https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCV1Y8WkZKI
Exodus International has begun advertising for its 2008 conference. Its new video, posted above, is slickly produced, but as one might expect from a two-minute ad it contains little of substance.
Like most of Exodus’ advertising, the video makes use of buzzwords like “change” and “freedom” without making any effort to define them. Alan Chambers does explain in one clip that change doesn’t come without struggle, but viewers unfamiliar with Exodus’ word games would be excused for concluding that they (or their gay friend or family member) need merely to persevere through a little hardship to achieve heterosexuality.
In terms of substance the video does reveal the names of several speakers lined up for the 2008 “Freedom Conference”:
–Dale Evrist, pastor of New Song Christian Fellowship in Tennessee;
–Michelle McKinney Hammond, who speaks and writes on women’s issues;
–Pastor Jimmy Evans, who co-hosts a televised marriage ministry with his wife;
-and Anne Graham Lotz, daughter of Billy Graham.
With a roster of popular evangelical speakers and advertising that looks like it came straight from Madison Avenue, Exodus may succeed in increasing interest for its conference among its evangelical base. Whether those that seek Exodus’ help remain enthusiastic once the hype is over and reality sets in remains to be seen.
Hat tip: Good As You
I hope I don’t offend anyone with what I am about to say, but Exodus is using the same tactics that most Christian communities of that genre use. They sugar coat everything and make it look so easy. Just trust God and everything will be ok. Repent, accept Jesus into your life, join us, and your problems will be over. Unfortunately, they never give a person the chance to read the fine print and once someone enters these types of communities, they soon realize there is more to it than just repent, accept, and join.
I’ve never agreed with this concept because I want to know all about something before I join it. Churches that offer catechism or religious instruction BEFORE allowing full acceptance of a new member is what I agree to. This allows the individual to participate partly in the community while learning about what it is all about. Then the person can make a decision at the end of the catechism or religious classes whether they want to join or not.
The commercial certainly targets whom they want to target – someone who is confused about their sexuality, someone who questions whether they are accepted by God for having same-sex attractions. And they have a clear message – gay = unhappy, ex-gay = happy.
But what is missing is the message that God loves us as we are. Why not play the hymn “Just As I Am” in the background? Why not preach Christ’s message that change is in opening our hearts to loving God and neighbor and ourselves? Well, mainly because this genre of Christianity does not adhere to the Gospel message:
GOD IS LOVE!
(Catholic Epistle – St. John I;4:8)
God is “the God of peace and love.”
(Epistle to the Corinthians – St. Paul II;13:11)
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)
How much does he love us?
For God so loved the world as to give his only begotten Son so that whosoever believes in him may not perish but may have life everlasting.
(The Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ – St. John 3:16)
The love of God has appeared towards us because God has sent his only-begotten Son into the world that we may live by him. In this is love, not as though we had loved God but because he has first loved us, and sent his Son to be a propitiation for our sins.
(Catholic Epistle – St. John I;4:9,10)
And God’s love is unconditional.
God commends his love towards us because, while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
(Epistle to the Romans – St. Paul 5:8)
They used one of my favorite Christian songs for the commercial… Which made it even that much more uncomfortable to watch. Honestly, I am trying to find anything unique about the sound bytes used in the video. I really can’t… There’s nothing that they say that can’t be said about any Christian’s journey.
“Change isn’t the absence of struggle, but it’s having the freedom to choose in the midst of that struggle.”
You mean… Choosing behavior? Color me shocked.
If he’s talking about the change of heart that comes about due to salvation and sanctification… He’s right. The Holy Spirit does give Christians a greater capacity to choose rightly in the midst of struggle. However, that’s not what the target audience of this video is going to take “change” to mean, is it? No. They are desperate and searching, and will take change to mean orientation change.
I think one of the biggest problems with ex-gay ministries is that they see the change of heart that comes about due to salvation and orientation change as one in the same. Therefore, it’s confusing for us (and, most likely, for them) to discern when they are talking about one or the other.
I’d hate to think there were malicious motives behind this confusion, but it does make me wonder. Obviously, if their message is, “God will change your heart, allowing you to live chastely even in struggles” they won’t get as many participants as “God will heal you of your homosexual orientation and make you straight so you can have a wife and kids just like everybody else.”
So it seems they just take a middle ground in terms of what they say in their advertising, so that both views can find what they are looking for in the murky things that are being said.
Jay said:
Good point, and unfortunately we’ve seen this before.
