WARNING: Graphic Description in Quote Below
Yesterday I posted, “CPAC, Conservatism and the Compassion of Christ” in response to a very disturbing quote Peter LaBarbera attributed to Matt Barber. LaBarbera, in the context of a much larger post, writes:
What is conservatism?
It boils down to this: there is nothing “conservative” about — as Barber inimitably puts it — “one man violently cramming his penis into another man’s lower intestine and calling it ‘love.’” Or two women awkwardly mimicking natural procreative relations or raising a child together in an intentionally fatherless home. This does not mean that people practicing those and other immoral (andchangeable) behaviors cannot think and act conservatively on other issues like lowering taxes, cutting government spending, ending abortion, etc. But let’s be honest: the “proud” in GOProud is not about pride in opposing the death tax, or defending the right to bear arms; it’s about proudly embracing sinful homosexual behavior – and that is hardly a conservative value.
Exodus President Alan Chambers contacted Mat Staver, Founder & Chairman Liberty Counsel, about the quote. He did so considering Matt Barber works for Liberty Counsel as the Director of cultural affairs. I was included in on the conversation.
Mr. Staver was very gracious and concerned throughout the conversation. He talked with Mr. Barber and this is the statement he sent to us in response.
Published with permission (I added the link:)
“Neither Matt Barber nor anyone with Liberty Counsel wrote or made any such public statement that is being alleged in this blog. Liberty Counsel promotes the traditional family of one man and one woman because we believe that such relationships are best for society and for children. While we strongly disagree with the sexual politics and agenda of activist organizations and individuals, we also believe that each person is entitled to respect. While there are some that hate us because of our message of sexual integrity, redemption, change, and hope, we have never, and will never, confuse the person with the agenda. We have never sought to dehumanize people to promote our message. Our message is one of redemption through the power of Jesus Christ.”
Thank you Mr. Staver for the strength and clarity of your statement. This quote will also be added to yesterday’s post.
Ralph C
James C
Erik
Alan Chambers
JE Clark
College Jay
Randy Thomas
Bob Finch
Box Turtle Bulletin
Thom Hunter
Liberty Counsel Responds to Crass Quote Attributed to Matt Barber http://bit.ly/5v1HCK
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Exodus International, Randy Thomas. Randy Thomas said: RT @ExodusIntl Liberty Counsel Responds to Crass Quote Attributed to Matt Barber http://bit.ly/5v1HCK [...]
What a mixed up culture we’re in when a blogger can quote someone in a description about conservatism and see some positive value in possibly invented shock language. It seems like we are drowning in an ends-justifies-the-means battle for everyone’s attention. I appreciate Allan seeking out the truth and Liberty for responding and demonstrating compassion rather than fanning the flames.
Thanks for adding your thoughts Thom. And a totally unrelated sidenote, your post that I blogged about here is in the top ten (as of now) most trafficked blog posts since we started this blog back in August.
Randy,
Thanks. I’m glad the piece you blogged about — Homosexuality and Your Church — which was originally written for The Baptist Messenger, received some good attention as a result of being in your blog. That was part one of a two-part series. Maybe I should e-mail you part two to take a look at.
I really do enjoy your blog and your courage for taking on significant issues.
Thom
Yes! Please send me part two and thank you for your encouragement. I enjoy seeing you here and on Facebook.
This really concerns me, because it sounds as if the implication is that Peter LaBarbera made this up, or at least made an egregious error in fact-checking. I attempted to contact Peter recently to have him give me some assurance that he actually heard (or someone did) Kevin Jennings make the gross, anti-Christian statements attributed to him by Peter (and no one else — all the other references are quoting Americans for Truth) in a speech he is alleged to have given at Marble Collegiate Church in 2000. Peter did not respond. I have a strict policy of not repeating comments or factoids that are not from a reliable or credible source. I’m afraid LaBarbera has come under the heading of unreliable for me.
I have met Peter on several occasions and we get along personally. Professionally we have had several passionate disagreements over the years but they were always civil and respectful (from my perspective.)
I don’t know for a fact but I am very certain that Matt Barber and he are talking, or have talked, about this. Of course I am sure you agree, this situation is actually between those two first. I am not sure we will see anything further publicly from Peter about this but … we shall see.
I am sure I would get along fine with either Peter or Matt. We would have to agree to disagree about a number of things, however. Liberty Counsel is in my back yard, and I do have some dealings with them. I have especially been in their corner on the Miller v. Jenkins case. Praying for that one big time.
This is a side issue and is probably best discussed elsewhere, but I honestly can’t imagine how one could side with Liberty Counsel on the Miller v. Jenkins case.
Yeah, it is a side issue to this thread but I posted it in case Debbie wanted to dialog with you.
