On November 20, 2024, I wrote a post entitled “It Is Just Not That Simple.”   In that post I commented on much of the debate regarding the nature vs nurture issue* and homosexuality.  The nature vs nurture debate fuels a lot of the attitudes that people have toward homosexuality and the church.  In that post, I referred to the nature vs nurture discussion as a “circular argument,” trying to explain that the “debate” goes around and around in circles, really getting nowhere.  One can leave the discussion there and just allow people to have their own opinions but if those opinions are “stuck” and based on pure lack of knowledge, that is a shame.  What we can do to work toward some solution is to read Sprinkle’s advice in Chapter 8.  I don’t do this often but I want to get personal in my comments about what Sprinkle is saying in “Born This Way: Does God Make People Gay.”

I don’t often reference my background but I will in this case because I have a level of expertise in a related subject matter.   I have a Ph.D. in interpersonal communication from the University of Kentucky.  Interpersonal communication study can be defined simply as the study of how two people can share their life experiences through the exchange of messages.  They can share to the point that they have a degree of commonality.  They can share to the point they feel that they have relational knowledge.

You might be asking how does this intersect the nature vs nurture issue regarding homosexuality and what is the solution that Sprinkle proposes?  I think that Sprinkle is trying to tell us in Chapter 8 that making the effort to understand others through effective interpersonal communication is the key to making progress with this endless debate [i.e. sharing experiences through the exchange of messages].

At the risk of being too simple, I will explain how people communicate. 

Like Sprinkle, I believe that there is a lot of complexity inherent in the communication process as one person shares their perception of the world with another.  Simply put, that is what happens when communication occurs.  I share how I see the world with another person who has a differing perception.  Communication occurs when they share in return.  Eventually we may begin to understand each other’s perceptions.

Don’t get me wrong; differing perceptions are ok.  There are so many factors that come into play that make us individuals, that make us have differing perceptions.  Here is a very partial list: gender, age, occupation, individual interests, cultural background etc.  The list can go on forever as each of us considers all the factors that make us unique.  It is ok to celebrate uniqueness but let us not forget that the goal of interpersonal communication is sharing experiences through the exchange of messages.   When I communicate with someone I want to understand them as a person.  I want to find some way to connect my life experience [my perceptions] with theirs and then I can begin to  know them as a person.

Let’s not spend much time bemoaning the current state of interpersonal communication today [the speed of life, the need for expression (and not making an attempt at understanding others), the search for simplicity, the lack of interest in expanding our understanding of others].  All of these factors (and many more) work against sharing experiences with other human beings. 

It takes time to speak and then to listen [really listen].  Efficient expression is not the ultimate goal; the ultimate goal is understanding.  Simple opinions about others can destroy relationships because those simple opinions can be based on all types of biases, incorrect attributions and just plain stereotypes [stereotypes can kill interpersonal communication].   Lack of interest in understanding others is also a major problem because that shows a lack of need for learning.  The more you share experiences, the more you learn.  Someone who wants to communicate with others has a deep-seated interest in learning from others.

Today there is a great confusion about tolerance.  Some dismiss tolerance as an erosion of standards.  In some Christian circles, the attitude toward tolerance is akin to an “anything goes” attitude about human behavior.  If tolerance is allowed, sin will soon follow.  Maybe it is unusual, but I have never seen tolerance that way.  Early in my career, I was profoundly influenced by a quote by a communication scholar named William Prather.  I used to share the quote with my interpersonal communication students: “I don’t see the world the way you see the world, but that is ok; you are not me and that is ok.”  For me, that is tolerance based on reality, the reality that people are unique individuals who must share their experience in order to understand others.  We cannot construct a world where we are all alike; it does not exist.  The best we can do is try to take what we think the world is like and share that with others and let them share their ideas about the world with us.  Let me add, that It is best to realize that the sharing process is talking and listening, not just talking.  Take the time to process meanings coming from others [of course, we must be quiet and concerned about understanding the positions of others to do that].

What is the point of all this?

The point is that given the complexity of the issue of homosexuality and Christianity we must be good interpersonal communicators or we will never understand people who have views that are different from  our own.

There are many metaphors that one can apply to the “circular argument” of whether a homosexual should be affirmed or not be affirmed by the church, but Sprinkle chooses the metaphor of an iceberg.  When someone learns of a person who has same-sex interest and wants to join the church, how do they handle it?  Do they “look to the story lying beneath the waters” or do they just see the tip of the iceberg and come to a quick conclusion about the person involved?  Too often it is the latter.

He advises making time to meet with the individual.  He advises listening, asking questions.  “You learn about the deep, painful, joyful, confusing story that has driven this marvelous soul from church and now back to church.  You look them in the eye.  You take them by the hand.  You smile, you cry, you hug, and you show the love of Christ that drew tax collectors and sinners to him” [139].

You acknowledge that “People don’t just wake up one day and say ‘I think I’m going to be gay’” [139].  It is a process that occurs over time, a conglomeration of a massive number of experiences that result in a view of the world that may indeed be different from your own.  Yes it is not simply nature or simply nurture.  What we are saying is that we have to add another differing perception to the partial list I cited above: sexual orientation.  That differing perception is at the heart of the circular argument of nature vs. nurture.  That differing perception is at the heart of a Christian’s ability to affirm or not to affirm a homosexual person who wants to belong to the church.   

The way to deal with this is to communicate, to share experiences.  Sprinkle calls his brand of interpersonal communication “You confront with the otherworldly love of Christ, which is far superior and way more humanizing than any other love you will find in the world” [139].

“People will gravitate to where they are loved the most.  And if the world out-loves the church, then we have implicitly nudged our children away from the loving arms of Christ” [139].

As Christians we can go around and around in circles on this issue or we can take a side and say awful things about the “other side” but I don’t think that those approaches solve anything.  To get somewhere with this issue we must take action.

We must learn to share our experiences and encourage others to share their experiences.

We must strive to understand others.

We must speak and we must listen.

*Comments on Chapter 8 of People to Be Loved  “Born This Way” by Dr. Preston Sprinkle, the author of the book People to Be Loved: Why Homosexuality is not Just an Issue