Alan S. said:
Exactly. The sales video reminded me of an infomercial or a long pharmaceutical ad. However, even pharmaceutical ads insert disclaimers about side effects and limitations. They should have added a disclaimer to the ad. Something like:
What really disturbs me is how Exodus and the fundamentalist/evangelical movement use consumerism to sell Jesus’ message. Following Jesus is not a one-time transaction and there are rarely quick and simple solutions to life’s problems. All the seminars, self-help books, and cheesy soft rock will not necessarily lead to a change in sex attractions, fulfilling celibacy, or spiritual enlightenment.
The implication being “you need to get over being gay…”
If this claim had a modicum of truth to it, Exodus programs would be unnecessary.
But, in the absence of such a “God,” one can always try Exodus and their methods.
I thought what Alan said was actually quite clear about the meaning of change. The question is whether the rest of Exodus and the Ex-Gay movement will follow along or keep taking advantage of the fuzziness of their claims to “change”.
Well said, Jay.
And unfortunately the converging of both meanings of “change” can cause a doctrinal dilemma.
If Exodus admits that orientation does not (or even may not) change, they are in essense admitting that God does not change the heart. And that is contrary to everything that Christians believe.
So they have to deny the existence of orientation. Or claim that the opposite of homosexuality is holiness. Or claim that chastity is a change in orientation – but only if one denies the direction of their attractions, otherwise chastity is as sinful as promiscuity.
Until Exodus is able to separate change in heart from change in orientation, they will continue to make bizzare claims – because the very basis of their faith requires it.
However, a separation of change in orientation from change in heart would require that they admit that God may not seek a change in orientation – and that would run contrary to their entire purpose. And because a homosexual orientation (or identity) is defined as sinful and in defiance of God, they would have to change their notions about identity.
Quite the dilemma. I doubt they are going to be able to resolve it any time soon.
I was happy to see this included in the clip, but I agree with Jay that the overall message of what change means remains unclear to me.
They don’t have to change their ideas about identity, in my opinion, so much as they need to change their ideas about orientation. I don’t care if they call themselves “gay” or not. Even I don’t really enjoy that term… And there is Biblical evidence for identifying solely in Christ (though I must admit ex-gays seem to take it more seriously than their straight peers).
There is not, however, Biblical evidence that a homosexual orientation is sinful in itself. Even they have admitted this, I’m sure.
Mainly, they need to be honest about where their attractions lie. What do they really have to lose by saying this: “I am almost completely attracted to people of the same sex. I don’t label myself as ‘gay’ because I choose to identify solely with Christ. God has changed my heart so that I can live in contented celibacy despite the struggles with lust that I face.”
Really… I’ve been doing it for years. It’s not that difficult.
Jay,
The point I was making was that they don’t think being same-sex attracted is sinful, but saying “I have a homosexual (or gay) orientation” is identifying with sin and defiance and therefore is sinful. Your admission that you are attracted to the same sex gets in the way of God making miraculous changes in you and takes you away from a Christian identity.
Or this seem to me, anyway, to be at the heart of Chambers’ comments about celibacy being as sinful as promiscuity if it is associated with a homosexual identity.
If that’s what Chambers, Exodus, et al believe about Christianity, then I wonder if they think being deceitful or purposefully ambiguous takes them toward a Christian identity. For me, identity is a personal issue. Honesty, however, is not. I’d rather be completely honest about where I stand (even if that means being somewhat identified with something sinful) rather than deceive others into thinking that God works in ways He most often does not.
This isn’t directed at you, of course. I’m just ranting. Thanks for the discussion.
“I have a homosexual (or gay) orientation” is identifying with sin and defiance and therefore is sinful. Your admission that you are attracted to the same sex gets in the way of God making miraculous changes in you…”
If G is all powerful and really wants me to change, what is stopping him? Am I like pharoah, and my heart must be hardened to teach me a lesson? And is G not moved by my fervid prayers, entreaties, and sacrifices to give me what I ask because…why? I don’t really want it quite enough, or maybe I’m holding back just a little so that I can be sinful and defiant, etcetcetc? G is SUCH a tease!
And what is the proof of the assertions? “You haven’t changed, have you?” so you must not be letting G in (or buying our (biblically literal) snake oil, because otherwise, you would. your fault, not ours.
Basically, Timothy, you seem to be repeating the old joke in a new format: How many ex-gay ministries does it take to change a lightbulb? Only one, but…
The failure of the ex-gay ministries to make a difference is fairly good evidence all by itself that maybe G literally DOESN’T GIVE A DAMN. And it uses exactly the same standard they use– failure.
It is really fairly perverted, but I think it is the kind of perverson that flourishes in that hothouse known as THE CLOSET. It gives one the typical wide stance in moral issues that we have come to know so well.
