how we can often have as little understanding of ex-gays as they have of us. If I understand him correctly, John’s reading of scripture is that God does not sanction sexual intimacy between two people of the same sex. I doubt John came to his faith in God because of this, nor do I think it likely he will abandon that belief because of it – at least I hope not. As was just noted, the latter happens all too often.
For some, perhaps many, their faith is in a God they consider more important than all else, and not simply a philosophy they can discard for another that better fits their situation. That’s part of the package, belief in something greater than oneself. And I also suspect that John considers the God he worships to be the one and only. There is no need to debate this, it is enough that he believes it.
For these people, it truly is not an option that they set one faith aside, and try on another. The fact that so many are willing to go to such desperate measures to attempt an unlikely change, or to live a celebrate life, is evidence of what I am saying. So while it may be difficult for some to understand, particularly those who do not share such a faith, we can’t glibly expect John to change any more than he should expect us to.
This isn’t to say that I don’t hope John can come to a different understanding of scripture, but it must be in his own time and out of a sincere desire for the truth, not what he would consider looking for a way to have his cake and eat it too. So as long as he is happy, and he is not forcing someone else to violate their own conscience by foisting change on them, he has as much right to live his life the way he wants as anyone else.
The last part, not requiring change of others, is why I asked him to be open about his involvement with an ex-gay ministry. If the ministry he works for is involved in denying my rights through political lobby, or is otherwise involved in browbeating others to attempt to change their orientation, then I think John needs to own up to that. But as he said his own views differ from those of that ex-gay ministry, I would like to at least learn more.
David Roberts, you are beginning to understand where I am coming from. There is one other here who understands completely where I’m coming from who I used to serve with in my chruch. He was the one who gave me the link to enter into this website but he remains silent every sense I post my first note.
What I’m doing is tying Truth into my reality. I can’t act out homosexually because I believe its against what the Bible teaches. However, the Bible doesn’t promise me if I struggle with homosexuality, the desire will go away.
I believe getting marry is a calling from God in which I don’t have. I believe all Christian ex-gay ministry should include in their teaching that Marriage is a calling from God that not everybody has. The Church difiantly should teach the same. If they did I believe the divorses in the Church would decrease.
While John H and I are on opposite sides of this issue, I respect and love him as a brother in Christ. He must follow his conscience as we all must do concerning homosexuality. I cannot choose to be ex-gay and deny my nature. However, John H feels, according to his beliefs, that he must remain celibate. He cannot go against his conscience. It would be a sin. Romans 14:22-23
However, you are right on what you said David. If John H’s ministry is political and demands that people change their sexual orientation by shame and coercion, then that is where the problem begins for me. Otherwise I have no problem with those that wish to be ex-gay.
Yes, marriage is a calling. And divorce is another matter. Which brings me to divorce and remarriage. The reason I have brought divorce and remarriage up here so repeatedly is the lack of consistency in conservative Christian circles concerning this and other issues that does affect a large majority of people, including many Christians. While homosexuality is a major sin to them (affects a smaller percent of the population thus easier to attack) other issues that clearly state biblically like divorce/remarriage=adultery and wealth does keep you from the Kingdom of God. Not my words. But God’s. So if these churches that these ex-gay ministries spring from are ok with remarriages for any reason and affirm a “prosperity gospel” then how can they claim to be grounded firmly in traditional Christian values?
Please understand what I have said above is not an attack on a belief system but rather questions the inconsistency that has yet to be fully and correctly explained to me.
Merry Christmas!
~Ken R~
Ken R asks:
So if these churches that these ex-gay ministries spring from are ok with remarriages for any reason and affirm a “prosperity gospel” then how can they claim to be grounded firmly in traditional Christian values?”
I ask the same thing. Many conserative Christian groups single out Homosexuality as being the worst sin. I agree with you here. Homosexuality is only one of many transgressions that is on the list.
I keep on hearing lots of concerns about the political side of this matter. The only time I get involved politicaly are with issues dealing with minors especially in the publict school system. I do believe when one becomes mature enough to make his own adult decisions I don’t think policts should be involved.
However please understand just as your heart goes out to the ones who you think need to embrass their homosexualiy to find freedom, my heart at the same time has compasion believing that homosexuality is not God’s choice for anyone to walk in and would want these to offer up their brokeness to God to find God’s best for their lives. You and I do the opposit thing out of love and with God’s Heart.
Please God Give Us Wisdom Here!
I believe it all boils down to conviction. And wisdom only comes as God leads us through our journeys all the years of our lives. We would go through situations that would either built our believes or break it apart. God never compells anyone to bang self scripted believes unto other people who do not share the same opinions.
In the same breath, it is despicable for ex-gay ministries such as FOTF’s LWO asking parents to being their children against their wishes to go into anti ‘pre-homosexuality’ programs. Children who are homosexual would be suffocated. Those who are not, would be misinformed about what homosexuality is all about.
I really pray that God would bless some sections of ex-gay ministries with wisdom and grace in dealing with these children, to not let them built convictions in them upon something they are too young to understand; at the same time give proper guidance to the parents regards to risks involved and true probability of ‘change’.
Barging into every family’s minds about homosexuality being such a great sin deserving of so much thought abuse in children’s minds are not exactly what God had intended. It draw families away from giving attention to more important issues to deal with such as rising crime cases, hate discrimination against minorities, and war.
David: I absolutely understand John’s position, and i would not consider asking him to give up his faith in G, if that is what sustains him, makes his life better, and makes him a better person.
My question to john is this: “John, did you choose your your church because its message is that gay is bad, or did you choose your faith because of the message of G’s love for us?”
This is THE question. If the former, then John, you are absolutely in the right place–by your lights. If the latter, then you are absolutely in the wrong place, because that is antithetical to the message of love that Jesus preached.
It is the conflict that I have come to see between what Jesus said and what Paul said. Jesus clothed himself in love, Paul created the whole mess of sin, damnation, judgment, death, suffering,and redemtption, emphasis on the first three, that is the church. The two could not be more opposed, and their continued conflict plays out for John and all the other victims of sin-centered religion.
“For god so loved the world…” is Jesus speaking. “For whosever believeth in him shall be saved…” is Paul. What a double message that one is. we love you totally, but if you don’t do what we say, there will literally be hell to pay. Unconditional love–Jesus. Fear masquerading as love– Paul. There is a reason that Jesus had nothing to say about homosexuality, but everything to say about judging others.
Broken– no john, i’m not broken, and i am very happy, out, proud gay man. the only thing “broken” in my life is the implacable hatred that some parts of religion direct towards me for their own purposes, purposes which have nothing to do with G’s love. I look at mylife, and feel totally blessed. By G, by the universe, by good luck–I don’t know. But I am very grateful for it.
I don’t ask you to give up your faith, but your faith should not be in your religion– or in the men who have appointed themselves to be the arbiters of your faith, your life, and G’s message to you. Men who, as has been pointed out many times in this and other blogs, whose will tell any lie, no matter how vicious, in order to get gay people to feel bad about themselves, and who create far more separation from G than being gay could ever hope to,. your faith and your love should be in your god and his love for you. And it should be in yourself.
If G is love and G is truth, then these so-called men of god represent only themselves.
