Kindness And Repentance: Romans 2:4 And Ministry To People With Same-Sex Attraction

By Glenn R. Kreider and Thomas M. Mitchell

[Glenn R. Kreider is Professor of Theological Studies, Dallas Theological Seminary, Dallas, Texas, and Thomas M. Mitchell is an attorney practicing law with Carothers and Mitchell, LLC, Buford, Georgia.]

Abstract

In late June 2015, the United States Supreme Court granted a fundamental civil right to same-sex marriage. This change in definition of marriage and the legal protection of the status of married same-sex couples has huge implications for Christian ministry. It is likely that one effect of this cultural shift will be increased pressure on churches and Christian ministries to refrain from speaking negatively about such unions. How should the church respond to this change in cultural sexual ethics? This article argues from Romans 2:4, “Do you not know that God’s kindness leads you to repentance?” (NASB), that one way the church could respond to the LGBTQ community is with kindness and mercy, rather than judgment and condemnation or fear and silence. Perhaps in this way, people will be drawn to repentance.

*******

On June 26, 2015, the United States Supreme Court held that “the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty.”[1] The ruling prohibits states from interfering with same-sex individuals’ exercise of that right and invalidates statutes and state constitutional provisions that define marriage as the union of a man and woman.[2] Justice Anthony Kennedy, who authored the five-justice majority opinion, reasoned that personal choice regarding marriage is important to individual autonomy[3] and is grounded in the Court’s precedents regarding the right to intimate association.[4] He also reasoned that the families and especially children of same-sex couples suffer stigma and experience material costs from the lack of recognition of marriage for same-sex couples.[5] Finally, he noted that marriage is a “keystone” institution placed at the center of the legal and social order by states.[6] The majority opinion concluded that there is no reason in the law that these principles should not apply equally to same-sex couples as to opposite-sex couples.[7]

With the emergence of a fundamental civil right to same-sex marriage, pressure to control or punish those who oppose or even criticize individuals who exercise that newly discovered right will likely increase. The majority opinion, acknowledging this possibility, added that “those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned” and that the First Amendment will give persons and religious organizations “proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faith.”[8] Warning that “proper protections” for those who disagree with the newly announced fundamental right are uncertain at best, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “People of faith can take no comfort in the treatment they receive from the majority today,”[9] while Justice Clarence Thomas warned of “potentially ruinous consequences for religious liberty”[10] and Justice Sam Alito noted that given the language used in the decision,[11] people of faith “risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools.”[12]

Criticism of same-sex relationships and failure to approve of these marriages will likely elicit increasing hostility toward those who hold traditional and biblical views of the condition of humanity, sin, sexuality, and marriage. Holding to those views will no longer be without cost and may bring consequences of a personal, social, and perhaps even professional nature.[13] While recognizing that all people are created in the image of God, but that all are broken and in need of grace, how should Christians respond to this enormous cultural, and now legal, shift? This article argues that because believers remain imperfect imagers of God, Romans 2:4 provides a biblical road map that may help Christians reach out to the LGBTQ community with a stronger witness for the gospel and thus be the representatives of God that he intends.[14] In this text, Paul reminded his audience that God’s kindness or mercy leads to repentance. If Christians respond to humans who experience same-sex attraction with kindness and mercy, perhaps this will be the means by which God will draw them to repentance.[15]

Introducing A Biblical Response To Same-Sex Attraction

Paul summarized humanity’s condition in its fallen state: humans have turned from God’s intended purpose in creating them—that they would honor and glorify him—to the worship of something other than God, with the result being all kinds of manifestations of sin and brokenness (Rom. 1).[16] They have rebelled against knowledge of God that is plain and clear in his creation (vv. 19-20). Humanity’s pursuit of wisdom has made them fools (v. 22; cf. Gen. 3:6). Because they have rejected him, God has given humans over to impurity and idolatry (Rom. 1:24-25) and to a state of being controlled by physical passions, with homosexual conduct being the first listed illustration of the rejection of God’s creation purpose (vv. 26-27). God intended the divine imagers to worship him, not idols. God intended humans to express their sexuality within the confines of a marriage between a man and a woman only, not with someone of the same gender.[17]

The passage continues with a vice list that includes “every kind of unrighteousness” (v. 29), “all sorts of evil” (v. 30), and approval of deeds that deserve death (v. 32).[18] While anything that is inconsistent with God’s plan is by definition sin,[19] in a passage demonstrating how far humanity has fallen from the creation ideal, Romans 1:26-27 is the New Testament’s central passage identifying homosexual behavior as inconsistent with God’s plan. Though many sins are encouraged or celebrated in this society,[20] at this moment, the celebration of homosexuality in the broader culture and the corresponding antipathy toward those who reject homosexual conduct as proper behavior is growing.[21] This cultural context, however, may provide evangelical Christians with an important avenue to practice mercy and kindness and point individuals to God’s intention for them to come into relation with him through Christ, in the church.

Romans 2:4, which follows the passage containing the central New Testament text on homosexuality, reads: “Or do you have contempt for the wealth of his kindness, forbearance, and patience, and yet do not know that God’s kindness leads you to repentance?” This underscores the character of God, who possesses a wealth of kindness, forbearance, and patience, and asserts that the richness of God’s kindness draws the sinner to repentance.[22] The apostle Paul elsewhere emphasized kindness as part of the fruit that God’s Spirit develops in believers (Gal. 5:22-23; 2 Cor. 6:6; Col. 3:12). Kindness is an essential divine characteristic that believers, and especially leaders, should demonstrate in such a way that it leads others to repentance and corresponding life change.

