The Battle over Sexual Diversity

You may also like...

Comment policy: ESA represents a wide variety of understandings and practices surrounding our shared Christian faith. The purpose of the ESA blog is to facilitate loving conversation; please know that individual authors do not speak for ESA as a whole. Even if you don\'t see yourself or your experience reflected in something you read here, we invite you to experience it anyway, and see if God can meet you there. What can take away from considering this point of view? What might you add? The comments section below is where you can share the answers to those questions, if you feel so moved. Please express your thoughts in ways that are constructive, purposeful, and respectful. Give those you disagree with the benefit of the doubt, and assume they are neither idiots nor evil. Name-calling, sweeping condemnations, and any other comments that suggest you have forgotten that we are all children of God will be deleted. Thank you!

16 Responses

  1. Mike Kadera says:

    Do we include polygamists in this same discussion?

  2. Mike Nacrelli says:

    This is a very eloquent dodge. The question must be answered if one is at all serious about discerning God’s will and obeying him, and the testimony of Scripture is decidedly unambiguous on the sinfulness of homosexual relations.

    • Mike Kadera says:

      Are you affirming that polygamy is a sin? If so, I would be interested in knowing what biblical passages you would use to support that position.

      • Mike Nacrelli says:


        My comment above was addressed to Tim, not you. I said nothing about polygamy. Since you asked, though, Jesus based all his teachings about marriage on Genesis 2. I just don’t see any room for polygamy (or homosexuality) there. Also, 1 Tim. 3 lists having only one wife as a qualifier for being “above reproach” and therefore suitable to serve as a church overseer. It seems clear enough to me, then, that polygamy is not God’s will. The familial problems resulting from the polygamy of Old Testament patriarchs are fairly self-evident.

        • Mike Kadera says:

          Mike Nacrelli, I apologize for the confusion. Yes, now that I have reread everyone’s comments I realize where everyone was going with their comments. I agree with you completely that the Bible is clearly against polygamy and homosexuality. I am disappointed that no one responded to my comment. The logical conclusion of the Oriented to Love dialogues would be to include polygamists because they are just another part of sexual diversity and its expression in society. I would like someone who supports Oriented to Love to try and justify not including them.

    • d says:

      Then you haven’t read the Bible and don’t know history well. Because if you knew history, along with the context, not one verse puts down homosexuality. (Cough cough national Bible quizzed.) He didn’t dodge it. Your heart is filled with society’s hate and not God’s love, on my opinion. Society for so long told you the Bible said it was wrong because power is money. The Bible is power.

  3. Bob Edgar says:

    Mike has a very good point, ” . . .if one is at all serious about discerning God’s will and obeying him, . . .” and I don’t in any way belittle his conviction. God has called on us to judge for ourselves how we feel, based on his word, about events and circumstances around us. He then tells us to report our findings to him. What he commands to do next is ” love your neighbor as yourself,” irrespective of whether your neighbor is a Samaritan, a Muslim, or a homosexual. Our God-given task is not to judge them, but to love them with his love. The rest is up to him. We cannot depend on our government to do our spiritual work for us. The American principle is “equal protection under the law,” blind to gender, religion, economic class, and, yes, sexual orientation.

    • Mike Nacrelli says:


      First, the Bible very clearly calls us to “judge” unrepentant sin by professing Christians. Second, neither Tim’s essay nor my response said anything about government. However, since you brought it up, the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment in no way mandates an androgynous redefinition of marriage. Those who crafted and ratified this amendment would be aghast at such an idea.

  4. jeanne says:

    Would you condemn a pedophile to a life of celibacy? Of course you would. Because you know right from wrong. And because it is still politically correct to bring down fire and brimstone against preditors. But now, because you don’t have the support from our culture, you believe you no longer know right from wrong when it comes to homosexuality. Good for you. Just so you understand that and admit that you do not stand on the accuracy or validity or truth that the Bible is the infallible Word of God. Just so you understand that and don’t claim it to be so. It’s your right. But one day, you will be asked to answer. Will the answer ‘neither’ be accepted? Homosexuality is not a big issue for me. But taking a stand as a Christian as to God’s Word being infallible and applicable for today is. And that is why Christians need to get this one right. It is much bigger that a slippery slope. The church is letting us down when it compromises with the world. The world needs truth, not compromise. Compromise is killing people.

    • Mike Nacrelli says:

      The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood warned in the early 1990s that the hermeneutic employed by “evangelical feminists” to explain away the Bible’s teaching on male headship would lead them to similarly discard the passages that plainly condemn homosexual relations. At the time, this concern was dismissed as alarmist, but it seems to have been validated.

  5. Gary Schwerin says:

    If I am so right that I cannot be loving, then I am wrong…

  6. Mike says:

    Responding to Mike Nacrelli’s comment I would ask him if he considers polygamy to be a sin, and if so, what would be the biblical passages that he would use to define it as a sin?

  7. Jim Cates says:

    Beautiful essay. Sorry to be late in reading it. As I think about the comments people have made above, I think the same principle of theological merit can be applied to divorce, capital punishment, immigration law – any social issue. When we begin to truly dig beneath the surface, as Christians we disagree on so many cultural concerns. I like to apply the principle of “respecting” vs. “accepting.” I respect a number of beliefs that I don’t accept as my own. I hope that people do the same with me.

  8. Andy Scotts says:

    I am definitely on SIDE A here. I firmly believe that God would not want anyone to be humiliated because of who we are. He loves all of us equally and He does not condemn anyone. GOD LOVES US ALL REGARDLESS OF YOUR GENDER.

  1. March 3, 2014

    […] is a wonderful perspective by Evangelicals for Social Action on this […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *