After the news broke earlier today that Jason Collins has come out as the first openly gay player in the NBA, I didn’t really plan to comment. But that all changed after watching Chris Broussard’s commentary for ESPN (see above).
After Collins’ announcement appeared, all the sports shows were abuzz with the news. ESPN’s “Outside the Lines” hosted a discussion between two sportswriters: the openly gay LZ Granderson and the Christian Chris Broussard.
The long and short of it is this. Jason Collins still claims to be a Christian even though he is openly gay. ESPN asked Broussard to comment on Collins’ claim that one can be both gay and Christian. Broussard answered the question politely and boldly, and he did so as a Christian. In fact, I think he said pretty much what I would have said if I had been asked such a question. You can watch the exchange above, but here’s Broussard in his own words:
Personally, I don’t believe that you can live an openly homosexual lifestyle or an openly, like premarital sex between heterosexuals. If you’re openly living that type of lifestyle, then the Bible says you know them by their fruits. It says that, you know, that’s a sin. If you’re openly living in unrepentant sin, whatever it may be, not just homosexuality, whatever it maybe, I believe that’s walking in open rebellion to God and to Jesus Christ. So I would not characterize that person as a Christian because I don’t think the bible would characterize them as a Christian.
After Broussard spoke his Christian conviction, there was an immediate backlash across the internet. Katie McDonough at Salon.com called Broussard’s words “hateful.” Even ESPN issued a statement saying that it regretted the distraction from Jason Collins’ announcement.
I think the criticism of Broussard is totatlly unwarranted. Broussard did not volunteer these remarks. He was asked by ESPN to comment on Jason Collins’ claim to be a Christian, and so he did.
After watching Broussard’s remarks with my wife, I turned to her and said, “That was strong.” All he did was to confess what the Bible teaches about sexual morality and about what God requires of every Christian—obedience (1 John 2:4). It was a clearer word than what you would hear in many pulpits. It was biblical. It was faithful. It was courageous.
So I want add my “amen” to what Chris Broussard said. He defended the faith once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3), and it was a beautiful thing.
To those who are reading this post who may not be Christian, I would add one more thing. The Bible doesn’t single-out homosexuality as the worst sin, nor does it permit mistreatment of homosexuals. So I am not advocating either of those things here. The Bible does, however, hold forth a stringent standard of sexual morality that we all fall short of (e.g., Matt. 5:28). That means that all of us are sinners and that all of us are in desperate need of a savior.
The good news is that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners (1 Tim. 1:15), both heterosexual and homosexual. He died on the cross and took upon Himself the punishment that we deserved. Then God raised Him from the dead three days later, and He is right now seated at the right hand of God. Now anyone can receive forgiveness and eternal life if they would but repent from their sin and believe in Christ. God’s arm is not too short to save (Isaiah 59:1), and if you would repent and believe, it would reach you as well.
Our late news advertised “his bold and brave confession” as a draw to listen to the story. It’s so hard to believe that in my lifetime homosexuality has gone from a hidden sin to one that’s now a “bold and brave confession”. I agree that Broussard’s statement was true according to the teachings of the Bible…and bold according the to flack he had to have known would come in an American media that now declares evil to be good. I appreciate your continued call to holiness and truth…and your encouragement of Christians on the frontline of Truth.
I agree. I thought John Piper’s tweet was very appropriate… “Solid steel in a world of cattails.” I think it would be appropriate to pray for Chris Broussand (to stand firm in his convictions) AND Jason Collins (that he would repent and trust in Christ).
The actual person here who is being bold is the one who is speaking the truth. No longer is the truth welcomed in the dialogue. Broussard’s statements are what should be considered brave and bold. This world is upside down as the fact that we now call evil good and what is good is “hateful”.
Collins spoke truth as well. At least, with respect to state of his current sexual preference.
I add my amen.
