I've written extensively about homosexuality and the church and the issue has never been more timely: billboards claim Jesus approved of homosexuality.
The billboards are inviting Christians to be more Christian by not excluding gays and lesbians from their churches, while asserting that it is OK in the eyes of God to be homosexual -- a practice thought by many conservative Christians to be an abomination. ...With statements such as "Jesus affirmed a gay couple" and "Ruth loved Naomi as Adam loved Eve," the billboards assert homosexuality has been around for thousands of years. The billboards also offer a scripture reference that is meant to validate the message.
The scripture reference from the billboard pictured above is Matthew 8:5-13 and there is no reason to believe that it has anything to do with homosexuality.
Christians face a difficult dilemma when it comes to homosexuals. On the one hand, homosexuality is no graver a sin than any others and we have a responsibility to love homosexuals, share the gospel with them, and encourage them to build a relationship with God. On the other hand, to many homosexuals their sexual orientation is the central defining characteristic of their life and any suggestion that homosexuality is displeasing to God is an immediate obstacle to further discussion. As an added wrinkle, while no graver than other sins, homosexuality is particularly damaging to society and to families. How can Christians love and minister to homosexuals while simultaneously not embracing or accepting homosexuality?
(HT: RD.)
You and I disagree on whether homosexuality is detrimental to society, on whether a homosexual can become a heterosexual, and on whether the Old Testament is any more than the best guesses of some tribal leaders 3000 years ago then edited by a power-hungry committee 1000 years ago. But given that Christianity has a lot of power, and that you are an analytical person who is good at explaining to me what you think and why you think it and helping to find the fundamental things that make us reach different conclusions... I would be very curious to learn about your perspective and your thoughts as you explore the question at the end of your post.
Here are some relevant thoughts I'd be curious to get your take on: I'm not sure that homosexuals want to be ministered-to by people who think that homosexuality is bad. Are you saying that it's important for you to minister to them against their will? Even if homosexuality isn't "the central defining characteristic of their life" (which I think it isn't; My male-ness and my heterosexuality and my being an engineer and my having certain tastes (in food, literature, etc) and my being a foreign-born US citizen and my being a naturalist and humanist all characterize my life, but none of that can be said to be "central", and I think it's the same for homosexuals; That is only one of the many factors that shapes who they are), why would they want to learn from a belief system that strongly believes that homosexuality (something they like and see as not being bad) is bad?
(By "minister" I am assuming that you mean more than just serving, e.g. helping them find useful ideas within Christianity about the self, society, happiness, God, etc).
Imagine some cult that believes that wearing clothes is bad. It's not natural, their ancient texts show that their god disapproves of it, and their academics show research about the detriment of buying and wearing clothes (such as having allergies, getting clothes caught in machinery, supporting sweatshops, whatever). Not only that, but they actively fight the interests of companies that make clothes, hurt the economy of areas that make clothes, etc. Say they try to promote bikinis and other minimal coverings, explaining why they are superior to full clothes. The cult spends a lot of effort and money trying to reduce the amount of clothes-wearing that goes on. Now they want to minister to you. You might feel the impulse to ignore them, since anyone who is that adamant about something that is actually inconsequential must be crazy. Or you might give them a try, and even learn something from them. But it is doubtful that they will convince you that wearing clothes is detrimental, much less that you ought to be naked in order to win the approval of some mythological deity in which you did not believe when they started talking (even if they call it the same name as a deity you do believe in, "God").
Or here is an even better example. Some Muslims think that drawing Muhammad is bad, that women should only wear certain kinds of garments, etc, and that it's ok to kill people (even non-Muslims) who violate these rules. Now say a Muslim wants to minister to you. Even if you decide to let them talk, and even if you learn some useful ideas about the self and society and happiness and God and whatnot, you'd still never become a Muslim. The only way you'd become a Muslim is if they convinced you that it's bad to draw Muhammad and for women to wear western clothes (or convinced you of some assumptions that led to those conclusions). But your belief in freedom of speech (and, I bet, in the New Testament) effectively immunize you from contemplating the Muslim assumptions. They run counter to your values. So let me ask you your question this way: How can a Muslim minister to you? How can a Muslim minister to you, without accepting your idea that freedom of speech is important, and without approving of the idea that believing in the divinity of Jesus is the only way to get God's approval?
If a person holds some value, and some of Christianity goes against that value, I think there can be three outcomes of getting them to appreciate different good insights from Christianity:
1) They see the disagreement and thus become closed-minded to anything you have to say. "You believe in X Y and Z, and I disagree, so there is no insight you hold that I could possibly benefit from learning".
2) They try to appreciate your insights, and succeed in appreciating the ones that don't contradict with their values.
3) They like Christianity so much, come to think that it has so much more truth than any other worldview possibly could, that they work to change their values, so that they can take it all in.
"1" is easy. "2" is not too hard for a person who is mature and tolerant and reasonable.
But as far as I can see, Christianity does not offer a monopoly on truth, nor even a greater quantity of truth than any other worldview, so I'm afraid that "3" is hopeless ;] Well, to the extent that it is hopeless to try and convert someone. Of course, in practice, it isn't, quite. But ministering to a homosexual who does not think that homosexuality is bad... is like ministering to a Muslim. Or an atheist. Either they'll like Christianity so much that they will try to change their values... or they won't.