I was thinking of you last night when I was watching “Shrek the Third”. You should see it. Not generally a great movie, but there are two places where shrek is telling Prince arthur to trust and love himself, and not let other people’s beliefs and judgments determine how he feels aobut himself– and thus the course of his life.
I have more thoughts i will try to share tomorrow, but it is christmas, and i have stuff to do.
Merry Christmas! Thank You for your replies. Not allowing my time to be taken away from my family on this Christmas Day, I’ll make this brief for now.
I chose my Faith in God is based on Love and on Truth. Love is my leading factor but if I ignore what I believe is fully true, I could not fully love God, others, and myself.
I believe my last reply above is also true for all of you as will.
John H,
I wish you the very best as we celebrate the birth of our savior.
I too worship a God of Love and truth. But I don’t capitalize truth. For me, truth is simply what is, not What is Declared to Be.
Love, on the other hand, that truly is divine.
So at this time of year we can share that spirit and purpose of God becoming human in the most fragile and weak of creatures, a baby, choosing to go through the difficulties and frustrations of life so that he could feel as we feel.
And that is love. Merry Christmas.
Timothy Kincaid,
I can’t put the Bible Scriptures aside.
John I live in Jackson Hole, Wyoming which is a long way from California but I know your area well.
I’m asking for a little leeway here and in the spirit of the lull between holidays when nothing really gets accomplished…might I have an open forum comment here? (hint hint Mr. Roberts) It is the season for introspection and new-year’s resolutions. And we make those resolutions to become more happy…right?
What are your resolutions?
I’m not going to make some transitory quest to fit back into my college-days jeans or resolve to get my taxes done early this year. I want happiness. Okay…I’ll settle for some contentment on some level with being single. But celibacy is not a long-term option for me.
Would a lodge-styled mansion in Wilson, Wyoming and a partner like the Jake Gyllenhaal’s character in Brokeback Mountain be asking for too much happiness?
In any case, to everyone here at XGW: may you find happiness in this new year!
Thanks cowboy, I made a post along these lines. If anyone would like to follow suit, please comment there.
John H,
No. I would not ask you to put Scripture aside. Just realize that Scripture wasn’t written yesterday in Dallas, Texas in English. And that Truth isn’t always the same thing as what is actually true.
We all interpret Scripture according to our faith, our traditions, our understanding, and how the Spirit leads. The important thing to remember is that great pillars of Christianity didn’t agree on everything.
Did Luther know the Truth? Did Augustine know the Truth? Did Billy Graham? Did Mother Teresa? Or do you know the Truth.
No. They all knew truth, but certainly didn’t agree on many many areas of faith.
When we capitalize our beliefs as Truth and declare them to be absolute, we begin to worship a god of our own making – we worship our doctrine and our dogma – rather than God. We replace God with a book and our own understanding of what it says. And that is idolatry.
John: I will have to add a few things to what Timothy had to say. I will be very direct, but i hope not impolite.
You say you cannot put Scripture aside. I will put it to you that you probably do already, all of the time. These are old arguments.
Do you eat pork? shellfish? Do you wear clothes comprised of two different materials? Have you failed to slay all the unbelievers in your town, as deuteronomy requires? Have you worked on a saturday or sunday?Then you are putting The OT aside. On your own initiative. Thus, as Timothy says, you are replacing the authority which you claim you cannot put aside with your own authority.
New Testament: You hand around in a church that is quite willing to judge other people, despite Jesus’ express injunction against it. They “bear false witness” by calling homosexuality the “worst sin”, something coined by that old reprobate and hypocrite, Jimmy Swaggart. NO scriptural basis for that!!! Paul said (I believe) that you should not sit down with fornicators? Have you? Paul also damns greedy people in the same way he (allegedly) damns gay people. Is your church demanding that Bill Gates give up 59.9 of his 60 billion?
And on and on and on. You are just choosing the “gay is bad” part. And you are choosing a church that reinforces that. that’s why I asked you earlier: “John, did you choose your your church because its message is that gay is bad, or did you choose your faith because of the message of G’s love for us?”
I have become convinced that the real problem here (and not just speaking to you) is that people come to this question, they are in fundamentally one of two positions: either gay is OK, or gay is bad. Like “I’m OK, you’re OK” everything else follows from which position you are in. If you believe gay is bad, you will do whatever is necssary– like join this chuirch you belong to– to confirm that positon. Likewise, if you don’t.
You do have choices. you just don’t want to take the responsibility for making those choices, nor do you wish to challenge your fundamental belief that gay is bad, even though, if i understand your previous postings, you know that you are never going to be straight.
Here’s a thought for you: Jesus said, Love thy neighbor AS THYSELF. If you do not love yourself, what hope is there that you can love anyone else.
Jesus said: “Look not for the speck in your brother’s eye lest you miss the beam in your own.” Your church mates blithely ignore that. when they have achieved moral perfection, then they are allowed to tell you where you fall short.
I hope you will consider these thoughts. I say them with all brotherliness, not condemnation or anger. I just hate to see people waste the best part ofd themselves, trying to please others who have no business demanding to be pleased.
Good points all, Ben.
Ben in Oakland
I had a good start addressing the Bibical views if you read my earlier postings but many of you did not appreciate them. Do you really want to see the view I hold of the Levical Law compare to the New Convient?
I’ll be open to anyones comments, but I don’t want to be accused again in doing sermons if I post the view. Guys let me know if I can really addess Ben in Oakland questions.
On a different Subject:
I’m not saying anything right now as being right or wrong down below.
Basically there are three groups of Churches. One group of churches will tell you that being gay is bad and there is not any hope of redemption. Then there is a middle group that say that acting out homosexually is a sin that can be forgiven. This group does not view Homosexuality as being the worst sin. And finally there is your group that believes being gay is not a salvation issue and its great in being in a commented reationship with the same sex that includes sex.
The church I go to belongs to the middle group.
I hope all of you are secure enough in your relationship in God without having to question your relationship with God when anyone tells you that you don’t love yourself. You seam pretty confident to me.
Well, then, john. there isn’t much else I can say, except these two things:
“Acting out homosexually is a forgiveable sin.” Where do they get the moral, scriptural, and godly authority to make that assertion? And who is doing the forgiving? Are they doing it, or are they making that claim on G’s behalf?
Have you ever tried going to one of these churches that doesn’t tell you to hate the best part of yourself, but instead, will allow you to experience G’s love without that particular piece of personal, cultural, and spiritual baggage? Would you be open to challenge your beliefs that being a happy, proud, and out gay man is somehow contrary to Love’s plans for you?
I belong to the Southern Baptist denomination, and they most certainly do not consider homosexuality a salvation issue. But I hope you are not putting SB in your third category, because I suspect they would disagree. When you start generalizing like that, you will almost always be wrong.
As to not making sermons; there is a difference between answering a question and posting three long comments in a row pontificating about an issue in scripture. I trust you can divine the difference and act accordingly.
Ben,
I gotta take John’s side in this one.
I unwaiveringly find the theological pinnings upon which that belief stand to be flawed, inconsistent with the overall message of the gospel, and based on the flimsiest of translation assumptions.
But they are neither arbitrary nor without basis. If John’s interpretation of Scripture is to be accepted then his answer is clear: they get the the moral, scriptural, and godly authority to make that assertion based on the words of the Bible.
And, of course, God does the forgiving, just as he does for all sin.
