http://www.harvestusa.org/articles/clarify.htm
http://www.harvestusa.org/articles/balancetruth.htm
http://www.harvestusa.org/articles/legends.htm
The above link goes to HarvestUSA a Presbyterian ministry to homosexuals, one of the most successful "exgay" ministries in the US.
Read it.
I would point out that we Reformed theology folks are the ones that are so often accused of teaching "Lordship salvation..." and not even they agree with the sentiments in the first post of this thread. The even bigger irony is that it's usually the Arminian types that suddenly become "Lordship salvationists" when this issue arises. All of the sudden, the ideas of backsliding go out the window." Oh well, I suppose that's to be expected when one's entire theology is man-centered, believing not in total depravity, but a mortal wound, that a dead man can make himself repent and have faith (when in fact it's the other way around, but that's a whole other discussion). Amazing, absolutely amazing how quickly the antiCalvinist becomes a very strict Calvinist, to the point of believing in something very close to sinless perfectionism.
Luther said we are simultaneously saints and sinners as far as the cooperative work of grace in sanctification goes. This is supported by Paul who calls himself the chief of sinners, not referring to his past life before Christ, but to his present view of himself in the here (well, the then) and now.
Here's some highlights:
The current problem in many conservative circles is that homosexuality has often been elevated to be the worst sin. The homosexual is classified as the most heinous of persons to be avoided and intolerated at all costs. Don't get me wrong, homosexuality is a most serious sin. But this pious pharisaical attitude that puts homosexuality in a category all its own can't stand.
There may be a need for Christians and the church as a whole to repent if they have practice this wholesale type of condemnation and rejection of people. Unfortunately most of the gay community lives with this kind of image of the average Christian. I remember visiting a neighborhood gay bar and seeing a bumper sticker someone had found. Hanging over the mirror behind the bar area, it read, "kill a queer for Christ." Is it so surprising to us that those in bondage to homosexuality have gone to great lengths to reinterpret and revise the scriptures and who, out of practical experience, see this historic kind of Christianity as uncompassionate?
. I think Gordon Dalby in his book, Healing Of The Masculine Soul put it best. He likened the discussion concerning homosexuality to a surgeon and a patient on an operating table. He said that, as a conservative, the surgeon curses the patient, slashing him ruthlessly while as a liberal, the surgeon glibly pronounces the patient "healthy" simply to spare him the pain of surgery, however necessary.
Too often the idea that we Christians have is to offer simplistic solutions. I for one can not get over the comment that if somebody is still "practicing" a particular sin five years after accepting Christ that person is not saved. Hmmm, well, does that mean the person that smokes for five years after accepting Christ isn't saved? The person that spends five years with anger problems?
Folks, some sins are bondages. Homosexuality is a bondage with deep deep DEEP roots.
Now, do I believe that a person can accept Christ and not feel conviction for sin? No. Do I think that they can go for a time, even a very long time, and not feel such conviction at all but later return to the Lord? YES. This is Biblical. The bottom line is no man among is in the position to make the judgments about individuals required in the first post of this thread.
I direct you all to the sin of two men in the Ephesian Church named Hymenaeus and Alexander in I Tim. 1:20. These men are named by Paul. He says he handed them over to Satan so that they would be taught not to blaspheme. We know that doing this means that they were put out of the congregation so that Satan could have their way with them. The idea is that what we bind on earth is bound in heaven and vice versa. The Lord, through Paul, chose to put these two out of the congregation and basically let them learn their lesson the hard way. Scripture teaches us to do this as a last resort. Why? Because what we do as a matter of church discipline is an example of what God is doing spiritually. Now, notice the conclusion of 2 Timothy. Alexander gets mentioned in a list of people Paul remembered as having hurt him. Hymeneus isn't on the list anymore is he? I understand from this past January's Bible study (those of us that are SBC should have been studying these two epistles as a denomination), that the general consensus is that Hymenaus learned his lesson. Alexander did not. Paul does not say anything about either of them not being Christians. However, since their particular sin pattern had to do with 'blasphemy,' most likely spreading Gnosticism/Judaizerism, one could argue that Alexander wasn't saved, since he's the one that Paul names as eventually getting judged by God for the harm he did to Paul, Paul being personally hurt by the situation in that church since he spent so many years in it.
