Hopeless Confusions

Modest Propositions

Here is a modest, straightforward, orthodox Christian syllogism:

The risen Lord Jesus Christ delivers people from their sins
Homosexuality in all its forms is sinful
Therefore, the Lord delivers homosexuals from their from their homosexuality.  

There is little that can be controversial about such a syllogism, unless one wishes to make the Incarnation or the Resurrection controversial.  True, some who profess Christianity may demur or disagree.  There may be some discussion on whether the Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin--but so often such discussions rapidly fall into deeper, broader matters such as the authority and inspiration of the Bible itself, or the Deity of our Lord. But for those who receive the Bible as the very word of God and who believe in its plenary divine inspiration there can be no controversy here. 

Why, then, is the following matter regarded as so controversial?
 

In the radio interview, which followed his initial claims about the link between flooding and gay marriage in a letter to the Henley Standard, [UKIP councillor] Silvester said: "I don't have a problem with gay people. "I believe as a Christian I should love gay people and indeed, I do.  "My prayer for them is they will be healed. It is nonsense to say it is homophobic. If you love a person enough to want them to be healed and to have a proper family, that is hardly homophobic. It is a spiritual disease … it's not what I say, it's what the Bible says." (The Guardian)

Silvester has been suspended from the party for these views. UKIP has a "gay and lesbian group" who wrote Silvester an open letter claiming he had "rightly attracted derision from people of all political beliefs, and once again painted Ukip in a negative light – an unacceptable act for which you cannot be excused". 

Now, we, for our part, would hasten to excuse that same group for their profound ignorance of Christian teaching.  Since they clearly have little knowledge of the Scriptures, they can hardly be held accountable for such fundamental theological and logical errors as confusing primary with secondary causes--as is evident for their additional criticism of Silvester (who had the temerity to link the recent floods in Great Britain with divine judgment):

The open letter from Ukip's LGBT group said: "The Met Office have stated 'the main reason for the mild and wet weather so far is that we have seen a predominance of west and south-west winds, bringing in mild air from the Atlantic – as well as generally unsettled conditions' – regardless of whether you believe in a God or not, sudden rainfall has not just formulated out of nowhere upon the UK. An Act of God this is not."

Such folk can be excused, yes.  But not taken seriously.  

Meanwhile, since homosexuals and (it appears) the majority of the public want to excuse homosexuals for their homosexuality, we wonder what else they wish to excuse in their generosity and tolerance.

Here is a clear, unequivocal statement from Scripture about homosexuality and its sinfulness:

For this reason God game them up to dishonorable passions.  For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 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 themselves the due penalty for their error.  (Romans 1: 26,27)

Then come the following litany:

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.  They were filled with all manner of:
unrighteousness
evil
covetousness
malice.
They are full of envy
murder,
strife,
deceit,
maliciousness.
They are gossips,
slanderers,
haters of God,
insolent,
haughty,
boastful,
inventors of evil,
disobedient to parents,
foolish,
faithless,
heartless,
ruthless.
Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. (Romans 1: 28-32)

One is left wondering by what standard homosexuality can be excised from this passage, whilst the indictment of other sins is left intact?   Or, is one left thinking that those who excuse homosexuality must also be bound to excuse the litany of gross moral perversions which follows?  Or by what means ought a Christian to think that God can forgive and deliver him from his sins of insolence and pride, and not from his homosexuality? 

Thanks be to God, there is both mercy and deliverance from homosexuality along with all other sins.  For the Christian there can be no doubt about it.  If this "rightly attracts derision from people of all political beliefs" then so be it.  We will appeal to a higher court, and await That Day.