On Gay Boy Scouts & My Christian Faith

As the Boy Scouts just decided to allow gay scouts but will still keep the ban on gay scout leaders, first of all, let me just say it takes guts to make a decision that doesn’t fully satisfy the desires of either side.

I know that many of my fellow Christians will immediately begin their ban on Boy Scouts for approving of such blatantly sinful behavior.

But let me say, regardless of your position on the sinfulness of gay sex: until the Boy Scouts of America ban every boy who openly sins, this is the most Christian decision they could have made. That is, if standing for justice and fairness is included in what it means to be Christian. If not, well then, I am not sure I want to be one.

And then there is that nagging question: why does someone sins disallow them to belong to a group?

Ironically, in the same chapter of Leviticus Christians use to show that homosexuality is an “abomination” to God, we have this: “When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt.” (Lev. 19:33-34)

Even those idol-worshiping (<–that’s a sin condemned hundreds of times throughout the Bible by the way) foreigners were to be loved as though they were God’s chosen people. If you are so convinced that the Boy Scouts are a Christian organization who should live by Christian principles, then perhaps we should acknowledge them as “aliens living with us.” We do not kick them out. We do not go find a new land. We live among them and love them as ourselves.

To be honest, I am typically embarrassed to admit how much time I spent as Boy Scout, doing those, let’s admit it, somewhat dorky things we Scouts did. But today, I am proud to be a Boy Scout and am proud that their Christian foundations led them to this decision.

45 responses to “On Gay Boy Scouts & My Christian Faith

  1. Interesting perspective Jared… especially in light of the fact that my son was banned from Boy Scouts (ratified at the highest level of scouting in the USA) because he would not participate in the Pledge of Allegiance (and before someone gets their nose out of joint about that, we are a non-citizen family – and it would be disrespectful to pledge to something that is not yet yours). It wasn’t until the UMC made threats about removing their support for scouting over this issue that they backed down. So… they seem happy to ‘neglect the alien’ when it suits them. Consequently, scouting will NEVER be allowed in any church I serve. (It took a full year to get the ban overturned – and by then my son had moved on – which saddened me because I grew up in the scouting movement also – in Australia)

  2. It seems some Christians walk a confused line when it comes to acceptance of those who are different, or “sinning” in their eyes. They exclude and call it holiness, but holiness can’t exist apart from love. They look at texts like Matthew 18:17 (treat them as tax collectors) and use these texts to support their exclusion. Except Jesus spent more time with tax collectors, treated them with love and kindness, and included them.

    I don’t know if you have ever seen the movie “Chocolat” but my favorite part, and I try to live by this in my life, is when the priest says, “I think that we can’t go around measuring our goodness by what we don’t do. By what we deny ourselves, what we resist, and who we exclude. I think we’ve got to measure goodness by what we *embrace*, what we create, and who we include.”

    • Very good quote! That’s very Nietzschean, where he chastises Christian ethics for saying “No” to life instead of “Yes!”

    • Interesting. Yes, Jesus included sinners, and that’s what I aim to do as well, but he also exposed their sin and told them to change their ways and that if they didn’t they’d have no part of the kingdom of God. Now, the last part Jesus could say freely, but it’s more difficult for us because we don’t know exactly what their hearts are like, or more appropriately, whether Jesus’ name is written on their heart. It was an issue of “who do you love more, me (Jesus) or your sin?” And I think that’s a question that can still be asked.

      I think a lot of Christians approach homosexuality in the same way., but it gets a bad wrap because people argue “how can you ask someone to change who they are?” Well Jesus did, and I think he charged us to do the same.

      • I don’t think Jesus asked people to change who they are. I think Jesus invited people to become their true selves. There are so many Christians who were born gay and lived with that attraction their entire lives, and were totally devoted to Jesus. There still are gay Christians like that.

      • J, he did ask people to change who they were. One man loved his wealth and Jesus asked him to change. I think you are assuming that being gay is completely unchangeable and fully rooted into our DNA. Yet many aspects of “who we are” are changeable. I used to have a terrible temper until I decided to change it in my late 20s. Just because something is “who we are” doesn’t mean it’s right and unchangeable.

      • He asks people to give up the things that make them less human, he does not ask anyone to change who they are. That’s like saying God made a mistake when he designed a person. Sin is dehumanizing, redemption is rehumanizing. I do think it’s true that homosexuals are born that way, yes. The man who loved his wealth was not born loving wealth. Jesus asks us to give up the things that shrink us down and enslave us (sin). He does not ask us to stop being who we are. He says “put to death your sin, and become your true self.”

  3. Don’t you feel though that there is a difference between a sin (maybe, say, cussing, stealing, anger), a sin that keeps the sinner in bondage (pornography/sex addiction, greed, rage, etc.) and a sin that’s a direct rejection of who God is (worshipping another god, pooping on a bible, murdering large groups of Christians)???

    Ok, so maybe my examples in the parentheses aren’t the most well thought out, but think about it. There’s a difference between treating Netflix like an idol and actually carving yourself an idol you pray to. You’re not putting your hope in Netflix, but you are in the carved idol.

    The question is (and has been forever it seems): is homosexuality a sin that’s a direct rejection of who God is? Some would argue that it’s clear that God designed life to be lived with a male and a female working in harmony together. Some would argue homosexuals are the way they are and that homosexuality is like anger (we may be created with a bent towards a sin -anger- that leads to bondage -rage-, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it WILL lead to bondage -rage-).

    My point being, I guess, that I understand the great confusion on the issue and the worthwhile debate. I get nervous reading how some are celebratory over the decision and some are enraged. Both responses seem wrong to me.

    I think one thing that will help these situations is creating an environment where no sin generates a “you’re a monster!” response from people. The stigma of various sins needs to be gone. So if a Boy Scout leader is gay and for years has no issue, then says he needs time off to deal with his sin now that he’s had impure thoughts regarding the kids, we don’t need to yell, “you’re a monster and you’re fired!”, but rather be understanding and loving. I wish there was a common understanding that it’s more brave to try to heal than to simply conceal sin. But will we ever get there? Maybe this Boy Scout decision is heading in the right direction.

    • Oops, got cut off. My understanding is that no two men or two women wanted to be with only each other. Two men or two women may have had sex, but the context was lust and often idol worship. They would still marry and have sex with people of the opposite sex. That gives me pause. I am not sure if homosexual sex in the context of a committed relationship is a sin. In relationship to idol worship and promiscuity, absolutely. This may be a “bury my head in the sand” kind of situation, but I don’t feel it’s my place to try to force conviction on it. God will deal with any changing of people that may or may not need to be done. I do believe people are born gay, and for that I do celebrate them. In general, I try not to concern myself with another’s (possible) sin. I exist to love God and love others, and I am more comfortable erring on the side of inclusion. Exclusion, unkindness, and shaming doesn’t make anyone a better or more loving person, in any context.

      • The issue is that Jesus challenges sin, and requires us to keep our brothers/sisters accountable. If something is a sin, it has to be treated as such. Which is why the argument of the sinfulness or not of a committed homosexual relationship is important and often heated. There’s a lot on the line.

        If it’s not a sin, then we respond a much different way. I think as believers we are required to lead others toward repentance. That is love. What if living in Houston was a sin (hypothetical, but probably should be real :>)? Wouldn’t we as the Church steer our brothers and sisters away from living there?

        Loving others is to concern yourself with their sin. Loving a person means wanting the best for them, and the best for them is holiness.

      • I have an easier time with Jesus confronting other people because Jesus’s sight wasn’t clouded by his own sin, and Jesus’s understanding was the correct understanding. I can’t claim any of that for myself. I sin, and I misunderstand *a lot.*

    • You’re making the mistake of assuming all gay men are attracted to young boys. Would anyone assume that all straight women are attracted to young boys?

      Now, what is condemned in the Bible may very well have been adult men with boys – catamites, or sex slaves. Which IS reprehensible because it is an abuse of power and de-humanizes the boy. But that kind of homosexuality is not the same thing as a committed, loving relationship between two adults.
      Homosexuality does not equal pedophelia!

      • Romans 1 doesn’t say boys, but “men”. And why was this such a big deal in Romans 1? Because it violated the created order, what Jesus spoke of in Matt 19. He’s very specific and leaves no room for anything beyond man+woman. They become one. Because God designed it to be that way.

        I think we forget about our responsibility to rule and reign over creation. We are to strive to maintain and create holiness. And where something slips, we need to attempt to correct it.

        I’m not a fan of the theology that says to just worry about your own sin, pray for those you see sinning, and just love God. Jesus was a man of action. He made people uncomfortable, confronting them with truth and exposing sin in their hearts. We are to do the same.