All Christians, but especially church leaders, as maturing divine imagers, must demonstrate the kindness of God to respond effectively to those with same-sex attraction in a culture that will increasingly criticize those who reject homosexual conduct as an appropriate expression of sexuality. In this way Christians can position themselves and situate their churches to minister to those who struggle with same-sex attraction. This is important because it increasingly appears that conservative churches will be a minority voice, and perhaps the only one, speaking in opposition to the acceptance of homosexual practice.[23] This approach may be especially important when ministering to younger people who deal with this sin personally or who have friends who do.[24] While not affirming or approving behavior that violates clear biblical teaching, believers should demonstrate God’s welcoming grace to all, and no less to those who experience same-sex attraction.[25] Rather than the cliché of “hate the sin, love the sinner,” this article argues that a proper response can be grounded in the text of Romans 2:4: patience, mercy, and kindness hopefully leading to repentance.[26]

To support the argument, the article explores (1) what welcoming looks like, (2) what “not affirming” involves, (3) how a Christian leader should deal with those in the local church who may disagree with either stance, and (4) how to address those outside or just coming into a community of believers. First, Christians should welcome everyone as God welcomes everyone who comes to him. If all humans are sinners, then the only people who could be welcomed are sinners. In short, God welcomes sinners (Rom. 5:8; Eph. 2:5).[27]

Second, believers deny the propriety of homosexual conduct because that conduct is not faithful to truths taught by Scripture, and importantly, because not telling people the truth is an unloving thing to do (Rom. 5:8; Eph. 2:5).[28] Christ always welcomed sinners, but never approved the sin and always called sinners to repentance (Luke 5:29-32).[29] God loves us enough to show us our hopelessness and need for his redemptive power. Third, Christians should courageously but graciously confront both those who refuse to welcome as well as those who desire to affirm, and should demonstrate how both positions are inconsistent with true discipleship. Finally, returning to the central theme of the article, Christians must address those outside or coming into the church with the Romans 2:4 qualities of kindness, mercy, and patience (by realizing that change may not occur with the speed or to the extent desired). Perhaps in this way Christians can regain their lost prophetic voice and, more importantly, become more faithful expressions of God’s image in the world.

Christians Must Welcome Those With Same-Sex Attractions [30]

Many American Christians are aware of controversies stemming from this society’s increasing acceptance of homosexuality. Even before the Court’s ruling, this country had experienced a rapidly increasing acceptance of homosexual behavior.[31] Likewise, there is an apparent increase of hostility toward Christians who hold to the biblical view of sexuality, especially when it comes to homosexual practice.[32] Perhaps Christians bear some measure of responsibility for this hostility, having singled out homosexuality for denunciation while becoming more tolerant of divorce, even in cases of the absence of adultery, abuse, and other sexual misconduct.[33] Those who experience same-sex attraction, as well as the society at large, find it hard to believe when Christians claim to love sinners.[34] Further, even more unfortunately, the perception that Christians are judgmental and hateful has diminished the church’s prophetic voice in the broader society.[35]

In addition to having failed to communicate love and kindness, Christian leaders have also sometimes failed to equip believers with the ability to articulate a biblical response to these social issues.[36] In 1998, before any state had officially recognized same-sex unions,[37] Stanley Grenz outlined his perspective on a Christian response to homosexuality in a book whose title succinctly summarizes his thesis: Welcoming but Not Affirming: An Evangelical Response to Homosexuality.[38] Grenz asks, “Should the church continue to condemn homosexual behavior, or has the time come for it to affirm gays and lesbians in its midst?” His answer is expressed in his goal “to indicate that the mandate we have received from our Lord calls the church to welcome homosexual persons on the same bases that all persons are to be welcomed. But this same mandate prohibits the church from condoning same-sex sexual behavior as well as same-sex sexual unions.”[39] In retrospect, Grenz’s position should have been more widely adopted.[40] Unfortunately, most evangelical churches failed to consider his advice.[41] Christians, now seeking to minister in an increasingly hostile social environment, must shift their tactics in order to maintain a biblical stance and still reach the lost. One way to do this—to stand on the truth of God’s Word while proclaiming the gospel of grace in word and deed—is to adopt the position of welcoming LGBTQ people while not affirming homosexual practice. Romans 2:4 provides a biblical and theological foundation for this process.

Believers must rediscover and re-acknowledge that the kindness of God is why, despite their own sin, they have a redemptive relationship with God through Christ.[42] The Apostle Paul reminded the Romans that “we were helpless” and “ungodly” (Rom. 5:6), “sinners” (v. 8), and “enemies” of God (v. 10). Believers must reflect that kindness in their approach to people who experience temptations to act on their same-sex attractions. In this way, perhaps Christians can provide a clear prophetic voice and practice that attracts sinners to the gospel. Even in the midst of opposition and antagonism toward the gospel, Christians must not respond in kind, but in kindness.[43]

Welcoming sinners is the model set by the New Testament. Christ welcomed all. He said, “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28), and, “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out” (John 6:37). In addition, “Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, ‘If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink’ ” (7:37). Paul declared, “It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all. Yet for this reason I found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life” (1 Tim. 1:15-16). Paul, in fact, chastised the Corinthian church for avoiding contact with those who most needed to hear the Word (1 Cor. 5:9-13). Grenz characterizes “ministering to all persons” as “the heart of the church’s mandate.”[44] As noted above, with regard to those with same-sex attraction, perhaps especially, many conservative churches have neglected Paul’s words to the Corinthians.[45]

Evangelical churches in America have the reputation of having done a poor job ministering to their own who struggle with same-sex attraction.[46] In a chapter titled “Whose People Are We Talking About?” Yarhouse discusses reorienting the church’s perspective to understand that gay believers are, in fact, believers first. Thus Christians have a special mandate to love them as members of the church and not reject them (John 13:34-35; 15:12-17). Seeing them as gay first and failing to minister to and disciple (and perhaps lovingly discipline) them as believers pushes them toward an affirming society and away from a redemptive relationship in community with other believers.[47] The goal for all believers should be to focus on becoming more Christlike,[48] growing in holiness together, and not necessarily conforming to any particular social standard.[49]

The early church reached out to and attracted those who were sinners and societal outcasts, and in that way the body of Christ often grew.[50] In some ways, this highlights a problem for the American church in the twenty-first century—almost no one is considered a sinner and so an outcast by society. The church can no longer depend on society pushing people toward the embrace of the church, but the church will have to rely (as it always should have) on the work of the Spirit. As the work of the Spirit, believers must welcome and be kind to those who are led into their midst, including—perhaps especially today—those who struggle with same-sex attraction.

Furthermore, celibate gay and lesbian believers may bring great benefits to a local church body. This is confirmed by both gay and lesbian believers themselves and also other Christians who have spent their careers studying ministry to the LGBTQ community.[51] Gay and lesbian Christians view the world differently than straight Christians and can make uniquely valuable contributions to the life and ministry of the church. More importantly, gay and lesbian believers who are living out the truths of Scripture in a chaste lifestyle “may teach us something about our true condition as people living between the cross and the final redemption of our bodies.”[52] In fact, as conservative Christians seek to minister effectively in this culture, it seems appropriate to seek such believers and cultivate relationships together in community. Recovering alcoholics, parents who have lost children, and any number of other categories of humans who suffer with particular consequences of the fall may have a special ability to reach out and minister to others who similarly suffer. Likewise, gay and lesbian believers or those who understand and empathize with their struggles will have a special ability to reach and welcome those who experience the drawing of the Spirit.

