In Reply to: Honestly posted by AG on April 07, 2004 at 06:04:05:
First off, I’d like to say that I’m not part of any “agenda”. I do want to say that I at least empathize with someone who, with TF in their background, has most likely had the common experience of having their personality blasted away, and had their identity supplanted, probably several times, depending on the length of time in the cult.
I can understand the reactive result of seeking “any port in the storm” emotionally, socially, and sexually. That’s usually the order taken in choosing homosexual self-identity.
That is a very common reaction to sexual abuse, especially when compounded with any sort of addiction process.
Multiple Personality Disorder, in fact, is an extreme reaction to sexual molestation—sexual molestation is the ONLY cause of MPD, in fact; according to current psychology/sociology studies.
Both women and men in the “real world” sex trade (“real” vs. TF’s) sometime reject their heterosexuality, because of its intrinsic association with their abuse. And, many “lower rung” (i.e.: not expensive/ or “high class”) people in the sex trade continue to receive abuse, but mostly of the heterosexual type.
My position on homosexual self-identity is much the same as that of CS Lewis, who, when he observed male homosexuality at prep school, said, in writing later about it, that it was merely something which was “a sin that he was never particularly attracted to”, although he was vigorously attracted to other sins.
I’ve never had any homosexual attractions, like Lewis. I do understand brokenness. I do have formerly homosexual friends, some of whom have died from AIDS (including TF exers), and one of whom specifically wanted it taught at his funeral/wake that, on his deathbed, he viewed homosexuality as a self-addiction to a chosen perversion.
He said that he came to understand his own brokenness, and his reasons for wrongly choosing this sexual self-identification. His gay brother, in my hearing, literally threatened to murder the pastor who fulfilled this dying man’s request for his beliefs to be made know to his loved ones. His brother’s argument, obviously, was emotional, not logical or scientific.
My wife and I were taking care of three-year olds (and up!) at church a couple of Sundays ago. Two of the kids were those of a couple who married after the guy did experience what you’re insisting is a false or “absurd” healing. He has not changed his position or belief in what he says he genuinely experienced.
Both of them are model-gorgeous bodybuilders, and either one could have any lover they wanted, heterosexual or otherwise, if they were so inclined. Their new life is a choice, and they’ll gladly tell you all about it, because they love God, and love people, especially those struggling with sex sin. They believe that they overcome the Devil by the blood of Jesus, and by the word of their testimony.
My heart goes out to you, when I read about your difficulty in what you say is the “rethinking and examining of [your] core beliefs”. I understand the difficulty, and hope your reaction to your fear will lead you in the right direction.
I wasn’t personally part of the conditioning you, very sadly, experienced, and it does break my heart; really. Please don’t just have allow yourself to have a conditioned response to what I’m trying to tell you here; that would be dishonest on your part. I know from experience that avoidance does not heal pain; especially the kind you have undoubtedly experienced.
And, you’re honest enough to say that you “don’t have all the answers to [the] mysteries of existence”, and it gives me hope for you that you speak of your “faith journey as it is at this point in [your] life”.
I’m not attacking you, here. The consensus of ex-gay people I know who claim the opposite, and there are many, is that the “gay and lesbian bar BS” is just that; unreasonable arguments.
I do have a problem with some of the so-called “science” I’ve discussed about this, with several people, including homosexuals and ex-homosexuals, both male and female. My main problem is this: what you call the “natural order” (and here, again, my motive is not to win an argument without regard to being sensitive to you), is based on some rather unusual presumptions.
If rationalist/materialist/atheism, a subset of which is the supposed “natural order”, is true, would it not then logically follow that both males and females would have an irresistible genetic mandate which could never allow any behavior which would endanger the propogation of their own specific genetic package? In other words, if evolution is true, wouldn’t it negate even the possibility of homosexuality?
In other words, why reject out-of-hand, in favor of an unreasonable and unscientific weak hypothesis, the idea that God created us, that the Fall of Adam and Eve really occurred, and that the “genetic” spiritual life that was in them died instantly, and became uninheritable, except by being adopted back into God’s family through the Second Adam, Jesus Christ?
And I am categorically NOT talking about the “other” false Jesus, Spirit and gospel of Berg and TF. I am SO SORRY they hurt you so very, very badly.
I’ve learned, as a Christian man of the NON-TF variety, that I must first give myself as a servant to my wife, in constant, and ever-maturing self-sacrifice, where we BOTH submit “to one another in the fear of God”. My wife will gladly tell you we view and treat each other as equals BECAUSE of our Biblical beliefs.