    • Loving another person is accepting them for who they are and loving them entirely. If my friend was a thief and a Christian, I would ask them if they realize their thievery was hurting other people. It’s not that I don’t have the backbone to tell my friends if I think they are doing something wrong. Stealing is pretty black and white, save extreme situations. Homosexuality is not nearly as clear of a situation, and if I am not sure gay sex in a committed relationship is a sin, I’m keeping my mouth shut. If my gay friend was giving himself to everyone sexually, I would tell him that he is worth more than that. I do think promiscuity is wrong, and I will say so. If my friend says “i don’t care, i will continue to do this” I will say “ok, I love you, and I am still here.” I don’t think it’s my responsibility to change anyone, or to ask anyone to change. It’s my responsibility to love, and love does not exclude, shame or abandon.

      Now obviously everything I just said does not cover every possible situation. Abuse, obviously, is a reason to put distance and space between yourself and another person. I literally ask myself “what is most loving?” In the situations I am faced with, and go from there.

      • I agree with most of that. But again, what if it’s a sin? And what if someone who has examined the Scriptures dutifully fully believes it’s a sin? Then, it’s that person’s responsibility to treat it as a sin.

        I believe Jesus uttered the words in Matt 19 fully understanding the possibility of a committed, monogamous homosexual relationship, and still excluded the possibility of it being honoring to the Father.

      • And what does a person, in your opinion do, when they “treat something as a sin” ? (I am not trying to sound rude or anything, I am curious so I know how to respond).

  4. You really have missed the point. The ban is not about preventing sin in the Boy Scouts. The ban was on the acceptance of homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, or as some incorrectly believe, an inherent, biological trait like skin color. The Scouts do not have a policy that allows for openly professing blasphemers, or openly professing thieves. Choose whatever sin you like.

    What this lifting of the ban has done is to say to boys that they can announce to everyone the type of sex they think they prefer even though it violates their duty to God and prevents them from keeping themselves morally straight.

    God condemns homosexuality throughout scripture. All of scripture is God’s word even Leviticus and Paul’s epistles. Despite what misinformed people say, Jesus did address homosexuality. (See http://americancreed.wordpress.com/2011/08/28/an-argument-from-the-red-letters/)

    It is ludicrous that the BSA should think children are mature enough to be able to identify themselves by the kind of sex they enjoy. They are children. They should not be having sex at all. It really is rather disgusting. If children wish to announce their preferred sin and seek help, that is one thing. But to allow children to announce that they enjoy sex with boys without correcting their sin, the BSA has then rejected the sovereignty of God. The rejection of the sovereignty of God is the point, though. That is what the homosexual community has at the root of its agenda. The BSA, filled with people who do not take their allegiance to God seriously, have sided with this assault on God’s sovereignty.

    You have confused treating a stranger in love with celebrating their idolatrous, perverted lifestyle. In affirming the entire moral law of God, Jesus said “Whosoever shall do the commandments and teach others to do them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of God.” Those who break the law and teach men so will be least. In fact, Jesus said it would be better for him to have a millstone hung about his neck and be thrown in the sea than to cause children to stumble.

    • Thanks for your thoughts, I do appreciate them. You say, “but to allow children to announce that they enjoy sex with boys without correcting their sin, the BSA has then rejected the sovereignty of God.” I can personally attest that when I was a Boy Scout there were many who announced that they enjoy sex with girls, and our leaders didn’t say a thing. So then hasn’t the BSA already rejected the sovereignty of God?

      Where we disagree on what it means to love. You have come to the hermeneutical decision that to love, according to Scripture, is to call people out for their sins, even if they are not a part of the community of faith, and hopefully save them. I get it. We just disagree.

      I also understand Leviticus to be “God’s word” but my question is what that means hermeneutically. It seems you have already assumed a reading strategy using the term “God’s word,” as though that phrase automatically implies some sort of way to read Leviticus as normative. Care to help me understand what it means for Leviticus to be “God’s word”?

      • Let me address your first point. That the Boy Scout leaders failed in guiding their troops in righteous living by allowing boys to discuss sexual encounters with girls does not mean the organization had a policy to ignore the sovereignty of God. The BSA just did a horrible job of choosing leaders and enforcing standards.

        To be honest, I believe the BSA has for a long time been an organization that has merely given God lip service. From my observations there is no sincerity in the BSA’s profession of faith in God.

        Now, by policy, the BSA is celebrating an aberrant lifestyle. The BSA won’t kick out boys for engaging in sexual perversion. The BSA has rejected the requirement to live a moral lifestyle. The BSA, having long since lost a sincerity of faith in God, has now lost a sincerity in righteous, moral living.