Thanks, Randy. Actually, Debbie, now that I have taken a deep breath and thought about it, I can see how someone could agree with them, especially coming from your background. I heavily disagree with LC on this issue, still, but I can see (maybe) where you are coming from.
Brady, I don’t think I should take the discussion in this direction. I’ve had plenty to say about it at my own blog, if you should want to see where I stand.
This is Peter LaBarbera. The quotation in question by Matt Barber — a brutally honest and necessarily accurate description of homosexual sodomy — is printed verbatim and was made in conversation between the two of us years ago — long before he went to work for Liberty Counsel. I asked Matt at the time if I could quote him on it and he gave me permission to use it, and ultimately I did — in the context of showing how CPAC or any organization that defends sodomy (as GOProud and countless other GLBT organizations implicitly and explicitly do) cannot call itself “conservative.”
I presume and hope that what Mat Staver and Liberty Counsel meant to say was that Matt Barber’s quoted words were not uttered or published under the auspices of Liberty Counsel — as they were made several years ago in private conversation long before Matt came to work there.
Frankly, I am appalled at Randy’s “spiritualized” condemnation of Matt Barber’s phrase. Sorry, Randy, I disagree with your self-righteous take on Christ-like compassion. Philosophically, I believe that you are conflating behavior with a supposed “identity” — “sexual orientation”/”gayness” — found nowhere in the Bible. Sin is what we do in our fallen nature, not who we are. Is Tiger Woods’ serial infidelity part of his “core” identity? I think not.
Would Randy be upset at a similar, direct condemnation/description of other sinful sexual behaviors condemned in the Bible, like pornography, adultery or incest? We’re talking about behavior here (sodomy) that God calls an “abomination.” Using the same logic, is Randy going to get on God’s case next for His very unambiguous (you might say harsh) classification of homosexual sodomy as detestable? Is Almighty God demonstrating “insensitivity” toward “gay” men with such language?
Let me ask you, Randy: how would you accurately and honestly describe the act of sodomy, and are you opposed to forcefully condemning it?
There is so much to disagree with regarding Randy’s posts that I will leave that for a formal reply on my site (Americans For Truth: http://www.americansfortruth.org). But I do want to clarify that Matt Barber’s candid description of homosexual sodomy — typical of his bold, entertaining and decidedly non-PC style – is completely accurate; that he stands by it; and that he did indeed give me permission to use it years ago — which has nothing whatsoever to do with Liberty Counsel today.
Next time please shoot me an e-mail and we’ll clear this up easier.
Peter, I have tried to dialog with you in person and via email in the past and it hasn’t cleared up anything before. You nod, say nice things and then go do something else that stigmatizes people who struggle with or embrace homosexuality. This time you wrote a hateful public quote attributed to someone else and contextualized it as a current reaction to the GOProud situation. We went through the direct and appropriate avenue to follow up with the person you alleged made this quote and got the above response.
Do what you got to do Peter.
Peter, since we are all conversing here, can I get you to talk to me (you can e-mail me directly at deb…@theformers.com) about the supposed, infamous Kevin Jennings statements at Marble Collegiate Church? I really want to know if he actually said those things or if it is hearsay. (Sorry, as I know that is off this topic.)
On this topic, I also have deep feelings about the sinfulness of homosexual acts. I share some of your concerns. I’ve heard James Hartline describe sodomy in even more graphic terms (to me in a private conversation that I will not quote). Like you, I cannot support “proudly embracing sinful homosexual behavior.” But I have learned (the hard way) that if my witness is to have any impact on those who are lost or caught in the web of homosexual bondage, I must see them as worthy of the same blood Christ spilled for me. Is there any wonder why they shut us out when we insist on graphically calling out their behavior to make a political point? Does anyone really need to be told what sodomy is?
I’ve been a struggler, like Randy has. That meant knowing deep down that there were precious few Christians I could ever entrust with my struggle. How many have designated themselves as both judge and jury, smug in their self-righteousness, without having walked a moment in my shoes? Give me somebody who knows what it feels like and is humbly and gratefully aware of how far Jesus’ love reaches to those who are “poor in spirit.” Those who have been forgiven the most are the most grateful. Pain is the only door some of us really find Christ through. I want all the prodigals out there (who am I to say whom God has elected?) to be open to the moment when they grasp Christ’s hand. I hope and pray I can be there to see it and walk it with some of them.
Excuse me Ms. Thurman. Keep my name out of your discussions. I have never, ever had explicit discussions with you of that nature, nor have I any intentions of doing so. You are a liar. I have been on many radio programs with women And in all of those discussions with females in the church nothing even remotely close to your lie on this website has occurred. I want no part of this kind of discussion board and am only interjecting this comment to tell you to remove your false statement about me. All of your comments on here are your business, leave my name and lies about me off of here. If it is not removed then I will take appropriate action.
James, you called Debbie a liar and that is enough for me to not publish your comment.
