On Monday, June 1^st, President Obama issued an official proclamation declaring that June would be lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgendered pride month.[i] Albert Mohler, president of Southwestern Seminary, offered an accurate summary of this proclamation.

The United States federal government, now by executive order, signed by the President of the United States, is declaring national pride in these lifestyles," he contends. "This is not mere toleration; it's not calling for legalization, an end to criminal sanctions. It's not calling even for something like civil unions...it's calling for pride.[ii]

This morning I will be preaching a sermon about the topic of homosexuality. I have not chosen this topic because of Obama’s proclamation for gay pride month. I did not choose this topic because New Hampshire recently became the sixth state to legalize gay unions. I have not chosen this topic because Viroqua has had its own share of controversy on this topic that has reached the national news. I am preaching this message on homosexuality because it comes directly from the text we are studying and it is so relevant to our lives and our future. Because of the current direction of our nation and the world, pastors in the 21^st century are being forced to navigate unchartered territory. To my knowledge, John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Wesley and Charles Spurgeon never preached a single sermon on this topic. We have no ancient mentors to help guide our way, but we do possess an ancient text—the Word of God—which has clearly defined parameters on this subject. My allegiance lies with God and His word and since it is so prominent in our chosen text, I am compelled to preach this message.

^26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

^27 So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.

Since I have never preached don this topic and since we have so many new people in the last year, I feel that I should give of my personal history on this subject. I might expect that some of you would have a reaction like this. “Oh no, here comes another sermon ranting and raving about the gay people!” I think a bit of my history will help you know where I am coming from.

My personal history with homosexuality begins with a relative who was gay. I have always had a good relationship with this person since I first learned of their circumstances. My first initiation into gay and lesbian activism came during a 1989 visit to some friends in Manhattan. We attended their church, Riverside Church, but unbeknownst to us, Riverside was and still is the most prominent gay friendly church in New York City. It just happened to be gay pride Sunday at the church and later that afternoon, we found ourselves riding a subway surrounded by dozens of people on their way to the annual gay pride parade.

Other than my gay relative, my first personal involvement came when I was an associate pastor in a church near Madison. I read a full-page advertisement in the Wisconsin State Journal promoting homosexuality that was signed by about eighty pastors and ministry leaders from the area. I sat down and wrote a letter and mailed it to everyone on the list whose address I could locate. This led to several personal conversations with these pastors, my involvement in a roundtable discussion and an invitation to present two in-services to Madison public school teachers on what the Bible says about homosexuality.[iii]

Fast forward to Viroqua in 2004 when the Diversity Day controversy erupted…I was not involved in the petition to ban Diversity Day, but I did write a letter to the editor in the Broadcaster which opened many doors. Numerous people on both sides of the issue complimented me on the tone of my letter. Two women who strongly disagreed with me, one of whom was a lesbian, said that my letter made them cry. This led to the formation of a group of friends made up of Buddhists, atheists, lesbians, New Agers, secular humanists, to name a few. We met together once a month for three years to discuss all of the most controversial subjects like homosexuality, abortion and politics. This group led to two articles in our denomination’s magazine.[iv]

I have met with the previous superintendant of Viroqua schools. I have attended all of the Diversity Day events since 2006. I have read literally thousands and thousands of pages of books, articles and commentaries on the topic, including the very best of liberal Bible scholars. I have prayed with a former homosexual who was struggling with same-sex attractions. I am trying to paint a picture for you that illustrates my background with this topic. I hope I don’t sound like I am bragging, because really hate to toot my own horn, and usually I don’t have anything to toot about anyway. As I have spent time on this topic, my time has been more or less equally divided between research and relationships. I am not just another pastor who bashed gay people every chance that he gets. In the past, many people who hold the opposing viewpoint have commended me for my respectful tone. As we enter this controversial subject, I want to carry on the same level of truth and love. I don’t want to back down an inch from what the Scriptures say, but neither do I want to utter a callous or unkind word to the opposition. I know what you might be thinking—any disagreement will be viewed as offensive to some people. I’m not worried about those people, I am only worried about myself—that I can proclaim and live a balance of truth and love. Do you understand the difference? I don’t care if they are offended by the truth, but I don’t want them to be offended by the way I speak the truth. This principle applies to everything we teach, but especially in controversial areas.

