tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16824250.post7032999925313659705..comments2023-05-10T02:59:33.596-05:00Comments on something deep and witty: A Better ConversationAmyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02677742255848919123noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16824250.post-30821577525433457022012-08-02T16:31:13.028-05:002012-08-02T16:31:13.028-05:00Thank you for sharing your thoughts, Andrea!
Whil...Thank you for sharing your thoughts, Andrea!<br /><br />While I love the shifts in perspective that this article proposes, and I agree completely with you about not elevating (or negating) any sin over another, I also agree that the article (I don’t know about the books) doesn’t address how to move this conversation out of the church into the world at large. Of course, I guess the first hurdle is actually having these conversations within the church.<br /><br />I think a shift in perspective can help the church in moving forward, speaking the truth *in love* (I think the love part has often gone by the wayside). That’s a delicate balance, and I think it’s one that’s best done on a personal level, not on a cultural or political level—not en masse. I think that’s where the church has gone awry. We’ve become embroiled in the culture wars, speaking in generalities to hypothetical groups of people, and that has contributed to the us/them mentality. We’ve also, on the whole, become very defensive about “our rights,” and I’m not sure that is biblical. To my mind, it’s a very Americanized way of thinking about Christianity.<br /><br />There will always be the sticking point of “the church’s traditional consensus on the sin of homosexuality.” And while the LGBT community as a whole is not receptive to that, and often views that statement as hateful, I tend to think that there could be actual conversation on this matter if there were personal relationships to back it up. There’s a lot more to say on this, and these are incomplete thoughts on a very complex topic. I just think the church can do a much, much better job than we have done in this area.<br /><br />All that to say, I like the example of your mom. You are in a place to speak to your mom (as the Lord leads) about all of these things—redemption, salvation, addiction—because you know her and are in her life. You love her. What you say about these things will carry far more weight with her because she can see how your life backs up your faith. If I were to attack these issues with her, it would be just that—more of an attack.<br /><br />I don’t know how all of this happens, though. I don’t know how to move into conversation about these things in the current climate. And I don’t know how to move beyond conversation to action. This blog is just an attempt to begin to move in that direction.Amyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02677742255848919123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16824250.post-90122441145678251312012-08-01T21:09:02.222-05:002012-08-01T21:09:02.222-05:00Thanks for pointing to both of those articles. I a...Thanks for pointing to both of those articles. I appreciated each of them. (Random note: Mr. Hill is a fellow Wheaton alum; we were there at the same time, though I didn't know him.) <br /><br />I agree that we've gotten too caught up in making sexuality into THE defining trait of identity. But the CT review made me wonder: it's all well and good for the church to stop classifying people by their sexuality (and I do mean that), but then what happens when we encounter a person who very much bases his/her identity on sexuality? I mean, it seems just as offensive to tell someone, "Hey, I know you identify yourself as GLBT, but I think sexual identity is just a modern construct, so I refuse to identify you that way." (And I say this as someone who has gay friends and relatives.) I guess what I'm saying is that I want the church to stop acting like homosexuality is a worse sin than any other (like pride, anger, etc.) and to stop defining people by that one temptation, but I also wonder how well that would really be received. Does that make sense? I'm having a hard time wording my thoughts without making it sound like an "us/them" issue.<br /><br />It all makes me think of a recent question Aaron (mine, not yours!) asked in regard to my mom, who has a number of addictions: "What would it look like for her to be saved?" Namely, would trusting in Jesus automatically free her from all of her addictions? Possibly, but I think it might also just look like her saying, "I do what I don't want to do (a la Romans 7). I don't want to sin anymore, but I still do." It would look like resisting temptation, instead of passively giving in, but also not being condemned when the presence of sin remains in her life. And as someone who loves her, I would (do!) want her to be free of her addictions, but I'd also just want to keep pointing her to Jesus, who offers more grace to his sheep who stray.<br /><br />And now this comment is far too long, so I'll end where I began. Thanks for sharing and for encouraging me and others to think.andreajenninehttp://entrusted.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com