Get articles delivered right to your inbox

Get the weekly article and occasional special updates delivered right to your inbox. Receive a sample chapter of my latest book just for subscribing.

By subscribing, you agree to share your email address to receive the weekly article and occasional special updates from Aaron Armstrong. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt-out at any time.

Truth and Lies: Dr. Peter Jones – Sexuality in a One-ist World

Dr. Peter Jones’ final session at The Exchange delved into the contentious subject of sexuality—and specifically the redefinition of what is considered normal sexual behavior. “This subject is, I believe, the tip of the spear of a societal transformation going on. And it’s unstoppable,” says Jones. “If there’s any way to stop it, it’ll be that the Christian church will have a discourse where we can describe what ‘normal’ is.”

A New Civilization

Jones believes we’ve come to a significant moment in American history. The “don’t ask, don’t tell” law is about to be repealed; the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and new “anti-bullying” laws are ready to be enacted. We’re likely to see the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as a new push for the legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States.

“The goal is for a new civilization. It’s not just a question of civil rights,” says Jones. Yesterday (June 23, 2010), CNN reported that Hilary Clinton—speaking of the need to end discrimination in the U.S. and around the world—said, “These dangers are not gay issues. This is a human rights issue…human rights are gay rights and gay rights are human rights.”

This, in Jones’ words is “breathtakingly ambitious.”

“This is not the normal progress of civic theory and civil rights,” says Jones.  The speed of change is unprecedented, particularly since the influx of religious and spiritual options that have become available to Americans since the 1960s.

The Christian Response(s)

Jones offers five possible Christian responses. These are:

  1. Silence. “You may avoid this issue because you have gay friends, it might make life at school is impossible. You will face intimidation, specifically from the homosexual community. [Or] you don’t want to offend those who need God’s love,” says Jones. These lead to silence.
  2. Indifference: it appears to be a non-essential issue. 75% of Millennials see no problem with alternative sexual practice. “The problem [in their mind] is up-tight, older Christians,” says Jones. This position asserts that sexuality does not touch the heart of the Gospel. This is perhaps best evidenced by author Andy Marin’s book, Love in an Orientation, which (according to Jones) presents a non-judgmental loving acceptance that refuses to call homosexuality a sin. Ever.
  3. Acquiescence. This is outright acceptance. The Anglicans, Episcopalians and Lutherans are all openly accepting of homosexual clergy. Some within the “Emergent Church” see homosexuality as normal, such as Tony Jones who says, “The complexities of gender [homosexual, queer, bi-sexual, transgendered, intersexed], are based on the poles of the two genders… [but they] have been thoroughly deconstructed.”
  4. Anger. This is most overtly sinful response, as best illustrated by Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist “Church” and their “God Hates Fags” campaign.
  5. Informed, wise application of the biblical worldview or cosmology. Here the writings of the Apostle Paul become our example. He was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and he wrote in a culture very much like our own—the Roman Empire. Nero, the Caesar at the time of Paul’s writing (and martyrdom) married two men—to one as his wife, to the other as his husband. (“How does that work?” wonders Jones.) What Paul shows us is that homosexuality is not about human rights; it’s about the gospel. When we try to avoid God’s judgment, we avoid God’s love. Says Jones, “That’s what makes the gospel precious, that we don’t deserve anything from God. When we slink away from the subject, we are avoiding the gospel.”

The Spiritual Character of Sexuality

Scripture shows us that sexuality is inherently spiritual. Humans are created male and female, made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27). This is the basis for human dignity. Marriage and sexuality echo the Trinitarian being of God; in the act of sex, the two become “one flesh.” They’re inextricably linked together. They’re still two persons, but they’re also one.

How Paul Views Homosexuality

In Romans 1:26-31, Paul writes:

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

What Paul shows us is that homosexuality is not the worst of sins (“Paul is not a homophobe,” says Jones). What he shows us is the religious depth of “unnatural” sexuality.

