Tag: christ

Categories
Opinions

Me, Marriage, and the Myth of Sexuality

Photo by: Nate Moore

I am what some would call “ex-gay”. Let me explain.

Since late middle school, I have almost exclusively been attracted to men, both physically and visually – sometimes emotionally, too. I remember finding girls and women physically attractive for a year or two before this, but seventh grade is about the time I became addicted to pornography, and my view of men and women quickly became distorted. I’ve lost most battles against the temptation of pornography since. Each time, I fell for the temptation to sexualize images of men. It has always been tempting to define myself as “gay” or “homosexual”, but I never actually have. Inwardly, though, I have questioned my sexuality many times. It is only within the past two years that, with the help of counseling, accountability, support, and Christ’s redemptive power, I have begun healing. And as I recover from a porn addiction, my sexuality has been healing, too.

Do understand: my story is mine alone, and cannot be used as an exemplar of “the gay story”, if one even exists. Nevertheless, I think my story is an important one, as I can honestly say that I have walked, am walking, and will continue to walk away from any thoughts and behavior that could be categorized as “homosexual”. Also, I believe a lot of the things that I have learned along the way are worth sharing.

I have always believed that homosexual behavior – in this case defined as sexual acts between two people of the same sex, and any physical or emotional intimacy that accompanies it – is defined by Scripture as sinful. However, for many years, this left me in a somewhat hopeless state. I did not remember ever choosing homosexuality, so I did not see how I could ever choose to give it up. And I never found myself lusting after women, like the guys around me did, so how could I even begin a serious relationship with a woman? I was surprised to find that the Bible’s most applicable response to this question is found in Paul’s exhortation in 1 Corinthians 7, verse 2: “…because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.” Scripture’s advice to me became clear: If I find myself tempted to be overtly sexual in any way, I ought to take seriously the recommendation to marry a woman.

At face value, this seems ridiculous. If that’s what you’re thinking, I’m not surprised. Our culture propagates the idea that we are born into one unchangeable sexuality, and most of us in the Church have fallen for it. I am living proof, though, that this is untrue. While homosexuality was never a conscious choice I made, I was not born into it, either. From the beginning, my story shows that sexuality is determined by sexual behavior (physical and mental), not the other way around. I know that most of my natural desire, the things I think will make me happy, are actually unhealthy. When I study lists of sins in the Bible, I find that this is the point of all God’s commands: He knows what is good for us and what isn’t; we think we know, but are usually wrong.

Over time, God has helped me to appreciate Biblical marriage as the important and graceful gift it is. The New Testament makes it clear that the reason God gave us marriage in the first place is so that it could model the Gospel. Husbands have the opportunity to live out a beautiful picture of Christ as they die to themselves and take responsibility for leading their wives and families. Wives can live out a wonderful picture of the Church by showing love and respect to their husbands. This relationship can model this aspect of the Gospel like no other human relationship can. Of course, this is one of many mysteries of our faith that I am just beginning to learn.

Many will tell you that attractions are nigh-impossible to change. Addictions, too. I would say the same. But I know that with God, all things are possible. For this reason I hold to Romans 12:1-2. “I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” In the face of a porn addiction and difficult-to-change attractions, this is my hope. If you find yourself in a similar place, may this be your hope, too.

Categories
Opinions

Operation Christmas Child

It has been hard to avoid the sight of Operation Christmas Child boxes around campus the last few weeks. In years past, I have been the one filling them with dollar store toothbrushes, coloring books, school supplies, dolls, socks, etc. This was a project undertaken by countless years of youth groups as well as within my own family.

This year I haven’t.

Sarah SlaterI was considering why I had become so uncomfortable with the images of smiling children with their shoeboxes of toys, and I think I realized why. This semester, for my senior seminar, I’ve been studying a myriad of nonprofit organizations and the different ways they give back. My concern about Operation Christmas Child is simply this: that it tries to do a lot of things, and it doesn’t do any of them particularly well.

What are you trying to achieve with your shoebox of gifts? If you are trying to have a personal connection with a person on the other side of the world, sponsor a child or find a pen-pal. For the past few years I have been writing to a Kenyan middle-schooler through Empowering Lives International. Her name is Gloria, and she wants to be a professor at a university. I have no doubt in her capability to do so. But the reason I know she can achieve her ambitions is because we have a (limited) relationship. I have written to her and received responses over time. The recipient of your shoebox, on the other hand, is unknown to you, and you are equally anonymous to her.

