Sabbath Sermon: Adam and Steve

[bonnie]

Sabbath Sermon: Adam and Steve

 

10 October 2014 | RACHEL LOGAN

 

New Pacific Union College chaplain and PUC Church associate pastor Jonathan Henderson took the university’s week of prayer as an opportunity to deliver a message that has resonated deeply with LGBTQ Adventists and their allies.

On Wednesday night, October 8, Pastor Henderson took the PUC Church stage for the third night in a row in a series on relationships. Monday night he highlighted Adam and God; Tuesday focused on Adam and Eve; and on Wednesday, Adam and Steve were the focal point of the conversation.

Henderson started his presentation with a humorous tone, noting that he still had his job, despite the intense nature of his sermons.

After beginning with prayer Henderson asked the audience to recognize his limitations understanding homosexuality. “You need to hear the perspective of those who have walked this journey,” he said.  “I am not an expert. I am not the Holy Spirit. I am not the Judge. I am not the prophet. I am your chaplain, who is still on his journey, and I am wanting to understand even better.”

Henderson quoted Matthew 19:3-12 (NIV) to propel his sermon. He focused on verse 8: “Jesus replied, ‘Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.’”

Henderson went on to say that God gave in on this issue of divorce, despite this not having been God’s intent in the beginning.

“You need to realize that God has given in often throughout history to us,” said Henderson.

He cited God’s giving the Israelites a king when they asked for it, even though God was their King. When David, a “man after God’s own heart” became King, he was good, but after time, he became corrupt.

“They [the Israelites] chose to be a part of something that was never God’s original design, but this is the world we live in,” said Henderson. “How I wish we could all go back to the way things used to be,” he continued. “And interestingly enough, God works with us in our own sinful matrix. How often that God has to put up with the way that we chose to do things. It was not God’s will that Eve take the fruit and that Adam also partook in it.”  

Henderson stated that maybe even up to 90% of the things that happened in the Bible did not happen as God wanted it to happen.  

“And you’ll say ‘but no, it’s God’s will!’” added Henderson. “God is just willing to allow us have our will. That’s it. Let’s just keep it real….just because God knew it was going to happen, doesn’t mean that God planned it.”

Henderson suggested that acting as though God is in control of everything is unhelpful, because then God bears responsibility for every molestation, hungry person, and murderer.

“God isn’t in control,” Henderson said. “He gave that over to you, and look what we’ve done with it.”

Henderson preached that what really upsets God is when people hurt other people. He cited Nineveh as an example, calling it the city of blood where people walked over dead bodies in the streets.

“We keep thinking that ‘Wicked Cities’ was like people at the slot machine in Vegas—people just watching a bunch of porn. When the Bible describes evil, it’s talking about stuff that’s so scary, so disgusting, that even the wicked city doesn’t want to be around itself.”

Henderson stated that sin is everywhere, but for some reason, the church has chosen to focus on one sin that some consider worst of all. People in the church will say that God did not choose to create Adam and Steve; He created Adam and Eve.

People will say that homosexuals are like rabbits, and all they want to do is have sex. Henderson said this is a problem, because these statements dehumanize. “You create all these images as if they are not people that are having soul connections—relating to one another, identifying with one another. You need to understand the foundation of relationships…and it’s not sex! It’s heart to heart connection.”

Henderson admitted that he used to believe it was okay for same-sex couples to “have the soul connection,” but not to engage in sexual activity. As he began to read the Bible, Henderson began to see the situation differently. He realized that God can “call an audible” because the game of life changes.

In Jonah 3:10, Nineveh repented and God saw their repentance, so He changed His mind.  

“Listen, the character of God never changes. His heart never changes. His love never changes. It will never–we could never be separated from that. But God will change His mind because we change! The game changes and God will adjust based on the circumstances. Why wouldn’t He? In fact, coaches get fired because they don’t know how to change their game plan within the game!”

Henderson reminded the audience that not everyone will accept or interpret the Bible the same, though some people find that hard to accept.