Jesus did not die for our sins so that we can be “free” to still live in them, but quite the opposite. He died so we can be released from their bondage on us. If we cant recognize a sin as a sin, then we have no connection to the weight of grace.
my question is this: what entitles Chris Broussard or anyone for that matter to tell Jason Collins that he can’t consider himself a Christian because he does something Christians view as sinful?
Zachary, As noted by Broussard, Jesus entitles him. The Bible makes it clear that if we live in a consistently sinful manner, which homosexuality is, we are not Christian. God says that. Broussard simply reported on that fact.
then as I would understand it, there is no one that could consider themselves truly Christian, as scripture clearly states that there is no one without sin.
Michael A. Coughlin
Zachary – This is a very good question & it appears you are honestly asking as you do not seem to be “just argumentative.”
According to the book of 1 John, no one in whom God has placed his Holy Spirit make a practice of sinning, or exhibits a pattern of sinning. It is also noted in the new testament that even though we are new creatures with new hearts that desire Christ, we still have a flesh which is corruptible and desires sin.
There’s more to it, but someone who willingly and knowingly continues to live in unrepentant rebellion to God (for example, homosexuality) cannot truly be born again of God’s Spirit.
Whereas, a Christian who one in a while sins is the norm. The difference is a Christian who sins, especially when confronted with God’s Word will be repentant. If he is not, I would fear for his soul.
Feel free to email me to discuss further. It is a hard to understand concept, so I tried to answer concisely. More importantly, I’d like to see you consider your own status before God as a sinner, and cling to the only provision, but oh so perfect provision of the resurrected Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins.
By no means do I view Broussard’s remarks as hateful. He comes across as a devout christian, who has nothing but love and the best interest of his fellow man in his heart. However, I do feel that you can be Gay, and be Christian.
I understand that this stands in contradiction to the bible, but the bible literally starts off contradicting itself. Genesis has two creation stories (one with god creating man and woman on the same day, after all of the animals have been created, one with God creating man, then the animals for him to have domain over, then woman). They cannot both be true if each is read literally. Throughout the bible, there are more contradictions, or statements that time and science have proven to be false (Earth is not the center of the universe or flat; Slavery is always wrong, women are equal to men). This doesn’t mean that the fundamental message of the bible is false, it just means that it was written a long time ago, and the authors were not always divinely inspired in their writing. Sometimes they were influenced by society, which is comprised of us sinners. When the bible was written, women, different races, and gay people were viewed as lesser people.
To me that means that Christians can violate some of the “laws” expressed in the bible that are representative of the time they were written, not the word of God. Anyone with an elastic straps in their underwear is violating a law in Leviticus that clearly states clothing with two types of fabric is forbidden. After reading Leviticus, anyone who continues to wear underwear with an elastic wasteband is not a Christian by Broussard’s logic. We know that’s not true though.
If you’d rather focus on the new testament, and Jesus’s words concerning homosexuality, then I’d counter that Jesus spent much more time telling us that wealth is inherently sinful than he did homosexuality. Count up references to each if this rings untrue to you. Therefore, anyone who continues to live a privileged life in America, while billions suffer all over Asia, Africa, and South America in comparative poverty, is living in sin, and is not a Christian by Broussards logic. We know better than that.
To me, God loves us all, created us all, and that includes people who are gay. The bible’s overall message is to love Christ, and love one another. It is not to judge our fellow man, not to cast them away. To Broussards Credit, he does not seem hateful. I respectfully disagree with his views on the bible and what it means to be a Christian, and appreciate that he is also respectful of others. But time has shown us that the world is not the center of the universe, that women are not of lesser worth than men, that elastic is not evil, and that wealth is not evil. If you take the time to meet someone who is gay, you will learn that homosexuality is not a choice, but rather a predisposition. They were born that way, created that way, and we should now know better than to assume they are somehow incapable of being Christian.
You must not have heard Broussard (or have read Scripture). Anyone who lives in unrepentant sin in defiance against God and His word shouldn’t be considered a Christian.
