http://www.bahamasissues.com/images/ads/kingdom_view_small.jpg

Buttons and Button Holes
By Apostle Cedric Moss

Recently I attended an interesting public forum at The College of The Bahamas. It was hosted by the College’s School of Social Sciences and Jones Communications and the topic was, “Towards an Understanding of Human Sexuality”. The presenters were: Mrs. Camille Barnett, Senior Lecturer Sociology (sociological perspective), Dr. Timothy Barrett, Psychiatrist (psychiatric perspective), Mr. Paul Hallihan, Lecturer Psychology (psychological perspective), Dr. Bernard Nottage, Medical Practitioner (health perspective), Canon Kirkley Sands, Lecturer Theology/Religion (theological perspective) and Ms. G. Diane Stuart, Attorney-at-Law (legal perspective).

The forum began with each of the six presenters sharing on the topic from his/her perspective and then questions and comments were fielded from the moderator, Dr. Jeff Lloyd, and the audience.


A Starting Point
Dr. Timothy Barrett was the second presenter. During his opening remarks he made a sober statement that, though related to his presentation, transcended it. And it got me thinking about buttons and button holes.
He indicated that discussing the complex topic of human sexuality in the context of the forum was not easy because it is difficult to find a starting point. So the obvious question came to mind: Which of the six perspectives being shared ought to be our starting point to accurately understand human sexuality?

Normal and Abnormal
As I listened to the other perspectives, some of which clashed, the question persisted and I thought more about buttons and button holes. The most obvious clash was between the psychological and theological perspectives. Mr. Halihan, who presented the psychological perspective, indicated that homosexuality is not abnormal, psychologically speaking.

According to Mr. Halihan, and as I recall it, something is abnormal if it fits two criteria. First, it must be something that the majority of people do not do. Second, it must be something that is harmful to the individual or others. Therefore, according to the psychological perspective, although homosexuality is not practiced by the majority and thus fits the first criteria, it fails the second (is not harmful to the person or others) so it is not abnormal.

On the other hand, Canon Kirkley Sands, who presented the theological perspective, clearly and unconditionally communicated that homosexual practice is sin, contrary to Scripture and against God’s revealed will in creation. So, from the theological perspective, homosexual practice is not only abnormal, it is sin.

Which Button is first?
As the discussion progressed, I thought about the topic, “Towards an Understanding of Human Sexuality”, as an open shirt that needed to be correctly buttoned. And I visualized each of the perspectives as representing a button on the shirt. Realizing that if the first button is placed in any hole other than the first hole it would be impossible to button the shirt right, I asked this question: Which of the six panelists’ perspectives should be the first button placed in the first hole, our starting point, as we seek to accurately button the “shirt” of understanding human sexuality?

I asked the question because I felt the answer was so obvious all would agree it should be the theological perspective. But I was wrong.
Some on the panel and in the audience actually felt we did not need a starting point.

Well, I disagreed with them because, if we are going to have an accurate understanding of sexuality, we need to start with the perspective of God, the Creator of human beings and sexuality. Then all the other perspectives can be discussed but they must be submitted and adjusted to that of the Creator’s. Believing that we can understand human sexuality without this logical starting point is a strong delusion brought on by arrogance or ignorance or a combination of both.

Beyond Sexuality
This issue of buttons and button holes goes beyond sexuality: We need to put the first button in the first hole in all we do. And God’s perspective is that first button. To our own hurt, we have disregarded God’s “how to button” directions in many aspects of our life and decided we will button our shirt as we wish and allow others to do the same. And so we continue to pay the painful, unnecessary price of our disregard in these areas. I am reminded of the repeated observation in the Book of Judges: In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit (see Judges 21:25). Their results were tragic.

My prayer is that we as a nation will humble ourselves and “button all of our shirts”, personally and nationally, by putting the first button in the first hole. Doing so will show our wisdom.