Henderson pointed out that in the Bible, Christ says some people are born asexual. Henderson suggested that it’s possible for people to be born homosexual. Again, this is hard for some people to accept.

“‘It just couldn’t be that way, pastor, because then somehow we wouldn’t be able to judge them in the same way that we are used to doing...If they are born that way then we might have to be more compassionate and understanding!’ And there’s something wrong with that picture!” said Henderson.

Henderson stated that while some people may be born homosexual, others might  be shaped that way by experiences they had as a child. People in the church find this all hard to accept because it is complicated; it isn’t black and white. He went on, noting that people have a tendency to want to fit sins in a box, but one size does not fit all. In the past, people did not believe a white woman should marry a black man, but things change–people change, Henderson pointed out.

He asserted that people believe the Bible governs morality, but oftentimes culture shapes our moral beliefs. “We are afraid of what we don’t understand. We are afraid of what’s different,” said Henderson.

Henderson drew attention to the fact that there is a ministry on Pacific Union College’s campus called Safe Place. He believes that the fact that this group exists on campus is a “tragedy.” PUC itself should be the safe place. “How do you have a sanctuary within a sanctuary?” he asked.

Sometimes, when homosexual individuals “come out,” their parents have a hard time dealing with it. Some unsupportive parents tell their child not to bring their partner around the house. Henderson said that thankfully, this isn’t always where the story ends. Sometimes, parents come around to accept their child, and their child’s partner because they love their child, and nothing can change that.

“If your parents can come to that point, how much more will your heavenly Father, who loves you more?”

Since Henderson’s talk on Wednesday, his words have prompted an overwhelming response.

 PUC student David O’Hair, who also works as the editor for the Campus Chronicle, called Henderson’s sermon surprising and great. “The talk addressed the differences between being born, made, or choosing to be part of the LGBTQ community. The honesty and different approach was refreshing to hear,” said O’Hair. “In an age where controversial issues are touched on, but never fully divulged, Pastor Henderson crafted a great message that was able to reach all listeners, not only those personally influenced by this topic.”

O’Hair stated that the “Adam and Steve” sermon seemed to draw the biggest crowd of the series so far. “I honestly have not heard one bad review of the talk or its message. It was well received and led to many discussions outside the sanctuary.”

PUC professor of psychology, Dr. Aubyn Fulton, spoke highly of Henderson’s talk. “This just may be the most powerful sermon ever preached from the PUC pulpit," he said. “What makes Jonathan's talk last night such a landmark is that it so clearly creates the space for pretty conservative Christians, who still might believe that LGBTQ is not quite what God originally had in mind, to still treat LGBTQ people with love and respect. From now on, no conservative Adventist has an excuse for their hate or rejection. We now know it is possible for people with those views to still be loving and respectful - and (I think) from now on we should expect nothing less than this.”

Seventh-Gay Adventists producer Daneen Akers also spoke passionately about Henderson’s sermon. “I was weeping through much of this sermon because I know what a step it is, and it just felt like this—this is what Jesus was talking about when he said his followers would be known by their love,” said Akers. “It’s really just the Gospel, and it’s what Christians should be known for—love and respect, even if we all don’t fully agree. But somehow we’ve gone so terribly wrong, especially around this topic, that tears are shed when someone preaches such a beautiful sermon about what Jesus said it should be all about.”

Jonathan Henderson began working at PUC in September 2014. Previously, he served as the head pastor for Grand Advent Seventh-day Adventist Church in Oakland, California for eleven years.

Watch Adam and Steve:

Rachel Logan is a writing intern for Spectrum Magazine

 

[JoeMo]

Very interesting article - equivalent to Pope Francis' announcement about the Catholic Church's shift on LGBT's yesterday (maybe not as big of a deal since Pastor Henderson is not a "pope").

[LifeHiscost]

It is interesting to note that each person or group of persons who wandered from God's express desires negligently, came to repentance as they understood more fully the abominations they were involved in and the damage that was caused to the many, by their selfish acts.

