S1: As Christians, we recognize that the best for others is
S1: not only to trust Christ, but to obey Christ as
S1: those that have trusted him. And so we wouldn't want
S1: to do anything in our attempts to love that would
S1: undermine that good that we want to see birthed in them.
S1: It's the Spirit of God moves.
S2: Welcome to building relationships with Doctor Gary Chapman, author of
S2: the New York Times best seller The Five Love Languages. Well,
S2: how do you love someone? Well, who disagrees with you
S2: about LGBTQ issues? How do you stand up for biblical
S2: truth and still show God's love? That's the question we'll
S2: tackle today with author, pastor and professor Doctor Casey Huff.
S3: The title of our featured resource at Building Relationships US
S3: is Doctor Huff's book, known for Love loving your LGBTQ
S3: Friends and Family Without Compromising Biblical truth again. You can
S3: find it at Building relationships.us and Gary. It's that last
S3: part that has me sitting a little closer to the
S3: radio today, because I don't want to be unloving to anyone,
S3: but I also don't want to compromise what I believe
S3: the Bible really teaches. You understand that tension.
S4: You know, Chris, I run into this numerous times over
S4: the last few years, particularly with parents, sometimes grandparents, you know,
S4: who are asking questions about how do I relate to this?
S4: I mean, this is it's very disturbing to me. I
S4: don't know how to respond. I don't want to just
S4: cut my child or my grandchild off. And yet I
S4: don't want to affirm, you know, something that I think
S4: is not right. Yeah, it's a common struggle today. So
S4: I am really glad that we are going to have
S4: this discussion today with Doctor Huff.
S3: I am too. Let me introduce him. Doctor Casey B
S3: Hoff holds degrees in computer applications, biblical languages, and biblical Interpretation.
S3: He serves as the Director of Partnerships and Curriculum with
S3: world Hope Ministries International. He's also an assistant professor of
S3: biblical interpretation at Luther Rice College and Seminary. He and
S3: his wife, Hannah, have three sons and two daughters. His book,
S3: known for loves are featured resource at Building Relationships us.
S4: Well, Doctor Huff, welcome to Building Relationships.
S1: Thank you so much for having me.
S4: You know, there must be a good reason for you
S4: to wade into this difficult subject. So why would you
S4: tackle an issue hot button issue like this?
S1: You know, it's a great question. And Gary, again, thank
S1: you for having me. I think that in one way
S1: I could say that I'm tackling it. Another 1st May
S1: be that I, I in pastoral ministry was tackled by
S1: it a few times, um, 17 years of pastoral ministry
S1: in three different states. And the more conversations that I
S1: had with my congregants, my own family friends. This just
S1: was a topic that continued to come up and was
S1: one that needed to be hopefully addressed in a way
S1: that's helpful and also full of hope.
S4: Yeah, well, I can certainly understand that. And I'm glad
S4: that you took the time and energy and effort to
S4: wade into this topic. You know, the title of your
S4: book is known for love, and I'd like to hear
S4: you talk about the definition of that word love. I
S4: think sometimes our culture has a rather loose definition of love.
S4: How do you define love?
S1: That, again, another great question that really gets at the
S1: heart of what I'm, I'm hoping to address in the book.
S1: And it's because the way that society is tending to
S1: define love is that love can only mean affirmation, full
S1: throated acceptance of a person and their lifestyle decisions. What
S1: I want to do, though, is I want us to
S1: look at how God has defined love in His Word.
S1: And so we're all familiar with the passage, uh, first
S1: Corinthians 13. It gives us a lot of characteristics of
S1: of love, particularly Christian love, which is what we're seeking to,
S1: to demonstrate toward others. And, you know, there's many things
S1: that we see there. And I think what I notice
S1: probably most relevant for this conversation is that love does
S1: not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices with truth. And so
S1: there is a way in which we love, but not
S1: in a way that it compromises truth or that it
S1: it advances wrongdoing. I think that anybody who's parented knows
S1: that this is a very common sense way of thinking
S1: about love. It would be very unloving for me to
S1: tell my nine year old. Um. You want to play
S1: in the street? Go for it. It's. I want to
S1: be loving to you. Therefore, I'm going to affirm you
S1: in that decision. No. Love would also require me to say, honey,
S1: I want you to have fun. But I want you
S1: to have fun with these boundaries so that you're safe.
S1: And so we have to recognize that there's this tension
S1: to where love can't just be defined by. You must
S1: accept me completely on my terms. We just don't function
S1: in society like that. And that's not a very helpful
S1: definition of love. So I prefer to look at what
S1: God has said in His Word regarding that definition.
S4: Yeah. And I think that's that's exceedingly important, because real
S4: love is going to do what you think is best
S4: for the other individual based on what God has revealed,
S4: you know, about right and wrong. You know, in the
S4: first two chapters of the book, you really form a
S4: framework of theology for discussing these issues. Can you give
S4: us an overview of what you're talking about in those
S4: two chapters?
