Many years ago I listened to a quite excellent teaching tape by R.C. Sproul on the topic of whether or not God counted all sins the same. His conclusion was "No", but I'm not going to go through his arguments here because this is just a nifty introduction rather than the point of the post. Plus, it's been a while since I listened to it and I am not sure I could do it justice were I to try and replicate it here.
Anyway, at times I have pondered exactly what sins are worse than others - especially in light of an insert in an old Lust Control or One Bad Pig tape (I can't recall which it was) offering me the chance to send off for a pamphlet explaining "Why Sexual Sins are Worse".
I've had a sneaking suspicion that God might judge sin based not on the act itself - sexual or otherwise - but rather on the impact that it has on relationships with God and others. It's just a sneaking suspicion, and I don't have any hard evidence to back it up, but one of the things that made me wonder about this is the story in 2 Samuel 11 & 12 of David's adulterous relationship with Bathsheba. When Nathan pronounces judgement on David he makes the remark that the baby will die because by his actions "...you have made the enemies of the LORD show utter contempt...". It seems that the issue here is how David's behaviour reflects on God. Now, rather than getting upset about whether or not this means God cares more about His honour than the murder of innocents and the ruining of families - which is not the suggestion that I am making - I would rather put it to you that the sin of a Christian is automatically a bigger deal than the sin of a non-Christian, because we drag God's name though the mud when we fall short. It should be a sobering thought.
Anyway, I've been thinking about this again because I've been re-reading What's So Amazing About Grace? by Philip Yancey. It's been about ten years since I read it last, so I thought it was time for a re-read, especially in light of the fact that a couple of my friends of have been reading it recently and it's come up in conversation.
I've just finished reading the chapter called 'Grace-Healed Eyes' which is about Yancey's relationship with Mel White, an evangelical Christian who came out as a homosexual. The chapter is mostly about how the Church relates to homosexuality, and the strong feelings of ungrace that the topic produces in Christians. Yancey makes the point, quite correctly, that the Christian stance to homosexuals is typically full of ungrace and that this is wrong. Yet at the same time, he's asking how you deal with and show grace in a situation where there is clear sin at work. It's a good chapter in a good book.
However, I found myself wondering about something that Yancey doesn't write about. You see, Mel White went on to be ordained and continues to be active as a Christian. As a result, what he does he does in God's name. I couldn't help but feel that both White and his condemners were actually guilty of the same sin - misrepresenting God. Those who hated him defined him by his sexuality and related to him that way - with ungrace and condemnation. His sexuality put him beyond the pale, but in reality he is no less loved by God than any of us, and in just as much need of God's grace. Those who hate homosexuals because they are homosexual, and do this in the name of God, are in great danger of finding themselves accused by Nathan just as David was. But likewise, Mel White seems to be guilty of re-interpreting his faith in light of his sexuality; of deciding to shape The Reality in light of his personal reality, and as such could also be charged with misrepresenting God. I felt that the hot potato issue of homosexuality was something of a red herring here. The real issue was that both sides of the argument were doing what they did in God's name, and as such were both in danger of making God's enemies show contempt. That is not something to be taken lightly.
Of course, in thinking about this I find myself wondering about how to avoid falling into the same trap. The temptation to define God in light of my personal revulsions or attractions is ever present. "I will love and hate what God loves and hates" very easily becomes "God loves and hates what I love and hate". I guess the only way to limit it is to recognise it as a possibility, and come before God with humility, allowing Him to shape me rather than vice versa. It cannot be impossible to walk the right path, but I acknowledge that it's very hard to do.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
But suppose that God has genuinely called Mel White to ministry, despite his homosexuality. What's Mel to do: obey the call, or refuse or ignore it?
@Terry Wright
God would not be the one calling a practicing homosexual to ministry. If Mel White is saying homosexuality is OK, and he is engaged in that activity, then according to the Bible he is not doing it under the authority of God. He is sinning. God calls sinners to repentance before he sends them out into ministry.
God calls sinners to repentance before he sends them out into ministry.
Are you saying that people ought to be sinless before God sends them into ministry?
And what about people in Christian ministry who lie, steal, cheat, judge, fly into rages, and so on?
Also, even if God hasn't called Mel White to Christian ministry, can God still use Mel's ministry to further the divine ends?
Are you saying that people ought to be sinless before God sends them into ministry?
Not at all. Repentance is not synonymous with sinlessness. It's the act of recognising you are a sinner, turning away from your sins, and accepting the forgiveness God gives us through Jesus Christ. Christians still sin. We still need to seek God's forgiveness for the things we do wrong. But Christians will recognise their sin, acknowledge it, and ask God for forgiveness. Mel White does not appear to have acknowledged his sin in this matter.
God may choose to use Mel White's ministry for His own ends - that's God's right as God. God uses all things, good and bad, to bring about his purposes. The question is more about whether God would have called Mel into Christian ministry specifically when Mel is actively involved in a sinful activity he hasn't repented of, or whether Mel was fulfilling some desire of his own that God *may* use for His own purpose.
The question is more about whether God would have called Mel into Christian ministry specifically when Mel is actively involved in a sinful activity he hasn't repented of, or whether Mel was fulfilling some desire of his own that God *may* use for His own purpose.
I dare say it is. And it seems to me that if God can use Mel's ministry, because it's God's right as God to do so, then it doesn't seem incongruous to suppose that God could exercise that same right to call a practising homosexual to ministry - in the same way as all ministers, I dare say, practise a sin or two without repentance. And, of course, this all assumes that homosexuality is sinful. (I hold the traditional line on this, by the way.)
The difficulty that line of thinking leads to, though, is it minimises the importance of sin. Does God care about sin or not? Can we do whatever sin we want, and call ourselves called by God, and expect God to bless what we do? Do we never have to repent? Mel White can say he is called by God to his ministry, but I don't believe he is. I don't know if God will use him or not. If God does use him, it will be in spite of Mel's own ministry. God will bring good out of evil, but that doesn't mean we should just keep sinning because God can use us anyway. See Romans 6:1-2.
I hear you on Romans 6:1-2. But I also think that to focus on 'the importance of sin' (as you put it) is to minimise the impact of God's grace and mercy.
Post a Comment