Jennifer Knapp on Larry King

The singer will appear on “Larry King Live” tonight along with Clay Aiken, Ted Haggard and others. Here’s Mark Moring’s report on one of CT’s blogs:

Jennifer Knapp, a former Christian music star who recently revealed that she is in a lesbian relationship, will be the featured guest on Larry King Live on Friday, April 23. The CNN show airs at 9 p.m. Eastern, 6 p.m. Pacific.

The one-time Grammy nominee and multiple Dove Award winner walked away from music in 2003, but has been making a comeback in recent months, doing a number of tour dates and gearing up to release her new album, Letting Go, in May.

Knapp will be joined on Larry King Live by Clay Aiken (a singer who came out two years ago), Pastor Bob Botsford (an evangelical pastor who wants Knapp to repent of her lifestyle), and disgraced preacher Ted Haggard. Knapp is speaking openly and honestly about her lifestyle, while also maintaining that she clings to the Christian faith. Should be a fascinating conversation.

30 Responses to Jennifer Knapp on Larry King

  1. Matt Svoboda April 23, 2010 at 10:40 am #

    This whole situation is sad. No matter how many Christians songs you sing, when you aren’t well grounded in the Word anything can happen.

    For those who think she was/is well grounded in the Word, I encourage you to go back and read the CT article. It is clear she has very little understanding of Scripture.

  2. Stephanie April 23, 2010 at 11:14 am #

    The whole situation is encouraging to me and many others that you don’t have to fit into one box when it comes to your faith. The Bible never deals with gay loving relationships, so I really don’t see the problem. The Bible is negative on certain types of same sex behavior like it is on certain opposite sex behavior. Heaven forbid she falls in love and is happy.

  3. D.J. Williams April 23, 2010 at 12:15 pm #

    Stephanie,

    Could you please show us where the Bible affirms some same-sex behavior like it affirms marital heterosexuality?

  4. Bette April 23, 2010 at 12:31 pm #

    It’s hard for scripture to affirm homosexuality at all when the term didn’t even exist until the 19th century. Biblical authors believed that everyone was heterosexual just as they believed that the earth was flat and the sun rose up and down. Clearly we have come a long way since then in not only our understanding of science but our understanding of people and cultures. Scripture nor Jesus speaks on the subject of homosexuality as we know it today – Verses do condemn same-sex acts however such as temple prostitution or idolatry. However we don’t see our culture taking one verse against a heterosexual act (for example, adultary) and applying that as a blanket condemnation of all heterosexuality….

  5. Matt Svoboda April 23, 2010 at 12:55 pm #

    Bette and Stephanie,

    It is really hard to have conversations with people who clearly are very uninformed when it comes to the Word. I suggest that you go get much more familiar with it before you jump into the blogosphere.

    God Bless.

  6. John April 23, 2010 at 1:18 pm #

    The pity here is that Jennifer Knapp has a sin problem – we all do. Unfortunately, the Christian church in America has become so self-authoritative that many are unwilling to correct Jennifer in love. We don’t hate Jennifer or those who share her lifestyle, we love them and want them to come into relationship with God Almighty through the atoneing work of Christ. But sin is sin and the only loving thing is to demonstrate that God’s wrath is already revealed against this unrighteousness.

  7. Matt Svoboda April 23, 2010 at 2:10 pm #

    John,

    Amen. The problem is in Jennifer’s mind her homosexuality is no more sin than “eating shell fish.”

    It is crazy to me how “christian idols” can be so ignorant of what the Bible teaches.

  8. Derek April 23, 2010 at 2:28 pm #

    I just read Pastor Bob Botsford’s blog, where he recounts his prior meetings and discussions with Jennifer. He will be on Larry King with Jennifer, Clay Aiken and Ted Haggard.

    Pastor Bob’s response is excellent. I hope Derek Webb and others are taking notes.

    Here’s Pastor Bob’s blog entry:
    http://www.bobbotsford.com/2010/04/straight-to-the-truth-in-love%E2%80%A6/

  9. D.J. Williams April 23, 2010 at 3:02 pm #

    Bette and Stephanie,

    How would Leveticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:8-11 line up with the interpretation you’re suggesting. I’m not seeing those contextually as acts of temple prostitution or idolatry in any way. They seem pretty encompassing, unlike the prohibitions on heterosexual practice, which clearly affirm sexual intimacy between a husband and wife.

  10. D.J. Williams April 23, 2010 at 3:03 pm #

    *Leviticus

  11. Lucas Knisely April 23, 2010 at 3:19 pm #

    The Bible doesn’t address loving homosexual relationships because the Bible defines love in a specific way. It also doesn’t address loving incestuous relationships, or loving polygamist relationships. The reason? It defines what a loving relationship is which leaves everything else outside of that definition.

  12. David Vinzant April 23, 2010 at 4:11 pm #

    The Bible never condemns polygamy outright and, indeed, contains rules for how polygamists should treat wife #2 in relation to wife #2. Many of the great heroes of faith practiced polygamy. Nowhere in the NT does Jesus or Paul or anyone else forbid polygamy. The closest are the Pastoral admonitions that an elder, deacon or overseer should be the husband of but one wife.

  13. David Vinzant April 23, 2010 at 4:15 pm #

    With regard to incest, Abraham was married to his half-sister, and Moses’ mother and father were closely related. Adam and Eve’s children apparently married each other as did the children of Shem, Ham and Japheth.

  14. Scott April 23, 2010 at 4:43 pm #

    1) Judaism staunchly opposed homosexuality. Even the most ardently secular biblical scholars will (reluctantly) admit this. This, along with idolatry, was a firm line in the sand, even amongst the Diaspora.

    2) That being said, there was no such thing as “homosexuality” in the wider empire as we would define the term today. There were certain rules regulating deviant sexual practices, i.e. “active” vs. “passive” partners. Rules of pollution, etc.

    3) The temple prostitution argument is weak as dishwater. The exegetical loops one has to jump through to get there lead me to believe that an early listener would have needed a “Ph.D from the agora” to interpret the thing.

  15. Lucas Knisely April 23, 2010 at 6:40 pm #

    David,

    Jesus on marriage:

    Matthew 19:4-6
    4 And he answered and said, Have ye not read, that he who made [them] from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh? 6 So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

    Clearly your assertion that Paul and Jesus don’t speak to this is blatantly incorrect. Jesus is defining marriage as between two that become one, and he links this to God’s purpose in creation.

    Now what Paul has to say…

    1 Corinthians 7:1-2
    1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 But, because of fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.

    Paul is viewing marriage within the same mandate from Christ: One husband and one wife. He is almost mirroring what Jesus taught in Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9. All of these passages are assuming one husband and one wife. In fact, the entire chapter of 1 Corinthians 7 uses wife and husband in the singular.

  16. Donald Johnson April 23, 2010 at 6:59 pm #

    I agree that Jesus and Paul taught monogamy.

  17. David Vinzant April 24, 2010 at 1:01 am #

    Certainly, the norm was monogamy, but polygamy was never condemned. Jews had largely abandoned polygamy by the 1st century AD as the Romans regarded it with disgust.

    Of course, the preference of both Jesus and Paul, as evidenced by their teaching and example, was that individuals abstain from marriage altogether.

  18. Lynn April 24, 2010 at 5:29 am #

    And so we go around in circles.

  19. Lucas Knisely April 24, 2010 at 10:59 am #

    David,

    When Jesus is defining marriage, he is mandating. It is tantamount to a command. Saying he does not speak to homosexuality or polygamy is like saying he does not speak to violence in the body of the church. He defines the body of the church as something, which as I said above is a mandate tantamount to a command, which means he does not have to exhaustively forbid every single thing outside of that definition. A definition is restrictive and exclusive. Therefore, when he defines marriage, you have a restrictive and exclusive command with reference to our sexuality.

  20. Donald Johnson April 24, 2010 at 3:53 pm #

    Jesus does not define marriage, but Genesis does.

  21. Doug April 25, 2010 at 1:38 am #

    I watched Larry King and thought that Jennifer came across as an intelligent, sweet, caring woman, while Pastor Bob came across as a bully. Ted Haggard kind of tried to look at both sides of the issue, but it’s amazing how much more tolerance he shows for gays since he was thrown out his church for having sex with a gay prostitute.

    Clearly sexual orientation is not a choice, but here’s my bottom line: Christians (particularly of the conservative bent) are WAY too hung up on sex. They really need to stop telling the rest of the world who they can have sex with, when they can have sex, and why they can have sex. It seems like no one thinks about sex more than Christians do. I suspect it’s because they’ve been so sexually repressed by their belief system that it’s constantly on their brain. Get over yourselves – you live your lives and let other people live theirs. It’ll make for a much nicer world.