S1: Sure. One of the things that I feel like can
S1: happen with a book like this is that it becomes
S1: an an answer key of sorts, where people just look
S1: for what's the answer to the question that I'm dealing
S1: with right now, and that I'll put it up? The
S1: reality is, is this conversation, this this debate in public
S1: life is one that is moving at a fast pace
S1: and that we can't anticipate all of the questions that
S1: we're going to be dealing with. So I want to
S1: provide a theological framework that not only helps us answer
S1: some of the questions we're dealing with right now, but
S1: also gives us the tools that we need to think
S1: about questions that we can't even anticipate. So the first
S1: two chapters deal with creation and what I would call crisis,
S1: which is dealing with the fall of mankind. Creation expresses
S1: how God has created all things, man and woman. He
S1: creates marriage. He blesses it. He calls it very good.
S1: He orders our bodies for that relationship as well and
S1: tells us to be fruitful, multiply, have dominion over the
S1: world and to reflect his image as his image bearers.
S1: That is good, and we should affirm that. But we
S1: should also look to it as an ideal that God
S1: has for his creation. Not a few chapters later in
S1: the Bible, we find that while man and woman were
S1: made in God's image, and they were made to have
S1: fellowship with him through their own choice to rebel against
S1: God through pride and idolatry, they they chose something contrary
S1: to God's will. They chose not to conform to his standard.
S1: And the result was crisis that not only was contained,
S1: it wasn't just contained in the garden, but it spread
S1: throughout all the earth through all their descendants. And so
S1: while we recognize that there are many, there's many good
S1: things within creation that we can affirm and celebrate. We
S1: also have to recognize that sin has brought this crisis
S1: where it's marred our understanding of God. It's infected our
S1: relationship with one another. It's affected our relationship even to creation.
S1: So many of the things that we see in the
S1: world had a good start, but have devolved and sadly
S1: are oftentimes, uh, um, changed from what God intended them
S1: to be. Later on in the book, though, we we
S1: get to the great news is that Christ addresses the
S1: crisis and through his life, death, burial, and resurrection brings
S1: hope and restores us to that newness and that goodness.
S1: And so it's not all bad news, though. There is
S1: some bad news we have to deal with if we're
S1: going to have a proper understanding of the world that
S1: we're living in.
S4: Yeah, well, let's talk about marriage. I mean, you alluded
S4: to this just now, and the marriage is God's idea,
S4: not our idea. It's his design. So so what are
S4: the implications of those realities?
S1: Again, I appreciate that question. One of the things that
S1: it reminds me of is when I was a child
S1: and my my dad, my dad passed away a few
S1: years ago, had a great relationship with him. He loved Christ.
S1: My dad had a lot of tools in the garage,
S1: and I wanted to try to build and do things
S1: in the backyard and was always constantly losing his tools.
S1: And the Lord was kind enough to give me children.
S1: That helped me lose my tools as well. One of
S1: the things that my dad did in that, though, was,
S1: is he taught me that these, these tools were designed for,
S1: for different purposes. And so you didn't use a hacksaw
S1: to cut wood, you needed a wood saw for these
S1: things that the people that designed it had a purpose
S1: behind it, and that these tools work best when they're
S1: used according to their design. I think that in some
S1: ways is is very much related to the idea of
S1: of marriage. Marriage, given that it's God's idea and in
S1: its God's design. We can't just take it and say, well,
S1: we're going to make this however we want it to be.
S1: We need to. We need to consult the one that's
S1: designed it and ask him and say, Lord, what, what
S1: what is the best way to have a fulfilling marriage
S1: and the best way to live in a way that
S1: brings you honor, that does much good. And I think
S1: that that's what this is getting at is, is to
S1: say that it's his idea. It's his design. It reminds
S1: us that we have to go to him if we're
S1: going to understand how it's going to work best and
S1: not just view it as some sort of malleable clay
S1: that we can do with whatever we please.
S4: Doctor Huff, I've heard a number of people say over
S4: the last few years that Jesus did not speak specifically
S4: about homosexuality, and neither should we. That's the implication. So
S4: how do you respond to that?
S1: Yeah, so I have heard that as well. Um, you know,
S1: one of the things that I, I am seeing and
S1: one of the things the book wants to try to address,
S1: is there are a few chapters in the book that
S1: are pretty deep in the sense that I want to
S1: try to help Christians wrestle through and answer the objections
S1: that are often raised, and this is one of them.
S1: It feels like a very easy win for those that
S1: have a revisionist understanding of biblical sexuality. They say, hey,
S1: let's look at all the times that Jesus taught in
S1: the New Testament, and you're going to see he never
S1: uses the terms that are often associated with homosexuality. Therefore,
S1: if we're going to take Jesus example, we shouldn't as well.
