Discounting and Not Listening

.

by Dr. Karl Van Harn

Statements Against Heterosexual Marriages Only

Statement

Dr. Van Harn grieves the lack of compassionate understanding in the HSR.  He says we may not put limits on God’s mercy which is deep and wide.

He was hoping the report would be unifying. The committee had an impossible task. The foundation had already hardened in 1973. There were further exegetical studies.

He has several concerns. The pastoral-theological method is the first. When there seems to be a conflict between Scripture and experience, Scripture has priority per the committee. Creation and the Word work together. The report chooses one over the other. The report needed to integrate more experience. A person with same-sex attraction may interpret some passages differently than heterosexuals do.

The second concern is that pastoral approach begins with listening. However, that became an opportunity for teaching what is right. This increases the shame of LGBTQ+ people. In pastoral care sessions he listened to the pain of these people. These people seek acceptance through relationships with other same-sex people. Same-sex partners have relieved the pain through a same-sex relationship.

Response

As is linked on the other three pages in this group, there are certain significant aspects that seem to be encountered quite frequently. Click here to review that page.

In this video Van Harn does not show how homosexuality is not a sin. He pretty much assumes it is OK. Is that a responsible approach? Possibly, partially because he’s seen people overcome shame and despair through same-sex relationships. Is experience our standard? Bible and world – what is the correct balance here?

He claims the report is biased toward Scripture. But he doesn’t show how understanding the world sheds new light. “Others may read the same Scripture and have other interpretations.” The spirits are to be tested. This approach is another version of good theologians accept same-sex marriages, therefore it has to be an option.

As far as comparing the Word to the world is concerned, science can tell us what is, but can it tell us what ought to be? Science can tell us about the relative movement of the planets and stars and the sun. But can it tell us what is moral and what is immoral? When two people of the same sex want to love each other and be committed to each other, that sounds harmless and good, right? Can science tell us if God accepts that? Where can we learn how God views such acts other than in the Word of God?

With respect to the Report of 1973, Van Harn says that there have been further exegetical studies since then. What are those studies, and are they true to Scripture? Brownson has come out with his 300-page book in which he advocates for full acceptance of same-sex marriage. He incorporates the latest studies. There is a problem with his book, though. His book contains no less than 15 critical errors. This claim that his book contains those errors has not been refuted. So where are these exegetical studies that Van Harn refers to?

It seems that Van Harn defines compassion as only being possible through full acceptance. If that is in fact based on an assumption of his that same-sex marriages are pleasing to God, and that assumption is not accurate, then his position on compassion is not viable.