Does God hate Gay people?

Does God hate Gay people? July 15, 2013

Conservative Minister with same sex attraction speaks out:

If for some reason the video above does not work you can try watching on youtube direct.

The UK has now passed legislation allowing Gay Marriage, to hear Sam’s views on this view the video from around 40 minutes.

This video is a Google hangout with my friend Sam Allberry in which we discuss his brand new book Is God anti-Gay?


Sam is a Reformed Evangelical Minister in the Church of England who also experiences predominantly homosexual or same-sex attraction. I have known him personally for a few years now. I am thrilled to be able to have him join me for a live hangout. We will be discussing his own story, his experience of how Christians have reacted to his “coming out,” celibacy, and why many people don’t share their experiences in this area with others.

I hope you will enjoy our conversation and also read his book which explains a compassionate yet conservative response to homosexuality. This is a controversial subject among Christians and the World today. It is very important for us all to understand this issue better, whatever our opinions. It does us good to stop and to listen to the personal stories of those who have walked a sometimes challenging journey whether they have comet to the same conclusions as us or not. Sam’s makes an important contribution to a debate which sadly all too often descends into a heated argument between practicing homosexuals and married heterosexual Christians.

Here is my review of Sam’s book from Amazon:

My friend Sam Allberry has bravely spoken about his own struggle with same sex attraction, what he believes the Bible says about that, and his decision to live a celibate lifetyle as part of his devotion to Jesus Christ. The idea of anybody being willing to lay down his life in this way seems strange to the modern mind. But Allberry believes it is no sacrifice to him to do so. Too few people are able to really listen to those we disagree with, so read this whatever your view on the most controversial issue that today faces the Church and broader society (and their relationship).  You will not be disappointed and will understand Sam’s viewpoint better, and become more compassionate towards homosexuals.  A friend of mine reported that in his workplace he is the only one who has a traditional view of marriage and sexuality. He is also the only friend of the one openly homosexual there. In the world many homosexuals still face discrimination and even hate crimes. Imagine the impact if every homosexual felt the people that were most accepting and loving towards them were the Christians.

Sam and two other ministers with same-sex attraction were interviewed in this month’s Christianity magazine.

As well as his own book, Sam Allberry recommend Washed and Waiting, and Walking With Gay Friends, and two organizations: in the UK the True Freedom Trust and in the UK Aligned Grace Resources.

Another helpful resource is the debate between Andrew Wilson and Rob Bell.

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Peter Kirk

    “Conservative Minister” with capitals? I was wondering which Tory member of the Cabinet you were interviewing!

  • Evidence2Hope

    It’s really interesting to hear the views of a Christian who has had to wrestle with their sexuality and balances it with his faith. He makes a great point regarding friendship and celibacy. I don’t agree with his interpretation of passages (but I am probably on the more liberal side) but it was a great discussion to hear

    • I do think its important for us all to listen to each other and understand differing perspectives rather than create “straw men”

      • Evidence2Hope

        Absolutely, all that needs to happen is for everyone to stop talking long enough to listen

        • Actually it is more than that, unfortunately often the meaning different groups put on certain words means we talk past each other, and often we simply cannot see the heart of the person on the other side, and grasp their motivations

          • Evidence2Hope

            Good point 🙂

  • Noah Smith

    When I was growing up in the evangelical church in the ’70’s and ’80’s it was made quite clear to me that god hated gays. But then wider society hated gays as well. It seems like the churches changing attitudes have been driven by society whose attitudes towards gays have been shaped by the successful advocacy of gay right’s groups and of individuals coming out. “Homophobia” didn’t exist when I was child; homophobic attitudes was just “common sense”. I’d be interested if someone could explain what theological developments have occurred over the last 15 years which have resulted in the church recognizing homosexuality as being a legitimate sexual preference.

    • Noah, I think that the issue remains very controversial in the Christian church and there is a broad range of views see my link above controversial subject among Christians

      • Adrian, I think that is slightly disingenous. My limited understanding is that there aren’t any theological developments, only theologians echoing shifts in society. I honestly believe its that simple.

        • I think that there are many Christians calling for a compassionate conservativism on this issue as Sam Allberry does in the video above. That is definitely new. We must recognize that life has been hard for homosexuals in society, and I think there are many Christians now who believe that we should stand strongly against things like homosesexual bullying, etc.