Further, I doubt that John’s church “tells him” to hate the best part of himself, or any part of himself. It tells him to avoid temptation and not give in to sin.
Now I’m sure no one thinks that I agree with John’s interpretation of Scripture. But I don’t fault him for believing it.
Timothy: you are quite correct in all that you say. My only fault with his belief in it is that it does not appear to be making him happy or at peace with himself.
I was thinking of Ted Haggrd earlier today. Here’s a man who gave himself to G, started a very successful church, brought people to G, the who megillah, yet somehow, remained gay (until his 3 week conversion course–anothr matter entirely). Of course he repudiated that part of himself, at least for public consumption. And he said he prayed and prayed and prayed, yet somehow he couldn’t pray the gay away. and somehow, G didn’t see fit to remove it from him, despite all the praying and the good works.
If we are to divine G’s intention here, what are the conclusions? and what is the evidence for them?
One, he just persisted in his sin, and never truly repented. I’ll put words in john’s fellow church members mouths– that was it. Possible, but many ex-ex-gay people would say they gave their everything, and in the ned, it didn’t matter, because it wasn’t about sin, temptation, or brokenness.
From whgat i understood that john said, he knows he is gay and he knows he will never be straight. Maybe that is G’s intention, and G just doesn’t care as much as some men do.
that is another explanation for Ted Haggard that accords with my experience, and makes far more sense to me.
I feel sorry for John in his struggle. I hope he finds some peace.
I could be wrong but I suspect John is happy. At least he hasn’t said otherwise. Now, there is nothing wrong with wishing to ourselves, or praying to God, that John could come to an understanding that would allow him to love another man. But in the end, the important thing is that John feels he is doing what God wants of him and he isn’t hurting anyone else in the process.
Of course, the reverse is also true, than John must respect those same choices of others, here or elsewhere. I’ve encouraged him more than once to explain his role in this ex-gay ministry he has mentioned, and the name of the ministry itself. It is not fair that we are discussing these things without knowing whether John in fact does respect the decisions of others.
John, does the ministry you work for lobby against various civil rights for gays? Against civil marriage rights, the extenstion of bias (hate) crime laws to cover perceived sexual orientation, housing discrimination, etc? You have said you don’t agree with them on the idea of conversion from homosexual to heterosexual, but are they actively holding this out as a possibility to clients?
I’m not trying to browbeat you with this, but I do think you need to be accountable to the truth here. We can talk openly and honestly about these issues but only if you can be honest about your actions, as well as your beliefs.
David Roberts belonging to a Southern Baptist Church, the same denomination that I was saved in and remain in my first three years of my salvation, truly understands my take on how I allow the authority of the Scriptures to be the key element of my salvation. I know all things must be done out of love or the Truths and the Wisdom from the Scriptures that we receive only from the Holy Spirit will not be present to live out our salvation and to use our spiritual gifts for others in the church body. Even though I belong to a charismatic church for the last 10 years, when someone ask about my Christian faith I respond back in Scripture. Right here I’m talking about the well off educated population who has heard many views.
My Southern Baptist Church knew I struggle with homosexuality and they knew like any other sin, homosexuality was forgivable. They continue to accept me and love me but at the same time did not know what to do with me. That’s when I got involved in the ex-gay ministry.
Now I want to point out something here of interest to you. I’ve seen many straight men that act out homosexuality for years but after many months to a few years of prayer and healing have been set free homosexuality. These men were victims of sexual abused. It’s very hard for a man to share that he had been molested or even raped by a stranger or in most cases a family member however once they take that bold step then God starts doing a great work in their lives. Obliviously, these men will hold on to their beliefs of their ex-gay ministry experience.
Then there are some like me. They may have been victims of abused or never been abused, they never get over their homosexuality.
I am happy where I am at right now. More so when I was in my three year relationship with my lady friend who I mention in a earlier posting even though I miss her very much. I have close friends who I can be real with and belong to a church that helps many people of many types of struggles that I am able to be part of. My identity is not in the ex-gay ministry alone.
I even have friends who I minister with that I am able to be as honest with as you guys. Many times I find it easier to be more open and honest with people who don’t me that will. But now days that is not quite as true.
John H wrote:
I am not really familiar with any straight men that act out homosexually for years (unless we are considering prison populations). Even more shocking, I am not familiar with any gay person who was truely “set free” from homosexuality no matter what length of time they spent in “prayer and healing.”
I have serious doubts that John H. has really seen any of these mythical creatures of the ex-gay world either. To be fair, these people may have lied to John H., and he just took them at their word and believed them.
John,
I also seen God heal incurable diseases, provide finanes to ones who were in desparate need, saved people from being hurt and more. I witness these things in others and some of these things for me.
Child sexual abuse can drammized a person for a life time that some times includes affecting his sexual orientation. When I made my last posting I thought many would say that only the straight men and women benefit from the ex-gay ministry but if you are gay they could hurt you.
If you think I’m making up to what I am witnessing in the last ten years, it wouldn’t matter at all to what I am saying.
But I wasn’t abused as a child and I don’t feel diseased sexually or “unclean.” I feel human.
I sensed that we had already accepted your happiness on your self being and secure in what constitutes your sexuality. What I do not get, why do you keep justiying ex-gayness?
Many of us are not ‘straight men acting out homosexuality for years’ or had been ‘sexually abused’. May I ask you, do you believe there is such thing as homosexuality in humans?
Even if you do manage to notice many straight men acting out on homosexuality that was sexually abused, do remember there are many many more homosexual men that are not.
Hold on to those ex-gay beliefs if you wish to. Perhaps it just feels nice to slide into one’s comfort zone. Sadly many would not relate to your version of homosexuality, or life stories.
Emily & YukiChoe,
Please read the one posting I made before the one you had responded to. The posting you were reading was my response to John who thinks I’m making the whole thing up.
I’m sorry for the misunderstanding on this dedicate issue. Rignt now I think David Roberts and Ben in Oakland are only the two who is keeping up with all of my postings in which I thank them very much for their time.
All of my postings are still posted. It’s only been over week, but there are quite a few.
I also want to thank Timmothy Kincaid, and to include him with David Roberts, and Ben in Oakland for their time in reading all my posting and taking the time in responding.
I’m not very familiar with the phenomenon of heterosexual men acting out homosexually. That really isn’t a population that overlaps much with my life.
But I don’t doubt that such persons exist or that they find their way to ex-gay groups. And I wouldn’t be surprised at all to find that they are indeed survivors of childhood molestation. Or even that ex-gay ministries are helpful in healing their emotional wounds and provide the framework for changing behavior patterns.
I think that perhaps these heterosexual folks may indeed be the “former homosexuals” that such ministries like to proclaim.
John H, you bring up an interesting point about the divine intervention of God. I too have seen healing and other forms of evidence that seem impossible without the presence of God.
I do believe that God is perfectly capable of working startling changes in us. I was raised by pentecostal preachers who prayed for the sick and I have seen response. (For those who don’t believe this, I don’t present it for argument or ridicule, simply this is what I have personally observed)
But I don’t know personally of any credible person who God changed from having a homosexual orientation to having a heterosexual orientation. And that, to me, brings into question whether such “healing” is elusive because God doesn’t wish it.
Now I know that not all prayers are answered “yes”. I’ve seen people insistently rely on God’s divine healing only to die in pain and know that God is not some genie in a bottle to command. But surely, if God so very much wants His children to be heterosexual, he would be inclined to answer the prayers of at least SOME of the strugglers and miraculously change the into heterosexuals. But he doesn’t.