However, she did attribute a difficult charge your way so I let it through. Debbie, while I think it is very unfortunate that James resorted to name-calling, please clarify. James just opened the door.
My hope is that it will help expose how stigmatizing through graphic sexual descriptions is not Biblical.
James, while you are not a high profile public figure, you do make a lot of public statements. People can make public observations about you without you. Not sure how private your conversation with her is but she didn’t give specifics, just her impressions, and there is nothing wrong with that.
While I think a clarification is in order, I am hoping this side conversation will continue to undermining the use of stigmatizing homosexual sexual behavior in the name of Christ.
I have never had sexually explicit conversations with this woman, nor will I be doing so in the future. If you do not remove such libelous and false statements, I WILL take action. I do not discuss such matters with women and I will NOT tolerate this website placing me in such disgusting and false conversations or to be associated with such clearly libelous, degrading and false statements. I have no desire to engage in further involvement with this matter other than I will take action with the board of directors of your employer as well as other legal means at my disposal. If you choose not to comply than I will seek injunctive and other means to deal with this filth.
cc: Chuck Smith/Calvary Chapel
Alan Chambers
United State Justice Foundation
Peter LaBarbara
Richard Ackerman
Scott Lively
Matt Staver
Matt Barber
Jack Sampier Sr. Presyb SD
Don Schmierer
Dennis Jernigan
This thread is not just odd, it is evidence that it is very easy to get distracted from the good that can come from exchanges when people suddenly begin taking everything personally and believeing it is all about them. It demonstrates the distance between our “selves” and grace.
Surely, Mr. Hartline, you can have the patience to allow Debbie to respond to you. I’ve read Debbie’s blog, wherein she has revealed her heart, and I know Debbie Thurman to be very careful in making statements. Obviously I was not present during whatever personal conversation you may have had with her. It would certainly be possible to be shockingly descriptive of an act you might find abhorrent without it being a sexually explicit conversation with a woman, which you say you do not have. You express yourself in this thread with considerable emotion. Perhaps you had a conversation in which your emotions took hold. I don’t know. I’ve certainly been there and have regretted it and had to take back some words of my own.
The people involved in this thread are all ones who profess to be doing what they do out of a love for Christ and a desire to serve him. Yet, you are threatening people’s jobs and the pursuit of legal action and you are certainly reacting in haste. This is a day after Christmas.
I think you would have to find that Debbie Thurman intended you harm in order to follow through on your description of her actions as being libelous. I don’t believe that’s even a slight possibility. Perhaps there is disagreement among us on the way we express ourselves. I’ve been told that there are times I should be more condemning and “honest.” I pray about that . . . and grace appears to be the direction in which I believe God would have me go.
Gay activists and those who believe God cannot change the heart or even the orientation of a person struggling with sexual identity take heart and draw strength from our attacks on each other. I hope you will be patient and allow Debbie to respond to your comments. Your harshness is not painting a very good picture.
Thom
James, I am baffled as to why you have sought on this occasion and one other recently to publicly contradict me. As I said on the last occasion, I have defended you and taken heat for it. You have done many admirable things and have stood up for truth and battled the forces of evil in a city I used to love. You are a brother in Christ. Peace.
I guess I should not have brought your name into this discussion (which has been strange, indeed, as Thom has already said). Do you not recall a phone conversation we had — a rather long one — in which you discussed gaining certain insights through your Bible study? We spoke of Jezebel being pushed from the tower. You quoted some passages of Scripture to me, and you then went on to talk of the abomination of the act of sodomy because of the specific way in which it “sowed seed.” I remember this conversation quite well. You were very animated.
For heaven’s sake, I see no reason for you to be threatening to “take action” for my pointing out something you said which I happen to agree with. I am not speaking against you.
James, is it correct to assume that your are upset because of the possible inference that you made a comment that was ungentlemanlike or of an inappropriate sexual nature to me? That was certainly not the case, and I apologize if what I said made it sound thus. I hope this is just a misunderstanding that we can clear up quickly.
Nice snippy non-response, Randy. Talk about presumption. Perhaps you are correct: dialogue between us is not very productive as you seem to have one foot still in the \gay\ camp (at least sympathy-wise) and another in the Christian pro-family camp. I sometimes wonder if you are more troubled by conservative pro-family groups like AFTAH than you are by homosexual activists. According to your loaded and misguided definition of \hate,\ I suppose you could make the case that the God of the Bible is a \hater\ because He calls sodomy \detestable.\ Matt and I and others are re-stigmatizing homosexual behavior, Randy — not people. Please, I beg you, show me anything close to \sexual orientation\ in the Bible! If you cannot, then stop defining people by destructive behaviors and treating homosexuality like some sort of special sin that deserves more deference than all the others. In fact, if criticizing bad sexual behavior is truly \hating\ people, then much of the country is hating Tiger Woods right about now. (Do you \hate\ Tiger? I don’t, and yet it makes me sick what he has done.) The practice of anal sodomy — or the infamous \crime against nature,\ as that \hater\ Noah Webster defined it — has caused untold physical destruction in this country, and across the world: I make no apology for agreeing with Matt’s dismissive and bold condemnatory description of it.