The Church Must Not Affirm Homosexual Conduct

If welcoming all and perhaps attempting to attract chaste homosexual believers into active participation in the local body is an appropriate Christian response, how does the local church avoid affirming the practice of homosexuality? Grenz puts it well: “Everyone’s story is different, but the bottom line is that God doesn’t call us to heterosexuality as much as He calls us to holiness.”[53] There must be recognition by all believers that the local body is a place of accountability and discipleship and thus membership should result in transformation and growth, not coddling and indulgence of homosexual relationships or any other sins.[54] The primary goal of all believers should be living a holy life in the midst of a fallen world (1 Pet. 1:13-16; Col. 1:21-23; 2 Cor. 7:1; 1 Thess. 4:1-8).

Yarhouse recommends focusing on the concept of stewardship.[55] Believers are not owners of their sexuality, to do with it as they wish, any more than they are the ultimate owners of any of their possessions, relationships, or time.[56] Believers are stewards of whatever God has provided and should conduct themselves so as to bring glory to him with everything they have and in everything that they do, both in the immaterial and the material.[57] Scripture provides the principles to understand how to be good stewards, “adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

In other words, growing in community as disciples is how Christians ought to relate to one another as fellow believers.[58] Growing and maturing as stewards is their God-assigned role and brings them closer to the relationship with all creation that God intended. Growing as disciples and maturing as stewards is how believers love God and love their neighbors, both fellow believers and those outside the fellowship (Luke 10:25-37).

Discipleship is following Christ and what his Word teaches. The Great Commission commands Jesus’s followers to make disciples, “teaching them to observe all that I commanded you,” and it is through keeping his commandments that believers abide in his love and through abiding become fruitful (Matt. 28:20; John 15:1-11). A compassionate community of faithful believers will encourage, edify, and instruct one another.[59] Romans 12 teaches that it is primarily in community within the body that believers are able to “present their bodies a living and holy sacrifice” (Rom. 12:1-8). By focusing on discipleship in the intimacy of the community, the importance of obedience for the sake of the community should resonate with all, but especially with younger Christians for whom connections, tribe, and relationships are of paramount importance.[60]

The primary human relationship, especially for believers, is the church, the company of disciples following in obedience to Christ.[61] Contrary to the teachings of Scripture, evangelicals have tended to idolize the family, to view marriage and childrearing as the highest and most important state for humanity. As a result sometimes singles, even those who do not struggle with same-sex attraction, are treated as inferior or second-class citizens.[62] Perhaps emphasizing the relationships of disciples, rather than family, will encourage chaste single people in the church, including those called to a lifetime of celibacy due to same-sex attractions. The church’s focus on the importance of discipleship rather than the priority of family will strengthen the foundation of the call to celibacy.[63] And when the church has a healthy view of singleness and encourages singles to pursue Christ as their sacred calling, people with same-sex attractions who choose celibacy will find a support network.[64]

By reorienting the discussion to a proper understanding of stewardship, the concern becomes how to please God rather than self or peers. Such reorientation must focus the discussion on the Scriptures and compel believers to view culture and their opinions through the lens/filter of Scripture, rather than interpreting Scripture through the lens of culture and experience. This reorientation will help them engage the culture Christianly.

A nonaffirming stance will increasingly become a way that the church distinguishes itself from the world.[65] This is critically important because of the warning suggested by Romans 1:32, that those who know the ordinances of God yet give approval to the conduct resulting from idolatry are guilty of greater evil than even those who engage in the conduct.[66]

A body of believers that welcomes and affirms homosexual conduct has certainly departed from an orthodox view of Scripture’s teaching.[67] Does that necessarily bring them within that warning of Romans 1:32? In short, yes. This has been the approach of some churches. For example, Metropolitan Community Church was founded for the express purpose of affirming the lifestyle of those who profess to be believers and yet fully engage in homosexual relationships.[68] According to its “Statement of Purpose,” “the MCC Theologies Team seeks to create opportunities and provide resources that will enable ‘holy conversations’ within our denomination about our various beliefs concerning the integration of sexuality and spirituality, the nature of Jesus, baptism, communion, GLBT people’s unique place on the margins of society, and the priesthood of all believers, among other things.”[69] In the “Exemplar Project: Finding What Makes a Church Exemplary in Its Ministry to Persons Who Experience Same-Sex Attraction or Who Struggle with Sexual Identity Concerns,” one unidentified church explains its guidelines:

Our purpose is to create an environment for the healing of any sense of separation that may exist between homosexuals, bisexuals, trans-gender and heterosexuals at [our church] and the greater community, and to heal any personal sense of separation that may appear within lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender individuals. We are here to anchor the consciousness of Wholeness and reveal and celebrate our oneness in God; to fully realize that each is a unique and perfect expression of God and to embrace and empower the many gifts this facet of God reveals. We are committed to providing an atmosphere of unconditional love, acceptance and support through this ministry, thereby uplifting us all to fully express as God has ordained through every sexual, affectional [sic] or gender preference/orientation.[70]

Some “gay-affirming” theologians purport to have found biblical support for their position, often arguing that passages like Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9; and 1 Timothy 1:10 are culturally bound and not applicable today.[71] Conservative theologians are almost unanimous in rejecting such arguments and note the faulty exegesis that supports them.[72] Others that are gay-affirming acknowledge what the Bible clearly teaches but urge rejection of that teaching.[73] Applying a proper hermeneutic, it is clear that Romans 1:26-27 teaches that homosexual conduct is sin. Further, there is no disagreement that verses 29-31 list conduct and attitudes that are rightly considered sin.[74] Given that, it is impossible to argue that homosexual conduct set forth in the preceding verses is not sinful. Therefore, churches and believers that affirm and accept homosexual conduct fall under the warning of verse 32.

In order to avoid the deserved condemnation that comes to those approving of homosexual practice, believers simply must not affirm or give approval to what the Bible calls sin. But believers must also be honest about common sin struggles, must avoid putting same-sex attraction in a different category from other sins, and must see all believers as united in the pursuit of holiness and spiritual maturity.

Addressing Disagreements Within The Church

The issue may then arise of how to address those in the church who may, for whatever reason, simply want to affirm homosexual practice. On the other hand, and more likely in conservative evangelical circles, there may be the issue of confronting those who wish to shun those with same-sex attraction. Both positions are wrong and must be addressed. The principles and arguments set forth above and in the section that follows must be communicated clearly to fellow believers.

To those who want to affirm homosexual practice, perhaps with the assertion that love and grace cover all sins, leaders should issue Jude’s warning in verse 4 that they should not become like “ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ” (NASB). Jude warns that some, by their conduct in presuming upon grace to engage in and encourage evil, deny the lordship of Christ.[75] Further, as argued above, those who affirm homosexual conduct bring themselves within the condemnation of Romans 1:32 as those who should know better, but give hearty approval to sinful acts.

A bigger challenge in many churches may be leading people to an understanding of the call to minister to and disciple all and not just the well-behaved or those who suffer from more “acceptable” temptations. It is with this group that perhaps Romans 2:4 provides a compelling basis to reach out to all, but especially to homosexual persons in this particular culture at this particular time.

Just As God Shows Kindness, Believers Must Do Likewise

If the appropriate response is to welcome those with same-sex attraction into the Christian community, but not to affirm homosexual practice, the question arises of how believers do this well. In view of the larger context of Romans 1:26-32, Romans 2:4 provides the road map. Having described the effects of rebellion in the lists of sinful practices that follow idolatry (1:18-32), Paul then condemned all humans. To the person who would deny any personal impact of this description, Paul wrote, “Therefore, you are without excuse, whoever you are, when you judge someone else. For on whatever grounds you judge another, you condemn yourself, because you who judge practice the same things” (2:1). In short, the evidence of universal condemnation is demonstrated compellingly in that everyone has been disobedient to parents (at least once), among other sins, and thus any claim to be innocent is groundless. To be sure of being understood, and to elevate the confidence he had in the gospel (cf. 1:16-17), Paul reminded his readers that God is a righteous and true Judge and that judgment will be applied equally and equitably to all (2:2-3).

Finally, Paul asked those who have been recipients of divine grace through the gospel, “Do you have contempt for the wealth of his kindness, forbearance, and patience, and yet do not know that God’s kindness leads you to repentance?” (2:4). The reader recalls that “ruthless” (NET; “no mercy,” NASB) was listed last in the vice list in 1:31. Human rebellion is characterized by, among other things, ruthlessness and a lack of mercy. God’s character, on the other hand, is merciful. And those who are recipients of God’s mercy must not forget that it was his mercy that brought them to salvation. Thus, the recipients of the mercy of God must be merciful.[76] Mounce summarizes, “God’s gracious dealing with his own people should have taught them of his kindness and patience. But, true to human nature, such things are rather quickly forgotten. They are ‘known’ yet ‘forgotten’ and must be brought to mind repeatedly.”[77]

Sadly, the church has not always treated sinners with mercy.[78] Thus the need for the reminder that, having received mercy, Christians must be merciful to one another and extend this mercy and kindness to the LGBTQ community. Who knows but that it might be the mercy and kindness of God expressed through the church to those who struggle with same-sex attraction that might draw some of them to repentance. In addition to offering a redemptive message to a group who will not find it in the broader society, such ministry may be a way to reform the evangelical church’s image and recover its prophetic voice.

James urges, “As an example, brethren, of suffering and patience, take the prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord” (James 5:10, NASB). As many of the Old Testament prophets experienced, fulfilling that role may bring suffering or at the very least the loss of comfort. But God’s patience, which, as argued above, maturing believers should reflect, is for the purpose of bringing as many to salvation as possible (1 Pet. 3:8-9).

Patience will be important in ministering to those in the community of faith who endure same-sex attraction but seek to live a chaste lifestyle. Struggles and uncertainty and pressures to conform to society’s views will be intense.[79] Giving room for such struggles within the Christian community, without complaint or irritation, will be important for those individuals as well as the witness of the church. Perhaps it is here that patience and mercy become most critical.

Those for whom this is a personal struggle explain that the struggle is not easy and often leads to loneliness.[80] They have found the most help and felt God’s presence most keenly from Christians who listen to them without judgment and provide simple loving gestures and kind words.[81] Those who provide guidance in the ministerial imperatives note the importance of those who are close to these individuals to give them space and not try to “fix” them.[82] Those who struggle with sin need support, loyal love, mercy, and patience. Those who struggle with same-sex attraction, especially those who understand that acting on those attractions would be sin and thus inconsistent with their practice as a follower of Jesus, particularly need support. Since the Scriptures proclaim that mercy triumphs over judgment (James 2:13), dealing mercifully with struggling believers gives others the opportunity to practice the art of extending mercy.[83]

Elsewhere, when Paul commended kindness to believing men and women, he described the impact God’s Spirit should have on and in the believer (Gal. 5:22; Col. 3:12; 2 Cor. 6:6). Kindness is among the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22). Peter made a similar point, noting that believers should grow in their salvation “if we have tasted the kindness of the Lord” (1 Pet. 2:3, NASB). Kindness is an attribute of God demonstrated over and over again in the history of redemption and in the lives of his children, and one that his Spirit grows in believers as spiritual fruit. That kindness is what allowed us and led us to a saving faith. Believers in turn must demonstrate that same kindness, and that is how believers must demonstrate God to the world around us. Anger and judgment can no longer be the first resort. As believers live out their role as the body of Christ, they—we—must demonstrate kindness.

Yarhouse has good advice for leaders who desire to minister in this environment:

A church that facilitates this kind of community treats all people with respect. Such a church avoids negative comments about the gay community. The pastoral leadership takes a lead with wording and language here. They set a tone when they talk about people who are sorting out sexual identity concerns. This kind of church welcomes broken people and relies on the Holy Spirit to work in the lives of those who listen to the Word of God preached and lived by those in the congregation. . . .

A church that fosters this kind of community does not shame people who continue to struggle. Instead, they have a realistic biblical hope. In other words, they know that people may make strides in a certain direction, but those gains are often followed by setbacks. If the church overreacts to struggles or setbacks with shame, it can drive people away from the church and into isolation, or it can lead them to misrepresent their progress as they are afraid to reveal what’s really going on in their lives.[84]

The leaders of a local church body, including not only the pastor and those holding leadership offices but laypeople as well, must all contribute to developing this community. They must gently correct those who make the types of comments and exhibit the types of attitude that have cost the church her prophetic voice. They must not indulge some in their sins in word or deed while completely rejecting others. They must constantly remind themselves that all are broken and that but for the kindness of God, believers would not be where they are today with the hope of glory in the age to come. And they must be reminded of this truth: “Do you have contempt for the wealth of his kindness, forbearance, and patience, and yet do not know that God’s kindness leads you to repentance?” (Rom. 2:4). After all, Jesus promised, “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy” (Matt. 5:7).