          • I’ll concede that. I personally don’t think its ‘new’, I just think the church has ignored it. I can get quite ranty about this, and am grateful for Sam’s book and his approach. I was referring back to the theological interpretation etc etc

          • Tom, what I am saying is that as Christians we must acknowledge the part that the church has played in society oppressing homosexuals. I know of no one advocating that for example homosexual acts should be made illegal like they were around 50 years ago. One of the heroes of the second world war in England was locked up after the war rather than thanked for what he did. I dont think many Christians at the time would have opposed that:

          • Absolutely, and I’ve repeatedly said that in my various posts on the topic. The eBook I’m working on is in part a challenge to the church to repent of homophobia. I’m not entirely sure how that is relevant to the theological questions that Noah asked. I’m not at all advocating for a return to the good old (bad) days, I’m just pointing out that the shift has gone hand in hand with the culture.

          • On some social issues the church leads and the culture reluctantly follows. On others the culture leads and the church realizes it was entirely wrong, on yet others it learns from the cultural change that it was partly wrong, and on some it stands firm as a rock despite the buffeting winds of society’s fierce condemnation.

          • Carole

            Adrian, I feel you are being deliberately non-committal about the original question of what theological developments have there been in the last 15 years that have resulted in the church recognising homosexuality as a legitimate preference. I stand with Sam Alberry on this issue, i.e. the Bible does not condone any type of sexual activity outside of one man, one woman marriage. However, I acknowledge that the established church has not necessarily been compassionate towards those who identify themselves as homosexual and clearly that needs to change. This does not however, in my opinion, mean that the church has to endorse their chosen lifestyle, simply that (and I’m sorry for the horrible cliche I’m about to use) we should love the sinner, hate the sin.

          • It’s not for this post for me to explain why so many Christians are thinking differently. I think that some of the links above especially the one on Steve Chalke and the posts that links to will explain. Generally tho, you are right most what some call affirming evangelicals seem to feel society has moved on so we need to change our views. Some though describe different ways of reading some of the key texts. Sam is very clear that as much as those readings might affect his lifestyle he feels the Bible simply can’t be read as supporting sex outside of heterosexual marriage, which is clearly the view of the majority of Christians for the past 2000 years.

          • Marco Luxe

            Carole: you claim the Bible says what you want it to say. That is all too human. Nowhere in scripture does it say anything about “one man one woman” marriage. You’ve just read into scripture your limited world view. Polygamy was the norm for rich men in most places in the world throughout human history. You think the Bible is anti gay, but you might be similarly mistaken.

          • Carole

            Marco, firstly, I am not claiming the Bible says ‘what I want it to say’ because I have absolutely no agenda here. It makes no difference whatsoever to my life if God permits heterosexual marriage only, or same-sex marriage. I have been looking at this issue for about two years now, trying very hard to come to the same conclusions as those who say that same-sex marriage is not outside of God’s plan for his world, but I simply have not been able to draw the same conclusion. Believe me when I say I have tried to find a different answer to this! One man, one woman marriage starts right back at the beginning in Genesis, and is quoted by Jesus in Mark 10 (there are other references but I’ll stick at two). There is no suggestion that I can find anywhere in the Bible that a man left his parents to be given in marriage to another man. It grieves me that this is such a divisive issue, but each of us who are trying to follow Jesus have to draw our own conclusions on a whole range of subjects, and have to accept that we will not always agree. Finally, I do not think the Bible is anti-gay, I just don’t think it is pro-gay – a subtle but important difference.

          • Noah Smith

            On the issue of homosexuality I would argue that its all of the above.

    • Rafael

      That’s because Homosexuality isn’t a sin, you think an establishment/building which calls itself a Church(Baptist, Roman Catholic etc who call themselves a Church, they are not) represents Christianity? Hell No.

      For example Roman Catholic break one of the most important rules, ADDING to Scripture, they added so much stuff that it came to be it’s own religion.