Ah, but now I’m rambling. I’m not trying to convince you of anything – though it probably seems that way. Just sharing some of my thoughts.
John H.
I too am keeping up with your postings. To date, I have never seen any convincing evidence of sexual orientation change, despite the fact that the ex-gay movement likes to claim that people are changing orientation “by the thousands, tens of thousands,” etc. I don’t think you are making the whole thing up, but I also do not believe your ex-gay colleagues and their claims of change.
Your sexual orientation didn’t change, and I am sure that it wasn’t due to a lack of trying. I thought your acknowledgement of this would allow you to more clearly see the ex-gays around you in a realistic light.
I guess if that was the case, you would have moved on with your life. I wish you all the best, John H. Good luck.
Shalom,
Spiritual rape feels like an accurate description to the pain and suffering you have survived. I believe the heart of Jesus is deeply grieved when non-heterosexual love happens and those experiencing this gift are told it is an addiction, not love, an incarnation of evil, a slip in sexual sobriety….It is frustrating to read the words of Joe Dallas and his encouragement to have glbt people flee from “sexual immorality” when what they express is natural for them. Sexual immorality is not a GLBT issue alone….I also believe that survivors of sexual abuse receive some healing from Living Waters Desert Stream, but if they are GLBT, it is more wounding and not about integration and wholeness. Rather, codependency is fostered as well as confusion around orientation versus how sexual abuse harms someone. If sexual abuse were the cause for GLBT orientation, there would be a lot more GLBT people. Wendy Maltz does a nice job at helping survivors out. I feel Living Waters/Desert stream has a person repeat the abuse cycle-“give this up for me and I will love you, you can be in this family”. Sexual abuse is about a denial of a soul. Sadly, I believe this ministry program adds to this soul loss and creates wounded hearts along the way. I pray you will find continued healing dear soul.
Jennifer understands how Sexual abuse done to you as child can really damage a person psychic for his or her life. The younger the child is the worst the affects are.
The rest of you have a different paradigm than me. Right now I’m not asking you to change your views or your agreement on homosexuality but I would like for you to be open to maybe to broaden your paradigm that includes heterosexual men who continue to act homosexually after they were sexually abused. I will write it like as one of you who agrees in Christian Homosexuality but only in my culture that I now see is a little bit different than yours.
I don’t know if you are familiar with Mel White. He’s a known pro-gay minister in my area. Mel White main argument is that he was never abused and had very loving parents because the main core reason for homosexuality that the ex-gay ministries are using for a man to act out homosexually is because he had a passive father and a very aggressive mother. For women and men he points out the ex-gay ministries blames sexual abuse as being behind the reason why one is acting out homosexually.
The ex-gay ministries never give anyone an identity as being a gay person. Most of them believe when one act out homosexually or are in a gay relationship they are acting out of their brokenness. The ones who do claim they have change are either bisexual or were not even gay in the first place. If they were truly gay many have personally witness that any church, ex-gay ministry or any organization cannot change them. So in my world no one will ever assume that they were gay unless they first went through many healing ministries for many of years. So in my culture for one to come to a conclusion that they were gay is usually done after a very long hard process that only a person who know without a shadow of a doubt is able to go through.
It’s not that differnt in the “secular” or even “non-christian” side of things. I’m perpetually questioned how I can “know” that I’m gay because I never once hooked up with a guy and didn’t need to experiment with my sexuality to come to the conclusion. I know because I just KNOW. You FEEL it. Still, for someone who has never been gay and never will be, that response can nonetheless be baffling.
The problem with theories about a certain kind of early life experience being at the root of homosexuality is that there is no common thread. Gay people have basically the same variety of experiences with family as anyone else, save perhaps those caused by the realization that they are gay and how the family does or doesn’t deal with that.
The need to find a cause, as though homosexuality were a disease or a disorder, has driven many to see patterns that just aren’t there. And when the majority of professionals realize this and stop treating homosexuality as a disease or disorder, a few with other agendas call foul and blame that shift on special interest groups, politics, or even Satan.
Like a fortune teller, questions worded carefully can elicit all kinds of familiarity from a subject. And some gay people will actually have had strong mothers, weak fathers, or have been molested. But still others have not. The need to put a cause behind homosexuality tells us more about the desires of those behind the endeavor than the lives of those they devalue in the process.
Just for this post board enough of me,
There is a theory that gay people had problems with their families and in their in neighborhoods because they were gay. i.e. The father did not know how to relate to his gay born son. The family issues between the son and his father were prexistant causing some dysfunction to happen.
I am friends with Mel White. I am currently working on a book called “The Rude Awakening” that highlights what the coming out process in the context of fundamental Christianity was like. The catalyst for the discovery and awareness was falling in love with an ex gay minister. I know the sexual and relational brokenness theory of Living Waters Desert Stream. I do not agree with it. The brokenness word does not feel comfortable for me. Perhaps this is because all of us have brokenness and sexualizing it seem more like a sexual addiction rather than a loving, same-sex bonding.
One more thought before I go into work and take an advantage of a quiet office today.
It’s been my experience that anyone heavily involved in an ex-gay ministry that chose to leave the ministry with a change mindset that God would ordain his gay relationship with a other Christian man would mostly come out believing this for himself. Not necessary doubting anyone who claimed that the ex-gay ministry did not help others nor would believe his work in the ex-gay ministry was done in vain.
He would come to the conclusion that it is God’s personally leading in his life at the present time. Many ex-gays were addicts in their teens and twenties when they found Jesus. So when they do leave the ex-gay ministry they feel there over their addiction and only desire intimacy in a same sex relationship.
Unfortunately, again this is only what I’ve witness, one choses to leave after having a period of having sex outside of a commited relationship. It’s in this state of mind afterwards when that person leaves.
Jennifer, I just now saw your posting. It came on while I was posting mine. Right now I’m only trying to make others understand the ex-gay ministry, not necessary make anone agree with them. I have to go to work now but wanted to acknowlege your posting for now.
John H,
Sorry to be joining this so late.
Here, in your above statement, is the crux of the problem for many who wish to espouse your brand of Chistianity and find themselves thus (i.e., attracted to the same sex). I don’t mean your particular interpretation of the bible, it seems such things can be disputed ad infinitum, eh? I mean your honest appraisal that you are still a sexual being. You have the task of fitting that into your particular beliefs. Many here were not able to line the two up.
You quote the apostle Paul, who acknowledged that “burning” with sexual desire is not a great choice, so rather than do so, get married. By my read, Paul didn’t consider marriage such a great thing either, but it’s better than “burning.” Paul seems to indicate that only those who are gifted with the ability to be celibate should forego the institution of marriage. So either all gays are so gifted or, those who are not, should just “burn?”
John,
You are 43 years old, at what point do you expect that you will be “free from [this] sin.” Or, at what point will the “Holy Spirit…strengthen [you]” to not “M.” You believe that Jesus has set a standard. You endeavor to follow this standard, yet by the first paragraph I quoted, you fail. To quote some more apostle Paul. “…that which you would do, that do you not…and that which you would not do, that do you do…”? And, “…wretched man that [you] are, who will realease you from the body of this death…?” “…I thank God, through Jesus Christ….” As I read you, being gay is not the sin, but acting out on it is? Yet you do indeed act out on it. And by the standard that you believe Jesus sets, if you do so in your heart (as you do when your “mind wanders and you M”), then you are indeed a practicing homosexual. By the standard you quote, are you any different in ‘God’s eyes’ than the person actually having sex with another person?