Even though we are studying Genesis, I am going to start with what Jesus said about homosexuality. Gay activists have their own brand of gay theology and a prominent part of their gay theology is to use of Jesus to support their viewpoint. (By the way, when I use the term “gay activist,” I don’t mean it in a negative or pejorative way. A gay activist is simply a person or organization who is actively promoting the viewpoint that homosexual behavior is just as normal, healthy and acceptable as heterosexual behavior. Granted, some gay activists are extremely radical. They break into church services and spread hate wherever they go. I don’t think it’s fair to need to talk about these radicals. We know that there are radical, fringe groups who call themselves Christians and we also know that we do not like it when other people use these extreme, hate-filled radicals as examples of our Christian faith. If we don’t think it’s fair to use these radicals to represent our viewpoint then neither is it fair to use radicals to represent the opposing viewpoint.) Therefore, since the gay activists use Jesus to support their viewpoint, it’s a good place for us to start.

The typical rhetoric about Jesus and homosexuality is to portray Jesus as the poster child for tolerance. Their version of Jesus—we can call him “tolerant Jesus”—is a man who walked around with a perpetual smile on his face, nodding his head in approval wherever he went. I picture tolerant Jesus being followed by a group of people who look like they were pulled straight out of the late sixties: long hair, bell-bottom jeans and all of them tripped out on LSD. Can you see these people skipping along following after tolerant Jesus?

If this Jesus were to see a man murdering another man, I think the gay activist Jesus would give the murderer a hug and tell him, “God loves you.” On a particularly critical day, tolerant Jesus might ask the gentleman to clean up the blood he was done stabbing the other guy, or he might even say, “Oh my, we are not in a happy place today, are we?” Please don’t misunderstand—I am not implying that gay activists are in favor of murder, but the tolerant Jesus whom they promote seemingly never met a behavior or action that he didn’t like. The only thing that tolerant Jesus doesn’t approve of is intolerance.

Last week I showed you a different version of the WWJD—What Would Jesus Drive. This week I have a variation on this theme used by gay activists—WJD—Would Jesus Discriminate?

If you want me to answer the question, my answer would be “Yes.” Of course Jesus discriminates. Jesus discriminates because he is perfectly holy. Jesus discriminates because absolute truth exists which says that some things are right and some things are wrong, and he is Truth. Yes, Jesus does discriminate, and this so-called “discrimination” is what sent him to the cross. If you want a tolerant, happy Jesus then you don’t get a Savior. You see, there’s an enormous trade-off here? Tolerant Jesus does not need to go to the cross because everybody is OK. Maybe the intolerant people will go to Hell or purgatory, but everybody else is fine and dandy. You can either have tolerant Jesus who is not a Savior or you can have the true Jesus who is the Savior of the world. Does Jesus discriminate? Yes, and thank God that he does.

The next tactic is to use Jesus not only to preach their brand of tolerance, but to transform Jesus into a gay activist, like this: “Jesus said some are born gay, Matthew 19:10-12.” I won’t even take the time to explain this ridiculous example of gay theology other than to remind us that with hard work and creativity, anyone can make the Bible say anything they want it to say. The average evangelical Christian can spot this kind of nonsense from a mile away, but we are not so good at spotting less obvious errors. The apostle Paul says that we are to “Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil.” (1 Thes. 5:12) Don’t just put nonsensical gay theology to the test, but every time I preach a sermon you ought to be testing what I say against Scripture. Let me give you some guidelines for Biblical discernment.

1.      Test everything I say and everything our church teaches. If you are not doing this, then you are not even close to fulfilling your role as a Bible-believing Christian

2.      If you find something you disagree with, please make sure you are not just having a gut level reaction to something. We come from a wide range of backgrounds—from the most liberal to the most legalistic, and everything in between. You may react to something I say because it is different than your personal experience. But remember that your personal experience may or may not match exactly what the Bible says. Test what we say against the Word of God, not your experience. There was one guy who left the church because he was convinced that I was teaching prosperity theology. Now if you spend any time with me at all, you will know that the last thing I am is a prosperity theologian. I presented a multitude of Scriptures to discuss, but this man didn’t want to talk about it any further.

3.      Approach me with the issue. If you think I am teaching something wrong and you leave the church without telling me, then no one is benefitting from the process. Of course this assumes that I first must be approachable. If you are afraid to talk with me, then you won’t bring your concerns to me. Do me a favor. If you ever find that I am not approachable, if I get defensive or shut down your questions and concerns, then would you please slap me in the face? You don’t have to knock me down, but give me a good slap so I know you mean business. Then, if I don’t change my ways and become more approachable in the future, fire me. I am serious. A pastor who is not approachable is not worthy of the title and position. If I am not approachable, then how am I any less dangerous than an adulterer? If I committed sexual sin, it would no doubt have a devastating effect on the people in the church, but if I am not approachable, I think the devastation is equally bad. But please don’t confuse approachability with agreement. In the end we still may not agree with one another, but the process of discussing the issue can be very beneficial for both of us. Remember, how we talk to one another is just as important as what we say. I think Paul wrote a whole chapter on this, didn’t he? Does 1 Corinthians 13 ring a bell for anyone? If I prove that I am right but I beat you up in the process, then I am more wrong than if you are spouting heresy.