Conclusion

Conservative evangelicals in America have lost this skirmish in the culture war. Same-sex marriage is now the law of the land.[85] How should the church respond to these conditions? How might she move forward into the “new reality” in which she finds herself? How might she act redemptively, as salt and light, in her treatment of those in the LGBTQ community, especially those who are disinclined to see the church in a positive light?

We have argued that Romans 2:4 provides a road map for believers to again find a prophetic voice. Believers should welcome all, and especially those who endure same-sex attraction. The church must not, however, violate Scripture and approve or affirm behavior or lifestyle choices that violate God’s intended purpose for sexual expression. If believers and local bodies act with patience and tolerance and kindness, perhaps culture will once again listen to the church. If we are as patient with the gay man who stumbles as we are with the recovering alcoholic, if we are as tolerant of the lesbian struggling with chastity as we are with the gossip or rebellious teen, if we are as kind to those with same-sex struggles as we are with the new believers we baptize in our churches, perhaps once again Christians can regain a credible voice to reach and minister to those we encounter. Perhaps this new world is an opportunity for the church, not just a challenge to her standards of biblical morality.

Notes

1. Obergefell v. Hodges, slip op. 22-23 (2015). Slip opinion available at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf.
2. Ibid., 2, 23.
3. Ibid., 12-13. Justice Kennedy notes an “abiding connection between marriage and liberty” and that “choices about marriage shape an individual’s destiny.” He posits a “dignity in the bond between two men or two women who seek to marry and in their autonomy to make such profound choices.”
4. Ibid., 13-14. Here Justice Kennedy relies upon the Court’s decisions that struck down laws prohibiting the use of contraception, restricting the rights of prisoners to marry, and criminalizing same-sex sexual activity (anti-sodomy statutes).
5. Ibid., 14-16. Justice Kennedy notes the many social and financial benefits provided by families and asserts “hundreds of thousands of children” are being raised by same-sex couples. He writes that prohibiting same-sex marriage stigmatizes the children as “their families are somehow lesser.”
6. Obergefell, slip op., 16-17. Here Justice Kennedy begins with a quote on marriage from Alexis de Tocqueville and ends with a list of “governmental rights, benefits and responsibilities” conferred by the states on married couples, such as tax benefits, hospital visitation rights, and access to inheritance and insurance.
7. Ibid., 17-23. These pages contain a discussion of why the five justices in the majority see that a Substantive Due Process right to marriage must be extended to same-sex couples and determine that denying that right to them is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Substantive Due Process is legal short hand for the Court’s determination that some activities are so important, or fundamental, to the exercise of individual liberty that the state may not take those rights away, no matter what process is provided (Obergefell, dissent, 10 [Roberts, CJ.]). Fundamental rights are distinguished from enumerated rights, which are those explicitly set forth, or enumerated, in the Constitution, such as free speech or freedom from unreasonable searches (ibid.).
8. Ibid., 27.
9. Obergefell v. Hodges, dissent, 28 (Roberts, CJ.).
10. Obergefell v. Hodges, dissent, 16 (Thomas, J.).
11. The concern arises in large measure due to the majority’s heavy reliance on Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), the case in which the Supreme Court unanimously struck down laws prohibiting interracial marriage. Many fear that those who oppose same-sex marriage will be treated like those who opposed equal treatment of persons with different skin color. Obergefell v. Hodges, dissent, 7 (Alito, J.).
12. Obergefell, dissent, 7 (Alito, J.). During oral arguments in the case, the United States Solicitor General, in response to a question from Justice Alito, acknowledged that the tax exemptions of religious institutions that opposed same-sex marriage may be at risk. See Tr. of Oral Arg. on Question 1, at 36-38.
13. Robert A. J. Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2001), 483-84. Gagnon notes that marginalization that already occurs in media, the arts, and academia is spreading throughout educational institutions (including elementary and secondary institutions), major corporations, and government. He predicts accreditation challenges for Christian institutions.
14. “ ‘LGBTQ’ is an acronym that originated in the 1990s and replaced what was formerly known as ‘the gay community.’ The acronym was created to be more inclusive of diverse groups. LGBTQ stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (and/or questioning) individuals/identities” (“Helpful Terminology,” The Welcoming Project, accessed July 21, 2015, http://www.thewelcomingproject.org/lgbtq-community.php).
15. The context for this article is the culture of the United States of America, though the principles developed herein do have broader application.
16. Cornelius Plantinga, Jr., Not the Way It’s Supposed to Be: A Breviary of Sin (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 14.
17. Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998), 93-94.
18. Unless indicated otherwise, all biblical quotations are taken from the NET Bible (N.p.: Biblical Studies Press, 2001). Quotations marked NASB are taken from the New American Standard Bible.
19. Plantinga, Not the Way It’s Supposed to Be, 12-18; Charles Sherlock, The Doctrine of Humanity (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1996), 42-44.
20. Plantinga, Not the Way It’s Supposed to Be, 81-83. He notes that “significantly, cultural decay” occurs when pride as an impetus to diligent accomplishment becomes “inordinate self-congratulation.” Likewise, economic systems based upon private property ownership find support in both the Old and New Testaments, but in the hands of sinful people it can lead to greed, coveting, and neglect or abuse of the less fortunate.
21. Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, 483-84; Michael L. Brown, A Queer Thing Happened to America (Concord, NC: Equal Time Books, 2011), 274-307.
22. Robert H. Mounce, Romans, New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1995), 90. Mounce notes that “God’s gracious dealing with his own people should have taught them of his kindness and patience.” See also 2 Peter 3:9, “The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance” (NASB), and Ephesians 2:4, which affirms that God is “rich in mercy.”
23. See the trend in Gallup polls taken over the past two decades, in “Marriage,” accessed July 22, 2015, http://www.gallup.com/poll/117328/Marriage.aspx.
24. Younger Americans tend to be more supportive of homosexual practice than their elders. See “Gay Marriage Support Hits New High in Post-ABC Poll,” accessed July 22, 2015, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/03/18/gay-marriage-support-hits-new-high-in-post-abc-poll/. See David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons, unChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity . . . and Why It Matters (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2007), 92: “In our research, the perception that Christians are ‘against’ gays and lesbians—not only objecting to their lifestyles but also harboring irrational fear and unmerited scorn toward them—has reached critical mass.”