S1: And for some people, that's that's very that's very compelling. Uh,
S1: the the problem that I have with that is, um,
S1: it's it's multifold. It there are several things that I
S1: think are difficult about that. One is to say that
S1: he did not ever speak of homosexuality. It is to
S1: assume something about the New Testament gospels that the New
S1: Testament gospels themselves don't assume. So, for instance, um, at
S1: the end of the Gospel of John, it said Jesus
S1: did many other things as well. If everyone were to
S1: write them down, I suppose the whole world would not
S1: have room for the books that they were written. So
S1: in one sense is that recognizes that the Gospels himself
S1: are not an exhaustive account of everything Jesus did or taught,
S1: but specifically the things that were pertinent to the audiences
S1: that the gospel writers were writing to. So in one sense,
S1: the best somebody could say is this we don't have
S1: a record of him addressing homosexuality directly. The other part
S1: of that, though, is that it fails to recognize that
S1: Jesus was was Jewish. Uh, Jesus in Matthew five through seven, um,
S1: often referred to the Old Testament in the Old Testament
S1: was Jesus Bible. He was constantly appealing to it. Have
S1: you not read? Do you not understand? He's assuming that
S1: the truthfulness of the Old Testament. He does this repeatedly.
S1: He assumes the historicity of certain characters in the Bible,
S1: and he tells us explicitly he has not come to
S1: abolish the law, but to fulfill it. And if that's
S1: the case, then the law, the Old Testament has much
S1: to say how humans should conduct themselves in sexual relationships.
S1: It's a revisionist idea to say that Jesus didn't have
S1: an opinion or a view on these things, because he
S1: didn't explicitly address it. In fact, he addresses it explicitly
S1: in the sense that he refers to the Old Testament law.
S1: He refers to its goodness. He refers to his own
S1: fulfillment of it. And he does not say that I
S1: have come to get rid of the law, but rather
S1: to fulfill it, and to achieve for us the righteousness
S1: that we so need to be made right before God.
S1: And so it's it's a sly way. It's, dare I say,
S1: it's a cheap way of trying to make a point
S1: that really can't be sustained. If you understand something about
S1: Jesus Jewish background, his affirmation of the Old Testament, and then,
S1: of course, what he just implicitly teaches about marriage in
S1: places like Matthew 19. He is clearly assuming that marriage
S1: is between one woman, one man for a lifetime. Even
S1: his teaching on divorce and remarriage in that regard is
S1: very controversial among his disciples and the religious leaders of
S1: his day. When people say that they just aren't taking
S1: Jesus seriously regarding everything, he has actually taught us about
S1: human sexuality, and I would encourage them if they're if
S1: they're doing that, they're asking that in good faith, if
S1: they're being sincere is to go back and read what
S1: Jesus is actually saying and see and ask yourself, can
S1: I really reconcile this affirmation of a sinful lifestyle with
S1: what I've seen Jesus say here? And my hope would
S1: be that they would they would see that that's just
S1: not something that that can be done in good faith.
S4: Yeah. Because the Old Testament is very clear on this issue,
S4: speaks very directly to this issue as a part of
S4: the law. You know, so you're right. Well, let's talk
S4: about Jesus and in his life and this whole issue
S4: that we're really discussing today about how do you love
S4: people without affirming, you know, what they're doing that's wrong? Uh,
S4: are there examples of Jesus showing love to others without
S4: affirming their sinful choices?
S1: Yeah, there there are. And, uh, I'll be honest, I,
S1: I feel like every time that I read and reflect
S1: on this passage, I get a little bit more emotional
S1: thinking about it before writing this book and thinking about
S1: these things. I think I just quickly passed over Jesus
S1: interaction with the rich young ruler in Mark ten. Jesus
S1: is dealing with the rich young ruler. For those that
S1: are listening that may not be familiar with the story,
S1: the rich young ruler comes and he's a good teacher.
S1: What must I do to inherit eternal life? Jesus questions
S1: him about what he means by goodness tells him that
S1: you understand the law. The man tells him, yes, I
S1: have kept all these things to my from my youth.
S1: And then verse 21 it says, Jesus looked at him,
S1: loved him, and said to him, now I pause right there,
S1: because if if we allow our society or our culture
S1: to define love and what it means to be loving
S1: to one's neighbor, or be loving to one who is
S1: living a lifestyle that's contrary to God's Word? If we
S1: allow the world to define that, then the only thing
S1: that we can expect Jesus to do here after it
S1: says he loved him is to say, well, come on then,
S1: you just come follow me and live however you'd like to.
S1: But Jesus doesn't do that. Jesus looks at him, loved him,
S1: and then says to him, you lack one thing. Go
S1: sell all that you have and give to the poor,
S1: and you will have treasure in heaven. And come follow me.
S1: And it says, disheartened by the saying, the young man
S1: went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. I would
S1: love to think that people recognize that we've never seen
S1: a greater example of love than in Jesus. And in
S1: God's Word says he loved the young man, and yet
S1: his love for him would not allow the young man
S1: to remain in this pattern of sinful greed. And so
S1: out of love he says, abandon that and come, follow me.
S1: And we see that the response from the young man
S1: was he left disheartened, very sorrowful, for he had great possessions.
S1: So he ultimately ended up choosing his sinful greed over
S1: following Jesus. I think that's a tremendous example for us
S1: to see that love does not always mean that those
S1: that we show love to are going to appreciate the
S1: way that we show love, but also that love also
S1: calls people away from the things that will ultimately separate
S1: them from God. And that's one of the most loving
S1: things that we see Jesus do, is calling people to repent.
S4: That's a powerful example. You know, the word lifestyle is
S4: kind of a landmine in conversations today. If you talk
S4: about a person's sexual orientation as a lifestyle choice, they
S4: sometimes are push back on that. How do you deal
S4: with the word lifestyle?
S1: Yeah, that's a that's a great question. I'll be personally honest.
S1: I haven't given just a ton of thought to the
S1: idea of a lifestyle. I don't I don't really know
S1: its sociological definitions and whatnot. But I do think, though,
S1: that in this conversation, especially regarding sexual orientation and whatnot,
S1: there is a tendency to Excuse that which may be
S1: understood as innate or just an involuntary desire that one has.
S1: I find it interesting that this category of sexual orientation
S1: seems to get a pass within culture, while other things
S1: do not. Again, I'm not drawing a parallel here, I'm
S1: just trying to show examples of how I how I
S1: see an inconsistency here. If a person grows up in
S1: a home that has been plagued by alcoholism, some may
S1: say that they would have a propensity to alcoholism or
S1: to addictive behavior. And yet, while there may be within
S1: us a a sympathetic response to that, if that person
S1: then goes and loses their job because of alcoholism or,
S1: heaven forbid, gets in a terrible car accident or something
S1: like that, we don't excuse them of of the consequence
S1: of that action, simply because there was a disposition that
S1: they had to it. It might cause our hearts to
S1: be sympathetic. Uh, trying to be helpful in understanding. But
S1: just because someone is inclined to something doesn't mean that
S1: that is a natural desire that makes it okay. And
S1: I think that's why that second chapter of the book
S1: that deals with crisis, which is related to sin, is
S1: that we all have to recognize that every one of
S1: us was made in the image of God. We're also
S1: born in in sins, what we're told in the book
S1: of Romans. And it's it's very obvious. Most anyone that
S1: would deny it just needs to go work in the
S1: church nursery. Whenever I my my four year old five
S1: year old's growing up, I didn't have to teach them
S1: how to be greedy and steal the toy from their kids.
S1: They just came naturally. I didn't have to teach them
S1: how to lie to get out of trouble. And so
S1: just because that's something that came naturally to them doesn't
S1: mean that it was something that is that is inherently good.
S1: But that's the that's the goodness of the gospel is
S1: that in Christ we're we're made new creatures. The old
S1: has passed away. Behold, the new has come. And so
S1: there is hope for us to be delivered out of
S1: patterns of sin. Even those that we don't feel like
S1: are things that we desire, that we that we go, oh,
S1: I would really not like that to be the case.
S1: That's the great news of the gospel of how he
S1: he delivers us and he sets us free.
S4: Yeah, I think all of us, from time to time
S4: have urges, desires that cross our mind that are not
S4: in keeping with God's plans for us. Right? We simply
S4: allow those and followed those. We would be off on many,
S4: many side roads, you know, that are contrary to God's
S4: plans for us, for sure.
S1: Exactly.
S4: So you've addressed this somewhat, but does the command of
S4: Jesus to love our neighbors? You know, as we love ourselves,
S4: does that mean that we should be more accepting and
S4: less judgmental about those who are practicing homosexuality?
S1: Yeah. So I think that, again, one of the things
S1: I keep coming back to in the book and in
S1: conversation is what do we mean by the terms that
S1: we're using? I've had people ask the question, Is Jesus
S1: inclusive or exclusive? Part of that comes down to what
S1: does a person mean when they say inclusive or exclusive
S1: or accepting and less judgmental? If by accepting of one's neighbor,
S1: we mean that we love them, that we're going to
S1: care for them, we're going to do anything that we
S1: can to be beneficial and point them in the right
S1: and good direction. Then I can understand how the love
S1: of neighbors there could be understood as being more more accepting,
S1: if less judgmental means something like, I'm going to deal
S1: with my own sin, and my own need for Jesus
S1: is a primary concern in my own life. Before I
S1: attempt to encourage others and correct them to abandon their
S1: sinful ways, then I think it could be helpful for
S1: us to think in those terms of being less judgmental.
S1: The problem is, again, people tend to read Jesus instruction
S1: whenever he says, judge not, lest ye be judged. For
S1: by the same measure that you judge, you will be
S1: judged as well. They read that in isolation from its context,
S1: because just a little bit later on in that passage,
S1: Jesus tells his followers, don't cast their pearls before swine.
S1: And to follow Jesus admonition regarding pearls before swine. So
S1: not not continuing to give wisdom to those that rejected
S1: and don't have any value for it. Jesus is assuming
S1: that you have to practice some form of judgment to
S1: be able to discern who who the swine are. It's
S1: kind of hard. But again, those those are Jesus's words.
S1: If by judgmental someone means we should be less discerning,
S1: I go, no, we don't. We need to be discerning.