Apostle Cedric Moss serves as Senior Pastor at Kingdom Life World Outreach Centre. Comments and feedback may be directed to: apostle@kingdom-life.org (apostle@kingdom-life.org).

You wrote, "........ if we are going to have an accurate understanding of sexuality, we need to start with the perspective of God, the Creator of human beings and sexuality. Then all the other perspectives can be discussed but they must be submitted and adjusted to that of the Creator’s. Believing that we can understand human sexuality without this logical starting point is a strong delusion brought on by arrogance or ignorance or a combination of both."

Does every Christian have the same view of God? No, they do not. That is why there are so many different denominations. There are even Gay Churches. Christians cannot agree on God’s perspective, at least not 100%

That leads to the most important question, "What is the perspective of God?" Keeping in mind my above paragraph, you can only give us your perspective on God’s perspective.

You wrote, "Then all the other perspectives can be discussed but they must be submitted and adjusted to that of the Creator’s." Are you saying that we can talk, we can argue, but at the end of the day we all must submit to the Creator’s perspective as you perceive it to be? Also, how are you going to make them submit? You did say that they must submit.

I have attended many "Ecumenical" meetings where people of many faiths have gathered to try to reach an understanding. The "fly in the soup" on every occasion is the Christian. He comes to the table with the idea that compromise is 100% for our side, 0% for everybody else.

It is never going to happen that the "shirt is buttoned" the way you like it because there must be compromise in a democratic country and the Christian cannot do that! He cannot compromise, it is against his religion.

We will have what we will have - religion of any kind, cannot dominate it. It can only do what the rest of us can do, add our voice.

CG sometimes you make a whole lot of sense! :cool: I don't know why the good rev thinks it is logical to start from his christian perspective. Is he saying this is the right and only option from which to start? Why do overly religious people fear person who do not behave/believe like them? What causes this innate fear of homosexuality? Why should it matter to them what two consenting adults in the privacy of their home do? Their preaching has not expunged homosexuals from the face of the earth so why do they keep trying? Live your life as a heterosexual and let them live their lives as homsexuals and if there is a God in the end let him/her be the one to dispense final justice not some egotistical christian! Isn't this a simple enough concept to grasp, even for overly religious persons? :hot:

CG sometimes you make a whole lot of sense! :cool: I don't know why the good rev thinks it is logical to start from his christian perspective. Is he saying this is the right and only option from which to start? Why do overly religious people fear person who do not behave/believe like them? What causes this innate fear of homosexuality? Why should it matter to them what two consenting adults in the privacy of their home do? Their preaching has not expunged homosexuals from the face of the earth so why do they keep trying? Live your life as a heterosexual and let them live their lives as homsexuals and if there is a God in the end let him/her be the one to dispense final justice not some egotistical christian! Isn't this a simple enough concept to grasp, even for overly religious persons? :hot:Thanks, truthseeker. You wrote, "CG sometimes you make a whole lot of sense!" Only sometimes? I guess that is better than never! :shaky:
As to the rest of your posting. I expect that the Rev. will answer that himself. Once he has done so, I may add my remarks.

http://www.bahamasissues.com/images/ads/kingdom_view_small.jpg

Buttons and Button Holes
By Apostle Cedric Moss

First let me say it was nice to meet you.

Now to work Your question was a good 1 but as you went on with it people started to laugh at you. Not loudly but I heard them.
Recently I attended an interesting public forum at The College of The Bahamas. It was hosted by the College’s School of Social Sciences and Jones Communications and the topic was, “Towards an Understanding of Human Sexuality”. The presenters were: Mrs. Camille Barnett, Senior Lecturer Sociology (sociological perspective), Dr. Timothy Barrett, Psychiatrist (psychiatric perspective), Mr. Paul Hallihan, Lecturer Psychology (psychological perspective), Dr. Bernard Nottage, Medical Practitioner (health perspective), Canon Kirkley Sands, Lecturer Theology/Religion (theological perspective) and Ms. G. Diane Stuart, Attorney-at-Law (legal perspective).

