Be Careful What You Say

I remember being told as a child to watch what I say.

That was good advice then, and it is still good advice today.

Watching our words implies that we know what we are saying. We understand the language we are speaking, and we are willing to be held accountable for the things that come out of our mouths. I was also warned not to make things up, because doing so could get me into serious trouble.

That warning becomes even more important when we claim to speak for God.

God calls men and women to His service in many different ways. Some are pastors. Some are teachers. Some serve quietly behind the scenes. Some teach Sunday school, lead ministries, or simply share what God has taught them with others.

Those who teach God's Word have an enormous responsibility.

Sadly, not everyone who teaches Scripture does so for the right reasons. Scripture itself warns us that people can be motivated by selfish ambition, recognition, money, influence, or the desire to promote their own ideas.

That is why anyone who teaches God's Word needs to surrender himself to God.

It is not easy.

The Word of God shines a light not only upon the world around us but upon ourselves.

I know that when I study something in Scripture and begin writing about it, I often find myself convicted by the very thing I am trying to explain to someone else.

Sometimes that scares me.

There are times when I wonder whether I am up to the task of sharing something that I believe God has placed upon my heart.

Then I remember that I am subject to the same Word I am discussing.

I am not above it.

I do not want to write something simply because it agrees with a religious tradition, a denomination, a preacher, or something I have heard repeated for years.

I research these subjects because I do not want to tell you that God said something when He did not.

Other people can help us understand Scripture. Pastors, teachers, scholars, books, commentaries, and even websites can be useful.

But Scripture must remain my final authority.

Some of the subjects I have written about are not easy.

Sometimes Scripture challenges things we have been taught for years.

Sometimes it challenges traditions.

Sometimes it challenges established religious practices.

And sometimes it challenges me.

One subject where I believe Christians need to be especially careful about what we say God has said concerns prayer and what is often called a private prayer language or praying in tongues.

Let us begin with what Jesus Himself taught about prayer.

In Matthew 6:5–15, Jesus warns His followers not to make prayer into a public performance designed to impress other people. He tells them not to pray as the hypocrites do merely so that they may be seen.

He also warns against meaningless or empty repetition.

Prayer is communication with God.

Of course, this does not mean that Christians may never pray publicly. Scripture contains examples of believers praying together and praying for one another.

But Jesus makes something very clear:

Prayer is not supposed to be a performance.

It is not supposed to show everyone around us how spiritual we are.

Prayer should be sincere communication between the believer and God.

Jesus also gave His disciples an example of how to pray.

He taught them to pray to the Father, to honor God's name, to seek His will, to ask for their daily needs, to seek forgiveness, to forgive others, and to ask for protection from temptation and evil.

The prayer He gave them contained understandable words.

That matters to me.

Jesus did not tell His disciples to stop thinking and begin making sounds they did not understand. He gave them meaningful words directed toward God.

That leads me to an important question:

Where does Scripture clearly teach that Christians should develop a private prayer language consisting of words or sounds they themselves do not understand?

I know that some Christians sincerely believe Scripture teaches such a practice.

I do not question their sincerity.

But sincerity and biblical support are not always the same thing.

I have looked at the passages commonly used to support the idea, and I do not find clear biblical evidence for the doctrine of a private prayer language.

One passage often mentioned is Romans 8:26.

Paul says that the Spirit helps us in our weakness because we do not always know how we ought to pray, and that the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words.

That is a beautiful promise.

There have certainly been times in my own life when I did not know what to pray.

But notice who is doing the interceding.

The verse says the Spirit Himself intercedes for us.

It does not say that the believer is instructed to begin producing unintelligible sounds.

Whatever else someone may believe about tongues, I do not believe Romans 8:26 can simply be used as proof that Christians possess a private prayer language.

Another important passage is 1 Corinthians 14.

Paul spends a great deal of time discussing tongues, prophecy, understanding, interpretation, and the edification of the church.

One of the things that stands out to me is how concerned Paul is with understanding.

He essentially asks what benefit there is in speaking unless what is spoken communicates revelation, knowledge, prophecy, or teaching.

He compares speech to musical instruments. If the notes cannot be distinguished, how can anyone know what is being played?

He compares it to a trumpet giving an uncertain sound. If the signal cannot be understood, how will anyone know to prepare for battle?

Then he applies the same principle to speech.

Words should communicate something meaningful.

Paul also says that when tongues are used in the gathered church, interpretation is necessary so that others may be edified.

This is important.

Whatever conclusions we reach about the exact nature of tongues in 1 Corinthians, Paul clearly does not treat unintelligibility as the goal.

Understanding matters.

Interpretation matters.

Edification matters.

Order matters.

Paul even says:

“I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also.”

That is an important statement.

Some people believe the tongues in 1 Corinthians were known human languages similar to what happened in Acts 2. Others understand some of Paul's statements differently.

I believe there are strong reasons for understanding biblical tongues as genuine languages, particularly when Acts 2 is considered alongside Paul's teaching.

But even if someone disagrees with me on that point, 1 Corinthians 14 still places tremendous emphasis upon meaning, understanding, interpretation, and the building up of others.

That brings me to something that has personally bothered me.