S1: If by being more accepting someone means we don't need
S1: to deal with sin ever, I would say no, that
S1: would be problematic. So a lot of ways I'd answer
S1: that question would be depend on what a person means
S1: when they say accepting and less judgmental because there's there's
S1: different ways, different terms that could be used there and
S1: that need a little bit of more refinement.
S4: Yeah, I think if we love a person, we desire
S4: what's best for that person. And as Christians, we believe
S4: that what is best for that person is whatever the
S4: Bible teaches we should be doing or not doing. You know. Amen.
S4: So the Christian has a perspective on what is right
S4: and wrong. Amen. I'm going to I'm going to quote
S4: this from the from the book. You say we must
S4: guard against losing our awe and wonder at the glory
S4: of God Himself, who came to redeem us from our sin.
S4: Why do you say that?
S1: I think that part of it is if I forget
S1: that I need the grace of Christ myself, then I
S1: will be predisposed toward a pretentious, self-righteous spirit toward others
S1: that will lead me to prayerlessness for those people that
S1: will lead me to hopelessness, because I will view people
S1: as sinners beyond the grace of God. And I think
S1: what's interesting there is, is when I look at somebody
S1: and I think, oh, that person is just gone, there's
S1: no hope for them. That's in a sense saying that
S1: there was something particularly special about me that made me savable.
S1: But whenever you read Romans five six through eight, but
S1: God demonstrated his own love for us in that while
S1: we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. His love
S1: for me, for for you, for everyone listening, his love
S1: for us was not predicated on our our beauty, but
S1: upon his his kindness towards sinners. And so we have
S1: to guard against losing the sense of awe of just
S1: what God has done to save us. And I think
S1: if we reflect upon that, that gets deep into our
S1: own bones, it will fill us with hope to say,
S1: you know, if he can save me, he can save anybody.
S1: And if he can save anyone, even whenever I see
S1: the things in my family or in my society or
S1: my community that are that are very sad and sometimes
S1: very dark, I still have hope because of who Christ
S1: is and what he has done. And so it preserves
S1: our humility and it also fills us with hope.
S5: Yeah.
S4: You know, Doctor Huff, I think we tend to identify
S4: ourselves and sometimes other people based on what they do.
S4: We think of a particular person, for example, and we think, well,
S4: they're an alcoholic. I mean, that's the way we identify them.
S4: That's what stands out to us. And sometimes we certainly
S4: do that in the sexual area as well. Uh, why
S4: is it dangerous to find our identity outside of our
S4: relationship with Christ?
S1: One of the things that's helpful to mention here is
S1: that it's not as if we don't have identities outside
S1: of Christ, but rather which identity holds the place of
S1: preeminence in my life. And so when I describe myself
S1: to people, you know, I'm a husband of one wife,
S1: I've got five kids, I'm a professor, I'm a director,
S1: I'm an author. Those can all be things that are
S1: are true. I am an American. I am from Houston, Texas.
S1: I love golf. Every one of those descriptions are true.
S1: And they and they, they have things that go along
S1: with them. The problem is, if I let any one
S1: of those identities become the controlling identity within my life,
S1: and it's not my identity in Christ. Um, there's all
S1: kinds of things that go wrong. One is that every
S1: one of those identities can let me down. I'll give
S1: you an example. When I was a pastor, when my
S1: church was full and the giving was up and people
S1: were being saved and we were having baptisms, I, as
S1: a pastor, felt great joy on Sundays when the air
S1: conditioner didn't work and the numbers were low and the
S1: child ministry leaders didn't show up, I would be very
S1: down and depressed. And why was that? It was often
S1: because my true sense of joy was found in my
S1: identity as the pastor. What I found is that there
S1: was an unshakable ness to my joy when I recognized
S1: that the most important thing about me was that I
S1: belonged to Christ, and that Christ dwelled in me by
S1: His Holy Spirit. And I think that what can happen
S1: if we allow other identities to creep in is they
S1: begin to exert a controlling effect upon us, where Christ
S1: just becomes an add on and Christ Christ does not
S1: like that. Christ wants to be preeminent in the hearts
S1: of his people. So I think that's one of the
S1: dangers of when we find other identities outside of Christ,
S1: and we allow those to become controlling aspects of our person.
S4: You know, in this whole area of homosexuality, it seems
S4: like the definitions of that word have begun to shift
S4: over time. How is the term homosexuality a moving target
S4: in our culture?
S1: I'm not old, but I'm old enough to have not
S1: grown up with the internet. We got the internet whenever
S1: I think I was in middle school And that was
S1: the dial up. There'll be some people listening to this
S1: that don't have any idea what I'm talking about. I
S1: even mentioned that in the book, is that there was
S1: a time when if you wanted to hear a song
S1: on the radio, you had to. If you wanted to
S1: hear a song at all, you had to call the
S1: radio station for the request line. And it was just
S1: a different time. And so, um, our language and speech,
S1: it had a slower pace to it. There were probably
S1: more gatekeepers to the way that language is used. So
S1: with the advent of the internet and really the the
S1: democratization of communication, where someone on Twitter or Facebook or
S1: Instagram or TikTok, they can have as much or more
S1: influence through a podcast or through their reels as many
S1: of the institutions that we grew up getting our information from.
