lovemeorhateme
Well-known member
Further research on the UK's True Freedom Trust organization makes me suspicious of them. A wiki article on the organization states "...It takes the view that homosexual activity is sinful, but being homosexual is not sinful in and of itself and, therefore, advocates celibacy for those of its gay and lesbian members who do not consider marriage to someone of the opposite sex to be a viable option."
Roaming through the True Freedom Trust website I came across this article which pretty much confirmed why I was suspicious:
Vicky Beeching's 'Undivided' trap: why evangelicals need a better story
"The second aspect I often read is some form of conversion attempt. By this I mean some therapy, or prayer or other similar exercise that was intended to change a person's sexual orientation. When this fails, as it normally does, the individual becomes despondent and confused. The key problem with these kinds of approaches is that they operate by necessity out of a framework where heterosexual attraction is morally superior to homosexual attraction, and frankly this is a concept we cannot find in the Bible. Rather the Bible's focus in this area is on specific sexual activity."
https://truefreedomtrust.co.uk/vicky-beechings-undivided
A man having a natural attraction to a woman, which often leads to matrimony is not morally superior to same sex desires which as shown throughout this 5 part thread were desires that didn't come naturally?
Obviously these people are for keeping their homosexual identity, (even though they're not physically having sex with someone of the same sex) while at the same time calling themselves "Christian".
Theologian Denny Burk disagrees:
Celibate Gay Christians: Is That Biblical?
...The defining element of same-sex attraction is desire for a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex. Once that desire is removed, it is no longer SSA. It is just friendship. In that sense, same-sex attraction is not a means to better, more holy friendships. It is an impediment to them. When one feels himself desiring a sexual relationship with a person of the same-sex, the only appropriate response is repentance from sin (2 Tim. 2:22). It is not right or helpful to think of that sinful attraction as the foundation for building holy friendships. It is not.
The nature of those attractions, as a matter of fact, is precisely what is in dispute at the moment. My hunch is that the Roman Catholic influence at spiritualfriendship.org has something to do with our differences over this question. Roman Catholics have historically approached the issue of indwelling sin much differently than Reformed protestants. The Roman Catholic view of “desire/lust” (or “concupiscence”) is that it is not necessarily sinful. As I mentioned earlier this week, the evangelical position has in the main taught the opposite. Reformed evangelicals believe that the Bible teaches that desire for sin is sin.
Read more: https://www.christianity.com/christ...celibate-gay-christians-is-that-biblical.html
Calling yourself a "Gay Christian" (even if you use an * saying that you're celibate) is an oxymoron. Simply put, you can't identify with sin (by calling yourself a 'Gay Christian', etc.), and still call yourself a follower of Christ.
"And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."
1 Corinthians 6:11
The True Freedom Trust certainly used to participate in attempts at conversion, though looking at their website it seems they have changed quite a lot since I was involved with them.
Just two points to clarify:
1. The exorcism I went through had nothing to do with the True Freedom Trust, but a pastor who my parents both knew. This was not the last exorcism I would go through either.
2. Not really important, but the counsellor I saw was named Ray and not Roger. Just want to make sure I’m being as factual as possible.