Apostate Theology, Spirituality, Sexuality

He shows us that homosexuality, like all sin stems from apostate theology. One-ism is a foolish rejection of God (cf. Rom. 1:18-22) in favor of worshipping created things (Rom. 1:35). God is unnaturally dismissed from His place as transcendent Lord.

This leads to apostate spirituality. This is a dehumanizing spirituality (cf. Rom. 1:23-25). “When humans made in God’s image reject the two-ist God, they have to worship something so they engage in dehumanizing unnatural worship of themselves and other created things,” says Jones.

This works itself out in apostate sexuality. Romans 1:26-28 says that “women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men…gave up natural relations with women…” But the crux is Paul’s words, “For this reason.” “[These words] show that homosexuality has a deeply religious One-ist component,” says Jones. “With this, homosexuals agree.”

The One-ist View of Homosexuality

Throughout time and history, the priests or shamans in Pagan religions have often been a homosexual. It seems to grow out of a pagan spirituality.

The late Mircea Eliade, a professor at the University of Chicago, argued that “androgyny as a religious universal appears everywhere at all times.”

Assinnu were associated with the worship of the goddess Ishtar from 1800 BC

In the fifth century AD, Augustine wrote this of the homosexual priests of the cult of Cybele:

They were seen yesterday, their hair most, their faces covered in make-up, their limbs flaccid, their walk effeminate, wandering through the squares and streets of Carthage, demanding from the public the means to subsidize their shameful life.

Today, this history is well known. Says Virginia Mollenkott, “To live in the gender I preferred; this striking phrase causes me to think about the native American shamans who were permitted to live and dress like the other sex without stigma and with a great deal of respect for their spiritual power.”

Mary Daly, an ex-Roman Catholic nun who taught theology at the Jesuit Boston College (and had tenure) is a self-identified lesbian witch who “discovered her ‘authentic androgynous being.’” Emily Culpepper, an ex-Southern Baptist and now a lesbian pagan witch, sees gays and lesbians as “shamans for a future age.”

The rise of One-ism since the 1960s has, undoubtedly, given rise to a new age of spiritual homosexuality.

The New Religious (One-ist) Paradigm

Toby Johnson, author of Gay Spirituality: The Role of Gay Identity in the Transformation of Human Consciousness, sees an appropriate new context in interfaith fellowship (since those who are “different” and queer have rarely felt as though they fit in with traditional religion).

He argues that gay attraction and (non-possessive) emotional relationships see the world with the harmonious non-dualistic vision of mystical religion. Further gay consciousness is called “pre-Edenic;” innocent; free of “original sin.”

“Since everything is one, there are no opposites like good and evil, sin and holiness,” says Jones.

Gay people have direct experience through psychic powers regarding “planetary consciousness” and humanity’s common mystical oneness with Gaia. And gay identification shows us how to get over dualistic polarized (male-dominated) thinking, so we can all live in peace based on common planetary identity.

These beliefs, according to Jones, are at the heart of the new paradigm.

 “Homosexual androgyny is ‘the Sacrament of One-ism. It carries within it the very essence of what it means to worship created things,” says Jones.

“If we fail to make this clear, our homosexual friends will never, ever hear the gospel. You have to hear the truth of two-ism to hear the truth of the gospel,” he concludes. “There are people you know right now that what they need is not stroking their backs, it’s the truth. [But] it might cost you.”

5 thoughts on “Truth and Lies: Dr. Peter Jones – Sexuality in a One-ist World”

  1. The Happy Chanter

    “ The speed of change is unprecedented, particularly since the
    influx of religious and spiritual options that have become available to
    Americans since the 1960s.”

    And thank god for those religious and spiritual options. Religious freedom and religious liberty are of paramount importance.

  2. If his comments there were not about same-sex relationships but about non-dual mysticism per se, which I hope they were, then why draw any connection between the two at all? Simply because you can find some gay theorists or proponents who have strange cultic religious views hardly reflects upon the group of people as a whole. To say that “gay people have direct experience through psychic powers regarding ‘planetary consciousness’ and humanity’s common mystical oneness with Gaia” is to strongly imply that this is true not just of Mr. Johnson, but also of all people who are gay. I know a number of quite orthodox gay Christians who would be totally perplexed at such an association.