The forum began with each of the six presenters sharing on the topic from his/her perspective and then questions and comments were fielded from the moderator, Dr. Jeff Lloyd, and the audience.


A Starting Point
Dr. Timothy Barrett was the second presenter. During his opening remarks he made a sober statement that, though related to his presentation, transcended it. And it got me thinking about buttons and button holes. He indicated that discussing the complex topic of human sexuality in the context of the forum was not easy because it is difficult to find a starting point. So the obvious question came to mind: Which of the six perspectives being shared ought to be our starting point to accurately understand human sexuality? Not 1 but all for get the buttons its the whole shirt that counts. There are shirts with out buttons. All of these perspectives are humanity.


Normal and Abnormal Whats normal? How about this is my normal
As I listened to the other perspectives, some of which clashed, the question persisted and I thought more about buttons and button holes. The most obvious clash was between the psychological and theological perspectives. Mr. Halihan, who presented the psychological perspective, indicated that homosexuality is not abnormal, psychologically speaking.

According to Mr. Halihan, and as I recall it, something is abnormal if it fits two criteria. First, it must be something that the majority of people do not do. Second, it must be something that is harmful to the individual or others. Therefore, according to the psychological perspective, although homosexuality is not practiced by the majority and thus fits the first criteria, it fails the second (is not harmful to the person or others) so it is not abnormal.
Neither is being left handed. Being left handed is not practice by the majority. But Christians mudered left handed people by the hundreds of thousands and that was harmful to left handed people.

On the other hand, Canon Kirkley Sands, who presented the theological perspective, clearly and unconditionally communicated that homosexual practice is sin, contrary to Scripture and against God’s revealed will in creation. So, from the theological perspective, homosexual practice is not only abnormal, it is sin.

I will ask you this question again. What is sin????
Theological perspective Canon Kirkley Sands was very clear it was jewdo Christian prespective. If one studies the Bible its the Old Testament which is Jewish law. I am not a jew. You your self can't live up to the laws of the Old Testament.

Which Button is first?
As the discussion progressed, I thought about the topic, “Towards an Understanding of Human Sexuality”, as an open shirt that needed to be correctly buttoned. And I visualized each of the perspectives as representing a button on the shirt. Realizing that if the first button is placed in any hole other than the first hole it would be impossible to button the shirt right, I asked this question: Which of the six panelists’ perspectives should be the first button placed in the first hole, our starting point, as we seek to accurately button the “shirt” of understanding human sexuality?

I asked the question because I felt the answer was so obvious all would agree it should be the theological perspective. But I was wrong. Some on the panel and in the audience actually felt we did not need a starting point.

Well, I disagreed with them because, if we are going to have an accurate understanding of sexuality, we need to start with the perspective of God, the Creator of human beings and sexuality. Then all the other perspectives can be discussed but they must be submitted and adjusted to that of the Creator’s. Believing that we can understand human sexuality without this logical starting point is a strong delusion brought on by arrogance or ignorance or a combination of both.
Homosexuality has been a part of humanity since there where humans. Its not new to this day and age. My question to you is can anything exist without the Creator?

Beyond Sexuality
This issue of buttons and button holes goes beyond sexuality: We need to put the first button in the first hole in all we do. And God’s perspective is that first button. To our own hurt, we have disregarded God’s “how to button” directions in many aspects of our life and decided we will button our shirt as we wish and allow others to do the same. And so we continue to pay the painful, unnecessary price of our disregard in these areas. I am reminded of the repeated observation in the Book of Judges: In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit (see Judges 21:25). Their results were tragic.

My prayer is that we as a nation will humble ourselves and “button all of our shirts”, personally and nationally, by putting the first button in the first hole. Doing so will show our wisdom.


