On What Basis Do Christians Maintain Ties with
Family Members Who Support Sodomite Unions?

by Stuart DiNenno


“I find it disturbing to be around my family members who approve of sodomite relationships but I will not completely separate from them because I believe that I need to maintain a Christian example and testimony to them.”

How much of a relationship do you think Christian men of Protestant Reformation times, such as Martin Luther, John Calvin or Samuel Rutherford, would have had with a relative after he announced before several witnesses that he is in favor of allowing practicing sodomites to live together freely and openly? We all know that after that point there would have been no relationship whatsoever between any of these men and the offending relative. They very likely would have delivered him to the civil authorities for punishment, or at least warned him that this would occur if he did not repent or if he ever expressed such thoughts again.

And let’s not even ponder the absurdity of Jesus Christ and His apostles maintaining a connection with those who openly expressed support for such enormous wickedness, just because they were blood relatives.

Yet today’s Christians seem to think that maintaining such relationships is not only permissible but an obligation that they must fulfill. 

Why?

Would they also have the same attitude toward family members advocating child rape or bestiality? If not, where is the difference expressed in God’s law that allows them to accept the advocacy of the former one evil that is deserving of the death penalty, but not the advocacy of the latter two evils that also are worthy of the death penalty?