Christian Singer Jennifer Knapp Says She's Gay

[Guest LadyC]

I agree with you Parker- That is why I believe you should remain celibate in order to be pure before God.

I don't agree with you that being homosexual is OK, CS. We only agree that it is not a sin to think of yourself as gay. We have nothing theological in common.

if you think of yourself as gay, then you do not think of yourself as a new creature in Christ. if someone does not consider themselves a new creature in Christ, are they?

[CSLewis]

Letter from C. S. Lewis regarding homosexuality, quoted in Sheldon Vanauken's A Severe Mercy, pp. 146-148, in response to a question about a couple of Christian students of Vanauken who were homosexual and had come to him for advice:

I have seen less than you but more than I wanted of this terrible problem. I will discuss your letter with those whom I think wise in Christ. This is only an interim report. First, to map out the boundaries within which all discussion must go on, I take it for certain that the physical satisfaction of homosexual desires is sin. This leaves the homo. no worse off than any normal person who is, for whatever reason, prevented from marrying. Second, our speculations on the cause of the abnormality are not what matters and we must be content with ignorance. The disciples were not told why (in terms of efficient cause) the man was born blind (Jn. IX 1-3): only the final cause, that the works of God shd. be made manifest in him. This suggests that in homosexuality, as in every other tribulation, those works can be made manifest: i.e. that every disability conceals a vocation, if only we can find it, wh. will 'turn the necessity to glorious gain.' Of course, the first step must be to accept any privations wh., if so disabled, we can't lawfully get. The homo. has to accept sexual abstinence just as the poor man has to forego otherwise lawful pleasures because he wd. be unjust to his wife and children if he took them. That is merely a negative condition. What shd. the positive life of the homo. be? I wish I had a letter wh. a pious male homo., now dead, once wrote to me--but of course it was the sort of letter one takes care to destroy. He believed that his necessity could be turned to spiritual gain: that there were certain kinds of sympathy and understanding, a certain social role which mere men and mere women cd. not give. But it is all horribly vague and long ago. Perhaps any homo. who humbly accepts his cross and puts himself under Divine guidance will, however, be shown the way. I am sure that any attempt to evade it (e.g. by mock or quasi-marriage with a member of one's own sex even if this does not lead to any carnal act) is the wrong way. Jealousy (this another homo. admitted to me) is far more rampant and deadly among them than among us. And I don't think little concessions like wearing the clothes of the other sex in private is the right line, either. It is the duties, burdens, the characteristic virtues of the other sex, I suspect, which the patient must try to cultivate. I have mentioned humility because male homos. (I don't know about women) are rather apt, the moment they find you don't treat them with horror and contempt, to rush to the opposite pole and start implying that they are somehow superior to the normal type. I wish I could be more definite. All I have really said is that, like all other tribulations, it must be offered to God and His guidance how to use it must be sought.

[Matthitjah]

I know Paul's passion was on Christ and Christ alone- he stated it is better not to get married- I don't think that he was gay necessarily though he did hint at an internal struggle that he was having but never came out - gays who confine their life to celibacy remaining single are free to be used by God - married people have to deal with our spouse.

That is very insulting to us who are single to assume Paul's singleness had to do with being attracted to men.

To clarify, Paul was a widower.

According to whom?

One had to be married to be a member of the Sanhedrin. See Phillipians 3:5ff and Acts 7 - 9

Those scriptures offer no proof that Paul was either a member of the Sanhedrin or Married. He could have been but calling them brethren could also quite possibly have meant that he was merely speaking in terms of their shared heritage in Abraham.

There is also no scriptural support for the basis of a command for Sanhedrin members to be Married.

He was in fact a Pharisee. However, he appears to indicate that he remained single so as to devote his whole Life to the service of the God of Abraham. As we know, he was quite Zealous concerning that duty even while he remained ignorant of the fact of whom that God really was.

Peace,

Dave

[wyguy]

Letter from C. S. Lewis regarding homosexuality, quoted in Sheldon Vanauken's A Severe Mercy, pp. 146-148, in response to a question about a couple of Christian students of Vanauken who were homosexual and had come to him for advice:

I have seen less than you but more than I wanted of this terrible problem. I will discuss your letter with those whom I think wise in Christ. This is only an interim report. First, to map out the boundaries within which all discussion must go on, I take it for certain that the physical satisfaction of homosexual desires is sin. This leaves the homo. no worse off than any normal person who is, for whatever reason, prevented from marrying. Second, our speculations on the cause of the abnormality are not what matters and we must be content with ignorance. The disciples were not told why (in terms of efficient cause) the man was born blind (Jn. IX 1-3): only the final cause, that the works of God shd. be made manifest in him. This suggests that in homosexuality, as in every other tribulation, those works can be made manifest: i.e. that every disability conceals a vocation, if only we can find it, wh. will 'turn the necessity to glorious gain.' Of course, the first step must be to accept any privations wh., if so disabled, we can't lawfully get. The homo. has to accept sexual abstinence just as the poor man has to forego otherwise lawful pleasures because he wd. be unjust to his wife and children if he took them. That is merely a negative condition. What shd. the positive life of the homo. be? I wish I had a letter wh. a pious male homo., now dead, once wrote to me--but of course it was the sort of letter one takes care to destroy. He believed that his necessity could be turned to spiritual gain: that there were certain kinds of sympathy and understanding, a certain social role which mere men and mere women cd. not give. But it is all horribly vague and long ago. Perhaps any homo. who humbly accepts his cross and puts himself under Divine guidance will, however, be shown the way. I am sure that any attempt to evade it (e.g. by mock or quasi-marriage with a member of one's own sex even if this does not lead to any carnal act) is the wrong way. Jealousy (this another homo. admitted to me) is far more rampant and deadly among them than among us. And I don't think little concessions like wearing the clothes of the other sex in private is the right line, either. It is the duties, burdens, the characteristic virtues of the other sex, I suspect, which the patient must try to cultivate. I have mentioned humility because male homos. (I don't know about women) are rather apt, the moment they find you don't treat them with horror and contempt, to rush to the opposite pole and start implying that they are somehow superior to the normal type. I wish I could be more definite. All I have really said is that, like all other tribulations, it must be offered to God and His guidance how to use it must be sought.

What's more important - what C.S. Lewis has to say about homosexuality, or what God has to say about it?

[Matthitjah]

Galatians 1:14 appears to indicate that Paul was advancing at a fast clip through his Religion;

Ga

[nebula]

Letter from C. S. Lewis regarding homosexuality, quoted in Sheldon Vanauken's A Severe Mercy, pp. 146-148, in response to a question about a couple of Christian students of Vanauken who were homosexual and had come to him for advice:

. . . I take it for certain that the physical satisfaction of homosexual desires is sin. . . .

And this agrees with what you are saying - how?

Second, our speculations on the cause of the abnormality are not what matters and we must be content with ignorance.

Do you agree that homosexuality is "the abnormality"?

[Matthitjah]

Letter from C. S. Lewis regarding homosexuality, quoted in Sheldon Vanauken's A Severe Mercy, pp. 146-148, in response to a question about a couple of Christian students of Vanauken who were homosexual and had come to him for advice:

I have seen less than you but more than I wanted of this terrible problem. I will discuss your letter with those whom I think wise in Christ. This is only an interim report. First, to map out the boundaries within which all discussion must go on, I take it for certain that the physical satisfaction of homosexual desires is sin. This leaves the homo. no worse off than any normal person who is, for whatever reason, prevented from marrying. Second, our speculations on the cause of the abnormality are not what matters and we must be content with ignorance. The disciples were not told why (in terms of efficient cause) the man was born blind (Jn. IX 1-3): only the final cause, that the works of God shd. be made manifest in him. This suggests that in homosexuality, as in every other tribulation, those works can be made manifest: i.e. that every disability conceals a vocation, if only we can find it, wh. will 'turn the necessity to glorious gain.' Of course, the first step must be to accept any privations wh., if so disabled, we can't lawfully get. The homo. has to accept sexual abstinence just as the poor man has to forego otherwise lawful pleasures because he wd. be unjust to his wife and children if he took them. That is merely a negative condition. What shd. the positive life of the homo. be? I wish I had a letter wh. a pious male homo., now dead, once wrote to me--but of course it was the sort of letter one takes care to destroy. He believed that his necessity could be turned to spiritual gain: that there were certain kinds of sympathy and understanding, a certain social role which mere men and mere women cd. not give. But it is all horribly vague and long ago. Perhaps any homo. who humbly accepts his cross and puts himself under Divine guidance will, however, be shown the way. I am sure that any attempt to evade it (e.g. by mock or quasi-marriage with a member of one's own sex even if this does not lead to any carnal act) is the wrong way. Jealousy (this another homo. admitted to me) is far more rampant and deadly among them than among us. And I don't think little concessions like wearing the clothes of the other sex in private is the right line, either. It is the duties, burdens, the characteristic virtues of the other sex, I suspect, which the patient must try to cultivate. I have mentioned humility because male homos. (I don't know about women) are rather apt, the moment they find you don't treat them with horror and contempt, to rush to the opposite pole and start implying that they are somehow superior to the normal type. I wish I could be more definite. All I have really said is that, like all other tribulations, it must be offered to God and His guidance how to use it must be sought.

Great!

There appears to be no support for the position of unrepentant homosexuality running rampant in the Church in this letter.

However, just what authority does C. S. Lewis have above Scripture?

C.S. also had some pretty absurd views on Evolution. I appreciate his mind and work, but I do not place him above the Word of God or God Himself.

Peace,

Dave

[~candice~]

Homosexuality is not some kind of disease that can be cured by a dose of good ole fire and brimstone. It is a part of who you are a part of your DNA - but people still make choices but God's love for us does not depend on our choices. Amazing grace.

Incest and rape are covered by Christ's summation of the law - loving our neighbor - homosexuality is not.

You seem to discount the workings of the Holy Spirit is a sinners life. Why is that?

Actually I am not discounting the work of the Holy Spirit. In fact I think it is impossible not to fall into immorality without the Holy Spirit. However I don't think gay can be prayed away. There actually is a lot of evidence that homosexuality is genetic.

