Comments on: Is Rob Bell Going Soft on Homosexuality?

By: Michael Self

Michael Self — Sat, 02 May 2009 18:39:55 +0000

Phil, you make a great point about Christians going after homosexuality as “the number one sin.” I was just about to make a similar point on gluttony. What about greed? Greed is far more rampant than homosexuality is — watch any televangelist.

As a gay Christian myself, I could not have put it better than Jim Johnson said in comment #5:

“First point to clear up is that there is nothing wrong with changing; so the ability to predict a change pattern as Wayne Grudem does is not necessarily a bad thing, despite Grudem’s implications. That is what the progress of revelation was all about from the human perspective. That IS what is amazing about the Bible’s view of how God and human beings interact. God created humans to live a certain way. They claimed freedom and God adjusted his plan. God planned for lifelong marriages, but humans demanded divorce, so God adjusted the plan. God provided outstanding leadership to the tribes when they needed it, but they rejected his approach and demanded a monarchy; so he gave it to them. God sent his son to offer spiritual blessings meeting the deepest longings of the human heart beginning in this life and culminating in eternity, and people crucified him; but God obtained human cooperation with the resurrection and the world has never been the same since, though his followers have not always been true to his name.

The second point is that the question about whether or not homosexuality is sinful is really the wrong question. There is no doubt homosexuality is against God’s created order as revealed in the Bible. So also is divorce; yet there are times when it right to counsel divorce. EVERYTHING that falls short of GOODNESS is against God’s created order; yet it still might be good to do it because of how we have to deal with sin. We can only get into unprofitable verbal semantics when we try to justify why “bad” things such as surgery things are good; but if a condition exists as a consequence of sin, then how to best correct or live with that condition is the moral question that challenges us. Do you let a person die, or do you do surgery? Do you tell a person who feels themself to be fully homosexual that they must deny that identity, or do you fully accept them? That is the moral question.

For several hundred years our society has created the conditions where young people are saturated with sexual stimuli yet prevented from entering early marriage without great risk, and now we are beginning to see the consequences on many fronts. We must face these moral challenges by loving people without ultimately rejecting them.”

I would also like to add that when Christians buy into the liberal/conservative labels, we step out of Christianity and into the political world. By blurring these lines, we still end up with the “watered down” version of Christianity, don’t we?

By: chad

chad — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 05:05:01 +0000

I fear many of you may miss the point I believe the bible makes. We are to love the person and still hate the sin which the bible is very clear abouti homosexuality is a sin. I believe the challenge is to show people their error in aloving way and do so on the way to repent for your own sins as well. I do not think we should interpet love as conveyance/ tolerance for sin as much as inclusion to proper perfection by the fathers written countenance.

By: Jeremiah

Jeremiah — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 06:52:15 +0000

One more thing. Your idea that Christ being silent on a particular issue in scripture means that He agrees with it is pure speculation at best.

By: Jeremiah

Jeremiah — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 06:47:20 +0000

Historic Christianity? The kind that inspired the crusades? Secondly,Mr. Trevin, the central theme of the Gospel is love, no other way around it. Jesus speaks on several laws, however, through the cross we are placed under a new covenant. No condemnation for those who believe. (Romans 8:1, 1st Tim 4:10,Hosea 6:6,Micah 6:8)

By: Veronica

Veronica — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 03:39:29 +0000

I know all of you on here seem to talk better than I do with your vocabulary and theology, so I say this as plain as plain can be.
Mars Hills doctrine does not state what you all say it does. Coming from a insider who has now left that church…….
“They don’t believe in Hell” and “All faiths go to Heaven” seems a bit universalism, don’t you think? I think before you throw all your eggs in Rob Bells basket, you should interpret the bible for what the bible says and not for what your interpretation of it is. Yes Jesus loves homosexuals and he loves sinners.
We all fall short. But, there is also a huge difference between sin (habitually) without the wanting to change, and the person that is constantly being sanctified from sin. Have you ever read Romans, when Paul discusses his heart to obey God, and to be righteous, yet he continues to do what he does not want to do, and proves that the law is good. When you choose a continuos life-style of sin, that can only lead to death spiritually.
So as I agree that we all need to give more to the poor and concentrate on ourselves more than others sins and mishaps, it is also very biblical to speak the truth in love. Are we living and believing in Jesus Christ from the BIble when we make justification for habitual sin? Are we believing in the Jesus Christ in the word when we teach that that the Bible was not inspired by God? (Rob Bells quote)
So….yes….lets all continue to look at ourselves and stop judging others and let people come to God as they are, but in the end, Gods love will draw us to change.
So as it may take some time for some to repent, and that is something to show grace for, it is also completely another thing to be condoning of sin, and allow people to go unchanged by the WORD OF GOD. THE WORD OF GOD WILL CHANGE ALL THINGS IN US.