      Want to know how Homosexuality isn’t a Sin?(And being straight I don’t feel good being Pro-Gay, so no biased from me, I don’t hate gay people, they are some of the coolest people, just isn’t my thing, however Homosexuality is not a sin and you’ll feel relieved in the next few moments),

      Lets start with the “Clobber” passages, such as Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13, boy you’re in for a treat, the burden will be lifted off your chest, as Scripture says,

      Deuteronomy 30:11 – “For this commandment which I command you today is not too difficult for you, nor is it out of reach.”

      Matthew 11:28-30 – “Come to Me, all [a]who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For My yoke is easy andMy burden is light.”

      1 John 5:3 – For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.(The word for burdensome here is the greek word, βαρεῖαι, transliteration = bareiai, which can mean, heavy, weighty, burdensome, lit. and met; violent, oppressive. )

      and most of all,

      John 8:32 – “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” – Jesus Christ(YHWH)

      Here we go, Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13,

      Leviticus 18:22 in Hebrew ואת זכר לא תשכב משכבי אשה תועבה הוא

      Transliteration – V”et-zachar lo tishkav mishk”vei ishah to”evah hu.

      Leviticus 20:13 Hebrew – ואיש אשר ישכב את זכר משכבי אשה תועבה עשו שניהם מות יומתו דמיהם בם

      Transliteration – V’ish asher yishkav et zachar mishk’vei ishah to’evah asu shneihem mot yumatu d’meihem bam


      lets use 20:13 as it has the extra stuff,

      V’ish – And male
      asher – Who
      yishkav – lie down
      et – with
      zachar – male
      mishk’vei (mishk’av)- Beds/lyings
      ishah – woman/wife
      to’evah – abomination/abhorrent/ritually unclean
      asu – Do
      shneihem – both of them
      mot – dying
      yumatu – they will die
      d’meihem – their blood (or blood of them)
      bam – on them (or them)

      And that equates to, “and male who lie down with male beds/lyings woman/wife abomination do both of them dying they will die their blood on them

      and then, “and a male who lies down with a male the beds of a woman (or wife), both of them do an abomination; Dying they will die, their blood is upon them’.”

      now watch this,

      Yes Numbers 31:18 – But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.(A verse often misunderstood by perverts, which Moses commands to kill all those who worship the false god and particpate in evil cultic rituals and to save for themselves(or bring into Israel) the ones who didn’t do wicked things, called Virgins)(remember this just says keep them alive and keep them in tribe, in other words bring them to Israel, why? because they weren’t evil and didn’t participate in evil child sacrifices, violence, and all other lunatic “atheistic” false religious cultic pagan things, if you see the word virgin and think sex of it as meaning to have sex with, then I suggest seeking help)

      which says, in Hebrew, וכל הטף בנשים אשר לא ידעו משכב זכר החיו לכם

      Which is transliterated,

      w’khol ha”af BaN”shiym “sher lo-y”d’ű mish’Kav z”kh”r hach”yű l”khem

      what a wha wha what?(Eric Matthews style, fa fa fa Feenay!, Feeeeeny!, Feeny!)

      Yes mish’Kav z”kh”r means Lyings of man, while in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 we have, mishk”vei ishah which is Lyings of woman.

      Why is this significant? Lets go talmud here for a sec,

      sanhedrin 54A as a reference to anal sex,

      and then this proves it all,

      [quote] The task was especially difficult because there is little controversy in the rabbinic tradition on the meaning of Leviticus 18:22. While it is translated in various ways, the basic meaning has always seemed pretty clear: “And with a male you shall not lie the lyings of a woman, it is an abomination.” The only difficult phrase is mishkeve isha (usually parsed as “the lyings of a woman”), because the phrase appears nowhere else in the Bible. A similar phrase, the lying of a male (mishkav zachar), appears in Numbers 31:18 and is understood to mean what women experience in intercourse, i.e. penile penetration. Consequently, mishkeve isha is what men experience in intercourse, that is, penile engulfment. If so, then the verse prohibits a man from lying with a male in such a way that his penis is engulfed in the other man”s body. And where is a man penetrable? Here the rabbis make use of the fact that the word lyings is in the plural form. The lyings of a woman are plural because she may be penetrated vaginally or anally. A man, missing the vagina, is singly penetrable anally. Consequently, for millennia the tradition understood that Leviticus 18:22 prohibited anal intercourse between men and Leviticus 20:13 reiterated and punished the crime with death by stoning.