    As for society, even if one holds that all same-sex behavior is sinful, from a gospel perspective, it still seems far better to have a society in which homosexual people can at least be open and honest about their feelings–even if they never choose to act on them–and in which they are not persecuted if they do choose to act on them. It is hard enough not to fit in as it is, but much more so when what makes one different is harshly stigmatized and even criminalized. Giving room for gay people to breathe in our society and to live how they believe is best for themselves, even if some believe it to be inconsistent with Scripture, does seem to be in line with Jesus’ statement of his duty “to proclaim freedom for the prisoners…[and] to release the oppressed” (Luke 4:18).

    There is nothing unloving in reading and sharing any part of Scripture, not even the controversial passages, for it is all God’s Word. What is unloving is to take a condemnation of Gentile idolaters who engaged in same-sex behavior and claim that it also condemns anyone who engages in any sort of same-sex behavior, regardless of their love for and worship of God. Romans 1 is indeed the key text in the homosexuality debate, as it is situated in a theological argument and is part of the new dispensation, but Dr. Jones here commits the same logical fallacy as many others in their understanding of Romans 1. In the passage, Paul describes same-sex desire and behavior among some Gentiles as a consequence of and punishment for their idolatry. This does not mean that anyone who has same-sex desire or acts upon them does so as a consequence of idolatry. And in fact, what we know about homosexual people today indicates overwhelmingly that their condition is not a punishment meted out by God for idol worship in the womb, but that rather, God has created human beings with the same kind of diversity in our sexual orientations that He has blessed us with in so many other aspects of our lives.

    Romans 1 should be prayerfully studied and considered in this debate, as it is one of the few Bible texts that does comment directly on same-sex behavior. But to simply assume that what is primarily a condemnation of idolatry, within which same-sex acts committed out of lust are condemned, necessarily also condemns all gay people who ever enter into a romantic relationship, even when those relationships are not “filled with every kind of wickedness,” a la Romans 1:29, but instead manifest the fruit of the Spirit as described in Galatians 5–of love, joy, peace, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control, against which “there is no law”–then that is unloving, yes.

  3. Dr. Jones’ speech is representative of much that has fallen short of the glory of God in the church’s handling of the gay issue. Though no doubt aiming to be loving by sharing Paul’s negative comments on idolatry & same-sex relations with homosexual people, Dr. Jones seems to lose sight of their humanity and is greatly lacking in compassion and love by the end of his talk.

    He speaks using abstract language and framing, and through this, he unfairly conflates apparently homosexual shamans in some religious groups with all gay people as a class, and even more offensively, states that, in a same-sex relationship, “there are no opposites like good and evil, sin and holiness.” The fact that he could say this with any measure of seriousness simply indicates how far removed at this point he is from real human lives. Virtually all the same rules of right and wrong can apply to same-sex relationships as to opposite-sex ones: fidelity, monogamy, and love are right; whereas cheating, polygamy, and cruelty are wrong. Whether one wants to bring other arguments to bear against same-sex relationships, the notion that the very distinction between good and evil is somehow dissolved through them is utterly groundless.

    The acceptance of homosexuality will doubtless alter our society in many ways–gays will be accepted and embraced as equals, and gender will be seen as non-essential to marriage and morality–but Dr. Jones here demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of it implications. In doing so, he does violence to vulnerable gay persons, and if Matthew 25 is to be believed, he is putting his salvation at risk in the process. Doesn’t seem very Christian to me.

    1. Thanks for taking the time to write this comment. A few things:

      First, Dr. Jones never said that in same-sex relationships “there are no opposites like good and evil, sin and holiness.” He said that in non-dual mysticism, which includes a denial of original sin, there are no opposites because all is one. This is based on the statements put forward by authors such as Toby Johnson (cited above). So how is Dr. Jones being unloving by citing material put forward by proponents of the view?

