So why do I get hit with all these questions about gay people seconds after someone finds out I'm a Christian? Who tagged me as an expert? Do people think that Jesus showed me His death list and pointed to gays at the top? He didn't.
I gots some 'splainin' to do. And unfortunately the efforts of a lot of my spiritual siblings have made this painfully necessary discourse a lot more necessary and a hell of a lot more painful that God would ever have intended it to be. So sit down and shut up. I challenge you to read the whole thing, point by point, from start to finish without exploding. And if you're quivering with anticipation of hate and judgment, shuffle your iPod to Judas Priest and let Rob Halford tell you You've Got Another Thing Comin'.
First of all, yes, gay behaviour equals sin. It's outside of God's design for human sexuality. It doesn't work. It's not meant to. If it were, He would not have forbidden it. Make no mistake, I have precisely zero personal grudge against it, though I also have precisely zero sexual interest in my own gender (hell, I don't know why women find men attractive). There's no reason for me to object to it at all, except for the fact that God does.
Secondly, and this is the point most Christians forget (if they even really believe it at all), it's NO WORSE THAN ANY OTHER SIN. God is not, repeat not, curling His lip in disgust at a gay person only to turn to me and pat me on the head and say, "Well, yeah, Doug, I know my Son told you in no uncertain terms that looking lustfully at a woman equals adultery, and I know that every list of disinherited sinners in Scripture that mentions gays also mentions adulterers and fornicators, but boys will be boys, y'know? Just don't hurt anyone with it [like that's even possible]. Hey, at least you're straight, right?"
There are a lot more points that could be made, but the above two are enough to blow large craters in the morass of wrong ideas that so many people have about this issue. If they're true, what does that mean?
First of all, it means that if He loves me, and I know He does like I know nothing else, than He loves gays as well. They're no more or less stained before Him than I am. The blood of His Son removes their stains just like mine.
Secondly, if the gay who wants to live in peace with his or her Maker gets there the same way I do - believing in His Son Jesus - then the path to overcoming their orientation is the same one I have to walk to overcome mine. Sure, I'm hetero, but I'm also a lustful little prick. I am not the least bit monogamous in my fallen human nature; in fact I know very few if any people of either gender who really are. Again, that's no better than being gay. I have to choose, every day, minute by minute, thought by thought, choice by choice, to live contrary to my nature. I love my wife, and am committed to her and to our marriage, but staying that course requires constant combat on my part against those parts of me that live only for mindless, animal desires.
The hard part is that a lot of those desires were born of genuine needs and real wounds that God understands and yearns to address. Just like I've been assured is the case with gays. God cares, damn it. He's not treating any of us like there's no pressure. All He wants from us is the will and sincere desire to overcome it. And we have to depend on Him even for that.
I ain't done with this yet, but that's a start on prying out some of the more stubborn stupidities on this issue. We as Christians need to jump on this, hard, right now. We need to make a priority of knowing what God knows about it. We need His heart, because He wants to use us to offer it to all who fall short of His glory. That's pretty much everyone.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Sunday, October 5, 2008
wish I could change the subject...
...but I can't. When I think about what inspires me, and what embarrasses me, about arts - be it visuals, music, film, etc. - I can't help but notice the "rose-coloured" tint so much "Christian" art casts on the world and life in general.
I think a lot of it comes less from being sheltered and more from a desire to be holy. I'm not saying that holiness casts a rose-coloured tint on reality. It's just that most Christians know, on at least some level, what scripture says about language, conversational subject matter, and mindset, and one's understanding of that will naturally affect one's expressions.
However, I can't escape the feeling that perhaps the way it filters down in much of our art is a little too clean. My question is, how does an artist "hit the mark" without either abandoning Godly conduct or hypersanitising the end result?
I have seen precious few who strike that rare and beautiful balance. Flatfoot 56 is a splendid example of a band who unabashedly stand up for their faith while making music that garners them considerable secular respect. They are a great oi band. They've toured with Flogging Molly and played the OiFest in PA. They are shining the light of Christ into darker places than many of us would ever be found. Cornerstone magazine, when it existed, was comprised of fearless, masterful journalists who tackled all manner of controversial and relevant issues from a strong, balanced biblical perspective.
I want to do something about the creativity vacuum in the Church. I have no idea where to start. I will say that I find it unfortunate that I get more inspired to action by watching old Sex Pistols clips on YouTube than by most Christian music or books. No, I don't want to puke on a church altar or write songs calling satan a "f*cking rotter", but any band I were to form along the lines of what affects me most deeply would sound a lot more like them than Skillet. I honestly see a parallel between the reactions provoked by Jesus and those provoked by the early punks. There are huge differences between them, to be sure, but can't I keep the energy, power, and "just try and ignore this-ism" and still make the love and holiness of God come through?
How do we do that? The Bible pulls it off - a true-to-form film adaptation would probably be rated NC-17. There has to be a way to bust out of the rose-coloured bubble without losing the nature of God. We can't be trying to compete with the world, we need to rise so far above it that there's no comparison.
Another point to ponder - could it be that we judge "cheesy" Christian art by a worldly standard without knowing it or intending to? The message of the cross is foolishness to unbelievers, right? And yet does it really have to look, sound and feel "gaytarded", to quote Brian Posehn?
Lots of questions, few solutions. I feel that there are so few Christians anywhere, least of all here in the Northeast, who are anywhere close to speaking, or even understanding, my peculiar cultural language. I can't do this alone. Hell, I don't even know specifically what "this" is.
There are forces both inside and outside the Church that work very hard to defuse the things God primes to explode in every one of us. A. W. Tozer said that if today's "gospel" were a poison, it wouldn't kill anyone, and it wouldn't heal anyone if it were a medicine. The gospel isn't just preached on Sunday mornings and passed around in little leaflets. It is - or should be - in films; in every manner and style of music; in conversations at work, at the mall, in pubs; anywhere and in any form ideas are exchanged. It's not an insider's club - it's the one and only priceless cure for a fatal disease that's eating the human race alive. I want to find - no, be - a means of conveying it that doesn't compromise it. And it's compromised just as badly when people come away from it thinking of God as an aloof, intolerant prude as it is when they think He's some amorphous, feel-good "life-force" sugar-daddy with nothing to say about what every single one of us is turning into with every choice we make in thought, word or deed.
I think a lot of it comes less from being sheltered and more from a desire to be holy. I'm not saying that holiness casts a rose-coloured tint on reality. It's just that most Christians know, on at least some level, what scripture says about language, conversational subject matter, and mindset, and one's understanding of that will naturally affect one's expressions.
However, I can't escape the feeling that perhaps the way it filters down in much of our art is a little too clean. My question is, how does an artist "hit the mark" without either abandoning Godly conduct or hypersanitising the end result?
I have seen precious few who strike that rare and beautiful balance. Flatfoot 56 is a splendid example of a band who unabashedly stand up for their faith while making music that garners them considerable secular respect. They are a great oi band. They've toured with Flogging Molly and played the OiFest in PA. They are shining the light of Christ into darker places than many of us would ever be found. Cornerstone magazine, when it existed, was comprised of fearless, masterful journalists who tackled all manner of controversial and relevant issues from a strong, balanced biblical perspective.
I want to do something about the creativity vacuum in the Church. I have no idea where to start. I will say that I find it unfortunate that I get more inspired to action by watching old Sex Pistols clips on YouTube than by most Christian music or books. No, I don't want to puke on a church altar or write songs calling satan a "f*cking rotter", but any band I were to form along the lines of what affects me most deeply would sound a lot more like them than Skillet. I honestly see a parallel between the reactions provoked by Jesus and those provoked by the early punks. There are huge differences between them, to be sure, but can't I keep the energy, power, and "just try and ignore this-ism" and still make the love and holiness of God come through?
How do we do that? The Bible pulls it off - a true-to-form film adaptation would probably be rated NC-17. There has to be a way to bust out of the rose-coloured bubble without losing the nature of God. We can't be trying to compete with the world, we need to rise so far above it that there's no comparison.
Another point to ponder - could it be that we judge "cheesy" Christian art by a worldly standard without knowing it or intending to? The message of the cross is foolishness to unbelievers, right? And yet does it really have to look, sound and feel "gaytarded", to quote Brian Posehn?
Lots of questions, few solutions. I feel that there are so few Christians anywhere, least of all here in the Northeast, who are anywhere close to speaking, or even understanding, my peculiar cultural language. I can't do this alone. Hell, I don't even know specifically what "this" is.
There are forces both inside and outside the Church that work very hard to defuse the things God primes to explode in every one of us. A. W. Tozer said that if today's "gospel" were a poison, it wouldn't kill anyone, and it wouldn't heal anyone if it were a medicine. The gospel isn't just preached on Sunday mornings and passed around in little leaflets. It is - or should be - in films; in every manner and style of music; in conversations at work, at the mall, in pubs; anywhere and in any form ideas are exchanged. It's not an insider's club - it's the one and only priceless cure for a fatal disease that's eating the human race alive. I want to find - no, be - a means of conveying it that doesn't compromise it. And it's compromised just as badly when people come away from it thinking of God as an aloof, intolerant prude as it is when they think He's some amorphous, feel-good "life-force" sugar-daddy with nothing to say about what every single one of us is turning into with every choice we make in thought, word or deed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
