Tip of the iceberg

You may not have noticed, but something pretty extraordinary just happened over at Gospeleer: a southern gospel record label executive made a strong case for, in his own words, getting beyond the taboo of homosexuality. Cuing off my article about gay men and gospel music, Mickey Gamble thinks through the question of sexuality and scripture.

While there are various thoughtful but opinion-based arguments to the contrary,  I know of no scientific studies that I can consider as “serious”,  acknowledging that sexual orientation is anything other than a fact of birth. Not a “condition.” Not a “lifestyle.” Not a choice.  Hair color, gender, skin color, body height, race, and sexual orientation, are all traits in the same “facts of birth” set. The mix of these traits in any person are facts that precede any life decisions or choices that we add on to determine the whole of “who I am.”


Fear and mistrust of those with traits “not like me” have created dramatic and oppressive prejudices throughout history. Those who have been the targets of all such prejudices have created much of the great and transformative music and literature, as well as  political and religious discourse, borne out of the struggle to just belong to the whole, to accept their own “unwanted” bodies, and to be accepted as contributors in their own societies.

In America, our own long, deep, and violent struggles for racial and gender equality come easily to mind. The perspective we get from that history is instructive to this discussion in a couple of ways. First, embedded deeply in those struggles was the effort to use scripture as the bottom line unchallengeable “reason” for maintaining the status quo. Just as now with the so-called “gay issue.” If those scriptures quoted against the struggle for racial and gender equality were so important then, why not now? You just don’t hear many folks quoting the Bible to justify slavery these days.

You should read the whole thing. I’d love to be wrong here, but I don’t know of any public statement by someone of Gamble’s status and place in the industry that comes anywhere close to this.

As I noted in my article, Gaither got clobbered into a full-scale retraction and denunciation of homosexuality when he dared to speak non-negatively about a gay person and her music in public. Dottie Rambo sent a lot of signals in her career that she was at least gay-friendly (appearing with Lily Tomlin, for instance), but she left unaddressed her own feelings or thinking on this issue, so far as I know.

What’s striking about Gamble’s post is not just that he bucks the party line on homosexuality, but that he does so in terms explicitly based, not on a critique of Christianity (what is typically disparaged as the godless atheistic homosexual agenda etc), but rather critiques evangelical (ab)uses of scripture from a distinctly Christian perspective, something that just doesn’t happen in sg:

There is something about being told, through no fault of your own, that  “you’re different” and “you’re bad” and “you don’t belong” that forces you to deal with how alien you feel to yourself and how alienated you feel from those around you. And is not this exactly the Christian experience of “having to be in this world” where we do not feel we belong?

The conventional wisdom will doubtless be to dismiss Gamble and his pov as a one-off exception to the consensus view, but all the email I get from gay and straight alike every time this topic comes up suggests otherwise. For instance, here’s an email I received last week from a performer whose name all of you would recognize:

I had several gay friends while I was in the music dept. at college, and I think without exception all shared this evangelical background experience Shores identifies. I was able to identify with them because I spent my high school years being called a sissie: I played the piano, sang, was in the band instead of playing football, wore Calvin Kleins and hairspray - hey, it was the 80’s. You know how hard it is to get dates with girls when they all think you’re gay !!??!?!?!

The absolutist mentality in southern gospel music/southern evangelicalism could perhaps be the root of all evil. The either/or of ministry-entertainment, gay-straight, crew cut-spiked hair, tie-open collar . . . it goes on and on. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been chided for “leaving my bible on the shelf!” when I go to the polls and vote for those damned liberals. Not only do they hate the sin, most of them openly hate the sinner. Surely that must be a miserable existence?

While no one would mistake southern gospel for a progressive or inclusive culture, history tells us that the emergent viewpoints appear like icebergs … the visible portion is always just the beginning.

So here’s a question for you (and I’m really asking): what if there a lot more – not a majority mind you, but a not insubstantial number all the same – of Mickey Gambles out there in sg:  straight but not necessarily narrow?

Email this Post


  1. Licensed Therapist wrote:

    The etiology of same-sex attraction is not relative to the discussion. There are myriads of credible studies that posit the idea that a propensity to addiction is heredity. Nonetheless, acting upon those propensities is sin.

    If “being gay” is defined as being same-sex attraction then I will concede that it is not sin. Temptation is not sin; Christ as tempted. However, if “being gay” is defined as engaging in same-sex sexual behavior then Scripture is clear.

    Behavior that is contrary to God’s Word is sin - even if there are biological factors at play.

