tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post4060309478309033505..comments2024-01-02T16:09:57.364-07:00Comments on Intrepid Lutherans: Homosexuality, God, and The BibleIntrepid Lutheranshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05867580862562801804noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post-87618249286647546882012-05-23T10:54:06.015-07:002012-05-23T10:54:06.015-07:00Rev. Andersen,
You obviously have an ax to grind....Rev. Andersen,<br /><br />You obviously have an ax to grind. Pastor Spencer is free to apologize to you, if he wants. I personally don't see any need for it. Intrepid Lutherans is not mainly about delivering Law/Gospel sermons, although we post them occasionally. Pastor Spencer's post was obviously not intended to be a sermon in which he applied Law or Gospel to anyone. It is, as he stated, a series of brief, Scriptural answers to a series of brief questions.<br /><br />Your sarcasm is uncalled for and your taunting of Pr. Spencer is childish. And cats? Maybe you are mistaking Intrepid Lutherans for someone else on the internet. We've never posted a picture of a cat anywhere, ever, as far as I can remember.Rev. Paul A. Rydeckihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01447491206453142100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post-9059857063550721482012-05-23T10:40:23.197-07:002012-05-23T10:40:23.197-07:00Hmmm
My mistake. When you subtitled your post &q...Hmmm<br /><br />My mistake. When you subtitled your post "The Whole Truth!" I should have guessed you only meant to present the part of the truth that comes from the Law - what could I have been thinking?<br /><br />Why is it pastors seem unable to just say "I'm sorry, I was so focused on answering the question that I forgot the Gospel. Here, let me add it in now."?<br /><br />Is the internet so full of pictures of cats that the addition of a couple of paragraphs of Gospel applied to the topic at hand might cause it to overflow? <br /><br />Come on, you can do better than just hoping the homosexually struggling individual will look for a further exposition of God's love elsewhere. You've got the room and opportunity here. You're a better pastor than that. You brought up the topic of homosexuality. So let's hear a bit more of the truth. Why not take a few more lines to tell what the Gospel has to say to the homosexually struggling individual who might happen upon your post? <br /><br />You can do it. Just give it a shot. Does the Gospel have anything to say to the unhappy homosexual teen before he veers off into a "positive gay identity"?<br /><br />Or shall we just change "What Friend we have in Jesus" to "Well at least Jesus doesn't shun me"?Rev. Mathew Andersennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post-36211725921866503182012-05-23T06:19:09.408-07:002012-05-23T06:19:09.408-07:00Pastor Andersen,
Thank you for your obviously ve...Pastor Andersen, <br /><br />Thank you for your obviously very thoughtful comment. <br /><br />Truthfully, kind sir, there was no other “purpose” behind the question beyond the fact that it has been asked of me quite often on this topic. I put this material together as a brochure or hand-out for my members more than a decade ago. It was based on comments and questions I received after the topic came up in a Bible class on Genesis and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. There was no ulterior motive of any kind behind the inclusion of this question whatsoever. I simply tried to answer it to the best of my ability. I am gratified that you found the answer “technically and factually correct.” That’s all I was attempting to provide. <br /><br />As to the apparent “lack” of Gospel content; I admit that in comparison there is much more “law” or at least “sanctification” than Gospel in this piece. But, then again, it’s purpose was to provide information and education on the topic, not a full-blown and extensive treatment of the wonderful comfort of salvation by grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ. As you noted, the Gospel was there, and my hope is that should this material find its way into the hands of someone struggling with this sin, that the Gospel toward the end will move them to seek out a fuller exposition of God’s love for all sinners in Christ. <br /><br />Again, thank you for your concern and your comments. <br /><br />Pastor SpencerPastor Spencerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01321516963313421661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post-2865120070703274952012-05-23T05:31:16.358-07:002012-05-23T05:31:16.358-07:00Pastor Spencer, I can't help asking why you fe...Pastor Spencer, I can't help asking why you felt it necessary to include question #4 "But isn’t it really just homosexual “activity” that’s condemned in the Bible, not homosexual 'orientation?' Isn’t it possible that a person can be a 'non-practicing homosexual,' like being a non-practicing Catholic or Jew?"<br /><br />While your answer was technically and factually correct, my question is "what was the purpose of it?" By their very lifestyle a "non-practicing homosexuals" (which, I would assume, includes those who have chosen celibacy or faithful marriage to someone of the opposite sex, in spite of their temptations) is witnessing to their belief that homosexuality is not God's intention for mankind nor part of God's good creation. So why was it necessary to emphasize it through that particular Q/A?<br /><br />There can be only three legitimate answers to this question:<br /><br />1: Christ points to the sinfulness of desires when speaking to those who do not recognize that they are lost sinners every bit as much as those they condemn. But this can not be the reason as you were speaking of a group which, by their actions, have already confessed that they believe homosexuality is sinful. To pile guilt upon the consciences of those who already feel guilty would be an awful thing to do.