Back to the subject at hand. Perhaps the most popular way that gay activists like to use tolerant Jesus is by handing out this pamphlet. On the front cover it says, “What Jesus Said About Homosexuality,” but when you open the brochure there is nothing but blank pages inside. When you open this, you are supposed to react like this. “Wow, do you mean to tell me that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality? Well that means those Bible-thumpin’ Christians are just full of hot air!” This is not their only theological argument, but many think it is their best argument. This is intended to be a slam-dunk, “see, I told you so” kind of argument.

Where do I start with this line of argumentation? I think the place to start is with what Jesus did say about homosexuality. This brochure is technically correct. Jesus did not say something like, “homosexuality is a sin against God,” but in principle he said at least that much.

When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the Jordan. ^2 Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.

^3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

^4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ ^5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh? ^6 So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.” (Matt 19:1-6)

Strictly speaking, Jesus was answering a question about divorce and remarriage, but the principles apply to our topic because he is giving a clear definition of marriage. Please notice that the foundation for Jesus’ answer about marriage uses two Scriptures: Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:24. We have already established that man was the pinnacle of God’s creation, not because there was anything inherently special about us, but because he placed within us the image of God. But man, or mankind, has two parts—male and female. God divinely designed that the imago dei would reside within the complementary roles of male and female. As Jesus said, it was this way “at the beginning.”

Jesus’ words are dripping with irony for at least two reasons. First, he asked them, “Haven’t you read?” When you ask a question like this to Pharisees and experts in the Law, it is meant to be offensive. It’s like holding an oblong, brown leather ball in front of Brett Favre and asking, “Do you know what this is?” In other words, they should have known the answer. It was found in the first two chapters of their sacred book, the Torah. The second bit of irony comes when Jesus said “at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female.’” But who is the Creator? Jesus himself is the Creator. He could have said, “at the beginning I made them male and female,” but I think that would have made the Pharisees really blow a gasket.

(The Genesis chapter two passage completes the chapter one reference. The leaving and cleaving described here is using covenantal language. A man leaves the parental relationship…)

Jesus has established that marriage is founded in creation itself and it is only intended to be between a man and a woman. I am sure you have heard Christians say this: “After all, God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.” I gotta tell ya, I really hate that phrase. Yes, it is true and if you want to say it to another Christian, I don’t care. But please don’t use that line when talking with people who disagree with you. It sounds sarcastic. Frankly, it sounds unloving. Remember, how you hold and share your belief is at least as important as what you believe. Let’s face it—the majority of gays and lesbians think that we hate them, so why would we want to prove them correct by our poor choice of words.

Let me summarize Jesus’ teaching on marriage and homosexuality.

1. Jesus is the pre-existent Creator of the universe. Man was created as male and female and marriage is between a man and a woman.

2. The Old Testament and New Testament both clearly call homosexual behavior a sin.

3. Jesus placed his stamp of approval on the entire Old Testament and ultimately is the revealer of all Biblical truth.

Two applications

1.                  Do you have enough confidence in Scripture to stand firm on the sinfulness of homosexual behavior. (Always make a distinction between homosexual urges and homosexual behavior.) The enemy (I mean Satan, not gay activists) wants to erode our confidence in Scripture. The bigger issue is always the authority and reliability of Scripture. When I wrote that letter to 40+ pastors in Madison, I stated that I thought the true dividing line between us was our view of Scripture. A couple of them wrote back and said, “Of course that is the number one issue.” The liberals understand that this is fundamentally a battle over Scripture, but we are not always as quick to see this. Last weekend the La Crosse synod of the ELCA voted to support the ordination of practicing homosexuals with two-thirds of pastors voting affirmatively.

2.                  Do you have Christ-sacrificial love for gay and lesbian people, even if they are your enemy? (or especially if they are your enemy?) If I prove to my opponent that homosexuality is a sin but have not love, I am a clanging gong or a banging cymbal. I have read thousands of pages of books and commentary, if I have won every debate on this issue, if I have been the State Director in leading Wisconsin to pass a marriage amendment, but have not love, I am nothing. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to be nothing.

Rich Maurer

June 14, 2009