 

…5But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed. 6All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him. 7He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth.…Isaiah 53

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[Sojourner]

li

Henderson quoted Matthew 19:3-12 (NIV) to propel his sermon. He focused on verse 8: “Jesus replied, ‘Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.’”

Henderson went on to say that God gave in on this issue of divorce, despite this not having been God’s intent in the beginning.

“You need to realize that God has given in often throughout history to us,” said Henderson.

 

 

 

Just out of interest, how does the Bible end in the book of Revelation? - Rev 22:19 "And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book".

 

It is a gross assumption to suggest that I have to realize that God has "Given in to us" and that there is some type of implication that He has "Given In" and changed the words of the New Testament.

 

Like it or lump it the New Testament clearly states that Sodomy is a sin and a sin along with several others that exludes people from the kingdom. Nothing can ever change the words of Scripture irrespective of how it becomes that they are seen as no longer being politically correct. It is exactly the way that the anti Christ attacks the church by attacking its beliefs and having doctrines changed accordingly. 

 

By all means be accepting of all people, just do not try and suggest that God has somehow changed his mind, and no longer means what He states in Scripture on any given subject. Your speaker above seems to have gone to a great deal of effort to create a straw man arguement that side steps the given issue of what Scripture actually says..

[Sojourner]

Henderson pointed out that in the Bible, Christ says some people are born asexual. Henderson suggested that it’s possible for people to be born homosexual. Again, this is hard for some people to accept.

 

 

I have viewed various scientific studies on this subject, relating to Genetics, Hormone levels in pregnancy, brain make up and so forth and nothing has ever been proven to suggest that a person is born gay because of any of these reasons. I would love to know where Henderson gets his proof that this is the case. I agree with his point that if that were true then it would have to be accpeted that God created that person to be gay. Yet again to suggest that its possible without any proof in terms of replicated scientific studies is poor form.

[Gregory Matthews]

Sojourner:  In your quotation, it was said that people were born gay.  It did not say that it was caused by genetics, brain waves or harmones, etc.

 

You are correct, no scientific literature has demonstrated that any of those are a cause of homosexuality.   However, there is  much to be said that homosexuality is not a choice.

 

NOTE:  People who are not homosexual  may chose to engage in homosexual behavior.  But, that behavior does not define homosexuality.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I have viewed various scientific studies on this subject, relating to Genetics, Hormone levels in pregnancy, brain make up and so forth and nothing has ever been proven to suggest that a person is born gay because of any of these reasons. I would love to know where Henderson gets his proof that this is the case. I agree with his point that if that were true then it would have to be accpeted that God created that person to be gay. Yet again to suggest that its possible without any proof in terms of replicated scientific studies is poor form.

 

the following was published this year: 

 

Adv Genet. 2014;86:167-84. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-800222-3.00008-5.

The biological basis of human sexual orientation: is there a role for epigenetics?

Ngun TC, Vilain E.

• Department of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Abstract

Sexual orientation is one of the largest sex differences in humans. The vast majority of the population is heterosexual, that is, they are attracted to members of the opposite sex. However, a small but significant proportion of people are bisexual or homosexual and experience attraction to members of the same sex. The origins of the phenomenon have long been the subject of scientific study. In this chapter, we will review the evidence that sexual orientation has biological underpinnings and consider the involvement of epigenetic mechanisms. We will first discuss studies that show that sexual orientation has a genetic component. These studies show that sexual orientation is more concordant in monozygotic twins than in dizygotic ones and that male sexual orientation is linked to several regions of the genome. We will then highlight findings that suggest a link between sexual orientation and epigenetic mechanisms. In particular, we will consider the case of women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH). These women were exposed to high levels of testosterone in utero and have much higher rates of nonheterosexual orientation compared to non-CAH women. Studies in animal models strongly suggest that the long-term effects of hormonal exposure (such as those experienced by CAH women) are mediated by epigenetic mechanisms. We conclude by describing a hypothetical framework that unifies genetic and epigenetic explanations of sexual orientation and the continued challenges facing sexual orientation research.