The level of monitoring appropriate to various types of programs is frequently debated in the international development community. One approach is known as outcome-based aid, which according to the definition used by the World Bank attempts to tie disbursement of aid to specific results achieved by the recipient of the aid. This approach to development has received some pushback due to the intangible, long-term character of many interventions.

It is even more difficult to hold mission-based programs to standards because of the non-coercive element that should be inherent in preaching the gospel. It should never be a condition that someone need to become a Christian in order to participate in a program. On the other hand, how can we know if a given program is doing anything? One standard to look at is the impact a given program will have over the long term. Over the years, it has become apparent that giving out free things tends to have a net negative effect, destroying the ability of local entrepreneurs and farmers to make a living.

Of course Christians run mission hospitals, schools, feeding centers, water access programs and many other sorts of projects around the world. But there is a clear difference between showing the love of Christ through sacrificial service, and giving people things in exchange for listening to the gospel. The one is in the tradition of the disciples; the other is in the tradition of American consumerism.

Mediocrity is not something we accept readily in most aspects of our lives. When it comes to international development and Christian mission, though, it sometimes seems like good intentions are good enough. But to paraphrase blogger Jamie Wright, good intentions do not relieve us of our responsibility to engage carefully with the world. Part of responsible engagement is taking the time to think through what you are supporting. If it were your sister in need, would you prefer her to receive a single box of gifts at Christmas? Or would you wish instead for school sponsorship and medical care, or the love of a pastor or missionary in her own community?

It’s amazing that you feel called to participate in the spread of the good news. The last thing I would ever want to do is discourage that impulse. And if Operation Christmas Child is something you’ve thought through and truly believe in, I can’t find fault with that.

What I can do, though, is encourage you to carefully consider what you are doing when you fill that box with a washcloth, a ball, soap, crayons. And think if there is a different way you could achieve your goal of encouraging school attendance, good hygiene, a happy childhood, or the spread of the gospel.

Operation Christmas Child is not the worst thing a person could do to show love at Christmas. But I would argue that it is far from the best.

Categories
Opinions

Is Theology Useless?

The website of Solomon’s Porch states: “You will not find statements of what our community believes on this site.  Belief is a dynamic lived reality.”  Instead, they list “dreams,” which include lots of very nice things like beauty, art, justice, mercy, and truth. Even “innovation .. in order to bring glory to God.”  But you will find nothing about monotheism, the trinity, or the gospel.

This feeling has long been common among laypeople—something which perhaps reflects as much on the bad attitudes of their pastors as of the people—but what I find more disturbing is the increasing trend toward this feeling among Christian students who are called to be lovers of learning as well as lovers of things pertaining to the kingdom.  I am stunned every year to discover students about to graduate, having never taken a single upper-level theology or Bible class, announcing to me that they intend to enter into ministry, missions or even Bible translation.  Some of these seem to think it a positive virtue to have never been contaminated by the academic study of theology or Bible before they serve the world in Christ’s name.  Yet to think one is fit to minister on the basis of Sunday-school training, Bible reading and zeal is tantamount to believing one can be an be an emergency-room doctor after having a first-aid class.

Does it really matter, after all?  I believe this anti-theological education sentiment is driven in part by the belief that, in the end, what really counts is simply loving people for God, not communicating doctrines.  As Peter Rollins wrote, “Orthodoxy … is a way of being in the world rather than a means of believing things about the world.”  However, this is a false dichotomy.  One cannot escape theology, for theology simply means what we believe about God and his relationship to the world.  As J. I. Packer used to tell his students: “Everyone has a theology.  The only question is—is it a good theology, or a bad theology?”  One has only to peruse the Emergent Village blog to see lots of both among people who claim to be doing neither.

paigeThis attitude exists not only among “emerging” Christians; it is to be found here in Houghton, and among many younger Christians.  What is perhaps more disturbing, however, is the increasing trend among some to view even evangelism as superfluous next to loving friendships, community development (here or in the two-thirds world), aid work, etc.  “I don’t care if they ever hear ‘the gospel’ from me” I have heard more than one person say.  The intent is that the object of their good works will see the gospel in their deeds.  The answer is: no they won’t.  I can say this having been raised in a bona fide “nonchristian” family, with no Bible, no religious training, no church, and no Christian family or friends.  We don’t infer theology from your good-works mimes.  You have to actually tell us the gospel.  Jesus proclaimed the gospel to his audience too, and ordered his disciples to proclaim the kingdom and to make disciples (Mark 1:14-15; 6:7-13; Matt 28:18-20), although Israel already had known God’s Word for over a millenium.