25. Even conservative Christians can differ as to how believers should respond to the issue at different stages—church attendance, church membership, ministry service. See Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, 483-84; and Brown, A Queer Thing Happened to America, 274-307.
26. For a helpful criticism see Micah J. Murray, “Why I Can’t Say Love the Sinner/ Hate the Sin Anymore,” Redemption Pictures (blog), June 20, 2013, accessed July 22, 2015, http://micahjmurray.com/i-cant-say-love-the-sinner-hate-the-sin-anymore/.
27. In the chapter titled “Antihomosexual” in unChristian, the authors quote Billy Graham: “I’m going to quote the Bible now, not myself, that it [homosexuality] is wrong, it’s a sin. But there are other sins. Why do we jump on that sin as though it was the greatest sin? The greatest sin in the Bible is idolatry, worshipping other things besides the true and living God. Jealousy is a sin. Pride is a sin. All of these things are sins. But homosexuality is a sin and needs to be dealt with and needs to be forgiven, and that’s why Christ came and died on the cross” (Kinnaman and Lyons, unChristian, 96).
28. Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004), 46-50.
29. After being criticized for fellowshipping with sinners, Christ said, “I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:32). On the other hand, Jesus told the paralytic from Bethesda, “Behold, you have become well; do not sin anymore, so that nothing worse happens to you” (John 5:14). See also his words to the woman caught in adultery: “I do not condemn you either. Go, and from now on do not sin any more” (8:11).
30. Yarhouse distinguishes between attraction, orientation, and identity. Attraction is not a choice and says “nothing about identity or behavior” (Yarhouse, Homosexuality and the Christian, 41). Gagnon distinguishes between orientation and practice or behavior, noting that the Bible does not necessarily proscribe “motives or . . . impulses” but that it “matters . . . what [people] do with these urges, both in their fantasy life and in their concrete actions” (Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, 37-38). Dallas’s and Heche’s categories are homosexual population, gay and lesbian community, and gay rights advocates (which includes homosexual and heterosexual persons) (Joe Dallas and Nancy Heche, The Complete Christian Guide to Understanding Homosexuality [Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2010], locations 2916-2943, Kindle [located in chapter 13 under subheadings “Terms and Concepts,” “Clarifying the Involuntary Nature,” and “Clarifying the Struggle between the Flesh and the Spirit”]). It appears that Yarhouse’s attraction is Gagnon’s orientation is Dallas’s and Heche’s homosexual population. They all make the point that at some level the attractions are involuntary and not chosen.
31. See the graph in Justin McCarthy, “Record-High 60% of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage,” Gallup, May 19, 2015, accessed July 22, 2015, http://www.gall-up.com/poll/183272/record-high-americans-support-same-sex-marriage.aspx.
32. Recently the New York Times repeated a comment by the founder of Faith in America, a gay advocacy group, that “church leaders must be made ‘to take homosexuality off their sin list,’ ” commenting that “his commandment is worthy—and warranted” (Frank Bruni, “Bigotry, the Bible, and the Lessons of Indiana,” New York Times, April 3, 2015, accessed May 2, 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/ 2015/04/05/opinion/sunday/frank-bruni-same-sex-sinners.html?_r=0). More recently two prominent gay businessmen were attacked on social media and forced to apologize for hosting a dinner for a Republican presidential candidate who shares their views on the importance of America’s relationship with Israel, but who opposes same-sex marriage (Justin Moyer, “ ‘Ignorant’ gay man sorry for hosting Ted Cruz—but may have done it for Israel,” Washington Post, April 27, 2015, accessed May 2, 2015, http://www.washington-post.com/news/morningmix /wp/2015/04/27/ignorant-gay-man-sorry-for-hosting-ted-cruz-but-may-have-done-it-for-israel/).
33. Dallas and Heche, The Complete Christian Guide to Understanding Homosexuality, locations 339-372, 4744-4750 Kindle (located in chapter 2 under subheading “The Church Disobeys the Truth” and in chapter 13 under subheading “From Contempt to Compassion”). See David Kinnaman with Aly Hawkins, You Lost Me: Why Young Christians are Leaving the Church . . . and Rethinking Faith (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011).
34. Mark A. Yarhouse, “Cultural Engagement: Sexual Identity,” video of Cultural Engagement Chapel at Dallas Theological Seminary, January 31, 2014, accessed May 2, 2015, http://www.dts.edu/media/play/ministry-and-sexual-identity/.
35. Kinnaman and Lyons, unChristian, 92; and Mark Yarhouse, Homosexuality and the Christian (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House, 2010), 159-61.
36. Kinnaman and Lyons, unChristian, 103.
37. In 1999, California passed a statute allowing domestic partnerships and the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples were entitled to the same privileges as opposite-sex couples. At the end of 2009, only four states formally recognized same-sex unions in any form—Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, and Vermont. Obviously history has accelerated dramatically since then (https://en.wik-ipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_partnership_in_California, accessed July 28, 2015; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage).
38. Stanley Grenz, Welcoming but Not Affirming: An Evangelical Response to Homosexuality (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998). For a position that we reject, a “welcoming and affirming” approach, see Ken Wilson, A Letter to My Congregation: An Evangelical Pastor’s Path to Embracing People Who Are Gay, Lesbian and Transgender in the Company of Jesus (self-published, 2-14).
39. Ibid., 1-2. After defending this conclusion on the basis of Scripture, tradition, and the relevance of both to current culture, Grenz provides guidance as to how Christians should respond. For an alternative position, see Matthew Vines, God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships (New York: Convergent Books, 2014). Vines argues that the church should accept and affirm same-sex relationships.
40. Unfortunately, while a number of writers, past and current, have provided similar recommendations, we were unable to find any anecdotes from churches that implemented Grenz’s suggestions and had successfully ministered to homosexual persons and brought celibate openly gay individuals into ministry roles. Stories of negative experiences by Christians who “came out” to their parents and churches are more common. For example, see Justin Lee, Torn: Rescuing the Bible from the Gays vs. Christians Debate (New York: Jericho Books, 2012). Lee now supports same-sex relationships. For a defense of celibacy from a Christian perspective, see Wesley Hill, Washed and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness and Homosexuality (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010).