By: phil

phil — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 05:59:32 +0000

It is amazing to me that Christians continually go after homosexuality as the number one sin. What about the gluttons, who fill their faces at every church bake sale? What about the self-righteous who continually mock God by perpetually illuminating the sins of every one else?

By: trevinwax

trevinwax — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:09:50 +0000

Apparently, you have not read the Gospels lately. The Gospels are full of Jesus weighing in on laws and traditions – often times intensifying them (take divorce, oath-keeping, lust, anger for instance). Yes, loving God and neighbor is central. Loving God necessarily leads to the exclusion of the behaviors that God condemns.

By: jonaustin

jonaustin — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:06:45 +0000

I find what you all are saying interesting. It seems that todays christian culture is almost copying that of the pharisees. Pharisees only cared about the hebrew laws and traditions, never about love. Today all we fight about again is what is lawfully right and wrong. How interesting. Its funny the response Jesus gives when asked about the most important commandment. He doesn’t say anything about sin at all! Jesus only says love God, love your neighbor.

By: trevinwax

trevinwax — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:29:08 +0000

No one is accusing Webb of advocating homosexuality. What Grudem and others are saying is that the same logic that Webb applies to the Scriptural passages on women is the logic that one can easily apply to homosexuality.

By: taddelay

taddelay — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:51:26 +0000

Seriously? Even a cursory glance through the book will show Webb doesn’t justify homosexuality. If you’ve read the book, you’d notice that Webb is fairly conservative socially, even leaving the door open for patriarchy. He does not even entertain the thought that homosexuality is acceptable.

I’d really like to see guys like Driscoll, Grudem and co. apologize for their sloppy outright slander of Webb’s position

By: Craig Bennett

Craig Bennett — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 04:27:11 +0000

I find it strange that so many criticize Rob Bell for his allegedly liberal (and heretical to some) theology, without really knowing what he believes. One of the best places to look would be at the doctrinal statement of the church he helped start and is currently pastor of, Mars Hill.

Among other things, their doctrinal statement reflects that they believe the Bible is inspired by God, that sin separates us from God, that Jesus is the only way to heaven, that only those who trust Jesus will have salvation . . . I could go on. To me, the best place to check a pastor’s beliefs is in the doctrinal statement of the church he leads. I see nothing in the Mars Hill statement that is unorthodox or heretical. In fact, I think it presents a great narrative of the gospel message and the history of man, relying upon Scripture as its basis.

For some reason, though, Rob Bell rubs many wrong, even though they have no real substantive basis for their dislike of him. Kinda funny – Jesus rubbed a lot of people the wrong way too! (No, I am not deifying Rob Bell, but I am sure someone will try to distort my comment to reflect that!) :-)

Peace of Christ to all.

By: Adam Lehman

Adam Lehman — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:48:16 +0000

roy
in what sense would you say that Bell has watered down the gospel? and how did you come to that conclusion….since you don’t care for his books, teachings, or sermons?

By: Roy

Roy — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:49:11 +0000

Personally I don’t care for Bell’s books, teaching, or sermons. His style is just not me. However, I think Bell is confused about what he believes and essentially he seems to believe in nothing which lines up perfectly with his post-modernism. I would love to see Bell come out and repent for watering down the gospel, repent for trying to weave the world into the church and the church into the world, and repent for not taking the inerrancy of Scripture seriously.

By: van

van — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:23:52 +0000

I like where your heart is at.

By: Ian

Ian — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:38:27 +0000

Sometimes discussions about homosexuality can make people sound like religious leaders. They use angry, controlling words where Jesus would have spoken compassionately. It just doesn’t sound like Him. Men have a tendency toward religion, as a set of rules, because it helps us to define our relationship with God. They give us boundaries. And I think that boundaries are needed for sure, but who decides what everyone’s boundaries with our Father are? Are there universal boundaries for all of his children or was it decided that it would be written on the heart of the individual and each person would act out their personal faith in Jesus as it relates to their unique situation?