This is typical of those who justify their use of the weapon of shame to elevate themselves above others created in God’s image who may have strayed down a different sinful path than they did. Fortunately for Peter, modern culture will always provide living examples to stoke the furnace. We’ve gone from hateful condemnation of those who struggle with homosexuality to questioning whether we should or should not hate Tiger Woods. Of course we shouldn’t, no more than we should hate the homosexual who, in a wandering state, sins. The words Peter uses are the very words that drive people to just about anywhere other than to other Christians or to the church for help should they feel a revelation from God that their chosen lifestyle is not His preference. Peter is so focused on whether orientation is mentioned in the Bible that he forgets the numerous mentions of grace, forgiveness, mercy and love. One of my main goals as one who has stuggled with homosexuality — and not just in my mind — is to help the church understand that we hold the promise for those who want to seek change through Christ. The condemning rhetoric Peter uses, whether he wants to hide behind it by saying someone else said it in a private conversation with him or not, bars the door. Why, Peter, if that conversation took place, did you not carefully correct a fellow Christian on his condemning language and lack of love? Even if the plank blinded you, your ears should have been able to hear and your spirit could surely discern the inappropriateness. Instead . . . you repeat it and then try to justify it. Your crassness is forgiveable but difficult to understand.
Thom, it appears you missed my point re: Tiger Woods. I do NOT “hate” him, but I do hate his behavior. God does not hate people caught up in homosexuality (or any other sexual behavior) but he hates the sin. He calls sodomy “detestable.” Ouch. (I am NOT comparing us to the Almighty — but does God need to be corrected for his “lack of love” in making that devastatingly harsh assessment? Is God a “homophobe” in need of some modern diversity training?)
I do not think Matt sinned with his colorful description of sodomy, so I do not need to correct him and I will not remove his quote from my website. Matt sort of dismissively described destructive, unnatural behavior that God calls detestable — as he and I illustrated the absurdity of the notion of “gay activist ‘conservatism.’” (Read my full AFTAH piece HERE.) You might not agree with his word choice but I think you and Randy (and Alan?) need to get off your high horses and stop speaking for God on the semantics of this cultural debate. (But now that you all have opened that door, let’s have a full-blown discussion on whether using phrases like “gay,” “sexual orientation,” “gay community,” “homophobe” (as applied to people who merely disagree with homosexuality) and worst of all — “gay Christian” – is biblical and makes any logical sense.)
Something tells me you wouldn’t be as upset if Matt had used a similarly colorful and dismissive phrase to describe prostitution, pornography, masturbation or incest….? You seem to forget that there is a massive GLBT movement with an adoring media that does everything it can to glamorize this particular sin — homosexuality — and ridicule/malign ANYONE who speaks out against it or who fights back against the GLBT juggernaut.
If you truly believe Matt sinned, please cite chapter and verse in the Bible explaining why. And why do you judge us so harshly, i.e., claiming we are trying to “elevate ourselves above others”? Why do YOU condemn? (Are you trying to “elevate yourself” above us? — or do we simply disagree.) Please note that I am not saying that everyone in the pro-fam movement needs to argue like Matt or me, or Gary Glenn or Linda Harvey — but rather that there is a place for those in the movement working to re-stigmatize shameful homosexual behavior. Corollary: it is precisely the “mainstreaming” of homosexual behavior — and the way it is given undue respect — that has opened up the culture to embrace it. The “Will-and-Grace-ification” of America — as Matt B. puts it — sadly makes it much, much easier for young people to go down this sinful road and embrace a “gay” identity and its associated destructive behaviors.
Yes, words have power.
Where I have a friendly quarrel with the likes of Randy Thomas and some of the ex-gays (including Alan Chambers) is that they still seem to act and talk as if there is this thing called “gay” identity (“orientation”). (Debbie: this may be one of those points of disagreement between us! Write me at amer…@comcast.net.) I don’t believe there is such a thing — but everyone has a “sinful orientation.” Is homosexuality a “special sin” so that those who practice it deserve special consideration and sympathy? IMO the answer is no, except that it’s one that most people do not struggle with (because it is unnatural). But if you’re going to call a man “gay” (by inherent “orientation”), then call me a “luster,” or a “gossiper,” etc., or label each man or woman by their besetting sin. That’s unbiblical.