1 John 2:4 – “Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him.”
Yes, Christians continue to sin. They also maintain a posture of repentance. So, the believer can be thought of as a sinner who is consistently repentant, and keenly humble given the gravity and extent of his sin. Sinning isn’t incompatible with Christian discipleship per se, but unrepentant sin is. Mainly because it indicates a certain underlying condition of the heart. It’s not the sin that’s exclusionary; it’s the underlying heart condition.
I’m quite sure I have brothers and sisters in Christ who struggle with same-sex attraction and at times give in to temptation. But that’s not really where Collins is right now. He’s not saying, “I’m attracted to men, but I love Jesus more and want to do what’s right.” He’s saying, “I’m attracted to men and that’s okay; moreover, I’m going to designate myself publicly as a member of a group that is defined by its same-sex attraction.”
That said, I’m also willing to permit that there are brothers and sisters in Christ, gay or not, whose understanding of the faith is flawed to the extent that they view homosexual practice as acceptable. If their relationship with God is genuine then I trust that they’ll eventually arrive at the truth.
As one of the more balanced people on this site, you have parsed the mentality well in that second paragraph of yours. But I question what you say about the “understanding of the faith” in the third. Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of both the OT and NT can see the clear delineation of homosexuality as a sin, along with a host of others. I don’t think it’s based in ignorance. In the case of those Christians who now view homosexuality as acceptable, they have willfully decided that it no longer meets the contemporary litmus test for sin–just as almost 100% of Christian denominations decided about divorce/remarriage 50 years ago, and it seems all denominations have decided today in regards to gluttony and subsequent obesity. These two sins are fully assimilated into mainstream culture, and homosexuality has nearly assimilated itself as fully into certain segments of culture.
Using that frame of reference, many of the more liberal Christian denominations have added homosexuality to the list of assimilated sins, which is why they can unapologetically argue in favor of gay marriage–i.e, they seek a moral/legal framework under which it will be equal to heterosexual pairing. After all, if we’ve ALL already done it with divorce/remarriage and gluttony, both of which are so pervasive they are almost benign, why not the same with another seemingly benign display of human frailty?
Eh, I think people can be pretty obtuse, especially when a teaching is “hard” like the one concerning homosexuality. Sure, folks who read the bible and conclude that it doesn’t forbid homosexual practice are almost surely not being entirely objective or intellectually honest. They’re no doubt motivated (perhaps unconsciously) to see things in a particular way because it’s just really hard to deal with the alternative. I guess I’m just more willing to cut people some slack when it comes to theological error and salvation. Or, for that matter, a flawed understanding of sin.
Consider the church in Corinth. They were proud that one of their number was sexually involved with his step-mother. Paul doesn’t condone that sexual immorality or the church’s acceptance of it, but he also doesn’t seem to suggest that their acceptance was so great a sin as to preclude their salvation. They were still Christians; they just happened to be Christians with a pretty messed up understanding of the faith (which Paul corrected).
Or since there are a fair number of Reformed readers here, consider Calvin. If we’re going to cast out the modern day Christian who’s mushy on homosexual practice, how about the guy who steadfastly defended the execution of heretics?
Zachary, Christians still sin, and no true Christian would deny that. The difference lies in confession of sin and turning away from it (repentance). The essence of confession is agreeing with God that certain things are sin, and when a person claims to be a Christian but disagrees with what God has written in Scripture concerning sin, they reveal that they are not really sons of God (1 John 1:5-10). No one is perfect yet, but God promises to eradicate sin and evil in the age to come after this one.
Zachary: You’re twisting Broussard’s words. Broussard didn’t say that Jason Collins “can’t consider himself a Christian.” Broussard was talking about himself when he said that he “would not characterize that person as a Christian”—referring to a person who is “walking in open rebellion to God.”
Christian view? Or God and bible base view? That is a more accurate question.
Mary Gray Moser
It’s like it was in the book of Judges: everyone does what seems right to him.