Oh?

Says who?

1Co 6:9-11 MKJV

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor abusers, nor homosexuals,

10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

11 And such were some of you. But you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

[Rick-Parker]

being bi-polar or having low self esteem is not a lifestyle, it is a medical condition.

look at it this way. if a heroin junkie accepts Christ as their saviour, and still thinks of themselves as a junkie, are they putting their focus on God or on heroin? on their spiritual condition or their physical desires?

i'm not going to go so far and say that a person who continues to identify themselves (publically OR privately) as "gay" instead of "christian" is committing a sin by putting that label on themselves, but if it isn't, i think it comes dangerously close to being one. the ONLY label that gives glory to God is born again christian... REDEEMED. that means you put away your old self... you put away the label that you identified with when you were in the world. as long as someone is still considering themselves "gay" (or a junkie) then (1) they're not giving God the glory for changing them, and in fact are denying that God has changed them, (2) are still giving time to sinful thoughts instead of taking them immediately captive to Christ. in short, they are identifying first with their "gayness" and secondly with their "christianity". and putting christianity in second place to their gayness IS a sin. so there ya have it, in one paragraph i have just gone from wishy-washy to firm. yes, a christian who calls himself gay is sinning.

Look, you have gone from having a dialog with me to throwing out dispersion in one sentence. I'm a Christian. I am also an alcoholic. I don't drink, but I'm still an alcoholic. It would probably take is one drink for me to start drinking again. Sometimes I look at a beer commercial on TV or on the shelf at a store and I get the desire to have a drink. But, I say to myself, "no, I don't want that; it's not worth it; Lord put these thoughts out of my mind." Does that make me a sinner? Yes, but because I coveted, not because I'm an alcoholic. But I still know that I am an alcoholic.

You don't know what goes on in the mind of anyone but yourself. People who think that they are gay, but don't participate in the behavior, or tell anyone that they think they have a gay orientation, take nothing away from Christ. They do exactly the same things we do, we sin, we ask for forgiveness, and we continue to try and live the life that God wants for us. They are doing what you say they are not in 1 and 2 above. Just as we do. They are not denying any glory to the Lord as you claim. They are as much a Christian as you and I, as long as they were truly saved in the first place; they are not participating in any sort of gay activity.

I don't want to debate you any longer about this because the is no debate. Only the father knows, and I cannot make the same kind of judgments about these Christians as you feel comfortable doing. I just know a few, I know what they think, I know what they do, because they have told me and I have observed them. Only God knows if being actively gay in the past to just knowing that they think they are gay now is a sin. Nothing wishy-washy about it.

[e lansing]

Letter from C. S. Lewis regarding homosexuality, quoted in Sheldon Vanauken's A Severe Mercy, pp. 146-148, in response to a question about a couple of Christian students of Vanauken who were homosexual and had come to him for advice:

I have seen less than you but more than I wanted of this terrible problem. I will discuss your letter with those whom I think wise in Christ. This is only an interim report. First, to map out the boundaries within which all discussion must go on, I take it for certain that the physical satisfaction of homosexual desires is sin. This leaves the homo. no worse off than any normal person who is, for whatever reason, prevented from marrying. Second, our speculations on the cause of the abnormality are not what matters and we must be content with ignorance. The disciples were not told why (in terms of efficient cause) the man was born blind (Jn. IX 1-3): only the final cause, that the works of God shd. be made manifest in him. This suggests that in homosexuality, as in every other tribulation, those works can be made manifest: i.e. that every disability conceals a vocation, if only we can find it, wh. will 'turn the necessity to glorious gain.' Of course, the first step must be to accept any privations wh., if so disabled, we can't lawfully get. The homo. has to accept sexual abstinence just as the poor man has to forego otherwise lawful pleasures because he wd. be unjust to his wife and children if he took them. That is merely a negative condition. What shd. the positive life of the homo. be? I wish I had a letter wh. a pious male homo., now dead, once wrote to me--but of course it was the sort of letter one takes care to destroy. He believed that his necessity could be turned to spiritual gain: that there were certain kinds of sympathy and understanding, a certain social role which mere men and mere women cd. not give. But it is all horribly vague and long ago. Perhaps any homo. who humbly accepts his cross and puts himself under Divine guidance will, however, be shown the way. I am sure that any attempt to evade it (e.g. by mock or quasi-marriage with a member of one's own sex even if this does not lead to any carnal act) is the wrong way. Jealousy (this another homo. admitted to me) is far more rampant and deadly among them than among us. And I don't think little concessions like wearing the clothes of the other sex in private is the right line, either. It is the duties, burdens, the characteristic virtues of the other sex, I suspect, which the patient must try to cultivate. I have mentioned humility because male homos. (I don't know about women) are rather apt, the moment they find you don't treat them with horror and contempt, to rush to the opposite pole and start implying that they are somehow superior to the normal type. I wish I could be more definite. All I have really said is that, like all other tribulations, it must be offered to God and His guidance how to use it must be sought.

I do not see that he is saying that its Ok to think you are gay and act straight. He seems to to be unsure as how to deal with that abnormity. It a rather weak arguement for your position.

e