    I love those who are tempted to engage in sexual behaviors that are outside the parameters God has set. They need support and accountability - just as someone with a propensity toward substance abuse would; just as someone with a propensity toward heterosexual sexual behaviors outside the parameters God has set.

    Chromosomal linkages are irrelevant to the discussion. Genetic and environmental factors are irrelevant. Those factors may result in temptations; giving in to those temptations and engaging in homosexual behaviors is sin.

  2. quartet-man wrote:

    First of all, many of us over the years have stated we are all born into sin and temptation, giving into temptation and deciding to always give into the temptation are different things.

    As far as the Gamble thing, I haven’t read it or your article either. However, it doesn’t change my opinion one bit if all in SG music believed the same as apparently Gamble does, I am not striving to please him and my belief system isn’t based on his thoughts.

  3. seventwenty-eight wrote:

    I think the whole thing is bunk and very laughable. To compare racial issues with homosexuality. You can’t help the color you are–eventhough Michael Jackson tried to change his. But you can help NOT being a homosexual. SORRY but truth.

  4. Tom wrote:

    Thanks for pointing out Gamble’s post. It is well-articulated, and its conclusions reflect the kinds of biblical interpretation that are the norm in many seminaries today–although, to be sure, these are not the norm in fundamentalist seminaries and Bible colleges–and clearly a large segment of the sg fanbase reflects a fundamentalist approach to scripture.

    It also seems to reflect a carefully-considered and intentional effort to raise a conversation, as there can be very little doubt that Gamble is well aware of the strident tone of opinions on this subject in the sg world.

    I, for one, applaud his willingness to bring this subject up. There are gays all around us, whether they’re “out of the closet” or not. Many such people are trying to lead devoted Christian lives–some of them in openly gay relationships, some of them in secret trysts, and some of them carefully remaining celibate or seemingly happily engaged in heterosexual relationships.

    I don’t claim to offer any answers on this issue. Unlike some who always feel compelled to chime in whenever this subject comes up, I’m not a fundamentalist–and I can’t resort to an easy “God said it, I believe it, that settles it” response. I am not at all convinced that this issue can be convincingly addressed by appeals to scripture.

    But I do have friends who are gay. I’m a minister in an evangelical denomination, and I have friends who I went to seminary with who are struggling with this issue. Some have tried to live a heterosexual life–with varying results. Others have remained single and celibate. One was a pastor for three years (married, with children) before having a nervous breakdown and leaving Christianity altogether.

    The stories of people like Ray Boltz or Ted Haggard seem to appear somewhat regularly. Less well-known names come out of the closet from time to time. Surely there are others like them in the evangelical world who are either suppressing or secretly practicing homosexual tendencies–statistically, it would almost seem inevitable. So unless you attend a church of less than 50 people, I’ll bet someone you go to church with has some sort of inner struggle over this issue.

    Surely compassion needs to be part of the conversation, does it not? And civility?

    Alas, given the nature of responses from vocal sg fans whenever this subject comes up, I suspect that Gamble may actually find himself blacklisted like others have been.

    I hope not. Can we have a respectful discussion? Thanks, Mickey, for your respectful contribution.

  5. Irishlad wrote:

    How does seventwenty-eight know “you can help NOT being a homosexual” has she/he come out then in again personally?Curious.

  6. Tony Brown wrote:

    I believe there is likely a larger number than you would think of Christians who are not as narrow minded, in their own minds anyway, as many would believe. We have a culture of intolerance where many different kinds of sins are publicly denounced but privately practiced. As long as you loudly decry the sin, you are accepted as being Christian.

  7. Tom wrote:

    There’s a recently published book that chronicles the personal stories and difficulties faced by people who grow up gay in America–many of them in intensely conservative Christian families in the Bible Belt. The book is “Crisis: 40 Stories Revealing the Personal, Social, and Religious Pain and Trauma of Growing Up Gay in America,” edited by Mitchell Gold with Mindy Drucker.

    I’ve not read it myself, but the essay-length review in the June 2, 2009 issue of The Christian Century offers an interesting overview from a mainline Christian perspective (available online at http://www.christiancentury.org/article.lasso?id=7089 ). The reviewer suggests that anti-homosexual attitudes are particularly strong in the most conservative Bible Belt contexts, writing:

    “As an evangelical Christian whose career has been spent in the South, I must say I find it scandalous that the most physically and psychologically dangerous place to be (or even appear to be) gay or lesbian in America is in the most religiously conservative families, congregations and regions of this country. Most often these are Christian contexts. Many of the most disturbing stories in this volume come from the Bible Belt. This marks an appalling Christian moral failure.”