        Ephesians 5:11- Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather reprove them. I do believe that the heathen will act like heathens, however, a sinner won’t come to repentance unless he feels remorse for his sins. The loving thing to do is to point out to sinners that they are lost in their sins and that Jesus made a way of redemption. Anyway, if a boy is in the boy scouts, isn’t he supposed to be in the “community of faith?” Does he not acknowledge he owes a duty to God to be morally straight?”

        As to your question on scriptural interpretation, II Timothy 3:16- All scripture is God-breathed. God has revealed his moral law through the written word. The Canon is God’s Word and is authoritative. The moral law found in Leviticus is as authoritative today as it was when Jesus walked on earth. When God said homosexuality is an abomination, he meant that literally. Jesus’ condemnation of homosexuality in Matthew makes it clear that all sexual sins defile men. Jesus affirmed Leviticus.

        The earthly consequences are different as we are not the nation of ancient Israel, living under a theocracy. But the moral law has not been done away with.

        Homosexuality is clearly sin. He who is born of God will not continue to practice sin. I John 3:9. Allowing boys to identify themselves by a practice of sin is affirming they are not born of God. That is the point of the homosexual agenda at the BSA: there is no moral code therefore we don’t need God to hold us to one.

        You think this new policy change is a good, Christian thing, but it is not. It is another nail in the coffin of the BSA. I can see Ichabod written on the BSA’s tombstone.

  5. J, for some reason I can’t respond to your last two posts. Internet Explorer issues I guess.

    You asked what does a person do when treating something as sin. When seen in another person, a dialogue occurs centered around holiness, whether the action glorifies the Father, where it conflicts with Scripture (if it does), growing in maturity, prayer with each other, etc. I think two good friends whose aim is to grow in Christ-likeness can lovingly talk and come to a mutual understanding of what to do. But our honesty about whether we’re really trying to grow in Christ-likeness is hard to admit.

    You also made the comment that Jesus had the perfect understanding. While that’s true, it doesn’t invalidate our responsiblity to our brothers/sisters/creation.

    • What happens then if the two friends disagree on whether or not something is a sin? Or one is not in a place where they feel convicted that they are wrong (say with my stealing example)?

      • in the latter case, we have Jesus’ steps to take in Matt 18. You mentioned that in your earlier post, but you left out the context. Matt 18 describes how to handle a fellow believer. Jesus treating tax collectors with love is different. He wanted to present the kingdom to them and invite them in. In Matt 18, it sounds like it’s addressed to those already in.

        If two friends disagree, I think it’s handled delicately. I’m not talking about a “what do you think about X?” brief exchange of beliefs. I’m talking about getting in the Scripture, praying, seeking wisdom. I think through that deep, intimate process, things will be brought to light.

      • And I think the deep, intimate, prayerful discussions is the key. We tend to be lazy with our love and our actions.

        But take one of my good friend’s case for example: his sister is gay, he was gay for his first 25 years of life. He and his sister both fully believe that their attractions from birth was to the same sex. However, at 25, he felt in the depths of his soul something changed. He says he 100% knew that his lifestyle was wrong and that his attraction could change. He warred for 2 years and now is no longer attracted to men.

        Is he not to share his story and preach repentance from homosexuality because it may not be seen as “loving” to his former community (most of whom have now ostracized him, but he’s still close with his sister, thank God)?

      • In Matthew 18 it is addressed to those already in, however that changes nothing about how he treated tax collectors. The way he treated them is key to understanding the verse. When someone is in the wilderness, you go and sit with them. When a sheep is lost, Jesus finds them. A lost sheep is still a sheep that belongs. It’s clear to me that when someone is “in the wilderness,” cutting them off, excluding them and treating them poorly is not going to draw them into the love of Christ. I also know this first had from my own experiences after getting divorced. Matthew 18 also book-ended by two parables on forgiveness.

        There are differing view points in the Christian gay community on whether or not homosexual sex is a sin, even. Some are convicted and some are not. I have never met anyone who’s attractions have been changed. And with your story of your friend, the key there to me is that he was convicted in his spirit by God. Conviction doesn’t come from people badgering each other. I don’t know anyone else’s heart. I barely know my own. What I do know is that for me to think I have the right to judge someone else’s spiritual progress, is sinful. Just because someone is not where I think they should be, doesnt mean they aren’t faithfully following God to the best of their ability here and now. If God hasn’t convicted someone of their sin yet, eventually he will, and I will be the supporting friend through it all.