Again, wise words.
Are we forgetting the real target of these ads?
Might it not be the Right Wing religious groups that fund them – to produce a product for them so they will feel righteous about denying GLBT equality?
Following up on Jay and Timothy’s comments on many ex-gay leaders like Randy Thomas being vague about change and their own attractions, Randy was asked on his blog today if he was now attracted towards women and not men. His response was: “What Alan [Chambers] said was that no one is above temptation and I would agree with him. If temptations come they still don’t determine who I am or how I behave.My tetimony is linked on my articles page.”
In his testimony, Randy does the same dancing around the question of whether or not he still struggles with same sex attraction. Saying that everyone has temptation and that IF a temptaion arises…isn’t really being open or honest to anyone. It’s simply not being upfront or clear.
As you guys have mentioned, being dishonest (or intentionally clouding the truth) is a sin just like being gay is. I guess for them it’s a means justifying an end. I just don’t agree with it.
It is as upfront as he is going to get, probably (and obviously) because even he would recognize the outright hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy of saying that he has actually “changed”, that he is now attracted women and not to men, when he probably is quite well aware that he has not.
However, by casting it in terms of temptation (something that comes from without) instead of orientation (something that comes from within), it relieves him of any of the moral responsibility of his position, and allows him to place himself will all of the other people who are “struggling” against sin instead of just their G-given nature.
Of course, on the same thread as other articles posted and blogged here, if he were to admit that he has not changed in the slightest, it would be an admission that the ex-gay ministry and RT are both snake oil sold as a cure for a non-existent disease, and someone would be out of a job and a paycheck…
…and out of the good graces of ignorant and bigoted people that someone has managed to convince himself actually have opinions that matter.
Exodus has billed itself as an organization that changes gays to straights, but there is no evidence that Exodus can or has changed anyone from gay to straight, including leaders of the group both past and present.
Since Exodus itself is based on a false premise (sexual orientation change), I cannot see how they can possibly advertise themselves in an honest way.
So, we can point out the falseness of this ad (which I think we should), but we can’t lose sight of the fact that the basic premise of this group is false.
Oops, wrong thread!
Jay, sweetheart…that makes you EXSEXUAL.
Thing is I’d hate to encourage the ex gay industry by saying anything about celibacy.
As you know, they see that as the viable alternative to marrying the opposite sex.
And will try to force that issue accordingly on the involuntary.
Of course, you’re just being honest. And I appreciate honesty.
But although it’s not anyone’s business whether a person chooses to be asexual, exsexual or simply waiting for the right one.
My point is, religious communities MAKE it their business to especially interfere in the sex lives of gay people. And they want our public laws and accomodation to reflect that. And if they can’t make it political, they’ll try to engage every church to do so.
I’d be more interested in WHY you made such a choice. I really would.
Would you say so if it was pressure from others?
Just as it’s often pressure from others to marry and have children, even against one’s personal better judgement?
I want the ex gay industry to accept that gay people ARE better served being in committed, monogamous relationships with another gay person.
And for them to REALLY allow the truth to be known which choice a gay person would REALLY make if left alone to.
I think you understand me there. They take a lot for granted that gay people SHOULD choose not only leaving being gay or leaving sex, but assume that staying and living as a gay person is a doomed life.
The less someone gives them ammunition for their assumptions, the better off everyone is.
I was just thinking how wonderful it would be if this same kind of conference were held for GLBT people along with their parents, family and friends but that the theme were acceptance of our orientation, unconditional love along with embracing a life in Christ. That would be amazing!
Benjamin,
I think gaychristian.net’s annual conferences are similar to what you’re seeking, as are some MCC and Soulforce gatherings that I’ve witnessed.
GCN’s conference definitely fits that bill. From what I hear, Evangelicals Concerned’s conferences do as well.
Why arent christians just trying to help things at the root of the issue. I mean if gays have poor self esteem, then help them with that. If we have unhealthy relationships… give us some advice to make them healthy.
When i was taking part in an exodus based program. (sorta conversion therapy i guess) I met with my pastor every week and discussed a book about boundries in my life. It was the best time i’ve ever spent in the church. If i got anything out of my therapy it was building healthy boundries in my life. Am i perfect now? Nope. Am i gay? 100%
Do I think i need to be straight to find God’s love? nope. Its sad that we need to force people to be who they are not, just to push an agenda. Work with the roots of the problem Christians!!!
Much love,
Mike G.