You see, we’ve bought into “gay” activist ideology and “gayspeak” — and it has nothing to do with God and a biblical worldview. (In fact, it abhors it.) From there it’s easy to go further into heresy, as Warren Throckmorton astonishingly has in becoming a de facto pro-homosexual activist of sorts (even while serving as an ass’t professor at Grove City College — which advertises itself as an “authentically Christian” college). Thanks for reading. –pl, http://www.aftah.com
Since when is Warren Throckmorton a pro-homosexual activist? From all I’ve read of him, he’s kept his political opinions private. He has disagreed with people like Richard Cohen and organizations like NARTH about the psychological origins and treatment of homosexuality, but again, those are hardly spiritual matters. And he has been outspoken against the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill, but then again, so has Exodus. Is anyone who disagrees with you, or anyone who refuses to use the same kind of language you use, a “pro-homosexual activist” all of a sudden?
Just another comment for Peter. You asked Randy to provide a chapter and verse citation if he thought Matt had sinned in his speech. Perhaps it wasn’t sin so much as “unwholesome” and ill-considered speech. Ephesians 4:29 addresses unity within the body of Christ, and specifically says, “Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, that it may give grace to those who hear.” I suppose unwholesome speech could become sin if it also “bears false witness.”
Now, I am well aware we need to speak with pointed frankness at times when addressing the sinful state of this world. And when we do, we had better realize that finger is also pointing right back at us. But when our words foster a spirit of disunity or condemnation or they are “fighting words,” I think we err. Both what we say and how we say it matters. If we speak in a condescending, prideful tone, then we are elevating ourselves. James also reminds us of the power and destructiveness of the tongue. Civility is something that has gone largely by the wayside. Pity.
Peter,
I think there is a considerable amount of misunderstanding and certainly enough to go around here. While I may certainly appear more empathetic towards those who struggle with homosexuality, perhaps because it has been a struggle of my own, I don’t waver at all regarding the sinfulness of homosexual sex, whatever form it takes in expression. I am well aware of the personal and corporate damage and the clarity of God’s Word on that sin issue. I also find it repugnant that culture has been leading the way and many Christians in fact are following culture and trying to adapt rather than taking the hard but grace-filled path of holiness. Having spent 20 years in public relations for one of the world’s largest and most successful companies, believe me, I am well aware that we craft words to usher in acceptability. That is certainly true of those who want to normalize the gay agenda. I’m not even a remote defender of their actions and I believe they make it extremely difficult for Christians who are tempted in a homosexual way to be upfront about their desire for freedom from the temptation. I think sometimes we lump all those who are tempted in a homosexual way together and make no distinction between the ones who struggle against and the ones who declare for.
Peter, there is not a man or woman out there who struggles with homosexuality that has not heard the horrible descriptions, felt the deliberate pain, or avoided the pointing fingers of condemnation. There are many, however, who have yet to be afforded true grace, which is, indeed a part of the truth. I am merely suggesting that you add that to your message. You and Wayne may describe intestinal invasion if you think that has some value beyond inflaming passions . . . you may choose shock words . . . but I believe you do a disservice by not offering at the same time the truth of The Way Out.
I don’t paint people as homophobes or haters. I just realize that some people fall a bit short when it comes to the expression of love. Certainly we need to point out that sin separates us from God, but we need to point to a solution as well. And we need to be consistent, not just choosing what serves our purposes at a particular time. The pro-gay people are not the only ones who know how to manipulate the media.
I disagree with your assessment.
I agree with Peter.
BTW, the use of terms like “hateful”, “homophobe,” etc is just a way to say, shut up.
It doesn’t add to the conversation, nor add weight to your arguments.
Ignoring the disgusting nature of homosexual/lesbian acts, which, by the way, is the self identifier of the individuals in the group, does not dehumanize the individual.
For some reason people are parroting what is said by the gay groups, and forgetting the obvious.
It’s all about sexual choices, not about the individual.
It’s all about special rights to a group that self identifies, that cannot be identified scientifically as different from the rest of humanity, and therefore still having the ability to choose with whom they have sex.
Sin is vile and disgusting. Framing sodomy in cute little terms like same sex couples does not change the seriousness of the sin, or the offense to the Creator of All Things.
The truth is a wonderful thing. When you hear it, you either deny it, or deal with it.
One way leads to salvation. The other to righteous judgment.
I absolutely do not believe gays are born gay.
But, as with a child of an alcoholic, many seem to be born with that temptation from early on.
It is totally a choice to be gay, to commit homosexual acts that are clearly condemned in Scripture, as any other sexual act outside of marriage is, but it certainly seems to be a very strong temptation with so many.
So many have bought the lie, and everyone in society is bombarded with the lie, the implication that somehow being gay is normal.
May the truth prevail, and fewer souls end up in hell because of their choices.
There is nothing that the Truth, repentance, and the realization of who they are in Christ Jesus cannot change.