 

 

While it's not a "replicated" study using human models, it *is* a substantial review of current knowledge and study pertaining to the biological basis of sexual orientation, including those studies using animal models...

[phkrause]

Its to bad that John no longer posts here. I would definitely like his expert opinion on this subject.

[Sojourner]

the following was published this year: 

 

While it's not a "replicated" study using human models, it *is* a substantial review of current knowledge and study pertaining to the biological basis of sexual orientation, including those studies using animal models...

Its also largely meaningless, these types of theories have been thrown around since the 1970's and often false headlines are printed stating that a link has been found and its later found to be fraudulent. Its also well known that results happen all the time in animals that cannot be replicated in humans and this extends to treatments for various diseases that are unable to proceed as a result. 

Henderson stated that its possible for people to be born gay. Again I would like to know where he gets his information from? SDA's like to focus on the fourth commandment, yet all are relevant including the ninth commandment which is that people shall not bear false testimony. If he cannot provide a source for his argument, then I suggest he retract it accordingly if he wishes to be taken seriously. 

[Gerr]

If God is so loving so as to "give in" to homosexuality, is He not loving enough to also "give in" to drunkards, drug addicts, compulsive gossipers, and serial murderers?

[Tom Wetmore]

And who says he hasn't or wouldn't exercise mercy for them?  (You say "given in", but I would say that God is merciful to all of us sinners.)

[Kevin H]

The issue is that first many of us are repulsed at this topic. We need to be honest with this as we continue.

 

Second, we have our proof texts.

 

Third, there have been problems pointed out about the proof texts. Apparently they fall into one of 3 groups: 

 

1. In worship services, there were certain times of the year that the people believed that they needed to help Baal and the gods of life to get the victory over the leviathan and the gods of death. They believed that by doing this they needed to unite their life forces. They would make clothing of mixed textiles, would make bread of different grains and everyone would unite their bodies together. This meant that as you go to temple to worship on those holydays (the spring one with the feast of unleavened bread. Yom Kippur in the fall and the others) you ate those mixed foods used the mixed textile clothes and everyone was with each other. You would be with your neighbor, your neighbor's wife, your neighbor's children, your neighbor's pets. And your neighbor would be with your wife and your children and your pets. 

 

The Bible is telling the Hebrews what they can and cannot do when they come to worship God. They would keep the same holydays and some of the other rituals, however they were to simply trust God to gain the victory for us without our help. Thus the uniting of the life forces was not allowed. And our "Proof Text" is in the context of what you can and cannot do when you come to worship.

 

2. In the ancient world they felt that if you rapped another man, that you could steal some of his life forces, and if you rapped him to death you would steal all of his life forces. What this meant was they actually believed that if they raped someone that some of the food that would have grown in his garden will now grow in theirs. That some of the animals born of his flocks will now be born in their flocks. That some of the children that his wife would have had will now be born to their wife...

 

The Bible condemns this stupid practice.

 

3. Paul is either quoting the above texts and their context, or uses a word that is a specific word for adult men being with little boys in the gym and may be better translated "Pedophile" than Homosexual.

 

The issue is how do we apply the texts which are in the above 3 contexts to what those people are dealing with today.

[LifeHiscost]

 I would say that God is merciful to all of us sinners.)

Mercy for sure, however salvation is reserved for the repentant only.

 

22And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. 23And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. 24And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. 25And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. 26And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.

27And there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Revelation 21

 

God is Love! Jesus saves! 

[Gerr]

And who says he hasn't or wouldn't exercise mercy for them?  (You say "given in", but I would say that God is merciful to all of us sinners.)

Of course, He is merciful! Forgiveness is offered to all repenting sinners.  But is He so merciful so that no one will be lost?

[Gerr]

The issue is that first many of us are repulsed at this topic. We need to be honest with this as we continue.

 

Second, we have our proof texts.

