I have to admit, I'm way too sensitive and way too passionate on this one. But it hurts to be told that you don't trust God because of your beliefs in this area.
Let me share a little of my history. When I was first married, I had my first miscarriage at around age 21. And then another - and then I stopped ovulating. At 23 I started fertility treatments (didn't trust God with my fertility, after all, it is God who opens and shuts the womb).
Every single month - my body betrayed me.
I have been reading and listening to a lot of Mark Driscoll, "The Radical Reformission". He has a lot of great things to say, but I'm increasingly hearing things that I don't like - which I intend to address directly to him.
One of the things that he says in his book is that external things don't matter - and specifically mentioned "goth" as a way of dressing. Here's the thing - I work in a high school and there is a dark spirit (way of feeling, not demon) that accomanies that dark way of dressing.
Don't get me wrong - I like to wear black - it's dramatic and goes great with my complexion and you can accessorize very easily! But I hardly ever (ok, I just don't) wear black with dog collars, purple hair and black lipstick.
When you see a young person calling themselves a Christian, dressing in that way - it's okay to ask a few questions - like "what are they identifying themselves with?"
Another thing that concerns me about Driscoll is his way of speaking of certain groups of people. He consistently uses "limp-wristed" and other terms that are reserved for men who are - well, less than masculine.
I listened to a sermon last night on Genesis 1 - and he referred a couple of times to "hillybilly rednecks" and "hillbilly redneck NASCAR fans" This bothers me, because if his congregation picks up on this (or picks this up) they will have learned that in their church, it's ok to use pejorative terms that put down entire groups of people.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't want my kids talking like that - and I don't want to pick up talking like that.
I talked to a friend today - she adopted a daughter at birth who had been exposed to many different chemicals in the womb, with a lot of consequences.
One of these consequences is her ability to "say no" to a boy. That inhibition just is not there. She's able to be taught, but she will never have that internal "voice" telling her that she shouldn't do this thing. Will she be held accountable for sexual sin - if her mother's prenatal actions deprived her of the conscience that God wanted her to have?
I believe that the sexual road that she is headed toward (she is not even in middle school), is sin.
In Calvinist terms - she can be "called" to a celibate (or faithful) lifestyle - and regardless of that call, she will not be able to believe in her heart that is the right thing. (yes, I know that my friend is not God, nor can she "elect" the child to obedience - I'm just relating my experience to an understanding of how one can be called and still not understand or believe. I know that anybody that stumbles onto this blog who believes in free will will tell me how the example is wrong.)
But there is another context that this girl could lead me to a different possible understanding.
Homosexuality. Yes, I believe firmly that homosexual intercourse is a sin. However, if there is something that happens before birth (some sort of chemical injury) that causes homosexuality, then the person injured would have no more choice in their same-sex attraction than the girl I know has in her lack of sexual conscience.
If this could be proven (or at least if there were strong indication), I would have to separate the act of being gay from the act of having homosexual intercourse.
Is it possible that homosexuals have the "call" to be "normal", without the ability to choose?