S1: I think that that is one of the things that
S1: has has produced this moving target of of language. And
S1: so there were, you know, years ago, the language of
S1: homosexuality would have more rightly referred to more of like
S1: a behavior. I think it's one of the reasons why
S1: we see translation slightly older translations from the 60s, 70s
S1: and 80s. They used the word homosexual to define some
S1: of the terms that we find in the New Testament.
S1: But now we've seen translators recognizing that homosexuality has expanded,
S1: its definitions shifted and changed a little bit. And so
S1: now they're going for a little bit more of a
S1: formal translation of those passages in seeking to try to
S1: capture what those texts were referring to in terms of behavior.
S1: And so I still wholeheartedly believe that Scripture addresses what
S1: we understand now in society as homosexuality. I have a
S1: whole chapter on that in the book, but I'm also
S1: understanding why translators now are are favoring more formal word
S1: for word translations of the Greek in an attempt to
S1: try to produce something that is not as susceptible to
S1: the change of language within society. But language changes so fast.
S1: I've got I've got two kids in high school, and
S1: they come home every, every week using some new word
S1: that I swore I would never be the parent that
S1: couldn't understand the terminology of today's youth. But but they
S1: that things just enter into the English language and different concepts,
S1: and they're refined and changed and, and so I think
S1: that's what's happened with a lot of the vocabulary that's
S1: used in this, this whole public debate regarding gender and sexuality.
S1: So I think that's part of what's happened with, with
S1: the term homosexuality and how it's shifted over over the years.
S5: Yeah.
S4: Now, in the book, you refer to same sex attractions
S4: as contrary to God's will for his Explain that.
S1: What I'm referring to there is this. This erotic same
S1: sex attraction, um, as being contrary to God's will. Um,
S1: in light of what we see in God's design for marriage,
S1: the culmination of of an erotic love. And I mean
S1: that in the best sense of the word, uh, with
S1: a sexual desire for someone is in the context of
S1: one man and one woman for marriage, geared toward, uh,
S1: the rearing of children being fruitful and multiplying and that
S1: any type of sexual desire outside of that. So not
S1: just same sex sexual desires or attractions, but any desire.
S1: So when Jesus talks about when a man looks at
S1: another woman with lust in his heart, he's already committed
S1: adultery with her. Anything that is outside that covenantal context
S1: of marriage between one man and one woman is is
S1: contrary to God's will for our sexual desires. We see
S1: this in creation. We see Jesus affirming this in the
S1: sermon on the Mount and in Matthew 19 when he
S1: talks about marriage. And so that's that's what I'm I'm
S1: getting at. And the reason why I address same sex
S1: attraction in the book is because there is somewhat of
S1: a movement among some professing Christians, some that would have
S1: more of a revisionist or deconstructionist type of approach to
S1: reading scripture that would say the Bible doesn't address this
S1: at all. These are natural. These are things that we
S1: shouldn't repress, but we should actually celebrate. And I find
S1: that to be contrary not only to the ideal that
S1: we find in Scripture, but the instructions that we see
S1: in the New Testament as well, regarding God's will for
S1: our sexual desire.
S5: Yeah.
S4: To what extent do you believe that the devaluing of
S4: marriage in our society and in no fault divorces have
S4: contributed to to kind of a redefinition of marriage.
S1: I think that one of the things that we have
S1: seen in society is marriage viewed with with disdain. And
S1: even the way that I I'm not going to say
S1: any names here, but I, I recall a Christian comedian
S1: that told a joke at a Christian gathering. The context,
S1: the joke was something to the effect of his wife
S1: mentioned to him, why are you looking at other women
S1: while we're out at this event or something like that?
S1: And and the joke was, honey, I'm, I'm just window shopping.
S1: I don't I don't intend to buy anything. I was
S1: kind of flabbergasted. I was thinking, surely I didn't just
S1: hear that and went back and listened to it. That
S1: type of attitude toward marriage, I think, is what has
S1: led within culture to this idea of we can just
S1: kind of shape it however we want to. And eventually
S1: if if marriage is just something that you can enter
S1: into and out of at leisure, that your your vows
S1: can be broken before God and men eventually down the road,
S1: you get to the point where you're you're questioning the
S1: very nature of what marriage is. And I don't think
S1: that whenever these things were happening in the context of
S1: the United States, that we fully understood what's going to
S1: happen when marriage is viewed as as something not to
S1: be held in honor? You know, that's that's one of
S1: the things that the author of Hebrews mentions in Hebrews
S1: 13 to honor the marriage bed, that there is a sanctity,
S1: that it's it's not the punch line of a joke.
S1: It's it's something that God has embedded into the fabric
S1: of creation to point to Christ's relationship to his church.
S1: And so as we slowly devalue marriage, we eventually think
S1: that it's ours to redefine and shape how we like.