A question was asked at the forum you did not mention that was of theological perspective. What did Christ teach about Homosexuality???
Canon Kirkley Sands answered that it was not an issue for Christ..
If it was so important don't you think Christ would have said something??
So then why is it an issue for Christians?????
Apostle Cedric Moss serves as Senior Pastor at Kingdom Life World Outreach Centre. Comments and feedback may be directed to: apostle@kingdom-life.org (apostle@kingdom-life.org).

Hi Vicky:

It was good to meet you as well.

I think we both know that people's laughter does not mean anything at the end of the day...it does not make my question wrong.

You made several imbedded comments in the article and its hard to respond thoroughly.

I would only say that the issue goes beyond our personal discussions and who can debate best to win it.

My restated conclusion is that to deny The Lord God, our Creator, the first place in discussing homosexuality (and all issues of life) is evident of arrogance or ignorance or a combination of both.

Beyond the discussion, we will all personally answer and give an account to Him.

CG sometimes you make a whole lot of sense! :cool: I don't know why the good rev thinks it is logical to start from his christian perspective. Is he saying this is the right and only option from which to start? Why do overly religious people fear person who do not behave/believe like them? What causes this innate fear of homosexuality? Why should it matter to them what two consenting adults in the privacy of their home do? Their preaching has not expunged homosexuals from the face of the earth so why do they keep trying? Live your life as a heterosexual and let them live their lives as homsexuals and if there is a God in the end let him/her be the one to dispense final justice not some egotistical christian! Isn't this a simple enough concept to grasp, even for overly religious persons? :hot:Truthseeker, as the Reverend has not answered my posting I guess I am free to now answer yours. You wrote, " I don't know why the good rev thinks it is logical to start from his christian perspective. Is he saying this is the right and only option from which to start?" It is important to understand the Christian mythology. For them there is nothing but God. There is no other place to start or end because there is nothing else. That concept is drummed into the Christian brain over and over. A Christian that does not believe that falls far short. I would have liked the Rev. to put that in his own words but he does not answer my postings (often.)

"Why do overly religious people fear person who do not behave/believe like them? What causes this innate fear of homosexuality? Why should it matter to them what two consenting adults in the privacy of their home do?" Because they (Christians) believe there is only one way to behave and believe. It must fit the Christian system. (A system that often changes, if only subtly, but they can’t admit that either.) Homosexuality flys in the face of their teachings - today.

"Their preaching has not expunged homosexuals from the face of the earth so why do they keep trying?" Christian preachers are taught that their preaching has power! It has power to change lives and the world. It has changed lives but it has not change the world. But they keep trying. You have to give them 100% for the effort. Sadly, the power seems to be getting weaker and weaker by the day. That is probably because a lot of Preachers practice what they preach against.

"Live your life as a heterosexual and let them live their lives as homsexuals and if there is a God in the end let him/her be the one to dispense final justice not some egotistical christian! Isn't this a simple enough concept to grasp, even for overly religious persons?" No it is not. Sin IS the Christian’s business. It is his job to stamp it out. The only trouble is what IS sin?

Hi Vicky:

It was good to meet you as well.

I think we both know that people's laughter does not mean anything at the end of the day...it does not make my question wrong. I did not say I agreed with their laughter. I felt it was very poor on their part. Your questions were good ones. Even though your answer is very different than mine.

You made several imbedded comments in the article and its hard to respond thoroughly.

I would only say that the issue goes beyond our personal discussions and who can debate best to win it. The only thing we (the Rainbow Alliance) are trying to achive is freedom and equality.

My restated conclusion is that to deny The Lord God, our Creator, the first place in discussing homosexuality (and all issues of life) is evident of arrogance or ignorance or a combination of both. I agree with you there.

Its arrogance or ignorance or a combination to think that your (Christians that think like you) version of the Creator is the only one and because of that all other humans must follow it. Kinda make me think of the Talaban.

Beyond the discussion, we will all personally answer and give an account to Him/Her.