I once watched a young man give his life to Christ and then immediately be encouraged to speak in tongues.

He appeared not to know what he was supposed to do.

He was essentially told that it did not matter what he said. He was encouraged to make sounds, not to think too much about it, and simply allow something to happen.

That concerned me deeply.

I am not claiming that every Christian who believes in tongues teaches people this way.

I am saying that what I personally witnessed did not appear consistent with what I see emphasized in Scripture.

The Christian life does not normally call us to abandon discernment.

Quite the opposite.

Galatians 5:23 includes self-control among the fruit of the Spirit.

Second Timothy 1:7 reminds us that God has given us a spirit not of fear but of power, love, and self-control.

First Peter 5:8 tells us to be sober-minded and watchful.

Those passages do not, by themselves, disprove tongues.

But they do remind us that Christian spirituality is not supposed to require the abandonment of thought, discernment, or self-control.

If someone tells me that in order to experience a spiritual gift I must stop thinking, stop evaluating what I am doing, and simply produce sounds without concern for meaning, I believe I have every right to stop and compare that instruction carefully with Scripture.

God does give spiritual gifts.

They are good gifts.

They are given for His purposes.

And Scripture also makes clear that believers do not all possess the same gifts.

Paul does not tell us that every Christian must speak in tongues.

Nor does he say that speaking in tongues is the defining evidence that someone possesses the Holy Spirit.

In 1 Corinthians 12, Paul asks a series of questions:

Are all apostles?

Are all prophets?

Are all teachers?

Do all work miracles?

Do all possess gifts of healing?

Do all speak with tongues?

The expected answer is no.

Different believers receive different gifts.

Paul also repeatedly places greater emphasis upon gifts that build up the entire church than upon a tongue that no one present can understand.

That does not mean tongues are evil.

Paul himself says not to forbid speaking in tongues.

But he also commands that things be done properly and in order.

That balance is important.

I do not want to condemn something merely because I do not understand it.

But neither do I want to accept a doctrine simply because someone tells me that it is spiritual.

Everything must be examined according to God's Word.

Philippians 4 reminds Christians to rejoice in the Lord, to pray with thanksgiving, to allow their requests to be made known to God, and to set their minds upon what is true, honorable, just, pure, lovely, commendable, excellent, and worthy of praise.

Our minds matter.

Truth matters.

Understanding matters.

And our words matter.

That brings me back to where I began.

Be careful what you say.

Be careful what you teach.

Be especially careful when you attach the words “God says” to something.

James 3 contains one of the strongest warnings in Scripture for anyone who teaches:

“Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.”

James then compares the tongue to a small fire capable of setting an entire forest ablaze.

That warning applies to pastors.

It applies to Sunday school teachers.

It applies to television preachers.

It applies to people teaching about spiritual gifts.

And it applies to me.

If I am going to tell another Christian that something he believes is not supported by Scripture, then I must be careful that I do not commit the very error I am warning against.

I cannot put words into God's mouth simply because they support my position.

I have to allow Scripture to correct me too.

I may misunderstand something.

I may have been taught incorrectly.

I may discover tomorrow that I need to rethink something I wrote today.

If that happens, then I pray that I will have enough humility to admit it.

But until someone can show me from Scripture that believers are commanded or clearly taught to develop a private prayer language of unintelligible sounds, I cannot teach that doctrine as biblical truth.

That is not because I want to take something away from another Christian.

It is because I believe God's Word deserves greater respect than our traditions.

James ends this section by describing wisdom from above as pure, peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial, and sincere.

That is the kind of wisdom I want.

And that requires me to do something I was taught many years ago as a child:

Be careful what you say.

And when you claim to speak for God, be more careful still.

Homosexuality and God

Homosexuality and Christianity is one of those subjects that seems almost impossible to discuss anymore without someone becoming angry.

So before I begin, I want to make something very clear.

I believe that same-sex sexual relations are sinful.

I also believe adultery is sinful.

Sex outside of marriage is sinful.

Lying is sinful.

Stealing is sinful.

Hatred is sinful.

Pride is sinful.

And I am a sinner.

That last statement is important, because I have no right to open the Bible, point at another person, and pretend that the same Word of God does not also judge me.

It does.

The question, then, is not whether homosexual people are somehow worse than the rest of us.

They are not.

The question is much simpler:

What does Scripture teach?

And once we determine what Scripture teaches, are we willing to allow it to judge all of us—even when we do not like the answer?

What Do We Mean by Homosexuality?

We should probably begin by being careful with our words.

Today the word homosexuality can describe several different things. It can refer to attraction, identity, relationships, or sexual activity.

My concern in this discussion is primarily with sexual conduct and the biblical definition of marriage.

I do not need to claim that I know exactly why one person experiences one kind of desire and another person experiences something different.

People experience desires of all kinds.

The fact that I experience a desire does not automatically make acting upon that desire morally right.

That applies to me just as much as it applies to anyone else.

A married heterosexual man may genuinely desire another woman.

His desire does not suddenly make adultery righteous.

Someone may desperately want something that belongs to another person.

That desire does not make stealing acceptable.

I may become furious with someone who has hurt me.

My anger does not give me permission to hate or harm that person.