[...] according to Wayne Besen went after me. Today was Peter LaBarbera’s turn (2 comments so far at that link and below [...]
Thom, one more point: you are wrong to say that I forget God’s love, grace and forgiveness. It is precisely His grace that I cling to and thank Him for in forgiving MY great sin. I cannot say I am better than the homosexual because without the grace of God I am nothing but a sinner headed for hell. And I frequently offer the Gospel of grace to homosexuals on my website as the true hope for homosexuals, and point out the chasm between Islam (which lacks grace) and Christianity on this issue. Moreover, being honest about the sin of homosexual behavior (sodomy) only magnifies the grace of God in forgiving this sin like any other.
We puff up man (and therefore bring down God’s holiness) when we sugarcoat the sin of homosexual behavior by erroneously ascribing to it some false \orientation\ — as orientation implies we have no control, since it is presumably an innocuous part of our very personality given to us by God (as opposed to sinful orientation). Do you speak out against Christians who misapply \orientation\ or only those who frankly and dismissively describe sodomy?
If we rationalize sin or treat some sins with greater deference than others — or \personalize\ it — we take away from God’s grace and truth. (And please don’t go there with the attempted guilt-trip of complaining how groups like AFTAH focus too much on homosexuality because the pro-fam forces fighting for truth on this issue are vastly outspent and out-organized by the GLBT movement.) Love for God does not mean we must minimize the evil of grievous sin. I can look at my life and admit that I have done some evil things. I think most people who are brutally honest to themselves (and God) would say the same. Jesus toughened the standard of holiness — even as He set a new standard of grace and forgiveness!) And if people can’t see their gross sin, they probably have an immature and inadequate understanding of God’s holiness.
Every day I realize how far I fall of God’s standard, but please be careful not to arrogate to yourself a greater \Christ-likeness\ merely because you disagree with our more confrontational approach toward a sinful behavior that is being celebrated like no other in our depraved and politically correct culture.
Hi, hmm, interesting… some things come to mind.
First, homosexual behaviour involves a lot more than sodomy. There’s holding hands, sending a bunch of flowers, looking at the person one loves…
Being a bit controversial, but this is sexual behaviour that Christians who are not married display to people of the opposite sex. Holding hands with the one you love is a sexual practice. Sending flowers to the one your love is a sexual practice. Looking at the one you love is a sexual practice. Sexual behaviour isn’t just an intimate act.
Second, married opposite-sex couples practise anal sex. Including Christians.
I think we can all argue over where the line is (between holiness and sin), and that argument can go on until then end of the world, and me being me, I’d rather see people saved and the hungry fed rather than debate too much a subject that people will never fully agree on because everyone’s faith is unique between them and God, despite being corporate.
At the end of the day, along with reading the Bible, it is a deep relationship with God that will show the individual what is holy and what grieves God’s heart in any matter. This is not being wishy-washy, but a simple message of ’stay close to God and He will give you every answer you need’.
Peace,
C -x-
Peter, I don’t think one can cop an identity based on any sin. That is just a sin identity, or the fallen nature we all have and which would swamp us were it not for the atonement of Christ. So I think we’d agree on that point. I never claimed a lesbian identity, for instance. And I always knew my unnatural desires were sinful and not God’s purpose for me, so I did not try to wrestle with Him on that. I was knowingly and willingly in rebellion, floating downstream, wondering if I could gain the strength required to swim against the current. God met me when I reached out to Him, and never left me.
Having read a penetrating series of daily devotional thoughts by Oswald Chambers this past week, including today’s, I can say that I do understand the harshness of standing on God’s truth and refusing to let sympathy for a sinner or struggler take over when intercession is what is needed. The cross does not translate into mushy sentiment, but into the realization that we must crucify our old lives in order to be resurrected into new, redeemed creatures in Christ. The Word is a two-edged sword (scalpel) surgically cutting out the cancer of sin and wrong thinking. It is hard when I sit face-to-face with the women in my recovery group, knowing they would love for me to give them permission to choose sin — what they see as good — over God’s best for them. I cannot. To “hurt” them with the truth is the kindest thing I can do, but I must do it in love and empathy (not enabling sympathy), as I’ve been in their shoes. I am with you in that sense.
What caused me to begin reevaluating my former harsh attitude toward gays was actually getting to know some who claimed to be happy with their lives. I don’t believe in randomness, so I took it that God caused our paths to cross for a reason. I undertook to find out what He wanted me to learn, hoping that he was teaching them something at the same time. I found my heart changing toward them. I began to see them through loving eyes, something only God could bring about, believe me. That is not affirming them or sympathizing with them, but rather extending a redemptive hand to them, realizing it has to be the work of the Holy Spirit to bring about real change. I saw that I had been hurting them and closing doors. They, too, had been misunderstanding me, but I could only control my thoughts and actions toward them.