 

Third, there have been problems pointed out about the proof texts. Apparently they fall into one of 3 groups: 

 

1. In worship services, there were certain times of the year that the people believed that they needed to help Baal and the gods of life to get the victory over the leviathan and the gods of death. They believed that by doing this they needed to unite their life forces. They would make clothing of mixed textiles, would make bread of different grains and everyone would unite their bodies together. This meant that as you go to temple to worship on those holydays (the spring one with the feast of unleavened bread. Yom Kippur in the fall and the others) you ate those mixed foods used the mixed textile clothes and everyone was with each other. You would be with your neighbor, your neighbor's wife, your neighbor's children, your neighbor's pets. And your neighbor would be with your wife and your children and your pets. 

 

The Bible is telling the Hebrews what they can and cannot do when they come to worship God. They would keep the same holydays and some of the other rituals, however they were to simply trust God to gain the victory for us without our help. Thus the uniting of the life forces was not allowed. And our "Proof Text" is in the context of what you can and cannot do when you come to worship.

 

2. In the ancient world they felt that if you rapped another man, that you could steal some of his life forces, and if you rapped him to death you would steal all of his life forces. What this meant was they actually believed that if they raped someone that some of the food that would have grown in his garden will now grow in theirs. That some of the animals born of his flocks will now be born in their flocks. That some of the children that his wife would have had will now be born to their wife...

 

The Bible condemns this stupid practice.

 

3. Paul is either quoting the above texts and their context, or uses a word that is a specific word for adult men being with little boys in the gym and may be better translated "Pedophile" than Homosexual.

 

The issue is how do we apply the texts which are in the above 3 contexts to what those people are dealing with today.

And what context do you need for idolatry, adultery, etc. but which you make for homosexuality?

 

ESV | ‎1 Co 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 

 

ESV | ‎Ga 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality,  ‎20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions,  ‎21 envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 

 

If one cannot use scripture as proof texts, what then shall we use?

Is it just and fair for God  to make exception for homosexuality and not to all the other abominations over which man is unable to gain the victory? 

[Tom Wetmore]

Of course, He is merciful! Forgiveness is offered to all repenting sinners.  But is He so merciful so that no one will be lost?

He is merciful to more than just repenting sinners. Jesus said he sends the rain for the just and the unjust.  Mercy is more than merely forgiveness of sin. Mercy also implies understanding of the whole circumstance and forbearance even in the face of rebellion and rejection.  We can extend mercy to anyone without regard to their attitude toward us or God.  It's that turning the other cheek thing, going the second mile, any random act of kindness to strangers.

[Gerr]

He is merciful to more than just repenting sinners. Jesus said he sends the rain for the just and the unjust.  Mercy is more than merely forgiveness of sin. Mercy also implies understanding of the whole circumstance and forbearance even in the face of rebellion and rejection.  We can extend mercy to anyone without regard to their attitude toward us or God.  It's that turning the other cheek thing, going the second mile, any random act of kindness to strangers.

True for now while He waits for sinners to  repent, but in the end, what will happen to the unrepentant? 

[Sojourner]

Dr Brown would like to share a word!

https://www.facebook.com/AskDrBrown/photos/a.190367064322237.55437.109430102415934/1014591975233071/?type=1&theater 

[Gregory Matthews]

Gerry, you  ask what will happen in the end to those who have not repented:  In the end God will accept their choice not to spend eternity with Him.  God will allow them to go their own way and the way, which is apart from God will have the  consequence of death as life is not possible apart from God.

[Tom Wetmore]

And that will be the most merciful thing to do. Mercy does not force repentance.

I think we err when we bind forgiveness and repentance. God forgives. We are to repent. God never fails to forgive, for He has already forgiven before we even know it or respond. We may refuse to turn around and accept it.

[Gerr]

Gerry, you  ask what will happen in the end to those who have not repented:  In the end God will accept their choice not to spend eternity with Him.  God will allow them to go their own way and the way, which is apart from God will have the  consequence of death as life is not possible apart from God.

And that is oblivion.