      By far the most intriguing element of the puzzle is the fact that lesbian relations are totally unaddressed in the Torah. The only explanation of this lacuna is that the Torah is utterly uninterested in “homosexuality” per se. The sameness of the sex (homo=same) that so dominates contemporary thought in regard to homosexuality is missing here. Instead, there is something about anal sex between men that is at the center of the biblical concern. Of course the obvious question is just this: Why does the Torah consider anal sex between men to be such a problem?{/QUOTE]

      1, So the verse condemns Penetration, aka Anal sex. if it condemned Homosexuality it would say SEXUAL RELATIONS as did the previous verses against Incest and Bestiality, Leviticus 18:22/20:13 and the verse against sex during menstration though are Specific with detail, for example Menstration verse doesn’t say “don’t have sex with women”, it says don’t have sex during menstration, likewise this verse says don’t have anal sex with another man.

      YHWH would’ve either said sexual relations, have mentioned lesbianism(as in the condemnation of bestiality YHWH told women Also not to do it), and

      Anal sex is is detrimental to Anyone(not just Homosexuals, look up women who did porn and have to sadly wear a diaper), it’s no good so either this reason is why it’s condemned or it was condemned for cultural reasons and is no longer sin(For example Leviticus isn’t all Universal Moral laws, it does contain Dietry and Sacrifice laws for Israel Only(Don’t eat pork, etc which were for Israelites only), contrary to False Doctrine, we ARE under Law, we aren’t under Israel laws like circumision, look up New Perspective on Paul, this is what was argued, Old Testament God even tells us He’d rather have MERCY than Sacrifice in Isaiah 1 and Hosea 6:6)

      All Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 condemn is Anal Sex, AT MOST, if not then Temple Prostitution.

      That’s why KJV(Don’t like this translation by the way) renders it,

      Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

      Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

      As with womankind/as he lieth with a woman as proven means Anal sex, which is cool as this probably means YHWH either assumes one is ALREADY gay or doesn’t care, He just says, no anal sex.

      Leviticus 18:22 doesn’t mean Homosexuality or Homosexual behavior in General, it was a condemnation of Anal sex, in order for my opponent to be valid he must refute every single point given.


      1,Whoever claims that Anal sex is ok is in the wrong, Homosexuality isn’t wrong, however Anal sex(No matter what your orientation) is, Factually and Scientifically wrong, it’s harmful,

      If you still insist on Anal sex then your arguing for something proven to harm and something that most people who are Homosexual don’t even do,

      to that I don’t know what to say, all I can say is that YHWH prohibits Anal sex for any Orientation(Straight people can have anal sex with another male) and that its wrong(Scientifically, Medically etc) and what your arguing has Nothing to do with Homosexuality, it’s just a messed up sexual act. now I agree one is bigoted or uneducated in The Bible for being against Homosexuality but to say one is bigoted for being against Anal sex is like saying someone is bigoted for telling another not mess with an cut or infection , it’s disgusting and harmful.

      2, Whoever says “Since anal sex is prohibited, All Homosexuality is prohibited” is wrong as well

      1, Anal sex isn’t a Homosexual Exclusive act, even Straight people can have male to male anal sex

      2, if one specific sexual act condemns the whole Sexual Orientation and other forms of Sex, then according that Faulty Logic, All Heterosexual Sex is condemned because Heterosexual sex during a womans Menstruation is condemned(Leviticus 18:19

      Straight sex during Menstruation doesn’t prohibit All Straight sex, likewise Male to Male(Straight or Gay) Anal sex doesn’t prohibit for example Male-to-Male Oral sex, as that is never prohibited.

      There you go folks, no where in Old Law is Homosexuality prohibited. YHWH(The Father, and The Son, and The Holy Spirit) Bless you to Truth.

      Next comment will be on Romans 1

      • Noah Smith

        I’ll be sure to let gay people know that you think homosexuality is ok

        • Rafael

          Why are you being condescending? I prove Homosexuality is not a sin, took time and effort, and you reply saying,

          “I’ll be sure to let gay people know that you think homosexuality is ok”

          Your reply should have been of relief, as other gay people who love YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit) would have done, instead you dismiss it.

          It has nothing to do with Homosexuality, whether He is against Homosexuality or not, and as proven He is not, you still reject Him.