A sinful world does produce, as only ONE of its byproducts, a sexism which has historically produced perversions of the truth about how we should treat each other. It’s a function of sin; not heterosexuality.
The woman in Proverbs 31 had self-determination, her own business, the respect and admiration of her husband, and many other things that simply do not fit the “gay & lesbian bar BS” sweeping allegations about all of society throughout history including our current era.
Sociology, another “social science”, has gathered a lot of data showing that the “femme” counterparts in Lesbian relationships are no better off, in the mean, in regards to unfairness, subjugation, brutality, etc., than those in abusive heterosexual couplings.
It depends on who you ask, but the data’s there; like it or not. Abuse is abuse. Subjugation of the weak works the same way, without regard to gender.
Here’s an interesting historical fact—the Marquis de Sade was quoted as saying that, “Whatever is, is right”. I feel I must point out that the “natural order of things” would necessarily always sanction whatever the “strong” were able to get away with.
Also, only Annelida, or worms, are truly hermaphroditic, and humans are never born with two functional sets of sex organs. And, there are 17 fully different biological distinctions between males and females, so androgen therapy and surgical mutilation do not change gender.
I’ve studied advanced human physiology; that’s my Bachelors degree. There are no physiologically-based sexual minorities, as you claim. It’s just not true.
Over the years, I’ve told more than one pastor that, because of my background, I get to choose who pastors me, and that the proof they are truly qualified as a pastor would be that they care ABOUT, and therefore care FOR, me and mine.
So, I am obviously not subject to assumptions about how social sciences "inevitably" affect me; as I’ve learned to think for myself, partly BECAUSE of my cult background.
I could try, on this board, or more privately by e-mail, if you choose, tell you what I’ve learned in a personal study of Christian apologetics—there is a whole WORLD of wisdom and understanding out there I might humbly point you to.
I am even fairly well-versed about Lesbian “liberation theology”, and might provide at least a good listening ear on the subject.
One of my favorite topics, as someone who appreciated the writings of CS Lewis and others, is both the power of, and the changing definitions of, myth, throughout history.
It can actually be studied without prejudice—extant manuscripts speak for themselves.
By the way, there have been a lot of recent exposés on the false historicity of Gaia, the self-acclaimed history of supposed “Goddess worship”, by several specific Lesbian authors, etc., etc. It’s interesting regardless of your position on the subject. Please, don’t let any pseudo-intellectuals snow you; here.
Any honest study of cause-and-effect eventually leads one back in time to where a philosophical decision must be made concerning “First Causes”. The honest study of chemistry, physics, and biology, which I have done in the thirty years since my own liberation and independence from the cult (next July 4th, as a matter of fact) leaves one with the observation that no upwardly-organizing force exists which is arranging matter upwardly (i.e.: against entropy) in a manner so as to make evolution even possible. And, the mere complexity of DNA/RNA synthesis and self-repair, or the cell’s information language and self-processing, makes evolution completely impossible.
We’re all theists of some kind, whether atheists, pantheists, or whatever (including “foxhole theologians”—a function of Romans Chapter 1 being TRUE? I think so).
The atheist trick at this above-mentioned point of speculation is this: merely assume that the Biblical God cannot exist, and in the face of the absolute necessity of a First Causer, opt out for the singularity of the Big Bang, which oddly enough, has almost identical characteristics to that very God (except its IMPERSONAL, so no one has to “get personal” about their personal morality)—it can create something out of absolutely NOTHING, is above any known “natural” or “physical” laws of any kind, and all cause-and-effect follows from it, and cannot be interrupted, so Bible-God miracles, much less “salvation theologies” are not even POSSIBLE.
Does that sound unreasonably dumb? It does, to me. It is; regardless.
I would challenge you to consider, perhaps for the first time, the REAL Bible, and REAL Christians who would love you, and REAL Christian thinkers from over the many AGES, from whom life in TF purposely HID YOU.
I’ve heard most of the arguments (that’s objective arguments ABOUT stuff, not arguing WITH PEOPLE IN ORDER TO JUST WIN AN ARGUMENT). Could I invite you to try to explain, and answer questions about, the “other EQUALLY PLAUSIBLE explanations for suffering, death and injustice”? What do you feel makes them plausible? Would you like to discuss it? I’m available, if you would.
You closed your statement with the admission that you “…don't have all the answers to mysteries of existence…”, but that you’re “OK with that”. I would submit to you that there is at least ONE mystery you MUST solve, before you die.
Please write, if you like. We’ll be praying.