Macklemore and Morality: A Hip-Hop Take on the Gay Debate by Nate Corley

              It’s hard to turn on the radio in Seattle these days without hearing the pulsing rhythm and repetitive saxophone refrain of Macklemore’s hit song, “Thriftshop.” Last week, I actually heard the song being played simultaneously on two different radio stations – one a top-40 hip hop station, the other known for playing alternative hits.

The song is so catchy that apparently some people can’t stop singing it – even at the threat of bodily harm. A woman in Colorado was arrested last night for strangling (non-fatally) her boyfriend when he refused to stop singing the chorus of “Thriftshop,”[1] even though she had asked him “25 times” to stop. Clearly, Macklemore’s music has a strong appeal.

                While “Thriftshop” may be Macklemore’s signature tune nationally, he is best known in his hometown of Seattle for “Same Love,” his anthem calling for the legalization of gay marriage. Although Macklemore uses this song to call out lawmakers and hip hop fans for their apparent discrimination against the gay community, he devotes the majority of the lyrics to criticizing the response of the Christian church to the issue of homosexuality in general.

                Because of the profanity featured in most of Macklemore’s lyrics and his roots in the ultra-liberal Pacific Northwest, it’s easy for most Christians to dismiss “Same Love” as just another rant of a godless celebrity taking pot-shots at the church.

Such a flippant dismissal would be a sad mistake. Even though Macklemore’s broadside attack on the church is aggressive and inflammatory, the lyrics of “Same Love” reveal many of the assumptions Millennials have appropriated concerning the church and sexuality. If the church wishes to engage this generation in theological discourse, they need to know where they are coming from. You can’t give them an answer if you don’t what questions they are asking.

That’s where Macklemore’s “Same Love” comes in. In this song, Macklemore poses the questions that the church needs to answer. A discussion must take place, and “Same Love” reveals what issues ought to comprise the loci of that discussion.

The first question concerns the origins of homosexual desires. As Macklemore puts it,

“The right wing conservatives think it's a decision
And you can be cured with some treatment and religion
Man-made rewiring of a predisposition
Playing God, aw nah here we go
America the brave still fears what we don't know
And God loves all his children, is somehow forgotten”[2]

In other words, does God create people as homosexuals, or is it a choice that individuals make? Far too often, the church dismisses this question as blatantly obvious: “Of course God didn’t create people to be gay! It was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.” The non-Christian world deserves a better response than this, and it’s up to those in the church to thoughtfully provide that answer.

The next question Macklemore raises concerns the authority of Scripture. He notes, “We paraphrase a book written thirty-five-hundred years ago,” as if the quotation of old dead guys is enough to settle the issue. Clearly, the larger question is, “What is the Bible?” Is the Bible an accurate, trustworthy revelation of God’s will, or is it an outdated collection of documents with little relevancy to life in the 21^st Century? This question of Scripture’s authority must be answered before Christians start lobbing Bible verses at their pro-gay opponents.

Macklemore also raises the question of whether homosexuality is an unalterable predisposition. In the chorus, a lesbian woman repeats the refrain, “And I can’t change, even if I wanted to. My love, my love, my love, she keeps me warm.” Most evangelical Christians assume the possibility of change and recovery for homosexuals, but non-Christians are not likely to share this belief. You must convince someone of the reality of potential change before you start preaching repentance.

The attitude of the church is also criticized by Macklemore:

“When I was at church they taught me something else
If you preach hate at the service those words aren't anointed
That holy water that you soak in has been poisoned”

If Christian opposition to homosexuality is coming across as “hate”, then there is a flaw in either the manner in which the message is conveyed or the attitude of the one giving the message. Macklemore’s critique here may be legitimate for some tactless Christians, but it may also reflect a confusion of loving opposition to behavior and a rejection of the person. The church must heed Macklemore’s words and take care to ensure that their opposition to sin is not misinterpreted as hatred of the sinner.

                The final question raised by Macklemore follows necessarily from the issue raised above: “What is love?” Macklemore ends this anthem by repeating some words from 1 Corinthians 13: “Love is patient/Love is kind.” Clearly, Macklemore is calling the church to love homosexuals by endorsing their behavior. But is that really what love is?

Unless the church provides a good answer to the contrary in both words and action, Macklemore and those like him will assume Christians are motivated by something other than love when they call homosexuality “sin.”

                Clearly, the gay debate is heating up nationally. Supporters of gay rights are getting ever more vocal, and laws around the country are being changed to accommodate gay marriages. And somehow, the church’s voice seems to be growing less and less relevant.

                To a large degree, this is because the church is ignoring the questions that need to be answered. Only when we address the mistaken assumptions of the pro-gay community will Christians be able to provide a convincing defense of God’s standards for human sexuality.

                 Listen to Macklemore, and get in the discussion.

-Nate Corley

---

[1] http://musicfeeds.com.au/news/woman-strangles-partner-for-singing-thrift-shop-non-stop/

[2] All lyrics quoted from: http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/macklemore/samelove.html.

Pope Benedict XVI by Sergio A.

As everybody has heard the pope Benedict XVI resigned from the position as head of the Catholic Church. Not only was the announcement of news to the Catholic’s but also to the world. Pope Benedict XVI is said to have broken six centuries of tradition upon his resignation. So it’s understandable to see why it’s been such a big deal. A lot of people have been asking the question: Why didn’t the pope remain as head of the church until the time of his departing? I’ve certainly pondered this question as well. Some of the things that come to mind are cover ups such as same sex scandals and child abuse. These scandals and many more not mentioned have caused many to flee from religion; most importantly from God. Therefore, it seems that the enemy is not just interested in attacking the Christian community, but is against anyone or anything that stands for God.

Sex (outside of marriage-or with a different partner other than spouse/husband) combined with lust has been some of the biggest contributors affecting the church today. Like the Catholic Church, Christianity has also suffered by seeing great leaders fall to sexual immorality. Sexual perversion at least includes pornography, oral sex, prostitution, lust, thoughts, intimacy, homosexuality, incest and everything else that stains purity as God sees it. So what are we to do as Christians in order to protect ourselves and those that we love from falling into the snare of the enemy? Should Christians stay at home and triple lock their doors? Should we ignore the topic and pretend that everything is ok? Well, no. We must be mindful that anyone can become a slave to sexual desires. As I hinted before, the Catholic Church is not the only church that is being attacked. So what should we do? Which master will we serve and love (sexual lust or God)? We can’t do both.

“Men that you recognize are rushing the opposite direction—spears aligned, ready to throw. Swords sharpened, shields fixed, helmets lowered they’re ready for battle. They’re calling for you to join them. They’re rushing for the front lines—they’re unafraid. They know they’ve been given victory. But not you. You’ve got your pants down around your ankles. You’re roaming in circles looking for the seductress that’s calling you by name. You can’t wait to fornicate on the battlefield.”[1]

These are some helpful tips to avoid sexual impurity:

1.      IDENTIFY YOUR CURRENT CONDITION.

2.      MEDITATE ON CHRIST AND HIS WORK.

3.      PRAY TO GOD FOR THE GRACE YOU NEED.

4.      REPENT OF ALL KNOWN SINS. 

5.      RETURN TO CHRIST IN FRESH DEPENDENCY. 

6.      Guard your heart and those whom you love

7.      train your mind to think praiseworthy (phil. 4:8-9)

8.      don’t watch things that will bring temptation

9.      remove yourself from situations of temptation

10. be part of an accountability group (prov. 4:23)

 

A person, who rejoices in God, will find beauty and contentment which will override impure sexual behaviors. He is less inclined to fall. Remember that the Bible commands that we flee from immorality (1 Cor. 6:18; Eph. 5:3Col. 3:5). Also Jesus “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell” (Matt.5:25-27). As Christians we know that God has set us apart for His glory. Therefore, we are to be holy as He is holy. Though we are in the world we are not of the world and we have to keep that in mind. We must walk in step with the Holy Spirit and rely on His strength in order to overcome evil. If somebody within our churches fall to sexual immorality before condemning them we must help them in their restoration. Don’t be that church that only knows how to condemn but not restore.

Sergio A.

---

[1] http://theresurgence.com/2011/11/30/fornicating-on-the-battlefield

The Problem of Separatism by Stephen Legg

Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about separatism.  I was first exposed to the idea four years ago while I was working on my undergraduate thesis.  At that time I was researching the theology and worldview of Puritan separatists who were willing to uproot their lives and families to move to the isolated wilderness of the New World in order to distance themselves from Christians who didn’t believe precisely as themselves.

I realize that the way I just described their intentions is not the way we usually tell the story.  We usually begin with the story of their persecution and delve into the heroism of an oppressed people who were brave enough to cross an ocean to practice their faith.  But there are other ways of looking at their separatism. 

For one thing, in their writings, the Puritans made clear their belief that they were being led to the New World as though it were an early-modern era Promised Land.  They compared themselves to the captive Hebrews of Egypt, being led to freedom in a land they had not previously known (a belief that was later adopted by many African-Americans Christians and lingers as theology in black churches today).  Today’s successors to Puritanism, conservative evangelicals, largely dismiss that theology.

Today, separatism doesn’t have the same meaning as it did for the Puritans, but it has similar results—a removal of Christian believers from one another and from unsaved and unchurched non-believers.

Now, there is a sense in which this is a good thing.  We are called to be different from the World, and commanded not to partake in its sins.  By maintaining a separation—by keeping our social and family lives within the safe confines of our churches—there is the hope that innocence will be preserved and the painful ugliness of sin might be staved off for another day.  It is good to desire these things, as it is good to “fellowship with the saints.”

But all too often we Christians tend to fellowship with the saints at the exclusion of loving our neighbors—our sinful, lustful, cursing, adulterous, homosexual neighbors.  We don’t want the careless sinfulness of these neighbors rubbing off onto us or our families.  We want to protect ourselves and our loved ones from sin.  We also don’t want to give the appearance of evil by associating with those who practice evil.  Again, these are good desires.

With the above in mind, I keep asking myself whether there are gray areas between separating from the world and socializing only with the church and engaging with the World so much that there is no apparent difference between a believer and a non-believer.  Those are the extremities that have been defined by many conservative evangelicals today.  I believe we have made this separation too extreme, too black and white.

Sin is a non-negotiable to a follower of Christ.  But so is separation from sinners.  One of the ways that Jesus came under severe scrutiny from religious leaders was his willingness to spend his time in the homes of sinners and outcasts from the religious community.  Yet, in all of the time he spent with sinners, he never sinned himself.  A separation remained, but it was not a physical or social separation.  The separation was the “bent” of his worldview and his intention.  Jesus truly loved the sinners but all the while kept himself from partaking in their sin.

I argue that we ought to follow the example Jesus set for us by befriending our non-believing neighbors, by truly loving them and sharing the joy that we have discovered for our own lives, by mourning with them and caring what is going on deep within their hearts. 

Certainly, there will be risks for us, temptation looms around every corner.  But as believers, we have the Holy Spirit to guard us against temptation.  We have a different outlook and a source beyond ourselves to draw upon.

In a world that is increasingly hostile to Christianity, we are fooling ourselves if we believe the lost are going to wander into our churches and small groups.  If we are going to bring the love of Christ to our neighbors, we are going to have to go to them—not handing out tracts and bearing condemnation, but by truly caring and expressing concern, by becoming involved in their lives.

- Stephen Legg

Downtown Abbey: I Watch It, and I'm Not Ashamed by Nate Corley

                Like many American men, I was tricked by my wife into watching an episode of Downton Abbey  a few weeks ago. For those of you who have recently emerged from your Y2K bunkers, Downton Abbey is the smash hit PBS series (no, that’s not an oxymoron) that documents the lives of the wealthy Grantham family and their servants during the tumultuous early years of the 20^th Century. From the sinking of the Titanic to the onset of World War I, the fictional story is firmly grounded in historical events and explores themes of politics, family dynamics, romance, and the erosion of the British class system.

Although I was hesitant to watch the show at first (I was warned by a friend that I’d have to turn in my “man card” if the word got out I was watching this “soap opera for history buffs”), I quickly found myself engrossed in the story. One of the aspects of the show that fascinated me is its apparent lack of a central protagonist; all of the characters receive airtime, and the various storylines are masterfully woven together into one gripping narrative. The superb ensemble cast brings each of these unique characters to life in a way that renders them believable and empathetic. There are no “flat” characters in this show; everyone has commendable traits, and everyone has flaws. I see in these characters the same complex battle that rages in my own soul, where total depravity is just as apparent as the Imago Dei.

No character on this show is more complex than Thomas Barrow, the First Footman of the Grantham estate. If any character on the show can be considered an antagonist, it is Thomas. Whether he is sneaking wine from the family cellar or spreading false rumors about rival staff members, much of the story’s conflict is caused by Thomas’s self-interested scheming.

It is revealed early on in the series that Thomas is homosexual. Even though the vestiges of Victorian propriety necessitate that Thomas keep his sexuality a secret, it appears to be common knowledge among the staff that Thomas is “different.” His employers, however, are ignorant of Thomas’s orientation, and he attempts to keep his same-sex attraction secret from the Grantham family at all costs.

Despite the prominent role this homosexual character plays in this series, evangelical Christians seem to have embraced Downton Abbey in a way they were hesitant to do for other shows with homosexual characters, such as Will and Grace. One man of my acquaintance, a straight-laced conservative Christian with traditional views of sexual ethics, explained his position succinctly: “I don’t have a problem with the gay guy on the show because he’s the bad guy. Really, the show puts homosexuality in a negative light.”

Indeed, the series in no way glamorizes or eroticizes the homosexual lifestyle (this is PBS, after all), and Thomas is certainly “the bad guy” on the show. But is the fact that Thomas is an antagonist really a censure of the homosexual lifestyle?

I don’t think so. Early in the second season of Downtown Abbey, a more vulnerable side of Thomas is revealed.  In a conversation with a wounded soldier, Thomas tearfully explains the pain of being different – of being surrounded by people yet still feeling alone. Thomas feels kinship with this soldier, who faces the prospect of living the rest of his life as an outcast because of his blindness and disfigured face. Thomas is already an outcast; not because of an external wound, but an internal one – the loneliness of living as a gay man in a straight world.

This conversation reveals the source of Thomas’ ill-will toward the other characters on the show: his bitterness springs from a lifetime of mistreatment and rejection. In this way, Thomas the Villain is transformed into Thomas the Victim – a prisoner of his own desires and the prudish sexual ethics of 20^th Century England.

So how should an evangelical Christian –one who holds fast to the biblical witness that homosexual behavior is sin – evaluate Downton Abbey’s portrayal of homosexuality?

 First of all, thoughtfully. To assume that this show promotes the common evangelical understanding of homosexual behavior as “sin” simply because the only gay character is a “bad guy” is misguided and naïve. As the plot develops, the writers of the show clearly seek to present the traditional sexual mores of the day as the “bad guy”: these archaic rules are the reason Thomas is ostracized, and they are the reason he responds with hatred toward his fellow man.

Second, the Christian should respond to this portrayal of homosexuality critically. While it is certainly implied that Thomas’s mean-spirited behavior toward his employers and fellow servants is the result of a lifetime of stifling his sexuality, it could also be argued that both Thomas’s misanthropy AND his homosexual urges are symptomatic of deeper personal problems. Perhaps the real “bad guys” of the show are not the restrictive rules guarding sexual expression, but the father who beat Thomas as a child, the boys who belittled Thomas at school, or even the indwelling sin that has warped every part of Thomas’s  personhood. Although the writers of the show do not leave any of these options available to the viewer, the Christian consumer of Downtown Abbey should recognize not assume that all of Thomas’s struggles would be solved if he were simply allowed to express his sexuality openly. On the contrary, homosexuality (like all sins) is the result of deeper problems – problems that can’t be solved by merely adjusting the standard of morality.

Finally, the Christian should respond compassionately. Too often Christians are quick to dismiss persons who struggle with homosexuality as depraved perverts who have chosen to be attracted to members of the same sex as an overt act of rebellion against God. While their respect of the Bible’s standards of right and wrong is certainly admirable, these Christians seem to have elevated the sin of homosexuality to some special level – more akin to genocide than adultery. Downton Abbey reminds Christians that those who struggle with the sin of homosexuality are people, too – children of God who are just as needy of grace and redemption as anyone else. If Thomas had encountered a compassionate Christian who had introduced him to the liberating power of the gospel earlier in his life, perhaps he would have found the love and acceptance he has been starving for his entire life and would not be bent on making the lives of those around him miserable.

Of course, if that were the case, the show wouldn’t have a bad guy and it would be just about as exciting as all of the other PBS shows that nobody watches. And without viewers like us, where would public television be?

 So, my fellow Christians, go ahead watch Downton Abbey and enjoy your escape to 20^th Century London, but don’t leave your brain behind in the 21^st Century – you will need it to carefully evaluate the complex themes and characters that make the show the show the engaging masterpiece it is.

- Nate Corley

My Hopes to Create a Christian Gang Mentality by Michael Hecht

My Hopes to Create a Christian Gang Mentality

Some personal thoughts that have been spurred after reading Francis Chan’s “Crazy

Love”, His books always speak just something that is true within our church. For those that

haven’t read his books in the past they are extremely light in contacts but very relevant to the

culture of today’s generation. I myself have been rescued from a life of violence and drugs from

growing up on the streets of San Francisco. I was raised by a single mother who did a fantastic

job but unfortunately due to the fact that being predominantly single income household while

mom was working hard to supply our physical needs I was predominantly raised by the school

yards and streets of San Francisco. Coming from the other side of the tracks sometimes I wonder

if it grants me a grand view of the grace of God rescuing me from where I was.

 

That sharing was relevant in the fact that it has been very difficult after reading the book

“Crazy Love” to get a certain point out of my head. In the book Francis Chan tells a story of a

young man that comes to church and that is never seen again. Francis bumps into him

somewhere in town and asked him why he stopped coming the church. The young man explains

“you see have always been part of gangs and when I came to church I thought it would be more

like the acceptance and love that I had experienced on the streets and unfortunately I was

wrong”. This rang deep in the heart of Francis and he felt ashamed but humbled at the reality that

this young man felt more love within a gang that his church. I don’t know if this is an Oregon

thing and apparently not because I believe the church Francis attends is in Arizona but I’m not

sure about that. However, the point I’m trying to make is that as Christians we are supposed to

project this loving acceptance that is to be a light within darkness and yet this young man which I

relate to quite easily found more acceptance and love within a gang that his local church.

 

It seems a shame that this young man couldn’t find that love simply on a Sunday but to us

something more important brings true is that we are to project this seven days a week. I had a

hard time finding a church home and was almost that my breaking point when I attended a

Northwest Prison Ministry convention and as I walked in the doors I was greeted with the love I

was looking for. After all who else would be able to forgive and pour into felons that were

returning from prison wanting a new starting Christ. I went into a corner weapons to myself they

God for this experience. The only thing I began to wonder is why my church could be like this. I

started a ministry called Inside-Out Ministry at Salem First Baptist Church in Oregon and by

plan is to be gained in Christian gang mentality with complete love and acceptance at least

within this ministry and hoping through God that it will create an infection spreads throughout

our church and possibly Oregon itself.

- Michael Hecht

This is a test...

It's time to gird your loins of your mind, because Sergio, Stephen, Michael, and Nate are about to unleash a theological tornado. The internet may never recover from the blog onslought from Group B in TH540....