So when someone says, “This is what I feel, therefore God must approve of it,” I cannot accept that as a biblical standard.

I could use the same argument to justify almost anything I wanted to do.

Scripture must judge my desires.

My desires cannot be allowed to rewrite Scripture.

Does the Bible Actually Address This?

One argument I hear frequently is that the modern word homosexuality did not exist in biblical Hebrew or Greek.

That observation by itself does not settle the question.

My name is Raymond.

The name Raymond does not appear anywhere in the Bible either.

That does not mean the Bible has nothing to say to me.

Modern words can describe things that existed long before the modern terminology developed.

There are legitimate discussions among scholars about the precise meaning and translation of particular Greek and Hebrew words. Those discussions should not simply be dismissed.

But neither should the entire biblical argument be reduced to whether one modern English word appears in an ancient manuscript.

The issue is not:

“Does the Bible contain the English word homosexual?”

The issue is:

“What kinds of sexual relationships and conduct does Scripture describe as consistent with God's intention?”

That is a much larger question.

And the answer does not depend upon one disputed word.

Marriage Begins With a Pattern

Genesis gives us the first biblical picture of human marriage.

God creates humanity male and female.

Genesis 2:24 then describes a man leaving his father and mother and being joined to his wife, with the two becoming one flesh.

Thousands of years later, Jesus Himself returns to this same passage when discussing marriage in Matthew 19:4–6.

He points back to creation:

God made them male and female.

A man leaves father and mother.

He is joined to his wife.

The two become one flesh.

That is significant.

Adam and Eve did not exchange modern wedding rings.

They did not apply for a marriage license.

They did not have bridesmaids, a church building, photographs, or a reception.

Those are human customs surrounding marriage.

They are not what creates the biblical pattern.

The underlying pattern is the union of man and woman.

This is also connected with the unique way male and female were created. Together they possess the biological capacity to produce another human life.

Of course, not every married couple can or will have children. Infertility does not make a marriage cease to be a marriage.

The point is that male and female are complementary in a way that two males or two females are not.

That pattern appears at the beginning of Scripture and continues throughout it.

Scripture Goes Beyond Genesis

The biblical case also does not depend solely upon Adam and Eve.

There are passages in both the Old and New Testaments that address same-sex sexual conduct.

Romans 1:26–27 is one of the clearest New Testament examples.

Paul describes women exchanging natural sexual relations and men likewise abandoning relations with women and becoming sexually involved with other men.

There are also relevant passages in Leviticus, 1 Corinthians, and 1 Timothy.

People debate the interpretation of some of these passages, particularly individual Greek words.

Those discussions can be worthwhile.

But when I consider the entire biblical pattern—creation, marriage, Jesus' teaching, Paul's teaching, and the consistent treatment of sexual morality—I cannot conclude that Scripture presents same-sex sexual relations as something God approves.

That is my conclusion from Scripture.

Someone may disagree with my interpretation.

But disagreement should lead us back to the text, not into hatred of one another.

Love Does Not Make Everything Right

Another argument sometimes goes something like this:

“God is love. These two people love one another. Therefore God must approve of their relationship.”

I believe the first statement completely.

God is love.

But the conclusion does not necessarily follow from it.

Love is extraordinarily important, but the existence of love does not automatically make every relationship or every action righteous.

A married person might sincerely believe that he has fallen in love with someone else's wife.

The feelings may be real.

The affection may be real.

He may genuinely care about her.

That still does not make adultery acceptable.

Biblical love and biblical obedience cannot simply be separated from one another whenever obedience becomes difficult.

Jesus said:

“If you love me, keep my commandments.”

Love therefore cannot mean merely doing whatever our feelings tell us to do.

Sometimes love requires us to deny ourselves.

That is true for heterosexual Christians.

It is true for homosexual Christians.

It is true for me.

It is true for everyone who claims to follow Christ.

The Bible Judges Me Too

This is where Christians need to be especially careful.

It is very easy to preach loudly about somebody else's sexual sin while quietly excusing our own.

A man condemns homosexuality and then commits adultery.

Someone condemns same-sex relationships while consuming pornography.

Someone speaks passionately about biblical morality while lying, cheating, abusing his family, harboring hatred, or refusing to forgive.

That is hypocrisy.

Scripture does not give heterosexual Christians permission to treat homosexuality as though it were the only sexual sin that matters.

It isn't.

Jesus had some of His harshest words for religious people who were very good at identifying everyone else's sins while failing to examine themselves.

If I use Scripture as a weapon against you while refusing to allow that same Scripture to expose me, I have completely missed the point.

God's Word judges both of us.

Should Christians Hate Gay People?

Absolutely not.

A gay man is made in the image of God.

A lesbian woman is made in the image of God.

So am I.

Their lives possess human dignity and worth.

Christians should not mock them.

We should not threaten them.

We should not abuse them.

We should not treat them as though they are somehow beneath us.

We should not refuse them ordinary kindness, friendship, compassion, or human dignity.

And we should certainly never imagine that cruelty becomes righteous simply because we attach God's name to it.

Jesus did not give Christians permission to hate sinners.

If He had, Christianity would be in serious trouble, because the church is full of sinners.

I am one of them.