S1: And it's had tragic, tragic, uh, results within society. There's
S1: a there's a great book I would encourage people to
S1: take take a look at it. It's called Get Married
S1: by Brad Wilcox. He's a sociologist at the University of
S1: Virginia who's written on, on the impact of of what
S1: happens and what happens to children and what happens with
S1: just from a sociological aspect of when a society devalues marriage,
S1: what happens? It has tragic results. We as Christians have
S1: not only this natural observation in the world, but also
S1: the special revelation of God's Word that shows us that
S1: marriage is not ours to redefine. It is ours to
S1: hold in high regard and honor above, above all else.
S4: Speak to the parent whose son or daughter has come
S4: home to them, and reveal to them that they are
S4: in their own minds, their homosexual. And the parent is
S4: obviously very, very devastated. What would you say to that parent?
S1: Thank you for that question, because that in so many ways,
S1: when I say that I want a book that's helpful
S1: and hopeful, that is that is what I'm getting at.
S1: I have not written the book primarily just to answer
S1: a bunch of questions that float around on social media,
S1: but rather the ones that are being asked at dinner
S1: tables and in living rooms. And so what I want
S1: parents to, to see. And so I'm, I'm going to,
S1: to make the assumption here that these are, these are
S1: parents that hold to a Christian faith. They're practicing Christians
S1: and they love Christ. They recognize that they haven't they
S1: didn't do everything great or right as a parent, but
S1: they love their kids and they're wrestling with this tension
S1: of how do I love them without without affirming them,
S1: but while also maintaining the relationship. All kinds of things
S1: come to mind here. And there's there's a good bit
S1: in the book that talks about this. One of the
S1: things that parents have to recognize is they're still called
S1: to love and parent their child. God, in his kindness,
S1: put that child in their life, in their family at
S1: this time and place within history for his glory and
S1: their good. And so they don't need to look at
S1: this as, Lord, why are you doing this to me?
S1: They need to look at it as an opportunity to
S1: cry out to the Lord and hope in him. And
S1: my hope would be that they would be in a
S1: good church, that that doesn't bring shame upon them. Um,
S1: I've heard stories, sadly, of parents that have wrestled with
S1: this that say, you know, I can't even bring this
S1: up as a prayer request at my church because my
S1: church wouldn't wouldn't know what to do with me. That's
S1: that's a sad place to be. And I don't wish
S1: that upon anybody. I hope that people are in churches
S1: that can that can help them. And so one of
S1: the things is, is you're going to want to continue
S1: to affirm that child in everything that you can affirm
S1: them in without affirming them in their sin. So there's
S1: a lot of things that you can do that with.
S1: Maybe their career, maybe their education, maybe their athletics depends
S1: on the age of the child, I guess. But there's
S1: there's ways that you continue to love them and show
S1: that you're for them. You're not against them. So that
S1: would be that would be one thing. The other thing
S1: would be to say whatever shame that you feel, bring
S1: it to the cross. Christ Jesus is kind to us.
S1: He he does not put out the smoking flax nor
S1: the bruised reed. Uh, and so it's not as if
S1: when we come to him in our sense of need,
S1: that he is going to go. I can't believe you're
S1: bringing me this and that. You want me to help
S1: and intervene in this, in this situation, in a practical way.
S1: I think that depending upon the nature of the relationship
S1: and the degree to which the parent has been able
S1: to have these types of conversations, I think it's important
S1: that Christian parents speak the truth in love. I don't
S1: think that that means that every conversation that they have
S1: with the child has to be about this issue. The
S1: flip side of that would be, you also have to
S1: recognize that there are things that you can do, and
S1: there's things that you can't do as a parent and
S1: the things that you can do as a parent. It's
S1: the same type of thing that we see Paul doing
S1: in the church in Corinth, when he speaks of his
S1: ministry and Apollos ministry. Paul plants the gospel seed, Apollos
S1: waters the gospel seed. But ultimately it is God who
S1: brings the growth and the increase to that seed. Parents
S1: need to recognize that they're not God. And most parents
S1: would go, well, I know that I'm not. But there's
S1: an inordinate amount of pressure that a parent can feel
S1: to change the hearts and lives of their children. But
S1: the reality is, is only God can do that. And
S1: so be faithful to sow the gospel seed to water,
S1: the gospel seed to pray that God would do, and
S1: then trust him to do what only he can do.
S1: And I would just say, I think that's a pretty
S1: good parenting philosophy across the board. I want all of
S1: my kids to love Christ, and three of my children
S1: have made professions of faith, and I'm I'm grateful for that.
S1: But I also recognize that the growth that I want
S1: to see in my kids, I can help along the
S1: way by planting and watering seeds. But ultimately, it's going
S1: to be the God of that gospel through the work
S1: of the Holy Spirit doing that work in my children.
S1: And so let God be God and let God be
S1: God of our parenting and our relationships and and entrust
S1: it to him. Don't compromise the truth in order to
S1: be perceived as loving, but at the same time, make
S1: sure that your truth that you share is motivated by
S1: a genuine love and affection that is rooted in that
S1: familial relationship that you have and to where they know, hey,
S1: my mom and dad, even though they disagree with me
S1: and they don't like the way that I'm living and
S1: the choices that I'm making and the decisions that I've
S1: I'm considering, I know that they love me, and I
S1: know that they are there for me, even where they
S1: might disagree with these decisions that I'm making and let
S1: God do what he can, uh, what he can do.