I realize that this current emphasis on social action and loving neighbor is a reaction to the weaknesses of previous generations.  And as a corrective, it is welcome and a part of God’s will.  But we must be careful lest in correcting the past we also fail to learn from it, and end up creating new errors.

Exactly one hundred years ago another Christian movement was at the height of its popularity, and like many trends today, it de-emphasized traditional theology and emphasized intervening to change the world for justice and mercy.  It was called the Social Gospel.  Its adherents accomplished many worthwhile and noble things for society, including advancing trade union rights, advocating for women’s rights, limiting child labor and prostitution.  But in the end, its adherents had so weakened the gospel half of the social gospel by various compromises, that they were unable to distinguish their cause anymore from nationalism and democracy.  In the U.S., they urged men to kill Germans to advance the kingdom of God.  And after the war, their social progressivism survived in various political organizations, but only at the cost of eliminating even more remnants of traditional Christianity.  The authority of the scriptures, the deity of Christ, the atonement, and the traditions of the church, were all trodden under in the name of progress, and faith in science subtly replaced the old faith.  There was no longer much Christ, or much gospel, to transform or to claim people’s allegiance, and many churches that bought into it declined.  The movement had killed itself spiritually.

My point is not, of course, that social action or loving neighbor is bad.  My point is that theology matters.  And one cannot escape the consequences of one’s theological beliefs.  In the New Testament, Saint Paul expected ordinary believers to think theologically and addressed open letters with profound theological arguments to congregations that were ninety percent illiterate.  Even Jesus took three years to train his so-called “unlearned” disciples before sending them out.  We should take note and be willing to learn if we wish to be Christ’s ambassadors.

Categories
Opinions

Selflessness and Humility in the NCCAA

This past weekend the Houghton cross country team competed at the National Christian College Athletic Association National Championship meet in Cedarville, Ohio. Roughly 50 meters before the finish, Cara Davenport, Houghton College junior, collapsed and was unable to keep going. Moments later, teammate Judith Marklin, Houghton freshman, stopped for Davenport and carried her through to the finish line, crossing it together.

The meet official disqualified both girls, saying they aided each other during the race. The whole situation pushed the women’s team from about seventh place to eighteenth place overall. But in a situation where helping another competitor damages ones own race-time, especially at a national championship meet, should a rule of aiding a teammate apply?

Section 8, subsection f, of the NCAA XC and Track and Field rule book states that an athlete can be disqualified “If unduly aided by a coach, a teammate not in the race or a non-competitor associated with the team.”

Marklin had not yet finished the race, so what exactly did she do wrong? The rule doesn’t include

runners who are also competing, allowing you to question the call made by the official. For those who witnessed the dramatic finish, it is safe to say cheating did not cross their minds, but instead I imagine they saw complete selflessness and love.

In a case where the “rules are rules” mentality wins, there is little to be done. Although many coaches of opposing colleges voted in favor of Davenport and Marklin, saying they should not be disqualified, the meet official had the final say. In the end, it was 100% the official’s decision in the disqualification. Had the assisting of an athlete helped the school, that would be cheating, but should the rule need to apply to all situations? Although the legality of it all makes sense, what does

the situation say about ethics?

The mission statement of the NCCAA reads, “The NCCAA is an association of Christ-centered collegiate institutions whose mission is to use athletics competition as an integral component of education, evangelism and encouragement.”

What happened on the course that day reflected exactly that. Those watching and competing alongside Davenport and Marklin were educated and encouraged at that moment. To see such humility can encourage everyone to do something great when the chance is presented to him or her.

nccaa

An organization, which is meant to be founded on the teaching and ways of Christ, disqualified an athlete for doing exactly what Christ calls us to do. Philippians 2:3 says, “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves.”

“The selflessness of a teammate to stop their race and give up their individual glory to help a teammate to the finish. That is the reason I coach, because the spirit of sport is revealed and the true character of our athletes shines through,” said cross country and track and field coach, Matthew Dougherty.

“After the race as Judith and I were helping Cara to the bus a girl from another team came up to us and told Cara what an awesome finish she had and how great Judith was for helping her,” explained Houghton senior and cross-country captain Leah Williams.

Despite the NCCAA’s decision to disqualify both Davenport and Marklin, there is still a great story to be told. It almost brought me to tears watching the two of them cross the line. “Cara has been such a strong asset to the team this year and to see her give everything she had to get across the finish line makes me so proud to call her my teammate. And for Judith to sacrifice her own race is one of the most selfless acts I’ve ever seen,” said Williams.