Brady's Bunch (@BradysBunch76)
The replies on this blog sum up the problem. That if you are gay you should ‘repent’, or that you are ‘evil’.
I am Christian, and also gay. That argument that they are in conflict is absurd, and is merely a mask for bigotry or at the very least it’s a myopic view of the teachings of Christ.
Brady, everyone should repent, and we’re all evil until we do.
I am Christian, and also a sinner. I was born that way. It’s in my nature and always will be in my flesh.
And yet, Jesus calls me to repent of and resist that which is in my very nature. That’s what He taught. So with you, and everyone else.
Your post puzzles me. The Bible clearly teaches that homosexuality is a sin. The Bible clearly teaches that a Christian is a person who believes Jesus is God’s Son…that He paid the price for sin (it has a price…death)…and He offers salvation to those who believe these truths. The Bible clearly teaches we demonstrate our belief and acceptance by confessing our sin and turning away from it…and living a continued relationship with Christ that does not include continued decisions to purposefully sin.
That then leads me to ask…who do you believe you are when you say you are a Christian? And what Scripture are you reading that has taught you that homosexuality is no longer a “sin”…is no longer an “abomination”…is no longer “evil”…and does not require repentance and turning away?
I think Brady is reading the same scripture as you, Lauren, but perhaps he is reading it with a more critical eye. Brady’s belief that he can be gay and christian stems from an understanding that the bible is not infallible. I believe that he accurately understands the overarching themes in the Bible, that Christians should love one another, and love God, but can see that certain passages in the bible don’t mesh well with those themes.
Some passages in the bible imply slavery isn’t evil, and that women are inferior to men. These passages conflict with the basic values that are inherent to Christianity. If untrue verses still somehow found their way into the bible, we have to be open to the fact that other passagesdid the same. The tricky part is determining which passages are not the word of god. To me, the commandment “thou shalt not kill” contradicts the verse in Leviticus that states homosexuals are an “abomination” that should be put to death. Since the former holds truer to the overall themes of the bible, I think it’s clear that the latter is not the word of god.
I am not going to go through every verse that addresses homosexuality and argue why I don’t agree with them, but I will say this: If you take the time to get to know anyone who is gay, you will see that they were born that way, and are not evil. They did not choose to be gay anymore than you had to choose to be straight. If they were created gay, then it is not our place to do anything but love them as we would any other of God’s children.
I hope at the very least this helps you see where Brady, and others who view Christianity and Homosexuality as compatible, are coming from. I think we all benefit from open and honest dialogue.
MRM, you need to use your first and last names if you want to post a comment. Thanks, Denny
You walk a dangerous tightrope when you choose to pick which parts of the Bible are “true” and which are “false” for the sake of condoning some sin while still agreeing with His Word on other sins. You give no credence to the power of the Holy Spirit to reveal the Truth. Your Bible isn’t very reliable if you are going to decide on your own which parts are the infallible parts…and which are just men making mistakes in what they say. I don’t want a God like that…and I wouldn’t trust a Bible like that.
I was created a sinner…the Holy Spirit living in me now helps me to overcome that I was “born that way”. I do have friends that are gay! I love them dearly. And they are choosing to remain in their sinful nature and not try to allow the Holy Spirit to help them overcome their sin. That doesn’t stop me from loving them…but it also doesn’t make me believe it’s now okay for them to be that way just because they say so.
You have become your own God…the original sin. You’ve decided that what you believe is truer than what God’s Word says. Satan convinced Eve that she would be like God if she ate the fruit…the very sin he was thrown out of heaven for committing.
Open and honest dialogue needs to start with an admission that there is an absolute truth. If there is no absolute truth, then anything goes and this world will only get worse…which is exactly what’s happening. Standards in America have continued to drop through the years…we never raise our standards.
By the way…you are right…homosexuals are not evil. But homosexuality is evil. And calling it good will never make it good. God doesn’t change his mind based on popular opinion. Calling murder choice doesn’t change the fact that it’s still murder…no matter what human courts say.