  22. Steven April 26, 2010 at 5:56 pm #

    You know one of the main reasons sodom and gomorrah was destroyed was because of homosexuality…when the angels came down to try n warn the people the man tried to rape the angels, (which are also men for those of you who didnt know)so God utterly destroyed the place save for Abram, later changed to Abraham, his fam and Lot and his fam, excluding Lot’s wife who looked back and was turned to a pillar of salt. Just because the world is all of the sudden making homosexuality politically correct does NOT mean it’s alright. I Corinthians 6:9-11 “Do you not know that the unrightous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be decieved. Neither fornication, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you> But you were washed, but you were sanctafied, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.” No one is perfect but to say being gay isnt wrong is the same as saying killing or lying or stealing is not worng. If you cant see that you are living in sin then you can’t be washed clean and you will not inherit the kingdom of Heaven.

  23. Tina April 27, 2010 at 2:53 am #

    God create the World for us to enjoy with everything in its. And He create a man and a woman and to bless them to multiply as many as sands on earth and stars on the sky. How is gay or lesbian people produce?. On other hand people are abortion right and left,then where are the next generation will be?. The gay and lesbian are against God’s law, God loves us all, but if you did not follow His rule you will be face His judgement, and we as Christian should show them the way. Repent, accept Jesus as your personal savior and turn away your wicked way and you will have eternal life. You can not do both way. Remember we are here for His purpose not our. May God grace to forgive us and help us to knee down and praying for this nation. God warning us with many ways: earthwake, flooding, tornado, disease, and may be He will allow terrorist to attacking this nation once again, so we will call out on His name and acknowlege that He is exit. What else you want God to show you His powerful on this earth?. After you pass this life do you care where is your soul go? I do, that why I follow God’s law and worship Him, and receive His blessing. God loves you and send His only Son died for you and me on the cross. He give us a change to repent. So do it while you can, it is not too late.

  24. Suzanne April 27, 2010 at 12:01 pm #

    What is so sad to me is that Mr. Haggard, who himself lost everything due this gross sin, still does not believe that there is anything wrong with it! How many more consequences,& losses will he have to endure before he realizes that “whatsoever a man sows, that will he also reap”. Sad!

  25. Donald Johnson April 27, 2010 at 1:16 pm #

    I thought angels were not gendered.

    I did not hear Haggard say there was nothing wrong with it. Did he say that somewhere else?

  26. M May 4, 2010 at 6:21 pm #

    I think her outing is very encouraging. I am myself a bisexual christian and have to deal with what makes me happy and what church condemns.
    I am sure that there r way more closet christians in the churches.

  27. Tracy May 19, 2010 at 11:14 am #

    Maybe the lesson for today reminds us that God is ever ready to do a new thing. It further reminds us that the God we worship is not a static God, capable only of speaking to us from two, three or four thousand years ago. Rather, God is living, alive in this moment, revealing new truth to us here, now.

    God is revealing new truth in many areas of life. One which is increasingly clear is that He is speaking to us in the issue of homosexuality.

    The new thing that God is doing in our midst right now is to show us that homosexuality is not simply an act or acts of willful disobedience to God’s law and commandments, but it is a state of being. It is an identity that God has given to some of His children. It is who they are.

    Twice in the Book of Leviticus and once in the Book of Romans are condemnations of homosexual activity. One in Leviticus indicates that death is the penalty for such acts. In truth, there are instances of homosexual acts which should be condemned, even as there are instances of heterosexual acts which should be condemned. I do not doubt that the writer of Leviticus and that St. Paul had good reason to write as they did.

    But when we turn to the scripture, we need to turn to the whole of the scripture. When we do that, the central and overwhelming message is God’s inclusive love for all of humankind.

    The overwhelming love of God in Christ sweeps some specific prohibitions away, even though they are in the Bible. Do you believe that? Anyone divorced? Jesus ruled out almost all divorce. Anyone here a woman? Well, Paul didn’t rule you out, but he ruled you out of speaking in church. Anybody here eat pork? Specifically prohibited.

    Look, the sovereign message of the Bible is God’s redeeming, all-powerful love that overrides all else, and places specific prohibitions in the context of the time and place and situation in which they were written.

    “I am about to do a new thing.” –Isaiah 43:1

  28. Donald Johnson May 19, 2010 at 1:39 pm #

    Jesus did not rule out almost all divorce and Paul did not rule out women speaking in church.

