Monday, March 23, 2009

Christian Songwriter Ray Boltz Embraces Homosexuality

Here is a story about Ray Boltz – Huge Christian Contemporary Musician – giving into the dark side of homosexuality.

It is old news but it is the first time I have read it. The article I read it from is an online magazine called
The Voice.

For some reason the article isn’t dated; however a quick perusal of the comments suggests The Voice published the story on or before September 24, 2008.

Boltz out himself publicly to a Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender rag called the
Washington Blade.

Boltz says he turned to Christianity to try to overcome homosexual tendencies when he was a young teenager. He eventually married as a Christian heterosexual and produced four kids which are adults now.

Apparently he outed himself to his family which obviously has led to a divorce for Boltz claimed he was living a happy normal homosexual life.

Sadly and Certainly Boltz has provided more ammunition for homosexual activists to attack Biblical Morality which is definitely anti-homosexual lifestyle.

JRH 3/23/09
Christian Songwriter Ray Boltz Embraces Homosexuality

By Sherea Atkins
September 2008
The Voice Magazine

A contemporary Christian songwriter Ray Boltz has embraced the homosexual lifestyle during his coming out journey. His songs were inspiring, patriotic, and encouraged many. Boltz authored 16 albums and enjoyed a nearly 20-year recording career. However, in a lengthy interview with the Washington Blade - a gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender newspaper – Boltz exposed his true lifestyle.

Boltz is a household name for many evangelical Christians, particularly for hits like “Thank You,” “Watch the Lamb,” “The Anchor Holds,” and “I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb.”

Boltz garnered a handful of Recording Industry Association of America Gold-certified albums, three Dove Awards from the Gospel Music Association and 12 number one hits on Christian radio. Boltz is regarded as one of the better-known singer/songwriters in contemporary Christian music. But after the release of his last album in 2002, and his last tour in 2004, he retired from the music industry and moved to Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.

On December 26, 2004, Boltz disclosed to his wife of 33 years and his four adult children that he was gay. According to Boltz’s own words in The Washington Blade, “It’s hard to say I came out because I didn’t have all the answers. I just admitted what I was struggling with and what I was feeling. It’s hard to go, ‘This is the point where I accepted my sexuality and who I was,’ but I came out to them and shared with them what I’d been going through.”

Boltz’s marriage to his ex-wife was, as he says, largely a happy one. It produced four children — three daughters and a son who are now between 22 and 32 — but family life and going through the motions of being heterosexual wearied Boltz. He describes himself as entering a serious state of depression. He was in therapy for years, taking Prozac and other anti-depressants, and was oftentimes suicidal.

Boltz told The Blade, “I’d denied it ever since I was a kid. I became a Christian, I thought that was the way to deal with this and I prayed hard and tried for 30-some years and then at the end, I was just going, ‘I’m still gay. I know I am.’ And I just got to the place where I couldn’t take it anymore … when I was going through all this darkness, I thought, ‘Just end this.’”

This month the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) announced Boltz would be giving two concerts at MCC venues in Indianapolis and Washington, D.C., with proceeds to benefit the new direction of Boltz’s musical career. MCC sees its mission being social as well as spiritual by standing up for the rights of minorities, particularly those of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people (LGBT).
Though he’s open to performing, Boltz says he doesn’t plan to let this issue take over his life.

“I don’t want to be a spokesperson, I don’t want to be a poster boy for gay Christians, I don’t want to be in a little box on TV with three other people in little boxes screaming about what the Bible says, I don’t want to be some kind of teacher or theologian — I’m just an artist and I’m just going to sing about what I feel and write about what I feel and see where it goes,” he told the Washington Blade.

Boltz declined to go into specifics about the first time he was with a man, but says he has been dating and lives “a normal gay life” now. He went on to tell the Washington Blade, “This is what it really comes down to: If this is the way God made me, then this is the way I’m going to live. It’s not like God made me this way and he’ll send me to hell if I am who he created me to be … I really feel closer to God because I no longer hate myself.”

The Official Brand and Website of The Voice®. The Voice® is a Christian magazine published by Jonas Clark Communications.

All rights reserved. Copyrights © The Voice magazine.


JadedSapphist said...

Sadly, there’s a pretty sizable segment of the LGBT activist community that care very little about biblical morality, or Christianity.

And there’s a very good reason for that.

By and large the church has forsaken its call to love people – and instead has projected an image of a Jesus who only loves the worthy.

It’s pretty difficult to convince someone they are loved by God, when those who claim to be his children don’t live out that love in a tangible way.

Whether or not biblical morality is anti-homosexual lifestyle really begs the question – what is “the homosexual lifestyle?”

Theway2k said...

JadedSapphist I appreciate your reasoned response to a polarized topic in America today.

You said,

By and large the church has forsaken its call to love people – and instead has projected an image of a Jesus who only loves the worthy.

The Institutional Christian Church is roughly divided between Believers that still affirm Biblical Morality and those who call themselves Believers which are members of "progressive" Christian Institutional Churches.

The progressives are probably the group that range from complete acceptance of homosexuality to toleration of homosexuality in the name of the love of Christ.

Progressives really do not adhere to Biblical Morality. Progressives adhere to a relativist morality more comparable to Secular Humanistic Morality.

