If one were a pitcher being called up to the majors, then it might be helpful to take the advise of Crash Davis and study up on clichés which would become useful in navigating the success and adversity in The Show. However, the Christian faith is not the majors. It is vastly more important and dire, which is why the use of clichés in articulating faith driven arguments is not only to be avoided, it is ineffective.
Given that it is pride month, there will be no shortage of Christians uttering the cliché “Love the sinner, hate the sin” in response to the homosexual community. To its merit, this cliché does not internalize liberalism as others do, like “what two consenting adults do in private is their business.” However, this mantra is wholly insufficient and is demonstrably ineffective in evangelism.
One might think that this mantra is useful in ministering, but it does not overcome the very objections internalized by homosexuals. For instance, if a person identifies in their sin, making it the essence of who they are as a person, and the Christian approaches them with the mindset to still hate the sin while loving the person, the individual who identifies as their sin would still feel hatred as a result. Just because the Christian can separate sin from the sinner does not mean those in the world do the same. This is why any affront to transgenderism is maliciously portrayed as erasing the existence of said individuals. Refusal to adhere to preferred pronouns is likewise an act of contempt or hatred. There have been no shortage of instances of people being arrested for “hate speech” or businessmen like Jack Phillips being sued on behalf of adherence to Christian orthodoxy. Even rejecting a “wedding” invite could be seen as an act of derision towards the individuals. This movement does not demand tolerance but submission. To speak the truth in love will not come across as loving but an act of hatred.
Secondly, the individual will often understand that the Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin. Regardless of the false rhetoric espoused by Side A or B theology proponents, they will be ineffective in transforming those they seek to save because they do not believe they require restoration by the Holy Spirit. Plenty of nonbelievers understand the bible, unfortunately at times better than Christians. Those who left the church over a particular passage in Leviticus likely know exactly what the text reads. It is not always that they are ignorant, but that they have rejected the truth.
To combat their objection, it is best to articulate the Christian sexual ethic which is uniform throughout the bible. Beginning in Genesis, God designed Male and Female and instituted marriage as the union between them for the procreation of new life. In our sin, we deviated from this design. Certain sins pervert the design, such as promiscuity, adultery, and pornography while other sins are a rejection of His design. A man putting on lipstick and a dress and labeling himself a woman is a rejection of the man he was created to be. A man having sex with another man is a rejection of God’s design for sex. It is insufficient to just be cognizant of what is and is not a sin. As Christians, we must be able to understand and convey why particular actions and desires are innately sinful. That we have collectively experienced the slippery slope on the issue of homosexuality should be comprehended to the Christian as to why Leviticus 18 and 20 read the way that they do.
In approaching the situation, I recall a story told by JD Hall of how he confronted a transvestite individual in a convenient store where he, in his monotonal fashion, articulated that the individual was a man in seemingly harsh, yet poignant words. Fast forward and that individual would later repent of his sin. In the recent video of Alex Stein confronting a drag queen who performed sexualized dancing before a crowd of children, the individual was visibly distraught at being publicly shamed. There is a potency in shame in that it confronts people with the gravity of their actions.
In His earthly ministry, the gospels say that Jesus amazed the crowds because He spoke with authority (Mark 1:21-27, Matthew 7:28, Luke 2:47). He was convicting, not coddling, nor did He teach in platitudes or clichés.
Power of Personal Testimony
Moreover another approach that one could utilize would be that of their personal testimony, particularly in relation to sexual sins or other categories of addiction. Pornography is a cheapened form of sexual gratification far more prevalent in American society than homosexuality. Perhaps this is the sin in which one’s personal experience best relates to homosexuals. Both possess an addictive nature in that they rewire the brain due to the instant gratification received. None would say that the desire to view porn is not inherently sinful. The same could go for one’s prior experience in promiscuity or with hookup culture. The parallels exist to where one can relate the damage of their own sinfulness in testifying to these people.
Many of these individuals have trauma and abuse in their lives in which they then turned to these sins out of desire for comfort and gratification.
Conclusion
Any place that does not receive you or listen to you, as you go out from there, shake the dust off the soles of your feet for a testimony against them. Mark 6:11
Always remember that rejection is a likely outcome and that God does the saving. There is no guaranteed pitch that will work on any homosexual that will magically convert and transform them. In preparing His disciples, Jesus makes clear that rejection is going to occur and instructs them accordingly for when that day happens. He did not instruct them to stay within the village and preach until they change their hearts.
The influence of the Rainbow Jihad entraps the individual through a sense of community and a warped ideology. Moreover, it targets children as has been demonstrated through Gallup’s infamous generational survey. In dealing with this societal plight, we cannot be nicer than God. Protecting children from falling prey should be a primary objective. It will get one called a bigot, a phobe, and all sorts of nasty epithets. To the fallen world, they view acts of love as hatred.