At the same time, love does not require me to call something righteous when I believe Scripture calls it sin.

There is an enormous difference between saying:

“I believe this behavior is contrary to God's design.”

and saying:

“Because you struggle with this or live this way, I hate you.”

The first is a theological conviction.

The second is a failure to love.

I can disagree with someone profoundly and still love that person.

In fact, Christianity requires me to.

What About “God Made Me This Way”?

I have heard people say:

“God made me, and I am gay. Therefore God made me gay, and He must approve of everything associated with that.”

I do not think that reasoning works.

God certainly created us.

But Christians also believe that humanity lives in a fallen world.

Every one of us experiences desires, weaknesses, temptations, physical conditions, emotional struggles, and tendencies that do not necessarily represent God's moral intention for us.

That includes me.

I cannot say:

“God created me, therefore everything I naturally desire must have been commanded by God.”

If that were true, there would be virtually no need for repentance, self-control, or obedience.

The Christian life repeatedly calls us to surrender things we desire to God.

Sometimes that surrender is extraordinarily difficult.

I do not pretend otherwise.

And I certainly do not want to trivialize what another person may struggle with.

But difficulty does not determine truth.

Scripture does.

We Must Also Be Careful With Scripture

There is another danger here.

Christians sometimes accuse other people of changing Scripture to fit their beliefs.

That certainly happens.

But Christians can do exactly the same thing.

We all have the temptation to make the Bible agree with us.

That is why we must distinguish between:

what Scripture actually says

and

what we desperately want Scripture to say.

If someone can demonstrate that I have misunderstood a passage, I should listen.

If the Hebrew or Greek changes my understanding, I want to know that.

If historical context matters, I want to understand it.

Faithfulness to Scripture does not mean refusing scholarship.

It means allowing good scholarship to help us understand Scripture rather than using scholarship merely to make Scripture say whatever we already wanted it to say.

And that standard applies to both sides of this discussion.

Sin Is Not the End of the Story

Here is the part Christians sometimes communicate very poorly.

Christianity is not fundamentally the message:

“You are a sinner, therefore God wants nothing to do with you.”

Quite the opposite.

The Gospel begins with the fact that all of us are sinners.

Paul writes in Romans 3:23 that all have sinned and fall short of God's glory.

All.

Not homosexuals.

Not heterosexuals.

All.

And the Gospel is that Jesus Christ came for sinners.

He came for adulterers.

He came for liars.

He came for thieves.

He came for the sexually immoral.

He came for proud people.

He came for angry people.

He came for people who have destroyed their lives.

He came for people who look respectable while hiding sins nobody else knows about.

He came for me.

And He came for you.

Sin is real.

Judgment is real.

But so are grace, repentance, forgiveness, and redemption.

Whatever sins a person has committed, the answer of Christianity is not hatred.

The answer is Christ.

Who Will I Follow?

Ultimately, I have to decide what will determine truth for me.

Public opinion changes.

Political parties change.

Politicians change their positions.

Cultures change.

I change.

God does not.

That is why I do not want my faith determined by whichever president happens to occupy the White House, whichever political party happens to control Congress, or whichever opinion happens to be popular this year.

No president is my Savior.

No political party died for my sins.

Jesus Christ did.

So when culture and Scripture appear to disagree, I choose Scripture.

But choosing Scripture also means accepting what it says about me.

I cannot demand repentance from someone else while refusing to repent myself.

I cannot proclaim God's holiness without remembering His mercy.

I cannot speak about judgment without speaking about the Cross.

And I cannot condemn sin while forgetting how much I need the same Savior I am telling someone else about.

So if you are gay and you have read this far, I hope you understand something.

I do not hate you.

I am not afraid of you.

I do not believe that you are somehow less human than I am.

I believe you were created in the image of God.

I also believe that Scripture places boundaries around human sexuality, just as it places boundaries around my sexuality and every other part of my life.

You may disagree with me.

We can still talk.

We can still sit together.

We can still treat one another with dignity.

And I will never need to pretend that you are my enemy simply because we disagree.

If you do not know Jesus Christ and you want to understand why I believe what I believe, I would gladly talk with you.

Not so that I can stand above you.

I cannot.

I would stand beside you as one sinner telling another sinner where I found forgiveness.

His name is Jesus Christ.

And whatever else we may disagree about, I believe He loves you enough to call you to Himself.

The same way He called me.

Today at Church

Test Everything, Hold Fast What Is Good

Today my wife and I attended a church we had never visited before.

The music was loud, but I enjoyed it. The preaching was good as well. At first I had a little trouble following where the pastor was going, but eventually everything came together, and I felt that much of what he said was grounded firmly in the Word of God.

Yet there were two things during the service that troubled me.

They concern subjects Christians have disagreed about for a very long time: speaking in tongues and physical healing.

Before going any further, I want to make something clear.

I believe in the Holy Spirit.

I believe the spiritual gifts described in Scripture were real.

I believe God can heal.

I believe God can intervene in ways that cannot easily be explained by human ability.

I am not interested in explaining away everything supernatural simply because I cannot understand it.

But neither do I believe that everything labeled “the Holy Spirit” necessarily comes from Him.