What you promote then, is not ex gay, just a different ‘gay lifestyle,’ repleat with the same ‘practice of sin’ that separates from the God who is any minute now going to deliver you. And this you call “perfect Peace and Contentment”. Do you really wonder at those who listen and observe this and say “there is no God?” At least, not the one you describe.
Since the principles used by Paul the Apostle are being mentioned, I thought I’d chime in a bit here.
Paul is well known for his exceptional logic in many writings. But in I Corinthians 7, he begins to almost ramble. At one time, I thought he’d lost the strong logic flow (as many writers do in long letters) and was simply being human, answering a set of somewhat-related sticky questions.
Now, I’ve come to view the chapter as Paul working through several principles and situations, and showing that the interactions defy singular logic that is applicable to everyone at all times.
That is to say, when Paul writes about ‘justification by faith’ in the Book of Romans, Paul’s singular logic is applicable to all mankind at all times.
But here in this section of Corinthians, when Paul writes about stations in life (marriage among believers, engagement, marriage with a non-believer, slavery, etc.), the singular logic yields to an individual application.
This is one of the points in the New Covenant wherein the corporate conscience must yield to the individual conscience. This concept is also shown in Romans 14, Galatians, and Colossians.
When does the corporate church determine that you, the individual, “burn in lust and should marry”? They don’t get to make such a determination. The individual determines if he or she is ‘burning in lust’ and therefore should marry.
When does the church say that “you are called to peace” and that such “peace” is defined as this action or that action? They don’t get to define what is ‘peace’ or ‘conflict’ for the individual. The individual determines what is “peace” to his own (or her own) self.
When doe the church define someone as a “slave that needs freedom”? They don’t get to make that judgment. The individual determines what is “slavery” and what is “freedom” to serve Christ.
I’ve come to believe that this chapter 6 is more beautiful as a tapestry of principles interacting with individual consciences than I ever thought. Paul the Apostle is holding up one piece of the tapestry at a time, giving principles for the interlocking threads, and then allowing the individual artist to continue the weaving according to the conscience of that individual artist. It is a tapestry of truth, with wildly divergent and colored threads.
To some, such freedom of choice is a horror! They need an agency to set limits on their selection of choices, a government to define ‘marriage’ as only ‘between one man and one woman’, and a ministry to help in their self-condemnation by defining all avenues (except one) as “sexual immorality”. They need a counselor to recast their past as ‘abusive’, ‘abandoned’, or ‘sexually broken’, and even to recall ‘lost memories’ that may have never existed before.
But to my friend that was born male and lives as female, her conscience has escaped the ‘slavery’ of male-acting and walks in the freedom of a woman that serves Christ. To my own wife that has chosen to stay with me – a man-now-legal-female – her conscience senses peace of continuing a marriage. Yet another friend lives in consensual slavery to her Dom; yet another lives as a young gay man dating and exploring whom to marry for life. Yet another is homosexual in orientation, and has chosen to deny himself and live with his heterosexual wife rather than ‘burn in lust’ towards men. Yet another is celibate.
These latter ones are “no longer children, tossed to and fro and carried about by every wind of doctrine….” [Ephesians 4:14]. These latter ones are making hard choices, listening to their individual consciences, considering the principles listed by the Spirit of God through Paul the Apostle, and creating a tapestry that they hold before the light of God’s mercy, with some regrets (for they are indeed human), but without guilt (for even more importantly, they are forgiven). These latter ones have thanked the agencies, governments, ministries, and counselors – for they were ‘mentors’ needed at a younger time. But they no longer need the ‘mentor’. They are not children; they are now adults.
What does your conscience say?
Caryn,
Yes, children love rigid rules and have a hard time with principles and concepts. If you watch children at play, often they create games that are little more than a series of steps and requirements.
We as people are comforted by the simplicity of rigidity. At work we are frustrated by inexact explanations and want to scream, “just tell me how you want it”. We don’t want to view things conceptually, but just not have to think about it.
And we love rules and laws about faith. We don’t want to think about whether something really applies or if one behavior is demonstrating care to another more than another behavior. We want RULES, especially those that are easy to follow.
And to play our games – and to make us feel that we are on the right path of faithfulness – we want to see illustration of others that aren’t playing the game by the RULES (or by the Law). And we condemn them.
I think this is what Paul was talking about when he said:
I think Paul was explaining that his certainties, the teachings of The Law that answered all the questions, the childish love of rigidity had to be put away. Now he’s faced by uncertainty and only partial understanding.
So he has to cease with Law and Rules and Truth and Games and instead has to apply the principles of faith, hope, and love.
The Law may say one thing – be it about slavery, or women, or creation, or homosexuality, or circumcision, or diet – and that’s very comforting in its simplicity. And we can rail against the greeks or asians or romans who don’t share the values and traditions of The Law and insist that they change. And follow the rules.
But what do faith, hope, and love say? Applying those principles is much much tougher. But we as adults need to set aside childish simplicity.
Though I have not been able to read all the posts I am the person that John H was talking about that he confronted and I was the one who mentioned this post/thread. Though most Christians will not say this openly for I have asked several of my evangelical Christian friends, there is the belief that gay men and lesbians will go to hell.
Their retractions tend to be well I’m not God but then I ask if you did not believe that then what is the big deal. For if I as a Christian gay man can enter into the kingdom of God then all this worry and need to get it right is of no use. And usually silence is the answer.
As one who was a leader in an ex-gay ministry for many years most of the issues tend to come from the side of addictive behavior for gay men and emotionally dependent behavior for women. One of the undoings for me several years ago was this whole dominant mother passive father theory that was exposed my Dr Elizabeth Moberly in the 80’s. I came from that so it was a perfect belief perfect set up for me and fro many men in the ex-gay movement could relate to it. But I discovered that there are many who have come from loving homes where there is more equality in the relationship. You as well have many coming from two thirds world countries who happen to be gay and that western thought/belief will not can not fit for them and their gay identity. And if one looks into the foundation of the ex-gay movement starting in Anaheim in the later 70’s you discover that the men came from addictive behaviors which was/is not congruent with their Christian belief system. So this gets back to the belief that two members of the same sex can not will not be able to have meaningful relationships for look at our lives and the lives of so many we know. This as well is backed by misinterpreted passages in Rom I Cor 6 etc.
For many people particularly church gay men are viewed in light of their sexuality or should I say sex with another man. What is seen is gay men having sex and getting into all kinds of fetishes. Which is sad for one doesn’t view heterosexual men and women in the same light. Truthfully as a gay man I do wrestle with all the so called sexual liberties that many in the gay community expose and express. And the reallity is that addiction is larger in the gay community than in the straight community. But I realize that most can not comprehend two men or two women supporting and loving one another for their beliefs say that can not be.
What I think is paramount to the movement is that men and women coupled and singled be-friending others in the community particularly those in the more conservative church and let them see us for who we are. Let them get to know us strength’s and weaknesses, flawed human beings being redeemed by the tender mercy and grace of God. In this way change will truly occur that affects a nation. As we know law never does affect or change the heart. And as it is written, “love covers a multitude of sin” so how do I, how do we love others espcially those opposed to us gay, lesbian and transgendered human beings.