    That seems to be a description of much of the sg community.

  8. Janet B wrote:

    My boss is gay - he’s never confirmed this to me directly, but it’s true. And he’s a wonderful, caring, funny man. He knows that I’m a Christian…I wonder if that has scared him into keeping silent and if so, that makes me sad.
    I do not wish to condemn, for I would stand condemned myself for my own sins if not for the gracious, merciful, and saving love of Jesus. That is all that needs to be conveyed.

  9. Joe wrote:

    And Tony- whehterh one practices the sin privately or publicly, they are still living in sin . Doesn’t matter how you say it. And it is the height of oxymoronism to thensay “I am a Christian”.

    The Bible is crystal-clear, no matter how much you, Tom, wish to hide behind your rhetoric and human logic.

    “Whoever abides in Him does not keep on sinning.” (1 John 3:6)

    “He who keeps on committing sin is of the devil.” (1 John 3:8)

    “In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest; whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God.” (1 John 3:10)

    “Let every one who names the name of Christ depart from iniquity.” (2 Timothy 2:19)

    “Have no fellowship with the unfrutiful works of darkness, but rather expose them.” (Eph. 5:11)

    “..Do not be deceived…homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Cor. 6:9-10)

    “There shall by no means enter Heaven anything that causes an abomination…” (Lev. 18:22, 20:13- Rev. 21:27)

    You are just posting empty words, meaningless talk, useless babble…especially when, as a “minister”, you are NOT willing to rest on the “God said it, I believe it, that settles it” level of faith.

    If you are truly saved, that is precisely what you did for your eternity. What gives you the right to not do it in this instance?

  10. Wade wrote:

    But Dr. Joe… if you read that literally we are all doomed…even after being saved we sin. So is it just hopeless?!?!?

  11. Wade wrote:

    Thanks for all who have noticed a little different tone from me. I am REALLY trying here. I even a few weeks back let The Goodman’s Up from what I still perceive to be pretty petty & judgmental behavior. But if The Oaks were classy enough to be that way so should I.

    The problem I am still having is if taken literally the verses that are quoted and read we are ALL doomed and what good is there to even try. It is very discouraging to be really trying to do better and then you see things like…

    “Whoever abides in Him does not keep on sinning.” (1 John 3:6)

    “He who keeps on committing sin is of the devil.” (1 John 3:8)

    “In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest; whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God.” (1 John 3:10)

    I have been spending time every day reading and seeking the face of God… I feel different about many thing but I am still a sinner and I still sin… but based on the top scripture there there must be something wrong with me… I keep sining even as I try not to and then the 2nd cite says I AM OF THE DEVIL!!

    I don’t ever see myself as being righteous… so the 3rd verse strikes me out too.

    So there has to be some context to what is being quoted!!!

    I am not going to give up. I still believe in my heart that homosexuals, or many I know would give ANYTHING to be straight. I have seen grown men cry their hearts out to God to take it from them. I know they were sincere and not just BUSTED for doing something.

    So of you Bible Scholars on here that do not necessarily believe the way that Dr. Joe or SGMUSICIAN or Yeah need to help us out some here… it is making me crazy!!!

    And all the ones mentioned above… give us a break about your little pouting stance that you are going to take a BREAK and not be around. That just does not even set well with the examples you should be trying to set with the ppl who are struggling and sincere. You ALL have said it numerous times and it has never BEEN TRUE… so are y’all of the devil for telling a story about being gone and not coming back… I love y’all and wish I could understand all of this but again it seems awful arbitrary what some of ya say… splitting hairs about what is gluttony and what is… what is TOO Much to drink and what isn’t!!

    Come on ppl we are all lovers of SGM…and should have a postive spirit just like the music does please help your brothers and sisters out.

  12. Sgmusiclover08 wrote:

    Wade…I’m not a fanatic or a basher. I may have the answers you are seeking. Feel free to email me. Sgmusiclover08@yahoo.com

  13. Yeah... wrote:

    Well, Wade - After saying sayonara, your post has me back for another post. I can only say that even your last posts just show a really great attitude on your part. I really appreciate it.

    First, I think I can answer for a few, maybe, as to why we’ve said goodbye, and yet “come back”. At least on my part, I was not going to write comments anymore, but there are news reports on here that are nowhere else. So, while I knew that I’d drop by occasionally to see what might be new, I was not going to comment again. Hope this explains why I wrote that.