  6. J,

    Yes convinction comes from God, but we have an entire Bible of God using people (and sometimes armies) to bring about that conviction. We are messengers.

    • And I see your point on Matt 18. So invoking Matt 18, how do you handle a brother’s sin who’s not affected after confronting, bringing a friend, and telling the church? And would there be a more damaging effect if the sin was homosexuality?

      • Also, don’t you think treating them as a pagan/tax collector will strain the relationship even if it’s interpreted the way you’re proposing?

    • We may the the messengers sometimes, but most of the time I would argue that we don’t know when the Spirit is speaking through us to convict another. I think often we take the reigns when the Spirit is actually telling us to shut our mouths.

      I don’t handle a brother’s sin if they are unaffected by the experience laid out in Matt 18. It’s not my place to handle their sin. It’s my place to love them and not try to force them into anything. So I remain their friend and pray for them. I don’t understand your question in regard to if the sin is homosexuality being more damaging (I don’t believe being gay is a sin, but I would like to know what you mean). Could you clarify?

      I don’t think showing kindness and inclusion would strain the relationship (in regard to treating them as a tax collector). Why would it?

      • Say you have a brother in close community who is in habitual sin and you apply Matt 18.

        So you confront him, but no admission/change. You bring a friend, but still nothing. You tell the church, but nothing. So now, while still loving him and praying for him, how does it look to treat him like a pagan/tax collector? Yes, you are to love, but how is Step 4 different? You are extra kind?

      • To be honest, I have no idea what to do with Matthew 18. It just feels a little disingenuous how the church has made it into a normative 5-step plan for how to deal with sin in a religious institution. Personally, and I know this doesn’t bode well for my orthodoxy, I think the idea of church discipline in a local church underestimates the pervasiveness of sin. As I used to say in pastor’s meetings, “I don’t think Paul took sin seriously enough.” By that I mean I am utterly sinful, I do very sinful stuff almost every single day. When the waters are that muddied, I am not sure how to pick out which sins to discipline and which to leave alone.

        And I don’t think I’m alone in that, which is why we traditionally just pick on the more “public” sins, which I find an arbitrary and unjust application. I would rather have no discipline in the church than a discipline hermeneutic that is unjust. Just my 2 cents, didn’t mean to butt into y’alls conversation!

      • Well, like I said, I don’t really think its my place to deal with his sin. I treat him the same. When it comes down to it I agree with Jared. The only time I have ever applied Matthew 18 is when it deals with a sin that was committed against me personally, and even then the only “step” I follow is confronting them directly. I typically don’t like to drag other people into it. If it can’t be reconciled, I still forgive and treat them with kindness. Unfortunately the relationship comes to a screeching halt beyond that.

  7. Jared, again I can’t reply for some reason (I guess once it reaches the 4th level of replies, my browser says ‘no way’).

    Anyway, I very much agree with your thoughts. And as you may have noticed about me, I just like to throw things out there and whittle down from there. So I’m always changing my thoughts/beliefs on things.

    I think one thing we don’t take seriously enough is how sin affects the body, and not just the local body, but the entire body of Christ. I think there’s a butterfly effect of sorts. Not that it hinders God’s plan or anything…or maybe it does? I still haven’t decided what I think about that. I lean more Eastern, more of an “And” person than a “either/or”.

    • Just in case I am giving the wrong impression, I just want to put it out there that I often times suck at practicing what I’m talking about.

      • Haha. Yeah, I feel that.

        Honestly, what it comes down to for me is if I believe homosexuality to be a sin and I have a friend who is engaged in a homosexual relationship, I feel God has called me as his brother to be involved in his life and help each other pursue holiness and “life”. The same goes for other sins.

        You say stealing is a black and white issue, but what about the mother that has to steal bread for her child to eat. Is it wrong then? If I steal a video game from a dead man, is that stealing? If so, why? Does it have an effect on me?

        What I’m currently weighing is regardless of it’s effect on others, what effect does my sin have on me? Does it weaken my soul (for lack of a better, more accurate phrase)? If so, is it possible that even a monogamous, committed gay relationship does the same?

    • orton1227 on May 24, 2013 at 5:40 pm
      Haha. Yeah, I feel that.

      Honestly, what it comes down to for me is if I believe homosexuality to be a sin and I have a friend who is engaged in a homosexual relationship, I feel God has called me as his brother to be involved in his life and help each other pursue holiness and “life”. The same goes for other sins.