As well I might add that many people believe gay/homosexual etc. is a choice. Now if you were to ask anyone in the ex-gay movement they would tell you their desires were not a choice but they do have a choice on whether to “act out” sexually which I will agree. But for many people they still think it is a choice you choose to be gay as if you can really change or even help who you are attracted to. And for me I knew I did not want to be celibate any longer after 20 plus years of it and I wanted to love and be loved which I think is a very divine thing
It seems Christians and Jews aren’t so different here. Jews will make the argument that it’s acts, not thoughts, that are sinful. But how can love be a sin? In this context, many LGBT frum Jews choose to abstain from certain sexual behaviors.
Wow Paul left a strong posting. We are all human and most men in our forties, married or in a same sex relationship, or single still masturbates from time to time it’s just part of being human. Our failures in living a righteous life will never stop here on earth. That type of living would only begin on that day when we do see Jesus face to face. When I do fail I don’t beat up myself, I go to God for His forgiveness. However, even going to God right away fail at some times as will, but when I do finally come His forgiveness is always there.
I have friendships that I’m in that I cherish very much that are full of commitment, grace, and unconditional love. I really do feel the intimacy there without the sex.
I’m going to reverse Paul’s question, because I have a tendency to lust for men rather than women does that make my sin any different? Just like a committed Christian man who doesn’t have a same sex attraction who may lust after women because he is human his sin is like my sin who can ask God for His forgiveness before taking his sin of lust to the next level
Maybe I’m being too open and honest on my short time on this board that I’m acting improper. I’m not saying you men and women are not, but I am only to expose truth here.
John H,
First I want to comment that the official position of Exodus is that masturbation is a big no no. Unless I’m mistaken, there’s generally a whole seminar on masturbation at the Exodus Freedom Conferences. So I’m glad you have found your independence on that matter.
And I don’t think you are being improper. You aren’t being crude for crudeness sake, you are just being very direct and honest. And I respect that.
Paul (the apostle, not the commenter) talked about how he could eat meat offered to idols. Considering that idolatry made the top ten list of “though shalt not”s, this must surely have seemed a bigger sin to the followers of the Law than pretty much ANYTHING else he could have done.
And Paul recognized that. And he said that if your faith won’t let you eat meat, then don’t. So I say, if your faith won’t let you fall in love with a man, then don’t. Further, Paul didn’t fry it up in the pan and wave it under their nose.
Which I fear I may be doing with the following, but I hope not.
I sincerely believe that if Paul were confronted with your situation today, he would say that it is better to marry a man (or commit within a relationship if marriage isn’t legal) than it is to burn with lust. I sincerely believe that he would think it best for you to have a sexual outlet that is devoted and intended solely for you than for you to objectify or fantacize.
Above all, Paul was pragmatic. If the Law stood in the way of sharing the Good News of Christ, then – as devoted to the Law as he was – he was ready to put the gospel first. In fact, I think much of Paul’s railing at the churches to straighten up was in some way to counteract the fact that he threw out the covenant (circumcision), the ritual purity (bathing and diet), and even the promised land. What Paul tossed out of the Law was far far FAR more central to Jewish faith than were the commandments about homosexuality.
If confronted with gay Christians (had he known what orientation was) I don’t think Paul would have hesitated a second.
And we know from Scripture that heterosexuality was not a requirement for Phillip’s evangelism. Nor did Jesus require heterosexuality. (Whatever you think eunechs were, they certainly weren’t heterosexual)
But I dont’ say all this to impose my beliefs on you. And you most certainly do not have to come to the same conclusion as me.
So Paul of Tarsus declared that ifyou’re human and you sin by engaging in an “immoral” sexual act, there’s always forgiveness. But since when does love need to be forgiven?
Bishop John S. Spong actually made the argument that Paul despised the Torah because he was actually a closeted homosexual, one who constantly had to bring his “members” in line with his mind, and had to live with a constant “thorn in his flesh.” And considering Paul espoused celibacy so much, and claimed he was GIFTED at being celibate, and that not touching a woman was a good thing, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch.
Paul, I have to take what you said one more step further. I know many men who got married and are still married and still are burning with desire.
As I read all of this, especially john’s responses, I jyust come back to what I said before. People come from one of two positions: either gay is good or gay is bad. All else– ioncluding beliefs, actions, and churches selected– comes from that. It is not the other way around at all.
John has stated, as far as I can tell,that he is not hetero. He has admitted that he doesn’t follow every last proscription of his anti-gay church. He has admitted that some portion of what they tell him doesn’t seem to be true, and some of it is slanderous.
for myself, if i knew the emperor had no clothes, I wouldn’t be complimenting him on the pattern of his tie.
My point is this. Because o much of what the exgay crowd says is bogus, relying on lies, distortions, and half-truths, why should I believe that the “moral” position is suddenly “true” in a way that all of the other points supporting this position are not?
The perfect example, especially for this thread, is :”Drs.” Jones and yarhouse. There are more distortions and half-truths around these two than can be ocunted. They trumpet that their study says “CHANGE IS POSSIBLE”. It then appears that change is possible for only 15%, and that the exact nature of the change is AT BEST complicated and ambiguous– just like you being ex-gay. Exgay doesn’t mean “not gay.”
The exgay ministries then trumpet totally bogus figures based on this totally bogus “research”. If i recall, they came up with a 67% figure (Corrrect me Timothy). Tens of thousands of people have changed, they say, but J&Y could only ocme up with 100 who were willing even to be studied, and only 15 who had changed.
Why would you trust someone whose ability to tell the truth, let alone distinguish what the truth may be, is so severely compromised? One thing (among many) that I admire aobut Timothy, Jim Burroway, Daniel dirito, and David is their willingness to go to any length to make sure that what they say is true, and stands up to factual and logical analysis and consistency.
Paul,
I wasn’t only talking about gay men. I’m talking about heterosexual men who still lust after other women after they got married. I’m sorry I didn’t qualify what I last posted.
(Moving on)
I was thinking today while I was cleaning up the flower bed this morning regarding how many here on this site find it hard to believe that a heterosexual man could act out homosexually in his brokenness. I know that’s something unusual to ponder about but nevertheless I remember a other place besides the ex-gay groups that you will find men who would also make such a claim. And those are in your 12 step SA or SAA groups.
The SA and the SAA groups have shared that there addiction to sex became so strong that they left their natural desire for women and had sex with men to fulfill their sexual needs. The words what Paul use in Romans fit so will here.
So as far as our different views, if all of you and I can come to an agreement that it is possible for a heterosexual to act out homosexually in his brokenness because of his depraved mind what SA and SAA try to address a very strong conclusion could be bring about regarding what Paul was talking about in Romans.
The conclusion would be this. That the men that Paul was referring were not really gay. What they were are men who just wanted to have sex just for the purpose to have sex. They had no desire for relationship.