I once heard the story of a woman who handed her pastor a Bible cover one day. When he looked at her with a puzzled face, she explained. “You’ve been our pastor for twenty years. Every time you’ve decided that a part of the Bible wasn’t really true or didn’t mean what it was saying, I cut it out. This is what I have left.” I suspect you will end up with empty themes that have no relevance to God’s Truth by the end of your life. I will continue to pray that God’s Word will remain powerful despite the way man continues to try to water it down…and I know God will answer that prayer.
Lauren as you defend your interpretation of homosexuality with this argument then you also condone slavery, since the Bible – AKA absolute truth when read without any critical interpretation – does not strike it down as evil, but instead instructs slaves to be contempt within their slavery.
mel mariner (@MelodyMariner)
If you take the time to spend a month with a two year old you will realize that we are all born with sin. We are self centered. We want what we want regardless of how it affects those around us. Left unchecked we will hit, bite and scream to get our way.
Christ died so that we do not have to continue in a self-centered life that ends in death. It doesn’t matter how nice you think a person. It doesn’t measure up. You either believe in what Christ did for you or you don’t. He came and lived a perfect life for you. He was brutalized for your sin so you could be free of it. When He said it is a narrow path, He really meant it. Think about it. How can changing what is sin to make the path wider and wider fit that? The more sin you decide isn’t really a sin the more you shrink what He died for. Pretty hideous thing to do considering what He went through physically and spiritually in order to do it.
When you don’t understand scripture you can ask Him for wisdom. He says He will give it.
Indeed Max, as others have said, if you want to talk about “overarching themes” of the Bible that you happen to agree with but ignore clear teachings from both Testaments, then you are likely worshiping no God and trusting in no Savior but yourself.
“The Bible clearly teaches we demonstrate our belief and acceptance by confessing our sin and turning away from it…and living a continued relationship with Christ that does not include continued decisions to purposefully sin.”
All true. Then again, we all keep sinning. And we usually decide to do it. Quite purposefully at times. It’s not always so easy to distinguish between “being in a state of turning away from sin yet still failing with some regularity” and “just sinning with some regularity”.
One imagines, though, that acknowledging one’s sin as “sin” is at least a necessary component (if not wholly sufficient) for “being in a state of turning away from sin”.
“And what Scripture are you reading that has taught you that homosexuality is no longer a “sin””
While some folks who approve of homosexual practice do try to play games with the language in an attempt to make the scriptures say something they don’t, the more thoughtful ones freely admit that the bible, read literally, prohibits homosexual practice. They just argue that it shouldn’t be read literally, and that the prohibitions on homosexual practice are a cultural artifact.
In my opinion there are some teachings that are clearly contextual. “No braided hair”, for example, since, at the time, it was perceived as ostentatious and/or overtly sexual. The universal take-away should be “don’t make your appearance sexually suggestive or indicative of ostentatious wealth,” and not “don’t braid your hair”. On the other hand, other teachings are clearly universal. “Love one another”. This elevates others teachings like “don’t steal” to universal status insofar as stealing from someone conflicts with loving them.
Those arguing for the permissibility of homosexual practice just put the scriptures prohibiting homosexual practice into the same category as those prohibiting things like hair braiding. They argue the take-away for today’s believer should be something like “don’t do sexual stuff that society overwhelmingly views as deviant and/or immoral” instead of the more literal “don’t sleep with people of the same sex as yourself”.
Here’s a perfect expression of this argument. If you don’t want to read the whole thing, start at the section titled “The Real Issue: Is the Bible Culturally Contextual?”:
Note: my posting the above shouldn’t be taken to imply that I necessarily agree with him.
“In fact, I think he said pretty much what I would have said if I had been asked such a question.”
I was thinking the same thing! I thought he was eloquent and polite, but also straightforward and honest. I thought he did great!