Scripture gives us a wonderfully balanced instruction:

“Do not quench the Spirit... test everything; hold fast what is good.”
—1 Thessalonians 5:19–21

Those commands belong together.

We should not quench the Spirit.

But we should test what happens.

And the standard by which I believe spiritual experiences should ultimately be tested is Scripture.

Speaking in Tongues

I believe speaking in tongues is biblical.

Acts 2 makes that impossible for me to deny.

At Pentecost, the Holy Spirit came upon the disciples and they began speaking in other tongues. People from many different regions heard them speaking in their own languages.

That is important.

The miracle was not meaningless sound.

Communication took place.

People understood.

The Gospel was proclaimed.

Years ago I witnessed something within my own family that has stayed with me.

During a Bible study, my uncle suddenly began speaking Spanish.

As far as I knew, he could not speak Spanish.

Sitting beside him was a woman who struggled with English.

She understood him.

What happened helped her understand the Gospel, and that very night she placed her faith in Christ.

I cannot scientifically prove what happened in that room. I can only describe what I witnessed and what I believe happened.

But it resembled something I recognize in Acts:

God overcoming a language barrier so that someone could understand the Gospel.

That is very different from some other things I have witnessed in churches.

I have sat in services where people produced streams of sounds that appeared to have no identifiable meaning, no interpretation, and no apparent purpose other than demonstrating that the person was supposedly speaking in tongues.

That troubles me.

Not because I believe tongues are impossible.

It troubles me because Scripture itself places boundaries around their use.

What Does Paul Actually Require?

First Corinthians 12–14 contains Paul's most extensive discussion of spiritual gifts.

And Paul does something very important.

He neither tells Christians to reject tongues nor gives them permission to do whatever they please with them.

He regulates their use.

In 1 Corinthians 14:27–28, Paul says that if someone speaks in a tongue publicly, only two or at most three should speak, they should speak one at a time, and someone must interpret.

Then comes something that I think modern churches need to take very seriously.

If there is no interpreter, the person is to remain silent in the church.

That is not my rule.

That is Paul's.

Paul repeatedly emphasizes the reason:

The church is supposed to be edified.

If someone stands in a congregation and speaks something nobody understands, and nobody interprets it, what has the congregation learned?

Paul asks essentially the same question.

He compares speech with musical instruments and even a military trumpet. If the sound has no recognizable meaning, how does anyone know how to respond?

Meaning matters.

Understanding matters.

Order matters.

Edification matters.

Paul eventually says that God is not a God of confusion but of peace, and he concludes his discussion by saying that everything should be done decently and in order.

Yet we also have to be careful not to make Paul say something he did not say.

At the end of the chapter he specifically says:

Do not forbid speaking in tongues.

Therefore I cannot biblically argue:

“Tongues are false, so churches should prohibit them.”

Paul will not allow me to do that.

But neither can someone simply say:

“The Holy Spirit made me do it, therefore no biblical restrictions apply.”

Paul will not allow that either.

The biblical position seems to require both openness and discernment.

Do not quench the Spirit.

Test everything.

Are Tongues Always Human Languages?

I personally lean strongly toward understanding biblical tongues as genuine languages, particularly because Acts 2 explicitly describes people hearing languages they recognized.

But I also need to be careful here.

First Corinthians 14 contains statements Christians interpret differently. Paul speaks about someone who “speaks in a tongue” speaking mysteries to God, and he describes praying with his spirit while his understanding is unfruitful.

Christians have debated what precisely Paul means.

So I do not want to make the same mistake I have criticized others for making.

I should not say:

“The Bible unquestionably proves every tongue must be a previously known human language.”

The evidence deserves more careful treatment than that.

What I can say with confidence is that Paul does not permit disorderly, uninterpreted public displays simply because someone claims they are spiritual.

If someone speaks publicly in a tongue, Scripture requires interpretation.

That alone should cause us to examine some modern practices very carefully.

Experience Cannot Become Our Bible

I have experienced things in churches that I believe were genuine works of God.

I have also experienced things that caused me serious concern.

I once witnessed a Christian presentation in which the Word of God was being proclaimed, and during the event a young woman underwent something that those of us present understood as spiritual deliverance.

I have witnessed people communicate across language barriers in remarkable ways.

In Mexico, I watched a woman who knew essentially no Spanish communicate with children by drawing pictures in the sand. They understood one another well enough that before long the children were trying to invite her to go swimming with them.

God has given human beings many ways to communicate.

But none of those experiences—even the ones I regard as extraordinary—gets to become my authority.

Experience must be tested by Scripture.

Otherwise someone can say:

“I experienced this, therefore God did it.”

Another person can say:

“I experienced the opposite, therefore God did that.”

Soon everyone has a different truth.

Scripture gives us a standard outside ourselves.

What About Healing?

The second thing that troubled me involves sickness and disability.

There are Christians who teach, in one form or another, that a faithful Christian should not remain sick or disabled.

Sometimes the implication is that if you are not healed, something must be wrong with your faith.

Sometimes it becomes even worse:

You must have unrepented sin in your life.

I know what it is like to hear that.

I have been in churches where people refused to pray for me because they believed my disability must be the consequence of some sin I had failed to confess.

That hurts.

But more importantly, I do not believe Scripture supports such a sweeping conclusion.

Jesus Addressed This Directly

John 9 contains one of the most important passages on this issue.

Jesus and His disciples encountered a man who had been blind from birth.

The disciples immediately asked the question human beings still ask:

Who sinned?

Was it this man or his parents?

In other words:

Someone must be responsible for this disability.

Jesus rejected their assumption.

He told them that neither the man's sin nor his parents' sin explained why he had been born blind.

That passage alone should make Christians extremely cautious before looking at someone with a disability and declaring:

“You must have unconfessed sin.”

We do not know that.

And claiming to know something God has not revealed can itself become a serious spiritual error.

Faithful Christians Got Sick

The New Testament also refuses to give us a picture in which faithful Christians never suffer physically.

Paul describes a “thorn in the flesh” in 2 Corinthians 12.

He asked God three times to remove it.

God did not.

Instead, God told Paul that His grace was sufficient and that His power was made perfect in weakness.

Whatever precisely Paul's thorn was, the principle is unmistakable:

God sometimes accomplishes His purposes through weakness rather than removing it.

Timothy had recurring physical problems. Paul advised him regarding his stomach and frequent illnesses in 1 Timothy 5:23.

Epaphroditus became so sick that he nearly died according to Philippians 2.

In 2 Timothy 4:20, Paul says that he left Trophimus sick at Miletus.

Think about that.

This is Paul.

A man through whom God performed extraordinary miracles.

Yet Paul did not simply heal every Christian around him whenever someone became sick.

That should tell us something.

Does That Mean God Does Not Heal?

Certainly not.

Scripture contains healing from beginning to end.

Jesus healed.

The apostles healed.

James tells believers to pray for the sick.

I believe Christians should pray for healing.

I believe we should ask boldly.

I believe God can heal someone instantly if He chooses.

But I do not believe we have biblical authority to promise that every Christian will be physically healed in this life if only he possesses enough faith.

Sometimes God says yes.

Sometimes God works through physicians.

Sometimes God gives strength to endure.

Sometimes healing does not come in this life.

Christian hope is ultimately bigger than temporary physical healing.

The resurrection is the final healing.

There will come a day when the bodies of those who belong to Christ will no longer suffer injury, disease, disability, deterioration, or death.

But we are not there yet.

Romans 8 describes creation groaning as we await redemption, including the redemption of our bodies.

Until then, Christians still live in bodies affected by a fallen world.

My Own Body

I have lived with a spinal cord injury and chronic pain for years.

My lower back hurts most of the time. Some days are much worse than others.

I would be lying if I said I enjoy pain.

I don't.

Pain is not my friend.

But strangely, God has used it.

Before I was injured, my life was busy.

Too busy.

I did not spend the time with God that I should have.

Church could be pushed aside.

Bible reading could be postponed.

There was always something else demanding my attention.

Then my body forced my life to slow down.

The pain did not make God good.

God was already good.

But God used something painful to change me.

Since becoming disabled, I have spent far more time studying Scripture.

I have read the Bible from beginning to end repeatedly.

I have spent years examining questions about God that I might never have taken seriously otherwise.

Before the injury, I never really imagined wanting to preach or teach God's Word.

Afterward, I did.

My physical weakness forced me to confront my spiritual priorities.

Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 4:16 that although our outer self is wasting away, our inner self can be renewed day by day.

I understand that verse differently now than I once did.

My body can hurt while my faith grows.

My legs can fail while my spirit remains anchored.

My physical condition does not determine the condition of my relationship with God.

We Need Both Faith and Discernment

So where does all of this leave me when I visit a church where I hear preaching I appreciate but encounter practices that concern me?

I do not think the answer is immediate condemnation.

Christians disagree about spiritual gifts.

Faithful Christians have reached different conclusions about tongues.

We disagree about healing.

We disagree about how the Holy Spirit works in particular situations.

But disagreement does not mean that anything goes.

We still possess Scripture.

That is where we must return.

If a church practices tongues, I want to ask:

Does it follow Paul's instructions?

Is there interpretation?

Is there order?

Does it edify the congregation?

Does it glorify Christ or draw attention primarily to the speaker?

If a church teaches healing, I want to ask:

Does it acknowledge the sick believers in Scripture?

Does it recognize that Paul himself lived with weakness?

Does it allow for God's answer to be, “My grace is sufficient for you”?

Does it comfort suffering people or accuse them?

Does it pray for the sick without pretending to know why every person is sick?

Those seem to me to be fair biblical questions.

And the same questions must be asked about things I believe.

I cannot demand that someone else's theology submit to Scripture while allowing my own theology to escape examination.

Test Everything

I am still not entirely sure whether the church we visited should become our church home.

But perhaps that uncertainty is not necessarily bad.

It forces me to do something Christians should be doing anyway.

Listen.

Study.

Pray.

Compare what I hear with Scripture.

And test everything.

I do not want to become so skeptical that I quench something the Holy Spirit genuinely wants to do.

But neither do I want to become so eager for supernatural experiences that I stop exercising the discernment Scripture commands.

So I return again to those words:

Do not quench the Spirit.

Test everything.

Hold fast what is good.

That seems to me to be one of the safest places a Christian can stand.

Not afraid of the Holy Spirit.

Not impressed by every claim made in His name.

But firmly anchored in the Word of God.

what do you think?

When Scripture and Culture Disagree

Recently I posted a statement on Facebook concerning homosexuality and same-sex relationships. I made it clear that, based upon my understanding of Scripture, I cannot affirm same-sex sexual relationships as morally acceptable before God.

The response surprised me.

Not because people disagreed with me. I expect disagreement on a subject like this.

What surprised me was the way Scripture itself was sometimes handled in order to make the disagreement work.

That concerns me far beyond the subject of homosexuality.

The larger question is this:

When what I want to believe conflicts with what Scripture teaches, which one am I willing to change?

Was Lilith Adam's First Wife?

One person who identified himself as a Christian challenged my argument by telling me that Adam had another wife before Eve.

Her name, he said, was Lilith.

I had never heard that taught from Scripture.

So I looked into it.

There is indeed an ancient tradition concerning a figure named Lilith, and later Jewish folklore eventually developed a story in which she became Adam's first wife. According to that tradition, she was created from the earth like Adam and later left him.

But there is an important distinction that must be made.

That story is not found in the Genesis account.

The Hebrew word lilith does occur in Isaiah 34:14, where translations render the term in different ways. Some transliterate the word as Lilith, while others translate it as something like a night creature or night bird.

But Isaiah does not identify this figure as Adam's wife.

Genesis does not mention Adam having another wife before Eve.

The story of Lilith as Adam's first wife belongs to later tradition and folklore, not to the biblical creation narrative.

That distinction matters.

There is nothing wrong with studying ancient traditions. They can help us understand how people interpreted biblical texts at different periods in history.

But tradition should not be allowed to quietly become Scripture.

If I am trying to determine Christian doctrine, I need to know the difference between:

“The Bible says...”

and

“A later tradition says...”

Those are not the same thing.

Christians should be especially careful about this because we can easily criticize other people for changing Scripture while doing something very similar ourselves whenever a tradition supports what we already want to believe.

Scripture must remain the standard.

What About Free Will?

Another person took issue with Christianity itself.

One of his objections concerned free will.

His argument was essentially this:

If God gives human beings free will, why would He then judge someone for using that freedom—particularly when it concerns sexual desire?

That question deserves more consideration than simply dismissing it.

Christianity does teach human responsibility.

But freedom to make a choice does not mean that every possible choice becomes morally right.

If it did, morality would cease to have any real meaning.

The ability to choose something and the moral rightness of that choice are two different things.

Human beings can choose generosity or selfishness.

We can choose honesty or deception.

We can choose faithfulness or adultery.

We can choose forgiveness or revenge.

The fact that I possess the ability to make either choice does not make both choices equally good.

Free will does not mean:

“Whatever I choose becomes right because I chose it.”

It means that my choices have genuine moral significance.

And Scripture teaches that those choices also have consequences.

What About Desire?

The same distinction needs to be made concerning desire.

Someone might say:

“God created me. I experience this desire. Therefore God must approve of me acting upon it.”

I do not believe that conclusion necessarily follows.

And this principle is certainly not limited to homosexuality.

I cannot say:

“God created me, therefore everything I naturally desire must have been commanded by God.”

I experience desires that I should not act upon.

So does everyone else.

A married man might find another woman attractive.

He may not have consciously chosen the initial attraction.

But the existence of the attraction does not make adultery morally acceptable.

I might become extremely angry with someone.

I may not choose the first feeling of anger that enters my mind.

But that does not mean I have permission to nurture hatred or seek revenge.

The Christian moral question is therefore not simply:

“Did I choose to experience this desire?”

The more important question is:

“What should I do with this desire in light of what God has revealed?”

That applies to heterosexual desire.

It applies to same-sex desire.

It applies to greed.

It applies to pride.

It applies to anger.

And it applies to me.

The existence of a desire does not create moral authority.

Who Determines What Is Right?

This brings us to a much larger problem.

Just because I believe something is right or wrong does not make it right or wrong.

My feelings are real, but they are not the ultimate source of morality.

My opinions are real, but they are not the ultimate source of truth.

Within Christianity, God is the source of moral truth.

That means morality stands above me.

I do not get to rewrite adultery simply because adultery becomes personally convenient.

I do not get to redefine dishonesty because telling the truth becomes painful.

I do not get to make hatred righteous because I believe someone deserves it.

And I do not believe human sexuality becomes morally right or wrong simply because society changes its opinion about it.

That standard must apply equally.

Otherwise I am not really submitting myself to God.

I am simply using God to approve whatever I had already decided.

What Does Scripture Say About Marriage?

The Bible begins its picture of human marriage in Genesis.

God creates humanity male and female.

Genesis 2:24 describes a man leaving his father and mother and being joined to his wife, and the two becoming one flesh.

Jesus Himself returns to this passage in Matthew 19 when discussing marriage.

That is important to me.

The first biblical model is male and female.

Jesus points back to that same model.

Marriage customs themselves can change.

Wedding rings are traditions.

Marriage licenses are legal instruments.

Wedding ceremonies differ across cultures.

None of those things define the fundamental relationship.

The biblical pattern precedes all of them.

Throughout Scripture, marriage is consistently presented as a relationship between husband and wife.

I do not find a biblical example of a same-sex marriage being presented as God's design for marriage.

What About Same-Sex Sexual Conduct?

There are also passages that directly address same-sex sexual behavior.

Romans 1:26–27 is one of the most frequently discussed.

There are also relevant passages in Leviticus, 1 Corinthians, and 1 Timothy.

There are legitimate scholarly arguments concerning translation, historical setting, and the meanings of particular Greek and Hebrew words.

I do not believe Christians should be afraid of those discussions.

If a word has been misunderstood, I want to know.

If historical context changes how a passage should be understood, I want to understand that context.

If someone can demonstrate that I have incorrectly interpreted Scripture, then I should be willing to listen.

But scholarship should help us discover what Scripture means.

It should not become a tool for forcing Scripture to say what we have already decided it must say.

After considering the larger biblical pattern—creation, marriage, Jesus' teaching, and the New Testament treatment of sexual morality—I remain convinced that same-sex sexual relations fall outside the sexual boundaries established in Scripture.

Someone else may reach a different conclusion.

But my disagreement with that person does not require hatred.

Does God Send Gay People to Hell?

This question is often framed badly.

Christianity does not teach that there are two groups of people:

Gay sinners who need salvation,

and heterosexual people who do not.

There is one group.

Sinners.

Romans 3:23 says that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

That includes me.

Christianity teaches both divine judgment and human responsibility, but it also teaches something even more important:

God has provided a way of reconciliation through Jesus Christ.

That invitation is not reserved for people who have committed certain respectable sins.

Christ came for sinners.

The adulterer needs Him.

The liar needs Him.

The thief needs Him.

The sexually immoral need Him.

The proud need Him.

The hateful need Him.

I need Him.

A gay person does not stand in some separate category of humanity beyond God's grace.

The Gospel is offered to all.

Does Disagreement Equal Hatred?

One of the most difficult changes in our culture has been the increasing assumption that refusing to affirm someone's belief or behavior means that we hate that person.

I reject that idea.

A person can believe that my Christianity is completely wrong without hating me.

Likewise, I can believe that a same-sex sexual relationship is inconsistent with Scripture without hating the people involved.

Disagreement is not automatically hatred.

If a gay man tells me that he believes my interpretation of Scripture is mistaken, he has not necessarily attacked me.

And if I tell him that I believe his relationship falls outside biblical sexual ethics, I have not necessarily attacked him either.

The question is what we do next.

Do we insult one another?

Do we mock one another?

Do we threaten one another?

Do we treat someone as less human because he disagrees?

Christians have no excuse for doing that.

Gay men and women are human beings created in the image of God.

They deserve dignity.

They deserve ordinary kindness.

They deserve the same basic respect I expect someone else to give me.

I can believe someone is wrong without believing that person is worthless.

Christians Must Examine Themselves Too

There is another side to this issue that Christians sometimes neglect.

We can become very vocal about homosexuality while remaining remarkably quiet about heterosexual sexual sin.

That is wrong.

Adultery does not become less sinful because the people involved are heterosexual.

Pornography does not become acceptable because the person watching it condemns homosexuality.

Sex outside of marriage does not become righteous because it involves a man and woman.

Neither does hatred, greed, pride, dishonesty, cruelty, or hypocrisy disappear simply because someone has correct theology about marriage.

The same Bible I use when discussing homosexuality also stands over me.

If I am unwilling to allow Scripture to expose my own sins, then I have no business using it merely to expose someone else's.

Truth Does Not Evolve With Public Opinion

Culture changes constantly.

Political positions change.

Public opinion changes.

Words change.

Social expectations change.

I change.

But Christianity claims that God's truth does not become true or false according to public opinion.

That does not mean Christians always interpret Scripture correctly.

We don't.

We must study.

We must listen.

We must correct ourselves when evidence demonstrates that we have misunderstood something.

But there is an enormous difference between improving our understanding of Scripture and changing Scripture's meaning because its teaching has become unpopular.

That is where I choose to stand.

Not because I believe I am morally superior to anyone else.

I am not.

Not because I hate gay people.

I do not.

Not because I think homosexual sin somehow places someone beyond God's grace.

It does not.

I stand there because I believe Scripture must be permitted to judge me before I presume to judge Scripture.

If God's Word tells me something I do not want to hear, the first question should not be:

“How can I make this mean something else?”

The first question should be:

“Could I be the one who needs to change?”

That question belongs to everyone.

It belongs to the gay person.

It belongs to the heterosexual person.

It belongs to the pastor.

It belongs to the skeptic.

And it belongs to me.

I do not expect everyone who reads this to agree with me.

But disagreement does not have to make us enemies.

You can sit across from me, tell me I am wrong, and still be treated with dignity.

I hope you would offer me the same courtesy.

Because ultimately this discussion is not about winning an argument on Facebook.

It is about something much larger.

Who gets to define truth?

For me, the answer cannot ultimately be culture, politics, feelings, desires, traditions, or even myself.

The final authority must be God.

And if I really believe that, then His Word must be allowed to correct me too.