41. Kinnaman and Lyons, unChristian, 91-120.
42. “A better way to frame this is that all of our sexualities are good and all of our sexualities are broken. Our sexuality is good when it draws us outside of ourselves and into community. Sexuality is good when it compels us to give our love away through sacrificial love and service. At the same time, all of us (gay and straight) display a broken sexuality when we allow it to be expressed through lust or sexual acts occurring outside of marriage” (Julie Rodgers, “Can the Gay be Good,” Spiritual Friendship: Musings on God, Sexuality and Relationships, October 23, 2014, accessed May 2, 2015, http://spiritualfriendship.org/2014/10/23/can-the-gay-be-a-good/). Sadly, Rodgers has changed her position, now expressing support for same-sex relationships (“An Update on the Gay Debate: Evolving Ideas, Untidy Stories, and Hopes for the Church,” Julie Rodgers [blog], July 13, 2015, accessed July 29, 2015, https://julierodgers.wordpress.com/).
43. “Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse” (Rom. 12:14).
44. Grenz, Welcoming but Not Affirming, 135.
45. It does not matter whether this neglect was intentional and deliberate or not, the solution remains the same. In short, the need for the gospel to transform lives is more important than identifying causes and culprits for the current condition.
46. Of course, some churches have done a better job than others. See the discussion of this and other issues in J. Paul Nyquist and Carson Nyquist, The Post-Church Christian: Dealing with the Generational Baggage of Our Faith (Chicago: Moody, 2013).
47. Yarhouse, Homosexuality and the Christian, 164, 168, 50-53; see also Kinnaman and Hawkins, You Lost Me, 158, 163; Kinnaman and Lyons, unChristian, 91-120.
48. Dallas and Heche, The Complete Christian Guide to Understanding Homosexuality, location 4823-4831 (located in “Afterward” under subheading “From Confusion to Clarity”).
49. Yarhouse, Homosexuality and the Christian, 165. Yarhouse provides practical guidance. He advises leadership to avoid negative comments about the gay community and avoid establishing heterosexual coupling as the standard for relational success. See also Grenz, Welcoming but Not Affirming, 135-36. Also helpful is Andrew Marin, Love Is an Orientation: Elevating the Conversation with the Gay Community (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2009).
50. Helen Rhee, Loving the Poor, Saving the Rich: Wealth, Poverty, and Early Christian Formation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), 1-48. This is the approach modeled by Jesus (cf. Matt. 11:28).
51. Wesley Hill, “The Ministry Gay Christians Have,” Spiritual Friendship: Musings on God, Sexuality and Relationships, posted May 28, 2014, accessed May 2, 2015, http://spiritualfriendship.org/2014/05/28/the-ministry-gay-christians-have/. See also Yarhouse, Homosexuality and the Christian, 214-16. Hill wrote, “A wise Christian mentor said to a group of us recently that perhaps many celibate gay Christians have (among other gifts) a particular genius for cultivating and sustaining close friendships. If so, that can be understood as a ministry—not so much anyone’s ministry to us but our ministry to others. It’s a ministry we are called to and equipped to perform, not simply a ministry we receive” (Wesley Hill, Spiritual Friendship: Finding Love in the Church as a Celibate Gay Christian [Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2015]).
52. Richard B. Hayes, “Awaiting the Redemption of Our Bodies: Drawing on Scripture and Tradition in the Church Debate on Homosexuality,” Latimer 110 (June 1992): 29-30 (quoted in Grenz, Welcoming but Not Affirming, 133).
53. Grenz, Welcoming but Not Affirming, 135. See also Michael L. Brown, Can You Be Gay and Christian? (Lake Mary, FL: FrontLine, 2014), 27.
54. Grenz, Welcoming but Not Affirming, 134.
55. Yarhouse, Homosexuality and the Christian, 183-85.
56. James P. Eckman, Biblical Ethics: Choosing Right in a World Gone Wrong, Biblical Essentials Series (Wheaton: Crossway, 2004), 10.
57. Kenneth Boa, Conformed to His Image: Biblical and Practical Approaches to Spiritual Formation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 243-48; Rom. 12:1; 1 Cor. 6:19-20.
58. See Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Life Together: The Classic Exploration of Christian Community (reprint, New York: HarperOne, 2009).
59. Erland Waltner and J. Daryl Charles, 1-2 Peter, Jude, Believers Church Bible Commentary (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1999), 320-21.
60. Kinnaman and Lyons, unChristian, 103.
61. Grenz, Welcoming but Not Affirming, 105; cf. Luke 8:19-21, 14:26; Mark 3:31-35. See Rodney Clapp, Families at the Crossroads: Beyond the Traditional and Modern Options (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993), and A Peculiar People:The Church as Culture in a Post-Christian Society (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1996).
62. See J. Scott Horrell, “The Covenant of Singleness: The Bible and Church History,” Kindred Spirit, Summer 2015, accessed July 22, 2015, http://www.dts.edu/ read/the-covenant-of-singleness-the-bible-and-church-history/; Carly Isaac Graham, “How the Church Can Encourage Singles,” Kindred Spirit, Summer 2015, accessed July 22, 2015, http://www.dts.edu/read/how-the-church-can-encourage-singles/; and Shannon Gianotti, “5 Things Single People Need from the Church, Kindred Spirit, Summer 2015, accessed July 22, 2015, http://www.dts.edu/read/5-things-singles-need-from-the-church/. Again, whether this treatment is deliberate or unintentional, singles sometimes perceive that they are seen as inferior.
63. Yarhouse, Homosexuality and the Christian, 173.
64. See Kelley M. Mathews, “A Professor’s Singular Focus: Choosing to Be Celibate for Christ,” accessed July 22, 2015, http://www.dts.edu/read/a-professors-singular-focus-choosing-to-be-celibate-for-christ-kuruvilla/.
65. Waltner and Charles, 1-2 Peter, Jude, 321. The authors argue that restoration of a New Testament church will require a disciplined community. They urge that discipline be viewed positively as, among other things, encouraging believers to conduct themselves faithfully in a pagan cultural environment. See also Gerald L. Borchert, John 12-21, New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2002), 74. He summarizes the message of John 13-17: “The chapters are equally about challenging the community to adopt a new model of discipleship in terms of lovingly and confidently relating to one another while being effective agents for God in Christ in the midst of a hostile world.”
66. Schreiner, Romans, 99-100. Schreiner relies on C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 135. Cranfield writes, “To draw attention to the fact that the man who does the wrong will often be under great pressure, as for instance that of passion, whereas the man who looks on and applauds will not normally be under any similar pressure, is not at all to diminish the guilt of the doer, but it is to reveal the greater culpability of the applauder. His attitude will very often be the reflection of a settled choice. But there is also the fact that those who condone and applaud the vicious actions of others are actually making a deliberate contribution to the setting up of a public opinion favourable to vice, and so to the corruption of an indefinite number of other people.” He then concludes, “So, for example, to excuse or gloss over the use of torture by security forces or the cruel injustices of racial discrimination and oppression, while not being involved in them directly, is to help to cloak monstrous evil with an appearance of respectability and so to contribute most effectively to its firmer entrenchment.”