I’m wondering why ESPN even cares about Collin’s religious beliefs. Aren’t they a sports network. Nobody is asking if any other athlete can be a Christian or Muslim ore anything else and live in their particular lifestyle.
For the record, I agree with Broussard.
When we confess Jesus Christ as Savior we are cleansed from our sin. We are not made perfect. When we sin we can go to the throne of grace, confess our sin and be forgiven. Mr. Collins does not consider his sinful behaviour to be sinful and hence is trampling on that grace. Christians sooner or later recognize and seek forgiveness for their sins.
The backlash against Broussard’s remarks are another indication of where our nation is going and what Christians, trying to be true to scripture, are facing and are going to face. If you think about it, Christians have lived a priveleged life in America, a life very few Christians get to experience or have experienced in history. We are facing persecution and a fiery trial the likes of which we have not known before in this country. Lord help us to remain true to Jesus, no matter how unpopular that becomes. And let us remain true to the love of Christ, shed abroad in our hearts to all men, whether they despise us or not.
Indeed, certain Christian movements have enjoyed a privileged life here in America–one might even say “entitled”. As the nation becomes increasingly pluralistic, both in terms of other religions and those who chose not to live under religion’s yoke, it will be harder for certain Christian movements to enjoy the same status…partly out of simple demographics. They may still be a majority, but no longer an overwhelming majority, and the minority groups are exercising their rights in a Constitutional republic that de Tocqueville recognized must accommodate all in order to avoid the “tyranny of the majority”.
I have zero sympathy with certain Christian movements’ claims to “persecution”–not only because of the aforementioned historic entitlement, coupled with the fact that American Christians know full well what’s transpiring in other countries in the world, and those of the faith here still clearly live like kings compared to Christians in many, many countries. But I also temper every reference to Christians with the phrase “certain Christian movements” because it really is EVANGELICALS who claim persecution, because it is Evangelical belief systems that are asserted so aggressively and attacked aggressively in turn. There are plenty of other Christian movements in American who do not share the same feelings of persecution. But then, most Evangelicals would claim these others to be “false Christians”–and by doing so, they have further alienated themselves from potential allies under the cross.
Interestingly, folks are overlooking that Chris Broussard A) has written on this before and B) maintains a personal friendship with gay colleague LZ Granderson (who was on the show). Broussard and Granderson play ball together, work together, dine together, and call each other friend. They have, by accounts from both men, been very open about where each stands on homosexuality and Christianity, but it does not prohibit them from loving past these differences.
Broussard handled this well, and has always handled this well. Hopefully many will recognize that Chrsitians are fully capable of loving any sinner. May the love of Jesus so affect us that we live in such a way that it is obvious.
A 2008 article by Broussard – (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:T2qJbrhyihwJ:holyculture.net/blog/2009/04/04/my-take-on-john-amaechi-by-chris-broussard/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)
Brady’s-Speaking what the Bible tells us is not bigotry. Does a difference of opinion now make one a bigot? If that’s the case, why don’t all Christians call pro-gay rights supporters bigots? He was asked a question and he gave an answer. If you don’t like it, that’s fine. There’s no need to attack a person for having a different viewpoint. That’s a party foul in any college level argument/persuasion course and even in high school debate class. You disagree? That’s fine. Make a counterpoint without a personal attack. Calling someone a bigot is a personal attack and does nothing to weaken someone’s stance. By the way, Broussard has previously mentioned his faith publicly. This isn’t new ground for him. Christ said to the adulterous woman, I do not condem you, but go and sin no more.
Once again, having a viewpoint that is counter to popular opinion or what is culturally acceptable is not bigotry or hate speech. To claim as much is to interject emotionalism and judgementalism and sway away from the actual topic.
I think the criticism of Broussard is totatlly unwarranted. Broussard did not volunteer these remarks. He was asked by ESPN to comment on Jason Collins’ claim to be a Christian, and so he did.