          • Noah Smith

            So it’s ok to be gay just don’t have guy on guy sex (I presume you’re heterosexual, funny enough we heterosexuals don’t appear to have a problem with the ladies getting it on. A trait apparently shared by the writers of the Bible.).

          • Rafael

            “So it’s ok to be gay just don’t have guy on guy sex”

            No, it says do not have Anal Sex, Anal sex isn’t Homosexual exclusive, they can have Guy on Guy Sex such as mutual masturbation or Oral sex, anal sex is medically proven to be dangerous for everyone, not just gay people, remember Anal penetration here is condemned to Straight and Gays, the Law says do not penetrate a man. most gay people probably don’t even have anal sex, people do it because it’s taboo or rebellion, as it’s not pleasurable.

            “A trait apparently shared by the writers of the Bible.).”

            Actually they have no problem with anyone with consent(of age) having sex, just don’t harm another(anal)

    • Rafael

      Now Romans 1, in Romans 7 Paul uses a Hypothetical Jew to demonstrate something, we know by 1 John 3 that Christians do not sin, so how can Paul say that He did? well he never said that he sinned, he used a hypothetical person Multiple Times in Romans, such as Romans 3,, or Romans 7,

      Note how Romans 2 starts with,

      “Therefore you have no excuse, [a]everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.”

      So Romans 1 and 2 go together,

      Paul basically mimicks the speech of someone else, whether they said it or Hypothetically, like he did in Romans 7, read,

      There’s absolutely no Bible verse against Homosexuality, come to Jesus Christ, you can be gay and He’ll accept you, as He said,

      Matthew 11:28-30 ” “Come to Me, all [a]who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For My yoke is [b]easy and My burden is light.” – Jesus Christ(YHWH)

      Matthew 7:12 “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.” – Jesus Christ(YHWH)

      Leviticus 19:18 – “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.” – YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit)

      Matthew 22:36-40 – “36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and[a]foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.” – YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit)

      • Bola Muyis

        Very well said Rafael, thank you, thank you.

  • Martin Thorley

    I think it is absolutely true that some people’s views have changed simply because of the changing views of our culture. However, I think another element worth mentioning is that there is, at least in some quarters, an ongoing recovery of the centrality of the gospel. For, if I truly know that *my* sins are so bad that Jesus had to die for them and yet, at the same time, He was glad to die for me, if I am settled that my righteousness is in Christ alone, then I no longer feel the need to bolster my own self worth by looking down on others who are different to me in any way.

  • Joe_R6

    It’s going to be very difficult for you to convince a general audience that you aren’t “anti-gay” if you keep on referring to gay people as homosexuals. Just as someone who in 2013 routinely referred to black people as colourteds or asian people as orientals is going to have a tough time convincing anyone that they aren’t racist. The word homosexual is archaic bordering on offensive. Not using the term that a minority group call themselves is a sure fire way of expressing contempt for that group. Seriously – the common courtesy of using the name that a person/group call themselves goes a long way.

    • Mmm, this is interesting. Here in the UK I have never heard anybody suggest that the word homosexual is offensive. It is hard to talk about this issue without using that word, especially when contrasting gay people with heterosexuals. Clearly there is a difference to highlight at times. Actually I did use “gay” in the article quite a bit. Interestingly Steve Chalke who is a British minister who has what is termed an “affirming” view on this subject, used the word homosexual, as does the BBC at times, and even the New York Times see It seems to me that if the word homosexual is truly becoming so offensive we are going to need another word. In some contexts the word gay just doesn’t seem to work as an opposite to heterosexual. Also, maybe its partly the scientist in me as its a fairly medical term really. But if I can be convinced that this really is offensive and that there really is an alternative of course I will change.

      • Joe_R6

        In general usage it’s an archaic term – hardly ever used any LGBT person under 50. It’s been that way for a long time now. The continued use homosexual as a noun by conservative Christians highlights the cultural self-segregation of that group.

        Gay does work as the opposite of heterosexual because, for the people who use it to describe themselves, it simply means same-sex attracted. It no longer has any associations with a particular lifestyle. The Prime Minister, who must also be a fairly small c conservative, only uses the term gay in his speeches.