      You say stealing is a black and white issue, but what about the mother that has to steal bread for her child to eat. Is it wrong then? If I steal a video game from a dead man, is that stealing? If so, why? Does it have an effect on me?

      What I’m currently weighing is regardless of it’s effect on others, what effect does my sin have on me? Does it weaken my soul (for lack of a better, more accurate phrase)? If so, is it possible that even a monogamous, committed gay relationship does the same?


      I don’t know one gay person who isn’t aware of the fact that some think their orientation and relationships are sinful. Even if I did think it was wrong, what right do I have to say “you should end your relationship with the one you love because it offends God” when that person doesn’t feel or believe it offends God, and my saying that will most likely push them even farther away from the Father? I don’t think I have any right to speak for God. I don’t think I have any right to place qualifiers on another for how they live. And if I think a friend is doing something wrong, I will say it in a way that hopefully shows them how it is hurting themselves or another, but I won’t force it, because whatever is going on in that person’s heart is hidden from me. I want to help those in my life pursue love. Holiness will fall into its place if love is primary.

      I said stealing is mostly a black and white issue. I don’t think anything is completely black and white at all. For a committed, monogamous relationship between a gay couple to weaken their souls, would require the presupposition that it is a sin to be in a homosexual relationship. Do I think it weakens a soul to commit to and love another, even in a homosexual context? No, I don’t. Do I think a straight, committed, unmarried monogamous couple is weakened in their soul because of the intimacy they share? No, I don’t. I think they are strengthened. I think if something is actually a sin, the effect on each of us individually is slavery. It holds us captive. Anything born of love will bring freedom.

      • Regarding the last paragraph, what’s the difference between a homosexual couple committing and loving one another and a same-sex platonic couple committing and loving one another?

      • Ok, I guess my point then would be that:

        – I believe the Bible calls homosexual sex (forceful or consentual) sin.

        – And I also believe that any sin, be it pride, stealing, adultery, lying, etc. has an effect on your intimacy with the Father. Even a private prideful thought has an effect on your being (body/soul/spirit/whatever), either positive if led towards repentance and forgiveness, or negative if pride compounds upon pride. There are varying degrees, of course, as well. Adultery can lead to serious illnesses and cause a great effect

        – So I also think that homosexual behavior has it’s effect on your being. Like greed, it’s possible that you don’t notice the obvious effects for awhile, or you simply become numb to them.

        I think, too, one of our problems in America is that our understanding of abiding in the Father, and the depth of the relationship when you are truly a disciple isn’t fully realized. We have become too okay with a lower bar and thus a lesser range of intimacy. If we were to realize the full potential of the relationship (like Paul and Jesus did), then the effects of our sin (whether we know them to be sin or not) would be much more obvious.

        That’s where I am at the moment, and that’s why I point out sin in my brothers’ lives. My greatest priority, yes, is to love them first and help walk and lead them in a path of greater intimacy with the Father, and that includes pointing out roadblocks where they lie.

        Now, 6 months from now, maybe I’m on a completely different side. It’s happened before :>

      • But while I point out the roadblocks, I’m not going to stay there until it’s knocked down. I think I agree with you there.

      • If that’s where you’re at, that’s totally fine. We don’t have to fully agree on everything and I wouldn’t ever encourage you to go against your conscience. I am in a different place based on my life experiences, my experiences with God and people. I used to think homosexual sex was a sin, but I am not so sure now. I am ok with not being sure and not knowing. I think our beliefs will continue to evolve over time, naturally, because there is always more to learn and know. I do agree that sin affects our intimacy with our Father, and that it affects our souls. We are called to put our sinful nature to death. I don’t really have any expectations of where I should be as a daughter of God. I just obey and trust the best I can. Besides, my self-perception would be skewed anyway. I’m glad for our interaction here and I wish you the very best 🙂

      • I understand. I’d say last fall my beliefs were very different, but it’s changed again recently. Most of that is as a result of one really close gay friend and the other I mentioned that used to be. Experiences do change you.

        I’m thankful for good discussion too. I think it’s a great tool (if handled correctly) to cause your beliefs and thoughts to evolve and also to find out what you really think and how firm your convictions are. Have a great night.

  8. One note of clarification. The Boy Scouts are not a Christian Organization. Every member must believe in God, but there are members of all the major religions (Christian, Judiasm, Muslim, Hindu, etc…)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s