 

Thank you.

[Kevin H]

But we have to be careful in our smugness. This is especially a danger for those of us who does not have an issue with this situation. I have enough in my own life to focus on than to worry about someone else's when there is enough credible arguments that the popular interpretation could be a misapplication of the text. Also, unlike other issues that we call sin, we do not see very many victories in this field. Why would that be? Why can the Holy Spirit be successful in other fields but be such a miserable failure in this field?

 

There are two possible dangers that I may face at the second coming.

 

First, I could go around understanding and sharing that I understand these verses to be speaking against heterosexuals engaging in homosexual behavior for some reason or another, or that other verses are actually condemning pedophiles. And encouraging people who struggle with homosexuality to do their best and to just be in a monogamist relationship. 

 

If I do this, when Jesus comes, he might say to me with anger in his voice that I gave them false hope. That I was not calling sin by it's right name and that since I did not push for them to repent for this sin that they are going into obviation anyway and that I was wrong to give them false hope.

 

On the other hand, I could join Jerry Farwell and others in the different campaigns calling homosexuality a sin and condemn this "Adam and Steve" sermon, and other such stuff.  

 

If I do this, when Jesus comes, he might, with tears, point out the problems with the text and tell me that I have added to the struggle of some tender souls and pushed them farther away from Jesus and pushed into obviation some precious souls that Jesus could have otherwise have saved.

 

There is still things being learned about these texts, so right now I don't know which one of these criticisms I will received from Jesus. Personally I would rather risk hearing the first condemnation from Jesus than the second... But you would have to decided which words you would rather hear from Jesus.

[LifeHiscost]

 Personally I would rather risk hearing the first condemnation from Jesus than the second... But you would have to decided which words you would rather hear from Jesus.

Aren't you glad that a great host trust in the mercy of God and the shed blood of His Christ as the only reason for their final deliverance.

 

…46"I have come as Light into the world, so that everyone who believes in Me will not remain in darkness. 47"If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. 48"He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.…

50I know His commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto Me, so I speak....John 12

 

God is Love! Jesus saves! 

[phkrause]

Excellent post Kevin and some great points. But we do know some that have overcome! One would be John 317 or 316, that used to post here. Also there is one thread that deals with someone that also overcame. I know someone that, when I lived in NYC, who was a very good friend of ours and he dedicated our daughter when she was a baby. We later found out that he was gay and he started a group to help gay's overcome with the help of God. He once was on a talk show with others talking about this issue.

[Kevin H]

Pkrause: We need to have a balance. I respect what John has gone through (and I miss him here). I have known a number who originally said that they changed through the study of Aesthetic Realism in New York City, two of my very closest friends from childhood among them. One still considers himself completely changed. The other is appreciative of what he learned but has been unsuccessful in his change. Many who had studied have returned to homosexuality. Some of them have been so upset that they have been supporting a web site by two boys who now call it a cult. (I remember those two boys, Ever see someone who you behave decently towards but in your mind you just want to give them the spanking of their lives, but fear that they are too stupid for a well deserved spanking to wake them up to their stupidity? ... that is those two boys.) Others while they have not changed, still appreciate what they learned. There are things going on with the foundation that many have felt wisest to distance themselves from it, but this website is making a mountain out of a foot hill. The foundation is no longer offering programs to try to help people change. I believe that Siegel was a man a head of his time, and a victim of his times and of his inner circle's role of being "Yes" people.  I think that realizing the years he lived and allowing him to be human, and taking his basic principles and comparing them with Mrs. White, William Glasser and Jack Canfield, forms a good dove tail with each other and very useful.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetic_Realism

 

http://michaelbluejay.com/x/

 

Then there are the groups from a more conservative Christian perspective, including one that the Seventh-day Adventist church had supported that ended up being a disaster.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuals_Anonymous

 

If people are able to change fantastic. But we also need to be aware of the disasters that we have run into so far. And we need to be fair to what we are now learning about the contexts of the "Proof" texts and what they are talking about.