    My take on this is pretty simple, Wade. I’ve stated this before, but here goes… I believe that we’re all born with a sin nature. Early life experiences, family environment, etc., may indeed play a part in the development of our character and personality. The sin nature of some pull them towards alcoholism, others to gambling. Some are tempted to heterosexual sin, others to same-sex relationships. We could go on and on. The verses that Doc Joe quoted prove that a truly born-again person should - with the constant help of God - try hard to live as manifestations of the new birth rather than the old sin nature. I’m a Christian, through marvelous grace, but I continually fight the tug-of-war between my twin natures. Anyone who says that they’re perfect is lying; we will not be what we should be until Heaven. If I may paraphrase the Apostle Paul from Romans 7:13-25, (An incredibly encouraging section, Wade, that I would greatly encourage you to read!) “The things that I would do, I do not. And, the things that I don’t want to do, those I do….O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?”
    If someone like Paul struggled with this, how could we expect not to?! We’re all in this together - every single child of God. We aren’t what we should be, but we aren’t like we used to be. And best of all, we aren’t anywhere near where we one day will be!

    The problem to me is when there are those who profess to be a Christian, but choose - as a lifestyle - to live in what is not only called sin all throughout the Bible, but which is also a life contrary to the first few verses that Joe quoted. It should grieve us (as it did Paul) when we fail and succumb to the old nature. It should be the exception, and not the rule. The same writer, John, who wrote the verses that gave you despair, also wrote (I John 1:8-9) “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. (But) If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” So, we do sin, but we shouldn’t continue to live in an openly sinful lifestyle, and there’s a real difference. Our sin should disturb us greatly, and cause us to come to the Lord to confess it, repent from it, and to beg Him to deliver us from its power. And primarily, that’s why (to me) I have a problem with those who choose to live in a lifestyle, openly practiced, that is contrary to God’s Word. And yes, the gay lifestyle is just that. It’s not just a same-sex attraction, Wade: that’s just a pull from our old sin nature, no more or no less than for the majority, whose sin nature tugs us towards heterosexual sin. When someone breaks under the temptation, there is forgiveness if we repent from the sin and confess it. That is grace, and mercy. Choosing to live in defiance of God’s Word and in any kind of a habitual life of sin is a diametric opposite of what God intends. We don’t have to judge those who live that way - their lives judge them!

    And yes, coming close to home, it does disturb me - and had caused me to decide not to comment here - when the writer chooses to live in a lifestyle that God repeatedly condemns. I find it very sad that the most-read forum on the “Criticism and Commentary on southern gospel music and culture” is owned and written by a man who chooses to live in open defiance of the Author of the very grace that we all need. It would be akin to your friend dr. Joe, a physician, being repeatedly critiqued and discussed for his medical ability by a CPA or auto mechanic. Perhaps the analogy is weak, and I’m struggling with how to word it; but it just seems a great deception to me.

    May God really bless you on your journey and your studies, Wade, and above all, I hope we’re all praying hard for God to do a work of grace in Prof. Harrison’s life.

  14. Joe wrote:


    This is an absolute honest, genuine, good-faith, sincere offer. I mean every word of this.

    I would like to try and help you on this hugely important dilemma you have posed, similar to how “Yeah” has responded, above. But I would like to do it privately, and personally, by email.

    Two ways to get this started.

    Since you are a bit more public than I am, would you be willing to answer this post here, and give me your email address?

    If you are uncomfortable with doing so, post so here, and I will post my email address for you.

    I mean this sincerely. There has been a huge change in you in the past months, and I am genuinely interested in being a bit of a help to you on this. For a number of reasons, I would rather not do it were.

    Waiting to hear from you.

    Your ol’ friend the doc….

  15. GRM wrote:

    I read the article on Gospeleer’s blog. What another shame for the Gospel Music Industry, and particular in the role he plays. But, he has since had sense enough to remove his article.

  16. crazyjoe wrote:

    Once I commented on your article in a previous post I made a private resolution to never visit your website again. But dog gone it, except for the gay stuff, you always have twice as much information then any other sogo blog. I wish I could quit you….

  17. John wrote:

    Seems your friend Mr Gambel does not have the, uh, stones to stand up and take the heat for his post. Your links to his article go no where.

    God help both of you.