<br /><br />2: To point the individual away from false pride or from finding assurance of salvation in their actions. But, if you know any of these non-practicing homosexuals, you will also know that they tend to be among the most humble and repentant people on earth and that finding false assurance in their actions is something they are not prone to do.<br /><br />3) As a lead-up to the assurance of salvation in Christ. But this can not be the reason you included this question as your presentation of the Gospel was one of the weakest I have ever seen. Seriously, 2 1/2 lines of actual Gospel? Come on, the last question should have led to a wonderful discourse on the forgiveness of Christ. Yet, in answering that question you spent less than a line on actual salvation and 4 full paragraphs on what other churches are doing wrong. So I can only conclude that your purpose could not have been the presentation and exposition of the Gospel.<br /><br />So why that particular q/a?<br /><br />These non-practicing homosexual men and women were often mocked from the time they were in grade school with words like "queer" and "sissy." They heard their father condemn "those fags" in their home. They heard adults at Church speak together about the evils of homosexuality. And they took all this to heart along with the biblical injunctions against homosexual behavior. Did you know that it tends to be the non-practicing homosexual teens that are most in danger of suicide? Pro-gay activists will not mention that when quoting statistics about bullying because there is a lot of political currency in usurping the victim status. But the reality is that suicidal tendencies drop dramatically once a teen comes out and forms a positive gay identity. The point I want to make is not that a positive gay identity is the answer, it's not. But rather, that there is pretty good evidence that the non-practicing homosexual feels an almost unbearable weight of guilt and shame. So why was it necessary to emphasize that guilt if you weren't going to even adequately present the Gospel?<br /><br />And while we are on the subject, what answer would you give to teen who asked you, "In Romans 7 Paul speaks of the Law producing all kinds of lusts in him. Do you think Saint Paul might have been homosexual, not in action, of course, but in desire?" (if a kid does ask you this, by the way, he is probably struggling with homosexual desire himself so please take that into consideration when answering).Rev. Mathew Andersennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post-86564779901045421352012-05-14T08:44:39.746-07:002012-05-14T08:44:39.746-07:00Jessica,
Thank you for your question; it is one ...Jessica, <br /><br />Thank you for your question; it is one that comes up quite often. <br /><br />Actually, the answer is very simple. Whatever law from the Old Testament is repeated in the New Testament by Christ and the Apostles is binding on New Testament believers, i.e. Christians. <br /><br />To take an obvious example: Christ made it clear that the Sabbath was made for believers, not the other way around. Thus, worshipping on Saturday is no longer required. Paul also confirmed this in his writtings. He said that the Sabbath rules, and regulations about foods, etc... were O.T. "shadows" of New Testament truths. <br /><br />In general, theologians have coined the phrase - "holy, immutable, will of God," to describe those laws of God that apply to all people of all times and all places. You may have learned this in Catechism class as "the Moral Law." Things like the Ten Commandments apply to everyone everywhere in every age. <br /><br />Thus, since the Holy Spirit led St. Paul to write so clearly that homosexuality is still against God's will and condemned by God, that part of God's will is binding on Christians today. <br /><br />I hope my answer helps you. <br /><br />Thanks again for writing. <br /><br />Pastor SpencerPastor Spencerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01321516963313421661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post-31190477065686693382012-05-14T08:00:19.563-07:002012-05-14T08:00:19.563-07:00Just a quick question pastor. Who decides which r...Just a quick question pastor. Who decides which rules in the Bible we must follow (no homosexuality) as opposed to those we no longer have to follow (shunning women during menstruation, and touching pigskin)? <br />If you could clear that up for me, that would really make things much more rational.<br /><br />Thank You!<br />Jessica BortleJessica Bortlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00260707008665300016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post-30157431542015620582012-05-13T06:37:34.922-07:002012-05-13T06:37:34.922-07:00Thank you, Pastor, for posting this clear teaching...Thank you, Pastor, for posting this clear teaching.Brian G. Heyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05646951149617990867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post-19985389651170244582012-05-11T13:05:29.623-07:002012-05-11T13:05:29.623-07:00PC,
Thank you for your kind words.
I'm hap...PC, <br /><br />Thank you for your kind words. <br /><br />I'm happy to be of service. <br /><br />I hope others see it as you do. <br /><br />Pastor SpencerPastor Spencerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01321516963313421661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881617320676906596.post-64745802481925597512012-05-11T11:50:33.886-07:002012-05-11T11:50:33.886-07:00Steve,
After reading the inane comments of "...Steve,<br /><br />After reading the inane comments of "fws" for two days in "Cranach, the Blog of Veith" concerning "President Announces His Support For Gay Marriage" your Biblically-based, referenced article above brought great relief to my aching head. Thanks.<br /><br />PCPCXIANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09204406574433401739noreply@blogger.com