It seemingly happens with no other group of people. No other group of individuals that I know of is treated so poorly by Christians. And for the life of me, I simply can't understand what occurs in the mind of a believer that allows them to continue justifying it.
The Scriptural truth that all of us have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23) pierces the heart of anyone capable of setting aside their arrogant pride just long enough to have a moment of real self-honesty. We all have sinful urges, unnatural desires, and too often we act upon them. Such acts separate us from God, meaning we need deliverance and redemption.
Salvation comes to no man who isn't able and willing to identify and admit their sin. But for those who can, for those who truly desire it, we all can escape the death wages of our sin through the free gift of God that is eternal life in Christ Jesus (Romans 6:23).
That is the central claim of Christianity. It is the reason for Christian joy and hope. It is the singular Christian message that the heart of any justified soul would want to scream from the rooftops.
But at some point, for some reason, we stop screaming it. At least in certain neighborhoods. Oh, you'll find us actively working the prisons, helping murderers and rapists see the light. We'll even counsel adulterers and thieves, prostitutes (er, "sex workers") and idolaters.
But at some point, somehow, Satan convinced far too many wearing the name of Jesus that His blood was not necessary, His deliverance was not required, His salvation was not mandatory for LGBTetc sin. In fact, it's so unnecessary that it's an insult to the identity and an attack on a person's dignity to suggest otherwise.
At some point, somehow, gay people became unworthy of the full counsel of God.
Of course, I understand how the zeitgeist has changed. Obviously, I see society's full normalization of LGBTetc relationships. Clearly, I know that cultural stigma has reversed 180 degrees and that it is now considered bigotry to refuse to affirm such conduct.
But Christians aren't supposed to care about the zeitgeist, imitate society, or worry what stigma the culture puts on us. We're to tell the truth, offering the world something other than a mere echo of itself. And in so many other areas, with so many other people, Christians still seem eager to do so. But not with gay people.
Why the hate? Why subject them to lies we wouldn't tell other people? Are they not entitled to the same truth that saved you and me?
I struggled over this wicked dualism recently as I saw the Babylon Bee's Joel Berry have an online exchange with a Christian gay activist. Here's how it started:
I'll be honest, the first thing that stands out at me about that inflammatory post is its profound lack of grace and charity. Particularly the last statement. I don't know if Zach really believes that to be the case or if he is simply grandstanding for social media impressions, but such a public characterization of your brothers and sisters is genuinely hard to square with anything remotely resembling the fruit of the Spirit.
Nonetheless, assuming he is writing in good faith, a clarification is in order. In the wake of World Vision's doctrinal shift, most Christian financial supporters didn't "pull their child sponsorships in protest." Some of them agonized over the situation but ultimately chose to pull funding out of obedience to Jesus who taught that a man's spiritual needs are of far more importance than his temporal, physical needs. Christians have to prioritize the former, and so many World Vision clients acted accordingly.
The organization's shift in doctrinal fidelity, its willingness to affirm sin as compatible with a Christian lifestyle put their clients in the unenviable position of having to choose between feeding their sponsored child physical sustenance along with spiritual poison, or protecting their souls at the expense of financial support.
Further, to suggest that those faithful Christians who were put in such a difficult position by World Vision's doctrinal drift suddenly stopped caring about hungry children is imprudent and mean-spirited. It's also almost certainly untrue. There are a multitude of other Christian relief agencies not equivocating on their willingness to tell the truth to all men. For so many of those Lambert slanders, that became the best option so as not to risk the spiritual health of the children they obviously cared about.
The failure belonged to World Vision alone. They were the ones who jeopardized the physical health of thousands of kids worldwide by prioritizing their compromise with the world.
That's when the Bee's Berry joined the conversation:
We've gone off the rails of rationality, it seems.
First, it's important to note that the years of support so many of these sponsors had already given to the World Vision children had already spared them from a miserable fate. That is something that hadn't been done for other un-sponsored kids waiting in line at, say, Compassion International.
Further, using Lambert's logic, if I choose to sponsor children through Compassion for any reason, am I responsible for depriving those I'm not sponsoring through World Vision? Is it fair to say that those who were sponsoring World Vision kids for years were responsible for depriving those un-sponsored at Compassion? This is a form of reductio ad absurdum.
Berry calls it a game, but I would suggest that maybe tactic is a better term, all meant to shame Christians who won't agree to abandon gay people to lies. To illustrate that point, he offers a blunt parody intended to show the absurdity Lambert and other progressives regularly commit against their conservative brethren.
