SSA v. be-Christian
Could it be possible that within the Christian church a way of thinking has emerged that, from the goal of wanting to play a positive role and being accessible to people with SSA (same-sex attraction) feelings, was fundamentally flawed from the beginning? And if that is the case, could the inherent result then be that the real core problem is overlooked, and therefore deviated from? Or the right dialogue?
Sexual preference is given a kind of status apartus
Or, does it actually contribute to further confusion and inadequate guidance? At the very least, it results in flawed assistance, causing people with homosexual feelings to be burdened with a kind of religious 'yoke' that they shouldn't have 'to begin with.' I hope to explain this in more detail below.
Sexual preference gets a sort of special status, a priority label that makes it different and exceptional compared to other people or believers who do not share this sexual preference. Heterosexual believers are seen as people as God originally intended them to be. But is that simply the only contrast? A heterosexual person also has a sexual preference, and each individual consists of so much more than just their sexual preference. Isn't it much more about who you are as a person, the totality of all your individual characteristics that define you? This includes your personality, character, thoughts, behavior, feelings, core values, and so on.
Shouldn't the church, and believers, see everyone, including those with a different sexual preference, in their totality: a personality with all their faults and shortcomings? Personally, I believe that the church has made "the other" (the sexual preference), which someone can also have, far too much into something abnormal, something extraordinary. And by doing so, "the other," that one aspect, the sexual preference, was made exclusive and singled out.
After all, everyone has a sexual orientation; there's no escaping that. Sexual preference is a part of every person and should be accepted as such, as something given by God. Note, however, this does not imply that SSA feelings are as God originally intended them to be! But that goes for many many things outside of Eden.
When this "other," these feelings, are present in a believer, it is labeled as: "You are deviant, different. Different from every other (hetero) believer." This is said even though EVERY person is fundamentally a sinful person and in need of His forgiveness.
The Fall changed everything. Nothing retains its original purpose as God intended. Do we think the Fall only affected everything except certain specific inner characteristics of humans, or more precisely, sexual preferences, feelings, and their expressions?
Yet, it seems that someone with 'different' feelings towards the same sex still needs, so to speak, 'more,' 'deeper' and different forgiveness. That is actually quite strange.
-
• Grace and His forgiveness are encompassed in His surpassing riches of grace to the person who believes in His cleansing blood and forgiveness of sins. His sacrifice was necessary and places the believer from death and sin in the light.
-
• Everything that concerns the heterosexual also applies to the gay person. There is not a simple "DIFFERENCE" distinction. Sexual preference does not have an exclusively determining factor concerning the grace and love of Christ.
-
• Behavior and change of thinking are for all believers, heterosexual and gay, a personal responsibility and growth in a personal relationship with Christ.
A flaw in the making...
There was a time when society approached homosexuality differently. Increasingly, there was recognition of the importance of equal treatment for people with SSA (same-sex attraction) feelings. Society, in a way, became more open and positive towards these fellow human beings. Improvement and tolerance.
Yet, the place to be taken, as ordinary citizens who, like heterosexuals, should live responsibly and normally, became more of a victim role. As fundamentally different. In weakness, vulnerability, and a call for attention and changes.
So...in essence, in the deepest sense, you are not allowed to be who you are.
Even in churches and pastoral care, there was a sort of shift. These 'different' people needed to be helped with their issue of sexual preference. Although... from the perspective that God does not want you to sin and well... SSA (same-sex attraction) feelings are ('extra'?) sinful according to the Bible. And this while 'not the preference', the orientation, is explicitly mentioned in the Bible. Only behavior.
Is sexual preference itself then the crucial aspect that sets one apart? After all, various rules apply to all people to walk as worthy believers. Can sexual preference be changed at all? Can a heterosexual change their sexual preference as such?
Are believers with SSA not only different but thereby also "extra" sinful? Do they thus need our prayers for forgiveness and support more urgently? But don't heterosexual believers have problems and need prayer too?
In other words, a kind of well-meaning but ineffective support has been created around the orientation someone has. Thus, just as society assists a sort of victim role, the 'church' has also contributed to this: sexual orientation must either change or be tolerated and borne in weakness.
As a kind of "extra baggage" one must carry and live with (preferably without a partner), or even better, be cured! In short, fighting against or denying one's preference and thus the sexuality that is inherent to you.
Fortunately, with the good grace-acceptance you're oke to be who you are AND God loves you!
Only... doesn't it all contradict itself? Because you may actually not be who you are in essence.
And isn't that exactly where division arises and people don't understand each other and dialogue breaks down?
Conclusion of the flaw
So, it's not about accepting and embracing who you are in totality (the sum of choices, character, personality, values, responsibilities, etc., as a result). Instead, the core is determined by making SSA explicitly and exclusively significant and setting it apart. There's a heavy emphasis on the sinfulness of this preference, rather than how you handle yourself and the choices you make (and consequently, your behavior), just like everyone else.
Recognizing that you have these feelings is still permissible. However, it seems too far-fetched to dismiss that there's something unusual going on. That this sexual preference is also genuine and true as a part of yourself. Mostly, it boils down to: you can be who you are except for your SSA, or preference.
Because preference is your weakness and should be ignored as such: Don't give it any attention, and essentially, within the 'being true to yourself' and the 'complete picture of yourself', it's denied.
While God says, "I love you, you are My child. Live in my unimaginable richness of grace. My love indeed surpasses everything! I have already done the work. Because truly there was nothing 'man' could do or change in regard to sin. I knew you before you knew yourself."
Christian, church jargon, therefore seems to reveal some shortcomings. Essentially, it comes down to denying one's own experience of sexuality. Because the SSA preference is disapproved of. Fighting and struggling, as opposed to accepting who you are as a person, because God accepts you as you are.
But how can you fully accept yourself if there is a part of yourself that will ALWAYS remain weak and sinful? There is something that will not change. And thus always imposes a kind of sinful burden on you?
But is that a yoke from God or is it a yoke because the 'church' advertises it as such (according to the Bible)?
If sexuality and the inherent emotional experience are something you have, shouldn't you accept that just like, for example, the color of your eyes?
However, I can guide the way I handle SSA and make deliberate choices in that regard. Through this, one can even conclude that to have idealized SSA feelings, magnified them, made wrong choices, and followed own selfish paths. To have set aside faith value, love, and promises for the sake of feelings and "I want' and 'I will."
And yes... that is such a sin. Because it might bring you a pleasant sexual feeling, but it does not lead to true freedom and a genuine deep experience of how God's love and truth can fulfill His purpose in your life. For indeed, two kings cannot sit on one throne.
Belief is a crucial factor in the choices and considerations we have made. Not out of a sense of "holy obligation," as a compulsion to "not be allowed," but from the faith that Christ's grace precisely gives: You may accept who you are, what is more, be who you are in totality. And that is the foundation for fundamental moral choices and discernment.
Faith is not something optional, it is a knowingly part of who you are as an individual. There is no 'bi' in be-Christian. That is not a preference!
And, especially within a MOM relationship, it also lays the foundation for what is important in 'together', as a couple, and unity. Being able to fully accept who you are is of great importance, because this belief applies to both in the same way and in return results in a deep inner willingness.