To the extent that my life is a reflection of Christ, I can rest confident in knowing I am a conduit of his love, but also of his penetrating sword of truth. It has to be a two-edged sword. It can’t be all one or the other edge. It’s not all truth or all love.
I hope this makes sense. I accept my calling as an apologist for the faith. That will put me in a vise that on one day will make me a target of gay activists and another, the object of conservative scorn. So be it. If you believe God has called you to shine the light of truth on this sinful, self-centered age, Peter, then you must do that. I would just ask that you temper it with love where you can.
you can hit reply underneath each comment to reply directly to that comment. No big deal, just for future reference.
Dear Hesed: Your comment that “It is totally a choice to be gay” demonstrates that you do NOT understand even the basics. This statement is not the truth it is a damaging lie, repeated a lot, usually by Christians (unfortunately).
Attempting to be so authoritative about this subject when one does not have even a basic understanding is not helpful especially in repeating an idea that is so completely untrue.
NO ONE makes a “choice” to be gay, at least I have never found one yet in many years of working with people with SSA.
“Acting” upon feelings of any sort IS a “choice”, we make them everyday based upon our value system.
Your comment “BTW, the use of terms like “hateful”, “homophobe,” etc is just a way to say, shut up.” is simplistic and fails to understand the context in which Thom uses it. before being so judgmental, pausing to think before repsonding would be a good idea. Thom never attempts to shut down discourse. Your sort of comments do. This is highly hypoctricical and uninformed. NONE of us Thom/Debbie/Randy or others I know of attempt in any way to shut people up. What we DO try to do is “frame” our responses in a way that, shows understanding and compassion, while NEVER in any way endorsing acting upon “feelings” that lead us in any direction other than one that is in concordance with Christ.
I think we are probably all in agreement that those of us on this side of the issue have not been as effective as the other side in using cunning wordology to our advantage. However using graphic descriptions does not serve to open the door for healing. In reading your comments I get the feeling that “being right” is paramount, notwithstanding that being so could have been stated in another fashion that could lead people to healing instead of causing them to feel shame. I am sure you have nothing in your life that, if we all knew the intimate details of it would cause you shame?…we all know the answer..cause we ALL are unclean…YOU, ME and people who suffer with SSA. Instead of everyone trying to defend a poor choice to use words, lets just work to heal.
We ALL know enough about the graphics.
Jack
I thought about this for awhile. My two cents is that this whole matter could have been dealt with apart from the blog site. The graphic nature of both posts I feel should come off the site, as none of this can be edifying to the Lord. This isn’t keeping with His intent that we be holy. I so applaud both you and Alan for addressing the matter though, albeit it sounds like this Matt’s thinking won’t change.
Randy, please post Matt Barber’s weekend clarification on this. I posted it as part of my AFTAH commentary on the whole episode, and am reprinting it below. Merry Christmas to all, no matter what your persuasion!
— Peter LaBarbera, http://www.aftah.org
I can’t find the link connector anymore so here is the URL for my AFTAH piece: http://americansfortruth.com/news/barber-clarifies-confusion-over-faux-controversy-about-his-bold-description-of-homosexual-sodomy.html
And here is Matt Barber’s statement 12/20/09:
“This is for clarification only. As affirmed in Liberty Counsel’s statement, neither I nor anyone with Liberty Counsel ever publicly ‘wrote or made’ the comment in question – an unapologetically direct and accurate depiction of the sin of sodomy (a sin that God directly and accurately calls both an ‘abomination’ and ‘detestable’). Some years before I began working with Liberty Counsel, I made the comment in private conversation with Peter LaBarbera. At the time, Peter asked if he could ‘quote me on it’ and I said yes.
“On a personal note, let me take this opportunity to share with those caught-up in this particular sin lifestyle that I am no less a sinner and no better a person than they. None of us are. The good news is that, through Christ’s earth shattering sacrifice on the cross, we are redeemed. We need merely believe, call upon His name, repent and make every effort to ‘go and sin no more.’
“Unfortunately, however, we live in a society where this particular sin is embraced, promoted and even celebrated. People erroneously equate this unnatural and sinful behavior with ‘identity’ and ‘orientation’ even taking ‘pride’ in an objectively deviant lifestyle. My hope and prayer is that this silly faux ‘controversy’ might actually make people reflect –– if only for a moment –– upon the emotionally, spiritually and physically destructive nature of homosexual conduct. ‘Gayness’ is about what people do, not who people are. It’s about feelings and behaviors alone. But those feelings and behaviors don’t make those caught-up in them any less precious to God, to me or to anyone I know.
“Scripture tells us that the ‘wages of sin is death.’ It breaks my heart that so many ‘gays’ and ‘lesbians’ continue in a lifestyle that ultimately results in spiritual and, yes, even physical death. I’m very grateful for ministries such as PFOX, Exodus and others that reach out to those who seek to escape the homosexuality snare. In the meantime, I will push forward, undeterred, on the front lines of the ongoing culture war, fighting the militant homosexual activist organizations that enable and encourage those trapped in homosexuality to continue down that changeable path of destruction. Shame on them and shame on those who support them.” – Matt Barber
This has to be one of the most disingenuous explanations I’ve ever heard. First Matt says he never publiicly wrote or made the statement; then he says he made it to Peter LaBarbera in private but gave him permission to make it public. It is a distinction without a difference, and no amount of lawyerly weasel-wording is going to change the fact that Matt Barber has let it be known to the public EXACTLY what he thinks. Matt Staver is correct in his criticism..
Matt’s clarification is well-reasoned and honest. We are indeed all sinners and we all can partake in God’s grace, mercy, forgiveness and healing. There are many of us on the frontlines of the culture war, though our call to arms may have its roots in differing experiences. The desire is the same: to see the captives free and the misguided cutural warriors removed from their significant positions of influence so they can quit destroying lives. Repentance and redemption are mighty, and certainly welcome to those who can see clearly enough to lay down guilt and shame and willful sinning in exchange.
I wish I had never been involved in a sin that God does call an abomination and destestable. I am thankful for Christians who were able to contrast my sin with their own and walk with me out of mine. Now we work side-by-side as warriors, rather than fearing each other.
Homosexuality is not funny. It is not something to be embraced or celebrated. Culture crumbles in upon itself. We need to be offering a way out to those who will be crushed in the collapse. We can be honest and loving at the same time, following Christ’s example.
[...] Recently I was accused of being snippy when I really wasn’t trying to be. But for this post … I am totally [...]
I very much appreciate Exodus addressing this issue. Thank you for your willingness to look into this matter and comment on it. At times I have been concerned that Exodus does not take seriously enough these kinds of things and can actually collude with people on the religious Right who are doing harm to the gospel of Christ. I do hope that this post signals a true break from Peter LaBarbera, but I am skeptical. There is a tendency to say “we’ll agree to disagree” and still pat each other on the back as Alan Chambers did for Peter just 8 months ago, saying, “Peter may not always say the right thing, but who one of us does? As Christians I think we ought to go to our brother or sister when we think they have missed the mark before we do a blog post on it…[I am] unalterably convinced that Peter indeed loves sinners and cares about their eternities more than the policies he fights for.”
Does this post here signal a change of heart for Exodus on this?
And I know there are folk on Exodus staff–one individual whom I really like and have had some intense discussions with about affiliation with Peter who defends Peter and considers him a comrade in the mission (this individual was not yet on Exodus staff when these conversations occurred though I imagine they still hold the same views).
Exodus cannot maintain an image of credibility if it denounces such behavior in a post like this and yet still maintains an alliance with someone who has such a history of harsh and unloving rhetoric toward the very people who need God. I have tried engaging with Peter (and some others on the religious Right) via private e-mail about my concerns to no avail. They do not have ears to hear.
If such a break in alliance occurs, it would be helpful to discuss this with Exodus staff and board members to avoid the appearance of internal contradiction (which helped lead to the PR problems with the homosexuality conference in Uganda–not only with a board member speaking together with the likes of Scott Lively, but also having a board member with info on his website for Richard Cohen whom Exodus supposedly disavowed, but now seems to be softening toward again?).
Consistency goes a long way toward building trust.
Karen, thank you for your opinion and I will let you continue to judge for yourself what this post means and what you perceive is consistent. This post and the other are pretty clear about how I feel about Peter’s quote of Matt. You appear to extrapolate what you will so … just like I told Peter, do what you gotta’ do. I don’t know that Exodus ever “affiliated” with Peter and I don’t know anyone on staff who matches your description of being an intense defender of his.
And you probably know this but I will hope that you will remember, relationships/friendships change and a lot of things happen behind the scenes to help that happen. Each situation requires careful attention and intentional good will. At some point those efforts to find common ground either succeed or fail. What you see as inconsistent I see apples to oranges. You not being on this side of the computer screen, or on staff, don’t know all the details and I don’t believe we have to explain them beyond what we have shared publicly already, consistently, in a number of places.
In this situation, my posts are about a quote. I feel I have addressed it forthrightly and directly.
Again, thank you for your opinion. I am glad you appreciate us addressing this issue.
[...] barbs between LaBarbera and Randy Thomas, president of the ex-gay group Exodus International, at Thomas’s Exodus blog. (Thanks to Pam’s House Blend for exposing the [...]
[...] barbs between LaBarbera and Randy Thomas, president of the ex-gay group Exodus International, at Thomas’s Exodus blog. (Thanks to Pam’s House Blend for exposing the [...]