Christianity Today

Chambers said, ""I don't know how anyone could call grace cheap when it cost Jesus everything." Grace is not cheap, we agree, because of the person who sacrificed his life to demonstrate it. However, believers cheapen it when they assert that deeds are irrelevant of deeds in the Christian life as far as one's relationship with God and their eternal destiny are concerned.

'I find it disheartening that we [evangelicals] are so inconsistent and over-focused on one group of people over another. I agree that many organizations have demonized gay lifestyle to the point of legalism, as if this sin is greater than other sin. But the problem with his quote is; a christian who commits adultry knows its sin. They do not look for a scriptual out,lets them carry a torch stating its not sin and God's ok with it. Being christian they struggle living a lie, feeling condemnation from there own heart and hiding their shame. I empathize with a christian who struggles with their alternative life style. But, since they can't believe how they feel could be so condemmed by a loving God, they attempt to change the scripture so they can have Jesus and their partner (s) too. I agree with Exodus's chariman that we need to love people in these situations, and let God judge. But I have more respect for gay people who reject the bible rather than change it.

Gentry has made too many assumptions in this article. The article is about homosexuality and modern thought, NOT homosexuality and the teaching of Scripture against it. FIRST, "antinomianism" is NOT unbiblical or dispensationally in error (See Rom. 6:14 & Acts 13:38&39). Chambers is right, but he's also wrong. In Eph. 5:25, Paul does not refer to the church's relationship to Christ as just a group of people and Christ, but he is directed to use the analogy of a "normal" husband and wife relationship. Paul presents examples of the proper way for lust to be controlled (1 Cor. 7:8-10). "shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? let it not be!" (Rom. 6:15). The homosexual relationship as an extramarital relationship is sin and even if the Scriptures didn't remind us of such, our conscience would and has been doing so for millenia.

I felt the first comment by Dane Gressett deserved to be re-posted: "While I applaud everyone who is trying to reach anyone with the saving grace of Christ, I feel we should avoid the equal extremes of either focusing on one type of sin or renaming it as un-sin! Chambers said, 'I find it disheartening that we [evangelicals] are so inconsistent and over-focused on one group of people over another. We aren't talking about this in any other subculture of people except this one.' The equal extreme to this error occurs when an entire subculture of people has the agenda to reclassify a sinful behavior as no longer sinful. If the subculture of alcoholic had a national agenda of mainstreaming drinking too much, I expect there would be a big pushback from evangelicals. Picking one sinful behavior out to persecute is wrong. But so is an agenda to make it no longer sin."

Well, at least this discussion proved one thing: Boasting to the CT world that you're a Dr. or a Rev. doesn't mean much. I just hope Mr. Payne, I mean Dr. Payne, that your doctorate isn't in theology.