  18. Randy wrote:

    Am I the only one here who has no clue, or could care less for that matter who Mickey Gamble is? (and I’m sure I will be told) Whoever he is, he is being made into a “celebrity scapegoat” for straights for gays and the justification of homosexuality.

    Nobody really knows how much I and other Christians care for the homosexual. I care so much, that I have found it Biblically to be wrong, genetically to be false, and on the same scale as an alcoholic. It’s an addiction. Like porn. Like drugs. It is something that someone uses to fulfill a part of their lives that is unfulfilled by other things. It is a struggle, but come to grips with it people! Get help for a mess!!!

    I can spill milk all over the floor, and I can spill spaghetti on the floor. I’m not going to accept that the spaghetti is okay to be left there because I like the design it made on my floor. They are both going to stink after awhile, reguardless of what the mess was made of! Just accept it, and move on to the road of recovery! Acknowledge that it is a problem and make steps toward treating it!

  19. Randy wrote:

    Maybe the term “sissy” really IS fitting for some…

  20. Wade wrote:


  21. Lurkey wrote:

    No, no, no, no…you bigots who are spouting your misguided readings of the Bible (translations of translations, at that) as justification for your intolerance need to do so in the open rather than retreating to private conversations where you hope to convert one more soul to your way of thinking because you think you see an opening to witness. I very seriously doubt your private emails to Wade are going to change his “struggling heart.”

    More to the point, you should really just stop pull-quoting the requisite verses out of the tracts because you’re never going to get consensus on the interpretations, which more often than not discount the historical context of the original writings or are so steeped in blind or willful ignorance as to give one a headache. As a thinking person, I do not accept proclamations that something is right or wrong based on man’s interpretation of anything because it will never be unbiased. Thankfully, America isn’t a theocracy and freedom of religion also means freedom from any one brand of religion. Weep and pray for me all you want, but I know that God loves me for who I am, and the decent way I treat my family, neighbors, and friends.

    The basic tenets of any religion are actually pretty straightforward and are best summed up in a (non-SG, sorry!) song by the composer & lyricist David Friedman:

    We can be kind.
    We can take care of each other.
    We can remember that deep down inside,
    We all need the same thing.
    And maybe we’ll find,
    If we are there for each other,
    That together we’ll weather whatever tomorrow may bring.

  22. Yeah... wrote:

    Lurkey - quoting Scripture means that a person is a bigot, and simply quoting the direct and accepted Bible is “misguided spouting”? Sad. And yet, evidently to you, the soppy drivel of Mr. Friedman carries so much more weight than a simple quoting of the Bible? No, I dare say that any willful ignorance is on your part. For you see, our words really don’t count at the end of the day. Only Gods words count. And he has spoken, quite expressly. Nor have you - as a self professed thinking person - expressed anything other than your own biases. In that, we’re all together, and there may be as many consensus opinions as there will be comments. And again, only the opinion of one matters, and He is the God that we all must answer to.

  23. Lurkey wrote:

    Yeah… - A bigot is someone who is irrationally intolerant, and, to me, it’s irrational to base your intolerance on ignorance. “Quoting the direct and accepted Bible” is exactly my point. Who’s accepted interpretation of what version of which Bible? God may be unerring, but man surely isn’t. You keep giving us your *opinion* that God has spoken quite clearly on the subject, when most rational people would see that there is no clear-cut admonition against homosexuality to be found without regressing back to biased interpretations. And don’t forget that Satan knows and quotes the Bible, too. My only bias is that I think people like you focus too intently on judging people’s “sins” while ignoring God’s true message of love. If it truly is only God’s opinion that counts (on which we both agree), then stop trying to force your version of the truth on everyone else.

  24. glenpaynerules wrote:

    Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. Snap!

  25. Joe wrote:


    You either accept the Bible as God’s Word, or you don’t.

    God’s “message of love” required the violent and despiccable death of a perfect Savior for the sins of mankind.

    If all He was, was love…why Calvary?
    If all He was, was love, why hell?
    If all He was, was love, why a lake of fire?
    If all He was, was love, why did they just unearth Sodom and Gomorrah from many feet of sulfur (brimstone; just what the Bible said happened), due to His hatred of the abomination of homosexuality?

    If you think God is all love, you are missing half of Him. And as Yeah said, He will be YOUR ultimate Judge.

    Which version of the Bible does NOT condemn homosexuality, by the way?

  26. Bob wrote:

    Regarding the scriptures that are commonly quoted concerning this topic:

    What do they mean if they don’t mean what the mean think they mean?