Riiiight. Because ESPN forced him to do this interview. Please. Broussard knew what was going to be talked about and was ready to make a statement. The backlash is completely justified. He knew he would receive backlash and said it anyway. Don’t act like he’s some sort of victim in this. Even though I think he’s wrong, I still respect the fact that he is standing up for what he thinks about Christianity. Don’t belittle his stand by making him out to be a martyr.
James, ESPN also knew. And the other man being interviewed, LZ Granderson, knew. No backlash is justified or warranted because nothing crazy was said. What is welcomed is open discussion amongst people with differences without freaking out. LZ Granderson can handle it. Has for years with his FRIEND Broussard. Why can’t you/others?
Jerome-we will probably soon experience what the rest of the world has for hundreds of years now.
So Collins goes to hell because he’s an unrepentant homosexual. And Broussard, Burk, et al go to hell for being unrepentantly prideful for being not homosexual.
Merely pointing out what the Bible actually teaches does not mean one is “unrepentantly prideful”.
I saw the Broussard comments earlier but this was the first I saw it in context of the conversation with LZ, and I actually can appreciate some of LZ’s comments about having an open conversation right before Chris gave his view. Of course then a couple minutes later LZ blatantly says that he himself lives in open rebellion to biblical norms (“A brother’s gotta do what he’s gotta do”).
News is already spinning it. Instead of stating that his response was to a question regarding if one can be both gay and a Christian. All I’m seeing so far is “Broussard calls Collins a sinner” or “Broussard calls homosexuallity a sin”. It’s already out of context to personnally attack Broussard.
Brady’s, What does evil mean?
Dictionary.com-“morally wrong or bad”
I suppose one can use the term “evil” to describe something providing they have an ultimate moral authority to reference. That being said, is there anything wrong with calling sin or any sin evil?
As a typical godless lefty I don’t think Collins has anything to repent of, but the backlash against Broussard is embarrassing. Almost everyone will tell you they value honesty, but when you see this kind of reaction you find that what most people really want is to hear are their own opinions echoed back at them.
I think for Broussard to have said that he believes homosexuality to be a sin and left it that would have been acceptable. The problem is that he implied that Collins was deliberately “shaking his fist at God”.
In other words, he made it out to be as if Jason were engaging in behavior or thoughts merely to tick God off. He was making an assessment of his soul despite Collins’ clear statement that he is a person of faith.
Unless Broussard has ESP, he overstepped in a form of slander. No one chooses to be gay merely as an act of rebellion. It just *is*.
Not sure I agree Broussard’s statement implies he thinks Collins has chosen to be gay purely to spite God. What he (Broussard) seems to believe, which is essentially what the majority of conservative Christians believe, is this:
1. The sinfulness of homosexuality is self-evident from any objective reading of scripture, moreover,
2. it is so self-evident that no room remains for reasonable misinterpretation, ergo
3. anyone who engages in homosexual practice and excuses it by arguing it is not outside the will of God has willfully ignored revealed truth in order to continue sinning, ergo
4. he or she is not in a state of repentance, ergo
5. he or she is without benefit of Christ’s atoning sacrifice, which is conditioned on genuine repentance.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m thinking that’s where Broussard’s coming from.
mel mariner (@MelodyMariner)
I think you are correct in your assessment. The fact that he included hetrosexual couples having premarital sex shows that he wasn’t merely being intolerant. Just speaking the truth about living in open rebellion to God. Calling a sin not a sin is like drawing a line through the F report card and calling it an A.
Most of the people that are tweeting nasty things at him are aware that the other guy in the conversation was not offended by what he said. They just don’t care. It’s a truth that no one wants to hear. That they are sinful and their future is death unless they repent. That is what they really have a problem with.