    Gentiles can eat pork.

  29. Derek May 19, 2010 at 1:56 pm #

    Gentiles AND Jews may eat pork. It is ok for either to follow OT dietary laws and it is ok not to as well.

    Tracy, the Bible doesn’t have anything to say about incest in the New Testament either. Nor gambling. That doesn’t legitimize either behavior. The Bible does not provide us with a comprehensive list of prohibited behaviors. In most cases, the Bible points us to the standard of holiness rather than the deeds of unrighteousness.

    With regard to sexuality, it is clear from Scripture that sexual expression is for husbands and wives and is a special gift to the married couple, for purposes of procreation and sexual expression (which is one of many ways that marriage is strengthened). When we ignore this standard, there are all kinds of unintended and dangerous consequences for us, our children, our families and our communities as well.

    The fact that homosexuality is condemned in multiple locations in both the OT and NT should tell us something. Plus, Romans 1 is not the only place where homosexuality is referenced – see I Cor 6.

  30. Tracy June 16, 2010 at 12:11 pm #

    Homosexuality is not condemned throughout the bible. You are using modern day thought to interpret it instead of putting it into historical perspective. You need to do research on the real meaning of the Greek words that were used and stop using modern day interpretations of the bible. For example Corinthians the word homosexuality was added later and not in the original text.

    Here is an example as to why you need to put the text into historical context.

    For this reason God gave them up to dishonourable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural …

    English-speaking country nowadays would probably agree to the following statement: ‘This quite clearly refers to lesbianism. That is the obvious meaning of the words. To deny that this refers to lesbianism is the sort of thing that you would expect from a clever-clogs biblical exegete with an ideological axe to grind.’ We have several commentaries on these words dating from the centuries between the writing of this text and the preaching of St John Chrysostom at the end of the fourth century. None of them read the passage as referring to lesbianism. Both St Augustine and Clement of Alexandria interpreted it straightforwardly as meaning women having anal intercourse with members of the other sex. Chrysostom was in fact the first Church Father of whom we have record to read the passage as having anything to do with lesbianism.

    It might also help to realize that the Catholic church even states to put the text into historical perspective.
    According to the official teaching body of the Catholic Church, Catholic readers of the Scripture have a positive duty to avoid certain sorts of what the authorities call ‘actualization’ of the texts, by which they mean reading ancient texts as referring in a straightforward way to modern realities.

    So keep this in mind next time you read Romans.

    For this reason God gave them up to dishonourable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

    These are exactly the sort of things that went on in and around pagan temples throughout the Mediterranean world in Paul’s time, as at the time of the writer of the Book of Wisdom, which goes into rather more detail than Paul does. These would include women dressing up as satyrs with large phalloi so that they could be the penetrators rather than the penetratees with their partners (and it was this travestying or exchanging of role, going against ‘farmyard logic’, rather than the gender of the partner which seems to have been what was regarded as going against type here). This is what Clement of Alexandria had to say on the subject:

    For that reason, births are infrequent among hyenas, because they sow their seed contrary to nature. … Such godless people ‘God has given over,’ the Apostle says, ‘to shameful lusts. For the women change their natural use to that which is against nature. … ‘ Yet nature has not allowed even the most sensual beasts to sexually misuse the passage made for excrement … .Blurring the natural order, men play the part of women, and women play the part of men, contrary to nature. … No passage is closed against evil lusts; and their sexuality is a public institution – they are roommates with indulgence.

    We have, you will not be surprised to hear, even more evidence from antiquity about the sort of things that the men got up to. Certainly there were cults like that of Cybele, Atys or Aphrodite, whose largest temple (rumoured to have as many as 1,000 temple prostitutes) was in Corinth where Paul probably wrote this letter, and whose cult had recently been introduced into Rome. This cult had a very strong cross-dressing element. Not only that, but the rites involved orgiastic frenzies in which men allowed themselves to be penetrated, and which culminated in some of those in the frenzy castrating themselves, and becoming eunuchs, and thus priests of Cybele, for whom, as was common with Mother Goddess cults, transcending gender was particularly important. Such castrated devotees, sometimes called ‘galli’, would wander around, as do the ‘hijra’ in modern India, as festal eunuchs assumed to have magic powers or prophetic gifts. The body of just such a castrated Roman eunuch priest with ornaments showing devotion to Cybele was recently uncovered by archaeologists in Northern England.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes