Tag Archives: bible

Love Connection – Passage 3/22/09

Posted on by

love-connection-jpgWell, here we are in our last couple weeks of this series, “Love Connection” and I think it has been kind of fun.  Hopefully you have too.   I know we still have much to learn about our relationships with each other, and yet I think we’ve learned a bit along the way.  Hopefully this conversation will remain as a record of our time here.

Here are the questions from this weekend’s PASSAGE message.


Question #1:
Do you think dating in high school is necessary?

I’m actually kind of surprised that this question hasn’t come up previously.   It seems like there are a lot of opinions out there on this one.   Some people think dating is the best way to find a mate, and others think that dating is a cultural assumption that should be challenged.  One writer even wrote a book called, “I Kissed Dating Goodbye,” where he encouraged people to swear off dating all together.

And beyond the opinions, there are many different guidelines that parents set out for their students; each family has its own rules.  *DISCLAIMER:  you should do whatever your parents say!!!!

high school datingSo what does the bible teach us about dating?  Very little.  In fact, the Bible doesn’t really prescribe any particular way that people should date, court or be “arranged” for marriage.

That alone is interesting isn’t it?  You’d think that as much as we talk about it that it would have some pretty big “air-time” in the BIG BOOK.   But, sometimes a lack of discussion of a topic in the Bible might indicate something important.  Perhaps there isn’t a mention of a particular method of “love-finding” because there isn’t a “RIGHT” and “WRONG” way to do it, from God’s perspective.

I mean, if God has created us to be able to choose WHO we will love (rather than pre-determining who we will love) then maybe he has given us the choice as to HOW we choose this person as well.

So should you date in high school?  Maybe.  Should your parents arrange a marriage for you?  Maybe.  Should you go on only group-dates and build friendships that will lead to a love commitment?  Maybe.

Do you see what I’m saying?  Maybe the question is not whether or not we should date people exclusively, but what kind of “daters” or “non-daters” we will be…

Three weeks ago, after the last message I answered a question that got into this subject.  It might be worth a read or a re-read if you want some more on “the kind of daters” we should be.

You’ll find the discussion in “Question #1” at this link:

https://nickloyd.com/2009/02/26/love-connection-passage-22209-part-two/

Hope that’s helpful…

Question #2:
What is your opinion on long-distance relationships?

They are difficult.

Hahahaha…  Well, they are, aren’t they?

long_distance_love_cThis is a good question because many people start dating-from-afar.   Sometimes the physical distance between people is over many states or countries.  But, in another way, physical distance can be almost as far if you live in the same county but go to different schools and rarely see each other.

Look, I don’t think that there is anything wrong with a long-distance relationship.   They are different.  And they are difficult.  But all relationships are difficult.  Whether you are talking about long-distance or close-encounter relationships (hahaha, sounds like some weird alien love, LOL), there are both positives and negatives.

Let’s look at the positives.  In some ways long-distance relationships may have potential for greater health.   One benefit of distance is that it often forces people to learn about each other on a deeper level than just physical.  Obviously if you live far apart physical contact will be limited.  Because of this, phone conversations and text messages and facebook chats become the primary method of affection.  But this affection-from-a-distance is healthy in that you are LEARNING deep interests, motives, beliefs and personality traits of the other person.

Also, a little distance test is good for any relationship.  People in relationships formed in close physical proximity have a tendency to quickly become dependent on each other.  You know the feeling:  “I can’t live without seeing him today!”   And yet, we have already learned that we were never meant to find our fulfillment in other human being; only in God.   Being apart physically may help keep that distinction more obvious.

datingcartoon15However, while there are some benefits (in theory) there are also some drawbacks.  People living away from each other don’t have the opportunity to experience the other person in “real life.”   There is only so much you can learn from phone calls and late-night text messages.  Who a person is on the phone and who they are in everyday life with their family and friends may be very different.

Also, the time and focal commitment involved in “long-distance” relationships often comes at the expense of a person’s other relationships that are more local.  When a person’s mind is off with his girlfriend in “Arizona” it is then difficult to invest in relationships (friends, family, etc.) or responsibilities right here in Everett.  To some degree this is true of all relationships, but more so with long-distance ones, I think.

Anyway, I think there are probably more positives and negatives that could be said here, but hopefully you get my point.  Long-distance relationships may be either good or bad, but that probably has more to do with the convictions of the two people involved than the land (or sea) that is between them.

Thanks for the great question!

Advertisement

“Letter from SEATTLE” – (response #1)

Posted on by

[Response #1 from SEATTLE – Part 3 of “A Conversation between Seattle and Mississippi”, a chronicle of honest discussion between two friends.]

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Hey, MISSISSIPPI:

Thanks for your note!  It is just great to hear from you guys.  Tania showed me some pictures of your kids and I can’t believe how big they have gotten.  Crazy!

Sorry it has taken me so long to respond.  My life is a little hectic right now.  Ministry is going completely awesome, but between all the work there and learning to be a dad it feels like I don’t have time to just sit down and “be” sometimes.

Anyway, your response was a little involved and in order to take it seriously, I needed a little bit of time to answer.  This is really the first time I have sat down since I first read it, and had time to respond.   So, all that to say, sorry it took so long. ☺

In regards to your concerns, I suppose I have a few thoughts.   First, I think I understand where you are coming from in being confused with apparently opposing points-of-view.   In fact, that is why I think these discussions are so important and that our views should be held with a degree of humility.  These are very complicated issues, involving real people and not abstract theology.

I have read a great deal on the issue of homosexuality (from a biblical perspective and otherwise) from many different authors from many different backgrounds.  And in that reading and research of my own, I have probably found myself more confused, not less.   There are genuinely good reasons that people argue over this stuff.  I used to think that the matter was rather cut and dry (homosexuality in all forms is sin), and like you, I assumed that those who argued against it were more motivated by political agenda than honest struggle with God’s truth.   However, I now think it is more difficult than that.

This argument exists in large part because there are legitimate reasons (at least in my mind) for disagreement.  For instance, there are word choices that the Apostle Paul could have chosen that would have made it much more clear (i.e. in Romans 1 and 1 Cor. 6:9-10, etc.), but unfortunately he didn’t.  And the Greek words he did use carry more ambiguity than I am comfortable with.   I encourage you to look into it yourself, of course, but I’ll be the first to admit that I end up more “confused” for the research, to use your terminology.

All that said and despite what I consider legitimate dissension, here is where I come out personally on this issue…  I still believe that as best as I can tell, homosexuality in all its forms is normatively sinful.  Hahahahaha!   And you thought I was going all crazy on you!

Anyways, there are lots of reasons for me ending up here, but this response will be long enough as is.  LOL.

However, even though this is my conviction (and what I will stand up for and teach), I have learned to hold that conviction with as much humility as I can.  Philosophers speak of a term, “epistemological humility.”  It means being humble about what you think you know and believe, because history it seems is full of well-meaning people who were passionately convinced on many issues (slavery or women’s rights to name just two), but on the wrong side of justice as we look back at them now.

And so, I live in this weird world where I hold to my convictions and teach them unapologetically, but try not to hold them so tightly that they define me more by what I’m against than what I am for.

Interestingly enough, most of my non-Christian friends already knew the troubling spots about homosexuality in the Bible before I did.  And, in my experience, they have become much more open to my understanding of homosexuality since I became humble in my dialogue with them about it.   It‘s as if they trust what I have to say more now that they perceive that I’m not just proverbially “drinking the Kool-Aid” of Christianity, but willing to think critically and openly.

And in that sense, I have learned to be a little less scared of the “slippery slope” theology that I think you expressed in your response.   It’s that feeling that Christians today buy into little things that might seem harmless; things the culture tells them is ok, but in the end is a slow start to a fast decline in the righteous path of God.

Now, I do feel scared about that at times.  But more often than not it is about things that are much more subtle, and in my mind, much more dangerous.  Things like consumerism, misplaced patriotism that becomes synonymous with faith in God, or spiritual pride.  That could be a whole response in itself!  LOL.

And to some degree I think issues like homosexuality are like that as well.  It concerns me greatly that a person would simply accept homosexuality as a normative behavior without wrestling with God’s word.  But it also concerns me that someone would condemn it without doing the same diligent work.   We tend to be lazy.   Lazy in our study of God’s Word and lazy in our dialogue with God and each other about what that Word might mean.  And in that sense, I think there are a lot of people out there that are sliding into either total relativism or total elitism, and I believe both slopes are equally slippery.

In terms of [The Mega-Pastor], I suppose I was a bit hard on him.   I looked into the graphic that you mentioned.   I actually didn’t put that in the blog myself;  I had an assistant who did that for me (I’m not all that tech savvy).  FYI — That photo isn’t from the [mega-pastor] protest, but is apparently a famous parody of those types of protests.  And in that way, I agree it may be misleading.  [Note to reader:  I have left it posted as it was for the purpose of this conversation].

In any event, I talked with people close to [the mega-pastor] and I think I understand his point-of-view in holding the protest.  I understand that he is protesting not the event but it’s placement in the educational system.

My problem with the protest was not with his concerns but with his methods.  There is definitely some pro-gay agenda to that event.  No doubt.  But several things are important here, 1) it is an event put on by students, not adults coming in to “indoctrinate” them.   Had it been a planned school event, hosted by the district or its employees, I think [mega-pastor] would have a better argument.   And 2) the effective end to his method was all my non-Christian friends (and everyone in Seattle) seeing Christians standing up for what they are AGAINST again.  All they saw was Christians protesting gay people.   And in that way, [mega-pastor] could have been right—and even won the battle—but because of his methods, lost the war for those people’s hearts.

Now, maybe that isn’t what [mega-pastor] wanted to communicate, but I don’t think that really matters.  That IS WHAT WAS COMMUNICATED.

So, how would I respond better?  I’m not sure.  I’m thinking it through for this year.  But, what I think would be more powerful is for Christians to EARN the right to speak into these students lives by showing up and RALLYING around the parts of it that they can support—such as the protection of the weak and vulnerable.   And even if they know there is an underlying gay agenda, to show up and demonstrate that they are FOR things like love, compassion, and grace too.

It’s an issue of language.  [Mega-pastor] didn’t speak a language that reached those students or that community.  He held a protest that made him and his followers FEEL GOOD about themselves and their convictions, but in the end, it didn’t reach a single person (that I know of) with a life-changing opportunity of faith in God.   He stood up for his rights, when he should have laid them down.  He asserted his beliefs by force, when he could have sacrificed his time and pride with unconditional love.

And in that way, I do believe that an act can be “violent” without actually being “violent.”  Well, maybe that’s not the real problem.  Maybe it was simply that it didn’t demonstrate “ultimate Jesus-like love.”

Listen, I know this is counter-intuitive.  It seems like exactly the opposite of what we should do when culture presses in on us.  It seems like we should fight back.  It seems like we should protest and pass legislation and speak loudly.   It seems ridiculous to be right but not ask for your rights.

But, I’m absolutely convinced that even though it makes no sense, it is the way of Jesus.   I think what Jesus came to teach us is that the “power-over” model of persuasion belongs to the world and not us.  In some strange way, it is the “power-under” model of love and sacrifice that wins the day.  That love wins.  Not protest.  I mean, that was Jesus’ own life model, wasn’t it?   He didn’t protest prostitutes, he loved them and forgave them.  He didn’t pass laws on greedy tax collectors, he went and ate dinner with them.   He didn’t even fight back when he was accused on trumped up charges, He choose instead to die for those who brought the charges.

Somehow, I think we have bought into the model of the world and tried to fit Jesus into it, rather than just follow the example of Christ.   And when we do that, we may very well win the battle for being “right”, but lose the hearts and souls of many people as collateral damage.

Anyway, that is a long answer to your questions, I know.  But you did ask, and I would feel bad blowing you off with some trite answers rather than the thoughts of my heart.  I only hope that I have clearly answered what you were really asking.

At any rate, it is discussions like this that I think Christians would be best served having right now.  Especially in light of new California laws and retaliations.   It may be that we have much to still learn in how to live with this righteousness “not our own.”

Give my best to your family.  I pray that you all are still enjoying Mississippi and of course that you will decide it isn’t for you and move back to Seattle!  Have a great Thanksgiving!

Grace and peace,

SEATTLE.