  27. Yeah... wrote:

    Lurkey, then basically, according to you, there’s just no real Bible then, is there? I yield to a plethora of scholars who had no motivation except to try and translate the accepted Bible as accurately as they could. I bow to the years of intensive study that they invested before tackling such a very sensitive undertaking. Since you’re evidently the only person in possession of the original manuscripts, I can only believe what every version of the Bible that I own (over 20) say, and say clearly. And, as Joe just stated quite succinctly - which translation of the Bible doesn’t condemn homosexuality as a sin?

    I also believe that God is a God of love. I John 4:8 &16 state that clearly, and I thrill to tell you that His love has been my undeserved, yet treasured, experience. Yet, there is another facet of the same God. I John 1:5 is just as clear, when John wrote that “God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all.” Many love to think of the God Who is love, and yet live forgetting that He is also a blinding searchlight Who sees all sin. Again, as Joe stated wonderfully, we cannot have God on our terms, as He is not half God.

    Personally, I have relatives who are gay. I love them, and they know it. And, they love me, and we tell each other that. Their sin does not make me love them any less, any more than I would love them less if their sin was of another variety. But, they also know what the Bible says, and we’ve discussed it on a number of occasions. I do not judge them - a fact that they would gladly affirm if they responded to this thread. Their lifestyle and their sin judges them, so I have no right or need to judge them. My responsibilities are to try with God’s help to judge myself and my own shortcomings, but to also yield to what God’s Word states. To not do so is a willful ignorance, and that - in and of itself - is not a biased interpretation. I say that because God said it. But, then, you don’t believe the Bible, so we’re back to square one, aren’t we?

  28. Glenn wrote:


    “My only bias is that I think people like you focus too intently on judging people’s “sins” while ignoring God’s true message of love.” What a great statement.

  29. md101 wrote:

    A problem I see is we have a lot of sissy preachers today afraid to stand up and say what’s right and not what everybody wants to hear that makes them feel good and ok. God is a God of love, but He is also a God that despises sin and no sin can enter into His presence. Thank God for the righteousness of Jesus Christ that covers all who respond in faith!

  30. Jake wrote:

    Wade — I’m another one who has noticed the change in your attitude. I think we all like the “new” Wade.

  31. Yeah... wrote:

    md101 - thanks for a great and accurate post. And Jake, #30, so many completely agree with you. It’s really neat to see.

  32. Charles Brady wrote:

    Homosexuality a FACT of birth???

    God’s Word NOT the bottom line unchallengeable “reason” for maintaining the status quo??

    I am stunned beyond belief…. You don’t “challenge” God’s Word over anything….. You obey it!

    Challenging God’s Word is a stupid Gamble….

    Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools

    26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

    27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

    28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

  33. Randy wrote:

    If homosexuality isn’t a sin, why is there a closet to come out of? Swimming isn’t a sin, and I’ve never known of anyone being a “closet swimmer”…

  34. bango wrote:

    All I can say is, Mickey Gamble better PRAY no one in the SG mainstream (artists or fans) EVER sees this article.

    Goodbye, Crossroads.

  35. md101 wrote:

    It seems the Bible is now in the closet and the homosexual out of the closet.

  36. John Doe wrote:

    As a Crossroads artist who shall remain anonymous, I am very disappointed to learn of Mickey’s stance, if indeed he said the things that are alleged in this article. Since the link is no good, I hope to find out soon from the “horse’s mouth” whether or not he feels that way, and if his is the same stance that Crossroads as a company takes on the subject of homosexuality. If so, I have just finished my last recording with them.

    Also, I’ve not read this site often enough (obviously) to ever know that the author himself is homosexual. After reading his essay on the subject, that is very evident. Therefore, I will not be visiting or otherwise supporting this site in any way in the future. I’ve always envied Prof. Harrison’s writing ability, but unfortunately it seems to be derived from such a great education that he’s now become smarter than God. That essay was the most disgusting and sacrilegious piece of garbage I’ve ever read in my life. I am utterly disappointed. #35 and many others here have it exactly right.

  37. rhymetime@queer.com wrote:


  38. woodstock wrote:

    #34, apparently Mickey did have second thoughts because the article is no longer available.

  39. bango wrote:

    John Doe, please do get to the bottom of this. Absolutely appalling. Words can’t describe this.

  40. gina wrote:

    Looks like a new article related to this post over at Gospeleer…

  41. Wade wrote:

    bango…words can describe….one word…ok maybe 2…chicken,,, somethng!!

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked * Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.