David Lose gets it completely wrong

I would invite the more discerning readers here to examine the article by Mr. Lose and see if you can spot the 9th grade level, appeals to emotion that he makes while trying to convince others of his point of view. I don't have time to go through them all here, but I would like to address at least one point that he brings up in his article...

"..while it may be true that the verses calling homosexuality an abomination, for instance, should be considered temporary and contextual, one needs to question whether this law (and many others) was just at any time or under any circumstances."

In relation to homosexuality, I am not aware that this sin was somehow rescinded. My mind goes back to about a week ago when I came across this article by pastor and author Trevin Wax (pictured above) which neatly and adeptly goes straight to the heart of the matter. In it, Wax imagines an interview taking place between a talk-show host and an evangelical pastor. I especially like how Wax drew up the dialogue when the imaginary host turned the conversation toward Christianity somehow being "radically intolerant" of homosexuality...

"Host: So how do you reconcile the command to love all people with a position on homosexuality that some would say is radically intolerant?

Pastor: (smiling) If you think my position on homosexuality is radical, just wait until you hear what else I believe! I believe that a teenage guy and girl who have sex in the backseat of a pickup are sinning. The unmarried heterosexual couple living down the street from me is sinning. In fact, any sexual activity that takes place outside of the marriage covenant between a husband and wife is sinful. What's more, Jesus takes this sexual ethic a step further and goes to the heart of the matter. That means that any time I even lust after someone else, I am sinning. Jesus' radical view of sexuality shows all of us up as sexual sinners, and that's why He came to die. Jesus died to save lustful, homo- and heterosexual sinners and transform our hearts and minds and behavior. Because He died for me, I owe Him my all. And as a follower of Jesus, I'm bound to what He says about sex and morality.

Host: But Jesus didn't condemn homosexuality outright, did He?

Pastor: He didn't have to. He went to the heart issue and intensified the commands against immoral behavior in the Old Testament. So Jesus doesn't just condemn adultery, for example, as does one of the Ten Commandments. Jesus condemns even the lust that leads to adultery, all with the purpose of offering us transformed hearts that begin beating in step with His radical demands.

Host: You say he condemned adultery. But he chose not to condemn the woman caught in adultery.

Pastor: That's right, but He did tell her to "go and sin no more."

Host: But who are you to condemn someone who doesn't line up with your personal beliefs about sexuality?

Pastor: Who am I? No one. It's not all that important what I think about these things. This conversation about homosexuality isn't really about my personal beliefs. They're about Jesus and what He says. I have no right to condemn or judge the world. That right belongs to Jesus. My hope is to follow Him faithfully. That means that whatever He says in regard to sexual practices is what I believe to be true, loving and ultimately best for human flourishing -- even when it seems out of step with the whims of contemporary culture."

Check out the entire article when you get a chance as it provides some great examples as to how Christians can respond when they are faced with these types of questions.

No Mr. Lose, the sinfulness of homosexuality was not just a passing fad that somehow became more acceptable when homosexuals became more involved in politics and the media. The same would apply if promiscuous teens or those involved in beastiality had better PR and greater representation among lobbyists and the television/film industry. Sex, that is to say any sex, outside of the covenant of marriage is outside of God's plan for us and it is a sin. The Bible is clear on this.