Perhaps today these men maybe called Sex Addicts
YES!!!! Abosolutely heterosexual men can behave and act out homosexually. This is the kind of sex that sex addiction is all about. Joe Kort has a wonderful article on this very topic. Heterosexuals can act out homosexually just as homosexuals can act out heterosexually. What I do NOT appreciate about Living Waters/Desert stream or ex gay ministry programs is that they do not support non-heterosexual orientation and put homosexual, same-sex eroticism in a sexual addiction box or the box of “it is the relational brokenness that tempts one to get legitimate needs met in illegitimate ways”. There is no room for non-heterosexual orientation. This I believe violates the message of Christ. The Bible is a book, or rather, a library of 66 books, that is a mirror of the context and time the authors of it lived. The Bible is a love ethics book, not a sex ethics book. Our focus needs to shift and our respect for proper interpretation sof the scriptures must grow so that more Christ Consciousness, integrity, and truth can be brought to all relationships. Our God is a God of diversity and rainbows.
I was thinking today while I was cleaning up the flower bed this morning regarding how many here on this site find it hard to believe that a heterosexual man could act out homosexually in his brokenness.
John H,
I’m confused. Who found it hard to believe that some heterosexual men act out homosexually?
I think we all know about situational same-sex behavior. Prisons, the sexually compulsive, those dealing with abuse, drug addicted persons, even some who think they cannot find opposite-sex partners. And perhaps ex-gay groups are helpful for them. But these folks are very few and far between. And they are not in any way indicative of gay people.
But your point about Romans is a good one. Perhaps Paul was speaking about the sexually compulsive.
I tend to think he was talking about idolatry. But your argument has merit. I’ll think about it.
Timmothy Kincaid,
Your posting on December 27th and other posting around that time gave me the impression that except in the pision population, that you and others found it hard to believe that hetrosexual men do sometimes act homosexually in their brokeness.
So if we can come to the conclustion that some hetrosexua men who do act out homosexually get the help they need, a change for the better is possible.
Are you still with me?
John H
I suppose that a heterosexual may engage in homosexual activity for any number of reasons, but I don’t agree with the ex-gay concept of brokeness. Therefore, I wouldn’t say that they were acting out of their brokeness. I don’t think I have ever seen or heard non-ex-gays using the word brokeness. It seems to be another example of the ex-gay neologisms.
Also, when talking about sexual addiction or other compulsive disorders, it doesn’t strike me that the problem is the homosexual activity. The problem is the compulsive behavior that leads to any destructive activity.
I really think that you are making quite a stretch by pushing for some sort of declaration that heterosexuals might engage in homosexual activity. I am not sure why that is so important to you. If a heterosexual engages in homosexual activity in prison, or for money (prostitution, porn, a place to stay, drugs, etc), or for lack of some heterosexual outlet for some compulsive behavior, their underlying orientation is still heterosexual. I can’t imagine why any of them would go to an ex-gay group for help. These people wouldn’t be gay to begin with and only engage in same sex acitivity for some secondary gain.
“I was thinking today while I was cleaning up the flower bed this morning regarding how many here on this site find it hard to believe that a heterosexual man could act out homosexually in his brokenness.”
Well I’m one who finds it hard to believe.
Why?
Heterosexuals are attracted to the opposite sex. I find it hard to believe someone would be just so consumed with desire for sex, or be so “broken” (whatever that means) that he would generate a false or psuedo attraction to other men, and maintain it long enough to have sex.
Why else?
Because this is one of the various lies I used to tell myself when I thought I was straight. “Oh I’m not gay, I don’t even like these guys, I’m just doing it because It’s an easy lay.”
Was I screwed up in the head? Yes, but it was my justification for my behavior that was screwed up, not the sexual attraction itself.
For women, maybe. Women’s sexuality, either by nature or societal approval, is more fluid and less rigid than male sexuality.
But for men? Nope. It’s too much of a taboo for men. For a man to have homosexual contact with another man it would have to involve prison, liquor, large amounts of money, and or a combination of those elements.
Or he could be bisexual. Why are the bis always tossed to the side? Granted they are few and far between, but why is that never an option?
I agree.
If a heterosexual engages in homosexual sex, most likey he is having fantasies about someone of the opposite sex much like when gay men who engage in sex with women fantasize about men. In both cases I would conclude that the sex to be a mere physical experience and not so much a spiritual one nor an experience that involves love. It’s just done to get physical pleasure and not to build a relationship. I believe that is why Christ accused people of “lusting in their hearts” even if they did not in fact act upon their thoughts. it goes back to intentions. When you have sex with someone, is your intention to unite with them in a spiritual and loving relationship, or are you just using them to satisfy your lustful needs? If a guy is making love to a woman and yet has to fantasize that he is making love to a man in order to get any pleasure out of the experience, is not that true brokeness?
Like I said before right now I’m not trying to change anyone view of homosexuality but I want others to understand the basis where the ex-gay ministries are coming from. If you read my friend’s Jeff most recent two postings on 12/28/07, mainly the first one, he explains that many addicts who do act homosexually go to the ex-gay ministries for help shortly after they find religion.
Some Men do have a homosexual orientation and some of them don’t who go into the ex-gay ministry for help. I believe some heterosexual men were lacking love for such a long time they would do anything to get love and acceptance that they would include puting on a gay identity to get it. I’m trying not to get too preachy, however when they allow God to fill those places in their heart that God could only fill, not any other man, a change happen for these men. Here I’m only talking about heterosexual men.
Now for me who really has a homosexual orientation, the change of my sexual orientation did not happen for me. Maybe Paul ,in the Bible, thorn was homosexuality, no one really knows. I would like to think it was so I could relate to him and know that God’s grace is sufficient for me.
That’s a possibility. Could be another explanation of Romans 1. The fact Paul may have been gay and because of his upbringing in Jewish Law, he could have been self-loathing and in turn spoke out against the very things he himself desired internally. That is not unusual considering recent events of Ted Haggard/male prostitute and other evangelical ministers coming out of the closet. Crying out against homosexuality, but on the inside desiring to be who they truly are.
And John H, the word “broken” is offensive to me. When conservative christians and ex-gays use that word to describe gays it makes it sound like we are toasters or T.V.s in need of repair. We are not objects. We are people with feelings.
Guys I used the word brokenness when I am explaining the ex-gay ministries approach,. If you been reading my postings, you will see that I may not agree completely with the ex-gay ministry approach but do find however some good that they do have on a certain group of people.
By now I hope you realized that I am not here defending ex-gay ministries but only viewing my own life experiences in the view of Scriptures. I have to admit there is a self motivation here why I’m posting my views here. I DON’T WANT TO LIVE MY LIFE WITH ANY DOUBLE STANDARDS.
The last two weeks here have been very healing for me. Even though you may not agree with me on everything, I appreciate your feed back that does challenge my belief system , in return make me make new adjustments, then live my life accordingly.
I don’t know how much longer this blog will go on but I do want to thank you all for taking the time in posting all of your posts.
John H,
I’m not sure why my 12/27 post made you think I disagreed with you. I thought it said I did agree to some extent. But, nonetheless…
I must say that some of what you are saying here is encouraging. The “official” position of the ex-gay movement is that there is no such thing as orientation and that everyone is heterosexual. So I am glad to see that – at least in your case – this is not just automatically accepted as Truth.
And please don’t go away if this thread peters out. There are always new threads and your perspective is good to hear.
Agreed, please do stick around.
John H.