        The Christian insistence that gay means more than SSA is used by non-Christians as an example of how “out of touch” evangelicals can be – and there’s some truth to that claim. Evangelicals have generally avoided having a conversation with gay people – regardless of their differences of opinion on sexual ethics – preferring to talk at them or demonize them a distance.

        The offense (although not great) is indirect. It’s like ignoring a person who says “Call me Dave” and carrying on calling him David because you think “That’s his name”.

        Steve Chalke does still occasionally use homosexual as a noun. I think that’s a legacy thing – when he’s not too sure of who his audience is. I haven’t heard him address a predominately LGBT crowd where he would be advised to stick to gay.

  • Rich Atterton

    What ever one believes about how you exegete certain passages, there is an important disentanglement of this topic from the bible and social policy. Do you accept you could come away from this discussing believing homosexuality to be sinful yet legal in a liberal democracy? Gay marriage wrong but a necessary part of good social policy? What do In mean by this? Should all sin be illegal? Should it be a crime to be gluttonous? Should it be a crime to masturbate? Can this church still have strong views on the sinfulness of these things but wish to become politically active in lobbying for their illegality? I believe the movement in this country to oppose same sex marriage is either because of an inconsistent governmental hermeneutic or a clinging to a 1980’s style conservationism far more than an exegesis of Romans or Leviticus.

  • Dee

    There is nothing in the inspired scriptures that show God hates people who are homosexual. God does not promote prejudice. The Bible doesn’t condone giving in to the tendencies either. It is the act that is detestable to him. However much as our modern society has changed and people have become more and more tolerant of things that were once considered “wrong” does not mean that God’s principles have changed. He laid out laws and principles that let us know that man lying with man and women with women. (old testament) Luke 18:22 says “You must not lay down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable thing”. (new testament) Romans 1:26,27 “God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetite, for both their female changed the natural use of themselves to one contrary to nature and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lusts toward one another, males with males working to what is obscene”. The acts that he hate is in line with adultery, lying, fornication, murder, etc. Yet, society wants to make excuses for homosexual behavior by dissecting the scriptures for their own means.

    • Allen

      Yep God doesn’t hate gay people just said that they were sick perverted people who will be burned and tortured in hell for being gay and having gay thoughts unless they apologized to this unchanged God who also happens to be Jesus who in the past said they should be put to death and their blood over their heads but now just wants to throw them in hell but yea your God totally doesn’t have anything against gays. Its all about love. When u love something you torture it for eternity or put them to death on earth then send them to be tortured for eternity .That’s what love is all about

      • MrTToftheWest

        As mentioned, God did not say he hated homosexuals, it’s the act he hates. Plus Jesus and God are two separate entities. Jesus is the son of God. Because God had great love for humans, John 3:16 says: “For God loved the world (of mankind) so much he gave his only begotten son so that everyone exercising faith in him shall not be destroyed but have everlasting life”. That includes those who have changed their life around to meet HIS standards since he is the Creator. The Bible assures us that all sorts of men should be saved and come to an accurate knowledge of Truth. God seeks honest-hearted individuals who seek his approval, not by reinterpreting the Bible but by bringing their lives into harmony with it.

  • Kori Majhor

    I believe GOD has made people from all walks of life. When one can look past the color of someone’s skin every time a shooting or murder occurs. The day one can walk alongside someone of a different religion or creed and not be afraid….that will be the day, people rely on GOD and not the GODS! I feel we are here to do the work of GOD not become him. We as a nation need not point the finger, but LOVE the sinner. I am not saying being homosexual is a sin, but I am saying I am a follower of the LORD and he set forth MY curriculum, not that of another. I can pray for all of us; yet I cannot pray you into heaven…that is between you and the personal relationship you have with GOD. People often make comments about hell and who will go and who will not. I say…since when you become GOD? Its not our place to judge, but in fact to love! Food 4 Thought!

  • Peter Charnley

    So refreshing to hear the
    truth being honesty accepted and bravely embraced even when it poses an
    enormous challenge to them personally. Such people will be dutifully
    rewarded in due course. Needless to say, relating to all of life’s
    issues, that is central to the real Christian message. Thankfully Sam Allberry understands that.

  • Adam Cummings

    So, you’re leaving the faith along with Rob Bell?

    Good to know.