S4: Here's a here's a question that many Christian parents have
S4: asked when their children reveal to them, you know, their
S4: sexual attractions and their involvement with someone else, and then
S4: they finally say, you know, Mom and Dad, I'm going
S4: to marry my partner. And I really would like for
S4: you to come to the wedding. What would you say
S4: to those parents?
S5: Yeah.
S1: I would say to them that this is where it's
S1: very important for you to remember. It is true that
S1: you are their parent and that you are called to
S1: love them. But before that, you were called to love
S1: and honor Christ, to honor God, and to honor His Word.
S1: And so before you are a parent, you are a
S1: disciple of Jesus. In that situation, what I would say
S1: and I recognize there is a variety of opinions here,
S1: given that marriage is God's design and that God's design
S1: is between one man and one woman, that a Christian
S1: should not participate or attend or affirm any marriage that
S1: is contrary to God's design, and that they should do
S1: that first and foremost. As one who is a follower
S1: of Christ, I recognize that that can and will be
S1: hard for some people to hear. But again, it goes
S1: back to what I was just sharing about entrusting God
S1: with the heart transformation that he can only do. And
S1: so I think that participation or attendance at a wedding
S1: could result in greater confusion. And ultimately, I believe that
S1: since marriage is God's design and his ideal between one
S1: man and one woman, for us to affirm any marital
S1: union that is contrary to that, it is. It is
S1: not something that we as Christians can or should do.
S1: I know that people will disagree with certain aspects of
S1: what I'm saying there, but I hope that they would
S1: receive that coming from me as as wanting us to
S1: wrestle with what does it mean to be faithful to
S1: Christ and, and love others well, but with a love
S1: that doesn't rejoice in wrongdoing but ultimately rejoices in the truth. Yeah.
S4: That's a very hard decision for parents to be sure,
S4: because we know they love, they want the best for
S4: their child. And yet here's something they don't agree with.
S4: They know it's not in keeping with God's original plan. Yeah,
S4: but I hear exactly what you're saying. It's getting back
S4: to that concept of of loving our children and speaking
S4: truth to our children.
S1: I think you're exactly right. Is it's it's a love
S1: that aims for the best for those that we love.
S1: As Christians, we recognize that the best for others is
S1: not only to trust Christ, but to obey Christ as
S1: those that have trusted him. And so we wouldn't want
S1: to do anything in our attempts to love that would
S1: that would undermine that good that we want to see
S1: birth in them as the Spirit of God moves.
S4: So your position, as I hear it, is that we
S4: are not to affirm something that is clearly a rebellion
S4: against God's guidelines in Scripture. We're not to affirm that
S4: kind of behavior, and at the same time expressing our
S4: love and God's love for that child. I mean, God
S4: loves them just as much as he loves us, and
S4: he wants to redeem them. He wants to have a
S4: relationship with them which will radically change their lifestyle. Right?
S1: That's that's exactly right. And that's the same disposition that
S1: we need to have in our own progress and growth
S1: in Christ. Uh, Romans seven and eight are very clear
S1: that the declaration that there is therefore now no condemnation
S1: to those who are in Christ Jesus. The fact that
S1: we know that we are loved even as sinners, it
S1: doesn't make us apathetic toward our sin, but it makes
S1: us go to war with our sin within us. Even
S1: for us, acknowledgment of the love of God should not
S1: make us indifferent to growing in holiness, but rather that
S1: recognizing that God loves us ought to empower us to
S1: want to be more conformed to the image of His Son,
S1: which he is working in us, which is the promise
S1: of Romans eight.
S4: Well, Doctor Huff, thank you for first of all writing
S4: this book, and thank you for being with us today
S4: on building relationships. I know that there are many families
S4: that are dealing with this in our culture today, and
S4: I think this book is very helpful. I would certainly
S4: encourage our listeners to get the book and read it
S4: and share it also with their friends. So again, thank
S4: you for addressing this issue and for being with us today.
S1: Thank you so much, Doctor Chapman, and I'm grateful for
S1: the work that you do and helping us love others
S1: well and really appreciate your time. It's been an honor.
S3: Again, the title of our featured resource is known for
S3: Love Loving Your LGBTQ Friends and Family Without Compromising Biblical Truth,
S3: written by Doctor Casey Huff. You can find out more
S3: at Building relationships.us.
S4: And next week it's one of the most difficult things
S4: to do. We'll talk about forgiveness in one week here.
S2: Debbie bar, talk about the choice that sets you free.
S2: A big thank you to our production team. Janice backing
S2: and Steve Wick building relationships with Doctor Gary Chapman is
S2: a production of Moody Radio in association with Moody Publishers,
S2: a ministry of Moody Bible Institute.
UU: Thanks for listening.