I understand what you are trying to say in that God fills us in a way that a person could not. But as an Orthodox Christian, my understanding is that God fills us with his love through others such as the Virgin Mary and the saints, and within the Christian community, with one’s family and with one’s partner. In other words, whereas the source of our life and grace comes from God, it can be channelled through others to get to us. So, for example, my partner is a channel of grace for me because my love for him and his love for me is God’s love manifested between us. It is unfortunate that the ex-gay ministries fail to see this, that love between two persons is a reflection of God’s love for us irregardless of gender.
In your journey John H., I pray you come to an understanding that God loves you … period. Not – God will love you if, but God loves you. Although it is not included in all Christian Bibles, one of my favorite versus comes from the Book of Wisdom:
You, oh God, love all things that are and hate none of the things which you have made, because you did not appoint or make anything hating it. How would anything have endured if you had not willed it? How would anything have been preserved had it not been called forth by you? You spare all things because they are yours, O Lord, who loves souls.
(Wisdom 11:25-27)
I haven’t really left this thread to explore the other part of this site. If you recall I got into this thread by a single link that Jeff had email me. So I will have to find out the ways to stay around when this thread ends.
Alan S my group that I am involved in would agree with you. You said
“In other words, whereas the source of our life and grace comes from God, it can be channelled through others to get to us.”
They wouldn’t allow any sex in the relationship and would assist you in not becomming co-depenat or emotional dependant on others. Besides that they would encourage you to be at a place of being loved and at a place where you can give love to others. They look as isolation as not being a good thing for anyone to do.
John H, thanks for your perspective on ex-gay. Sorry to see that you are involved in something that, in my opinion, is harmful to you and many others, and with leaders who knowingly lie and continue to push this.
I appreciate the scriptures that you cite to justify your reasons for hating yourself, and continue to make yourself miserable. Please consider the following.
As you believe in God (as I do), then you must know that God gave you a brain to think wisely with. Then you must know that being gay, in and of itself is not wrong. And that there is nothing harmful about having a loving same sex relationship with someone you love. Instead of making excuses for not taking part in God’s gift to you, start accepting who you are and realize you can be close to God and happy at the same time.
We don’t live this life we have forever. So get going and choose to be happy, instead of finding and misinterpreting quotes under the guise of Truth. Good luck and best wishes!
The physical component of a relationship between two people is an outward expression of their inward love. Again, it is what is the intention that should be at question and not the act itself. If I am just using my partner in order to satisfy my lustful desires then, at least in my understanding of the Gospel, I would have committed a mortal sin and forefit God’s grace in order to satisfy my lusts. But if I am being intimate with my partner i expressing my love for him then it becomes an outward expression of an inward love that we mutually share. My intention would be to express my love for him in an intimate manner. There would be love envolved, and all love has God as its source.
As for being co-dependant and emotionally dependant others … well, we are humans and, with few exceptions, we are dependant on others emotionally, physically, and mentally. At our work, we seek approval and recognition from our bosses and coworkers and clients. As sons or daughters we seek the approval of our parents, their love, and their support. In a heterosexual couple, there is co-dependancy and emotional dependance. Homosexual couples should not be excluded from this basic human experience.
It is when this co-dependence and emotional dependancy overrides our co-dependence and emotional dependancy on God that takes us from the normal to being guests on the Jerry Springer Show.
It’s good to be around loving people, but I would find it difficult, in fact impossible, to not long for being with one person. I would never feel comfortable telling a large crowd my inner most feelings and would seek to find someone in the crowd who would be willing to be taken aside to talk to, not for a relationship per se, but just having a one on one friendship with someone whom I could depend on.
It is better that two should be together rather than one because they have the advantage of their society. If one falls he shall be supported by the other. But how sad it is for the one who is alone because when he falls he has no one to lift him up.
(Ecclesiastes 4:9,10)
Allan S said:
I understand. I guess that is where Orthodox Christianity and Sola Scriptura Christianity differs. For us, while we consider the Sacred Scriptures to be inspired by God, we do not believe our interpretations to be necessarily so. Nor do we consider Sacred Scripture the only source for our faith. While this is true, there are still many Orthodox Christians who hold the same views as those of Sola Scriptura Christians with regards to sex being only between a man and a woman for the sole purpose of procreation. And they primarily use Scripture to further their argument.
But there are many Christian churches out there who have come to the conclusion that Scripture does not condemn same-sex relationships, even when sex is involved, provided of course the couple is in a monogomous relationship united in the love of God. It would be to your best interest to at least hear what they have to say in order to draw your own conclusions.
In all honesty Allan H I’ve all ready study so much and so long on this issue. I’ve all ready done too much studying on this.
I know pretty much everyone feels the same as Allan. I’m following what I feel is the conviction of the Holy Spirit. If I am wrong everyone here really needs to pray for me.
John H,
You are never wrong if you go with your heart and what you feel God is calling you to do (as long as it does not harm yourself or others). But remember the Pater Noster (the Our Father) where it says “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” which means that we ask God to help us do his/her will, what he/she wants us to do. This means, in the words of the Blessed Virgin Mary, “Here is God’s slave; let it be done according to his word.”
If you recall the story of the Annunciation, Mary had already had in her mind how her life was going to be. At least she was not planning on being the Mother of God. When the archangel Gabriel revealed to her that she was to be the Christ-bearer, she didn’t doubt God’s message but rather wanted to know how it was to be done because she did not see herself capable of such a role. I think as gay Christians we too wonder how we can be in a loving relationship when we have been told that there are certain requirements for a relationship, and we are told that we do not have those requirements. Like Mary, we question how can we do something that seems impossible. But God revealed to her his plan for her and she accepted. So too, as gay Christians, we are given a revelation that God has a plan for us as well. And that plan can be to obtain a loving and caring relationship if we, like Mary, are willing to exchange our will for God’s.
I will pray for you not that you are wrong but that, like all of us, we need someone to pray for us every now and then. I ask for your prayers as well.
dear john h
i think youre wrong (about this). i think its great that you can be open to the possibility of being wrong…the conviction of the Holy Spirit can be a difficult thing to be sure about … in 1 John the apostle speaks about our hearts condemning us when God doesnt…so our hearts can mislead us … false guilt…straight (scuse the pun) from the accuser of the brethren… it worries me that when it comes to sola scriptura we evangelicals tend to shift from “in God we trust” to “in some long dead, unknown, poorly resourced, medieval scribes and translaters…we trust” especially when it comes to verses that biblical scholars admit are unclear containing words that we are all uncertain of (e.g. arsenokoitoi and malekoi) and about such currently and historically contentious subjects such as sexuality – and homosexuality at that! why dont we trust God and what His word clearly says is the most important thing: LOVE! and try to understand the rest of t he verses in THAT light? some new research is strongly suggesting that the levitical laws are actually condemning temple prostitution as is Paul’s use of the word arsenokoitoi in 2 of the 3 NT references to date taken to refer (erroneously) to all homosexual activity… hope that helps?
I was deeply scarred by Desert Stream when they were in the Marin County area (San Rafael?) around 1981. I am a liberal Episcopalian today and rejoice that I found the truth that Jesus loves me and includes me in His Kingdom just as I am, which today means proudly gay despite the harm done to me by Desert Stream’s attempts to make me hate myself. Just because these so-called ex-gay ministries are escaping human justice for their crimes in this life does not mean they will not face the wrath of God in the life to come. They are spiritual rapists, and do permanent psychological harm to God’s precious children.