      Second, your comment suggests that the acceptance of homosexuality and the inevitable gender blur that is part of the result is a positive societal evolution. Am I understanding correctly?

      Thirdly, again, if I’m understanding your comment correctly, are you suggesting that it’s hurtful to speak the truth of what Scripture says about homosexuality? By your own logic, does that put you in the same error that you’re accusing Dr. Jones of (i.e. violating Matt. 25)?

    2. Pagans & Homo-gays both worship their proclivities and liver-quivers (“bellies’ appetites” says the Apostle Paul in another epistle [to Titus?]).
      Why cite Luke 4, the setting of which is the period when “not one stroke & no serif shall pass away [from Moses’ Law] until I have fulfilled it”_?

      “Cause offense to neither Jews, nor Gentiles, nor to the Church of God” says Paul.

      . . . . . A few verses re. confrontation of those who are “Slouching Toward Gomorrah” . . . . .

      Paul is appealing, but [Nor_man Vincent] Peale (a.k.a. Mr. Schmooz) is appalling”(–Walter Martin [confer http://www.WalterMartin.com -or- http://www.equip.org] ).

      He who yields to the wicked is like a trampled, muddy water-spring (-Solomon’s Proverb).
      “When the wicked are not penalized(e.g., ec-clesiA-stic-ally in I Cor. 5/ Matt. 18/ Luke 17/ James 5/ Gal. 6),they become bold/ committed to offend YaHWeH” (-Ecclesiastes 8:11).
      “Speaking the truth in Benevolence …” says the little Apostle.
      “Follow my example as I follow Christ” –A.P.
      “I beat my body into submission in order to make it my slave” –A.P.

      . . . . . Mean-while, outside the church . . . . .

      I Cor. _? — “I have given [the guilty] over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh so that their souls may be saved.”
      They can create their own “co-dependent, insecure, dysfunctional” societies(-Paul Aldrich @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/Paul-Aldrich/169031639151 ),so that “the Light [of the Church] shines in the darkness” (–author unknown).
      . . . . . . . . . .
      Homo-sexuality is wicked, the opposite of Love/ Benevolence/ Devotion (agap{ee}, I Cor. 13).  Adulteration, i.e., introduction of a foreign element into one-self’s cogitations, is condemned (Matthew 5/ 6).  Defiled consciences characterize false prophets who appeal to sensuality, says the Apostle Peter, e.g., Jimmy Jones, the New Ager in Guyana.  The latter says,“I’m a god, & you’re a god. … But until you realize that YOU’RE a god, I will remain very much what I am — God, almighty GAWD_!!!” (–audio available from C.R.I. @ EQUIP.org/ KKLA radio @ KKLA.com).
      There is an occultic proclivity in the U.N./ Council on Foreign Relations/ Anglo-American Establishment(confer Stanley Monteith, M.D. [retired] @ http://www.RadioLiberty.com ).Will you be subducted in the dysfunctional Demo-cra[t/B]ic, confiscatory co-dependency that saps the Treasury & Prot. families?  Maybe, if you “do not have a love for the Truth” (II Tim. 2).

      . . . . . .. . . .

      98% of Homo-sexual “couples” dissociated before 1 year elapsed(-Greg Koukl, broadcaster [www.STR.org -or- www.CrawfordBroadcasting.org ], who cited X, whereas his call-screener referred me to Focus on the Family/ James C. Dobson).
      The average number of extra lovers per homo-phile in a “couple” was 6(-Radio Adv. for Prop. 8 in Cal.; confer http://www.ProtectMarriage.com ).
      Their average duration was 1.5 years (-P.M.) to 5 years (-Michael Medved via Salem Radio [www.Salem.cc]).  Your theoretical considerations are contradicted in the Lab. of Life.  The main adhesive of Homophiles is Money ($55,000/ year in the ’90s).

      Silly sodomites sully the consciences of children.  In order to “taste & see that the L-o-ord is goo-ood” (quoted by the NewsBoys), Hetero-philia is to be preferred & supported by tax-exemptions, not the concentration of passive or polemic traits in both parents.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top