67. Mark A. Yarhouse and Trista L. Carr, “The Exemplar Project: Finding What Makes a Church Exemplary in Its Ministry to Persons Who Experience Same-Sex Attraction or Who Struggle with Sexual Indentity Concerns,” accessed July, 22, 2015, http://www.sexualidentityinstitute.org/academic-papers, 39; Grenz, Welcom-ing but Not Affirming, 62, 80; “Pastoring LGBT Persons,” Vineyard USA Position Paper, August 2014, accessed April 11, 2015, http://vineyardusa.org/site/files/Posit-ionPaper-VineyardUSA-Pastoring_LGBT_Persons.pdf. The Vineyard position paper contains good exegetical arguments and good practical guidance consistent with its title. This position paper was motivated in part by former Vineyard pastor Ken Wilson’s publication of a book advocating for fully affirming LGBT persons in ordination and marriage (ibid., 7). In the same vein, from a Catholic perspective is “Ministry to Persons with Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care,” United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, November 14, 2006, accessed April 11, 2015, http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/homosex-uality/up-load/minstry-persons-homosexual-inclination-2006.pdf. See also J. Brit Carpenter, “A Missiological Approach for Ministering to the Homosexual Community,” ThM thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 2009.
68. A brief review of their website, http://mccchurch.org/, demonstrates this fact. One page notes that “MCC has a long history in the struggle for Marriage Equality around the world beginning in North America” and boasts that it performed the first same-sex marriage in 1968 (Metropolitan Community Churches, “Early MCC Marriage Equality History,” accessed May 2, 2015, http://mccchurch.org/over-view/history-of-mcc/mcc-and-marriage-equality/).
69. Metropolitan Community Churches, “Statement of Purpose,” accessed April 11, 2015, http://mccchurch.org/ministries/mcc-theologies-team/statement-of-purpose/.
70. Yarhouse and Carr, “The Exemplar Project,” 39.
71. Carpenter, “Missiological Approach,” 18-59, evaluates these texts from a variety of perspectives. See Tony Tucci, “Homosexuality: The Biblical-Christian View,” accessed July 22, 2015, https://bible.org/article/homosexuality-biblical-christian-view. He defends a traditional view. See also John Shore, “Taking God at His Word: The Bible and Homosexuality,” The NALT [Not All Like That] Christians Project, accessed July 22, 2015, http://www.notalllikethat.org/taking-god-at-his-word-the-bible-and-homosexuality/. Shote rejects the traditional biblical interpretation.
72. See Grenz, Welcoming but Not Affirming, 35-62; Schreiner, Romans, 95-97; Vineyard, “Pastoring LGBT Persons,” 20-24, 65-67. For a contrary example, see Brandon Ambrosino, “The Best Christian Argument for Marriage Equality Is That the Bible Got It Wrong,” Pacific Standard, July 22, 2015, accessed July 23, 2015, http://www.psmag.com/books-and-culture/jesus-was-wrong-about-homosexuality.
73. See the discussion in Grenz, Welcoming but Not Affirming, 87-89. In recent years, this approach is less common, in favor of re-interpreting Scripture as not addressing homosexuality as understood today. See, for example, David P. Gushee, Changing Our Mind, 2nd ed. (Canton, MI: Read the Spirit Books, 2015).
74. “And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful” (Rom. 1:28-31).
75. Schreiner, Romans, 440; Gene L. Green, Jude and 2 Peter, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 59-60.
76. Surely there is no more graphic illustration of this than the parable Jesus told of an unmerciful servant, who, although forgiven much, was unwilling to forgive a much smaller debt owed to him. The words of the angry master hang over Paul’s argument here: “Evil slave! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me! Should you not have shown mercy to your fellow slave, just as I showed it to you?” (Matt. 18:32-33).
77. R. H. Mounce, Romans, New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1995), 90.
78. R. Albert Mohler, “God, the Gospel and the Gay Challenge—A Response to Matthew Vines,” AlbertMohler.com, posted April 22, 2014, accessed May 2, 2015, http://www.albertmohler.com/2014/04/22/god-the-gospel-and-the-gay-challenge-a-response-to-matthew-vines/. Mohler acknowledges in his concluding paragraph that the church has historically failed homosexual persons but encourages believers not to fail them further by failing to speak truth. See also Mohler’s address at the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Convention, October 29, 2014, “Aftermath; Ministering in a Post-Modern Marriage Culture,” AlbertMohler.com, accessed July 28, 2015, http://www.albertmohler.com/2014/10/29/ erlc-2014-ministering-in-a-post-modern-marriage-culture/.
79. Hill, Washed and Waiting, 57.
80. Ibid.
81. Ibid., 42-44, 47-48, 113.
82. Yarhouse, Homosexuality and the Christian, 169, 188-96; Lisa Graham McMinn, “Sexual Identity Concerns for Christian Young Adults: Practical Considerations for Being a Supportive Presence and Compassionate Companion,” Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 24, no. 4 (2005): 368-77. McMinn argues that the ability to effectively reach out at least on an individual basis may require one to define healing as a lifelong movement “toward spiritual depth and maturity . . . not necessarily characterized by a lessening of same sex attraction” (ibid., 374). This can fulfill the created need to relate to others without the sin and shame of sexual activity (ibid., 375-76). She does acknowledge that she is arguing for individual outreach of which the institutional church may be incapable.
83. Micah describes God this way: “There is no other God like you! You forgive sin and pardon the rebellion of those who remain among your people. You do not remain angry forever, but delight in showing loyal love” (7:18). God delights in showing mercy.
84. Yarhouse, Homosexuality and the Christian, 165-66.
85. Those who may hope that a future president and Senate will appoint and confirm judges who will reverse the course of decline should remember that the author of the majority opinion in Obergefell, Justice Kennedy, was appointed to the Court by Ronald Reagan, an icon of many religious conservatives. Not only did Kennedy author the majority opinion in Obergefell, he authored the opinions in the Court’s other cases addressing the rights of gays and lesbians: Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996) (invalidating an amendment to Colorado’s state constitution that precluded local governments from granting special protections to persons based on “homosexual” orientation, conduct, practices or relationship); Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (invalidating laws criminalizing same-sex sexual practices); United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) (striking down the definition of marriage and spouse as excluding same-sex partners in the federal Defense of Marriage Act).