All sin is an act of rebellion against God or “shaking our fist at God”. That includes hetero and well as homosexual sin, which Broussard made quite clear. If people are going to criticize Broussard, at least learn basic Christian Theology.
mel mariner (@MelodyMariner)
Wondering what it takes to not have your comments moderated to obscurity
I guess my other comments were unacceptable for some reason
Melody, my comments policy requires first and last name. Thanks, Denny
mel mariner (@MelodyMariner)
ah well its in the email address – paste it in for me lol for some reason the connection to twitter doesn’t always work for me on the phone. The approve app just keeps popping up over and over instead.
I read this blog post today by Justin Lee. It was written in response to these recent events and I think his words are very relevant. The gay/Christian debate often starts off wrong because people rarely define their terms. Everyone thinks everyone else is on the same page as they are. But a lot of terms are misunderstood or misused (like “being gay”) and Justin addresses this well in this blog post. He also addresses the importance of seeing gay people as people, not just “symbols in a culture war”. I encourage you to take a look at it:
I also highly recommend Justin Lee’s book “Torn: Rescuing the Gospel from the Gays vs. Christians Debate”. It’s the most insightful, grace-full, gentle, personal book about the gay Christian issue as ever I’ve read. He recounts his own journey as a gay Christian and his own thorough research into the subject. You don’t have to agree with it, but it’s always good to listen to the other side from time to time.
“The Bible doesn’t single-out homosexuality as the worst sin”
This statement is misleading. The Bible condemns homosexuality in the strongest possible terms, calling it an abomination. It may not be the worst sin, but it’s extremely serious.
“It may not be the worst sin, but it’s extremely serious.”
Moses had a man executed in a brutal fashion (stoning) for gathering wood on the Sabbath. Have you ever seen a video of a stoning? It’s pretty gruesome. The person generally doesn’t die right away. They’re usually bloodied to the point of being unrecognizable before going unconscious.
Given that this punishment was exacted for what I think any sane person would consider a trivial infraction, how do you differentiate between “not so serious” and “extremely serious”? When you’re terminating the lives of people for picking up sticks, what room do you have left for actual crimes?
Moses had stood in the presence of the living God. He’d heard His voice. He understood that God was establishing rules that would show man how incapable he was of just being good… forget good enough. Maybe had we stood before God and heard His voice, we’d feel as strongly about the fact that sin is sin. It’s not the Bible that differentiates “serious” from “non- serious”…that’s man’s doing. We continually want to hedge on law…on rules…on obedience. Our very nature makes us want to be in charge of ourselves.
But loving God changes that nature. Knowing that God sent His Son to take our punishment…our deserved stoning…our deserved crucifixion…changes us. When God is no longer our Judge but our Father, we don’t live in fear. My experience with God as my Father is loving and gentle and merciful and graceful and forgiving. If you don’t know Him personally, you won’t have that experience with Him.
You think stoning is horrible? Wait till there’s an eternity without the presence of God. A stoning will seem tame…will even be desired.
that seems awful fire and brimstoney of you. why all the doom and gloom?
if I may quote Bill Hicks
“eternal damnation awaits anyone who rejects God’s unconditional love”
we’re all born atheists until someone starts lying to us, just have some fun with your life and stop worrying about whether other people adhere to your personal ethos.
Zachary…that sounds very unloving and uncaring of you. Your atheism may satisfy you now… but eternity’s going to last a lot longer than your short time on earth. I don’t have to know you to care about you. God created you…I love God…so I love and care about you. I’m not “worried” about you adhering to “my” ethos…I’m concerned about your soul and how long eternity is. It’s not a lie just because you don’t believe it. Your belief or unbelief does not affect Truth. It affects your eternity. I hurt for people that choose to believe deceived by the father of lies. But if your choice is to live an eternity without God, He loves you enough to let you make that choice. I love Him enough…for Who He is…for what He’s done…that I want to spend an eternity IN His presence. I’m not sorry if that offends you. Funny that you saw my message of a God Who is loving, gentle, merciful and graceful as a fire and brimstone, doom and gloom message. I never mentioned fire and brimstone, by the way.