Well, the editing of this video is amazing. The marketing consultants did a phenomenal job. At what exactly??? Selling this to right-wing groups who fund Exodus. SharonB is totally right. Having the experiences I do, I still find the video effective in drumming up some emotion…amazing how Religion can do that.
Thank God for people willing to stand up to the establishment, essentially, and speak out on these distorments of truth.
Moderated: commenter has been warned (heavily) about proselytizing here for his own benefit. Discuss, don’t preach, the subject of the thread civilly. Count this as your last warning.
Wow, here comes Falzarano parroting the SAME ol’ crap he always does every few months or so at XGW.
You’re not winning any converts over here with your sledgehammer diatribe, Anthony, so stop wasting your energy. Yelling the same points over and over and over month after month, year after year isn’t going to make people here believe you any more than they did the LAST time you trolled around XGW. People come here because they want to see a perspective other than the one they are constantly presented with – Biblical “proofs” about homosexuality being wrong – so screaming those “proofs” at the visitors and writers here will not win anybody to your cause.
This just me, and i don’t know who anthony is, but it seems to me that if he has something to say, he should be allowed to say it, even if he is totally full of crap. The answer to speech we don’t approve of is–surprise!–more speech.
He can, just not here. He has his own site which you can visit any time you like. Unless the thread is open, it is topical. Commenters are expected to follow, at least loosely, the topic of debate, and they are expected to follow basic rules of civil discourse. We do not moderate each comment before posting, and we rarely moderate at all (and when we do, it is noted for all to see).
Anarchy exists on some sites, and it allows just a few people to successfully derail the pertient discussion of the entire group by diverting the thread into their own directions, with no regard to others. We don’t want that to happen here. If the governemnt tries to shut him up, I’ll defend him. But really, he has his own blog, and a book coming out – he has plenty of avenues for his speech, it’s just that few are still listening. That is also a valid response.
XGW is not a free-for-all (thought that is a valid format if one wishes it), it is a topical site with a purpose. Anthony does not have to agree with the purpose, but he does have to respect the rules of debate. He has proven long ago that he does not.
Ben: I’m normally pro-dialog (very much so) and even pro-debate (to a limit). Anthony visited here a time ago, and posted a truncated version of the following scripture passage (his version deleted all the ‘sins’ save for “homosexual”):
“Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” [I Corinthians 6:9-11]
So, as I recall, I posted the full passage, and asked Anthony if he also extended the verse to apply to the other sins.
[Note that it is common for conservative Christians to believe that remarriage to a divorced woman (or even just instigating divorce) is a form of ‘living in adultery’ per the teaching of Christ. Thus, by extending Anthony’s logic, we can show that many remarried Christians have also lost their salvation. Logical extension is a good exercise, in my opinion, for understanding each other and/or for proving the meaning of a passage.]
As I recall, Anthony never replied to my Exgaywatch post. Instead, a few posts later, he called two major branches of Judaism “apostate”. When asked to provide a rationale for such a label, he declined other than to say that his own partial Jewish ancestry gave him the right to call it as he saw it.
Anthony: I hope that you are reading this note. I am not against you posting your view of fear-based anti-homosexual statements. But Jesus offered rationale and/or reason when pressed by His listeners. He also responded to their questions. Please do consider our Lord’s example, k?
David and Caryn: Of course you are correct, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he never responded. He’s probably not interested in learning anything, only justifying himself. This has been my consistent experience with fundamentalists and their hermaneutics. In Humpty dumpty’s immortal dictum: “Words mean what I say they mean. nothing more and nothing less.”
Neevrtheless, cutting him off is exactly what he is doing. Is there a middle ground? a cut and paste paragraph:
“Anthony has posted one of his long rants justifying his distorted and inconsistent view of scripture. to wit ‘Gay is bad. Nothing else matters.’ Here’s a link to the last time he did it. Nothing new here.”
Just a thought.
With all due respect, Ben, I think I explained adequately in my note. Everyone deserves to know when something is moderated, as perhaps one in a thousand comments might be, so I make sure to remark on it. But I honestly don’t have the time to write little summaries and hunt around for the last offending comment. If it is not obvious by now that we encourage civil, open, fair debate, nothing else we do will make the point.
Let’s get back to the topic please.
That what i was suggesting a cut-and-paste thingy. But i perfectly understand.
And you must also know that if a mere wish could shut up all of these ex-gay, anti-gay, christo-islamo- or anyone-else fanatics, I would do so in a moment. So much time and energy is wasted on this topic that could actually be spent on something important, like feeding the hungry, stopping war, and so forth, instead of what gets my genitalia going.
But here, I preach to the choir.