By Sarah Fields, Weather Vane student newspaper
Homosexuality can be controversial, emotional and divisive, especially in the Christian community, but EMU professors Ted Grimsrud and Mark Thiessen Nation’s debate presented both sides of this issue respectfully, according to senior Sarah Kalichman.
‘I was really pleased with the event. It portrayed both sides of the issue. There were people in the audience who felt strongly about the issues, and it really felt balanced,’ she said. ‘Often, debates have one side that takes over, but this debate gave equal opportunity for each man to speak strongly. The balance makes people more willing to give an opinion.’
The public debate between Grimsrud and Nation stemmed from the recent publication of their book Reasoning Together: A Conversation on Homosexuality. The book, like the debate, intricately held each man’s viewpoint on this postmodern church issue but also revealed the respect and collaboration of both Grimsrud and Nation in the controversies in the Bible and in today’s society.
The friendship between the two professors seems unnatural when recognizing that they hold such strong, but opposing, views on homosexuality in the church. Grimsrud takes a less traditional stance by stating that the church should be ‘both welcoming and affirming’ to homosexual individuals. Nation’s approach is more conservative. He believes the church should be ‘welcoming, but not affirming’ to homosexuals.
Grimsrud and Nation’s friendship and theological discussions began in1980 when they met in Indiana. Over the years, they have developed an understanding for the importance and growth of knowledge that increases from disagreement.
During the debate, Grimsrud and Nation respectfully took turns stating their beliefs about homosexuality through study and interpretation of specific Bible versus such as Galatians 3:28 and Leviticus 20:13. Grimsrud introduced two definitions of ‘sinner,’ and then questioned ‘which sense of ‘sinner’ gay Christians in relationships may be?’ He emphasized the labels distributed to people, by people.
‘Human labels are abolished by Christ,’ said Grimsrud, and ‘there is direction [from the Bible] to welcome the inappropriately labeled.’
Nation countered with his self-titled ‘Flat-Earth Society’ views. He used references from the Bible and personal experience to touch on topics of compassion, fundamental views in the Bible, ‘Flat Earth Society’ views, and the importance of openly addressing homosexuality in the church. ‘God does not call us to be tolerant of our neighbors, but to love them,’ said Nation. He continued this thought with ‘where there is no compassion, it should be challenged.’ Helping neighbors carry their ‘burdens’ themed Nation’s side of the debate.
Although they did not promise clear answers with their debate, the two professors encouraged audience participation through questions and comments. The audience stated and wrote questions. ‘How can we be compassionate, but not affirming?’ and ‘What is the ‘spirit’ of the law?’ asked some of the audience members.
Both Grimsrud and Nation answered the questions to the best of their ability, but the discussion of homosexuality still continues in churches and at dinner tables. They also emphasized the importance of respectful relationships, even in the course of disagreement. The two theologians discussed the importance of addressing difficult topics, both in the church and outside of the church.
‘Going to these debates about homosexuality and other difficult issues are kind of frustrating because everyone goes in with their predetermined ideas,’ said senior Jake Goertz. ‘It’s unfortunate because we have people who know a lot of facts and who have studied these topics in-depth. It seems we always come out with people accusing and judging whether each other are Christian or not.’