Sadly way to many Christians which adhere to Biblical Morality do not demonstrate the Love of Christ toward sinners as Christ did. I suspect part of the reason for that is the sense of attacks on Christianity. Unfortunately a large part of hostile Bible Believers do so out of a sense of superiority rather than Biblical Love. In my younger Christian days I probably allowed this sense realm domination to exude from me to others.

So I will have to agree with you. A lack of love will not inspire one practices sin as defined by the Scriptures to turn around and walk the way of Christ.

You said,

Whether or not biblical morality is anti-homosexual lifestyle really begs the question – what is “the homosexual lifestyle?”

The Old Testament is obviously harsh toward homosexuality as well as other sins that require a reckoning for the sin. To be fair to homosexuals, that reckoning was the same punishment for heterosexuals as well. There was a death penalty for adultery. In Western society adultery is not a criminal offense nor is there a society outcry for what been judged normal in this day in age.

This is where the Love of Christ comes in. A common statement by Jesus after the power of God healed a person was something similar to "Go and sin no more."

Biblical Morality is definitely anti-homosexual lifestyle. As I said the Old Testament is harsh. Christ as the fulfillment of the Law thus abrogating the penalty of sin by Believing in the Lord's Blood Bought sacrifice and Resurrection. The anti-homosexual view of the New Testament is most readily viewed in Romans chapter one.

However it is also in the following chapters of Romans that warn Believers to think so highly of themself as to condemn one outside the faith or learning to walk in the faith of Christ.

The homosexual lifestyle is simply two males or two females partaking in the carnal appetites of sex and promoting that lifestyle as normal and acceptable in society.

JadedSapphist said...

Thank you for your response.

I have to say that while I understand the need for labels; I find they tend to do more to divide than unite people with differing views. Beyond that they tend to tell us precious little about the individuals they are attached to.

As long as we are imperfect human beings there will continue to be disagreement about the meaning of scripture.

No matter who we are the conclusions we have reached in response to the scriptures are the result of acts of interpretation.

While I have many brothers and sisters in Christ with whom I disagree with on theological matters, I respect their viewpoints and strive to live out the grace and love toward them that has been extended to me through Christ.

I’m aware there are many vocal individuals within the LGBT community who demand that others agree with them or be labeled as bigots. I am not among them – and there are many others in the LGBT community who do not support this notion.

You said: “Sadly way too many Christians who adhere to Biblical Morality do not demonstrate the Love of Christ toward sinners as Christ did.”

I have to wonder what kind of Biblical morality exempts its adherents from demonstrating the love of Christ to others?

It is my belief that Christ has called me to demonstrate his love to everyone – not just the people who agree with me, not just the people who are like me or who are kind to me. I believe Christ has called me to love people because he loved me – not because I have some ulterior motive, not because I want them to be more like me, or because I want them to change their behavior, or even because I want them to become a Christian – but because it’s an overflow of the love of Christ in my life. Everything else is in the hands of God.

Christ demonstrated his love for all people – including the ones he knew would always reject him, the ones who would never accept his love, and the ones he knew would ridicule him, his father and his message.

The issue of homosexuality in the Bible is something that both sides believe they have the “definite” truth on. The bottom line is that not all people interpret the scripture in the same way, and I’m sure a more in depth discussion of interpretation is beyond the scope of your comments section ;)

My point about “what the homosexual lifestyle is” has more to do with grouping people together and assuming they are all the same. It’s very much akin to assuming that all heterosexuals have the same lifestyle.

It’s true there are those in the LGBT community who reject the sovereignty of God, and those who engage in promiscuous sexual activity, and those who abuse drugs and alcohol. All those same things are true of some heterosexuals.

I hope I have not been too presumptuous in assuming that my continued comments are welcome here. It has not been my intent to be divisive or argumentative, but merely to suggest that while we may not always agree with others, even others within the Christian community we have been called to love –and that is crucial to the practice of biblical morality.

Theway2k said...

I agree with your concept of should I say the God-kind of Love.

There are a wide degree of Scriptural interpretations of the Bible even among the Christian Right or Conservative Christians. The evidence of that are the multiple Protestant denominations, the Roman Catholic, the Eastern Orthodox Church or whatever Christian movement I forgot.

However - and I'm really trying to not be offensive - I see the Biblical interpretation on the wrongness of homosexual is as basic as the death, burial and Resurrection of Christ. The Redemptive act of Christ is the ultimate demonstration of love to bring all humanity back to the Father after the Fall.

Due to this belief those that reinterpret the basic agreed interpretation of the Bible are embarking on a path of sophistry to revise morality to fit their life.

Does that not sound imposing the will of the creation on the will of the Creator?

Anyway ... the question of choosing who to demonstrate the God-kind of Love or choosing to exempt some people and embrace others also wreaks of the creation imposing its will upon the Creator.

Too often Biblical Christians use Roman Chapter one to prove homosexuality is not an acceptable practice; however if one would read at least Roman chapter two through eight one would discover there is now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus.

For a heterosexual Christian rail upon a homosexual and yet engage in adultery or fornication is the very hypocrisy the Apostle Paul warns about in Romans. After all there is probably an non-Biblical reason that about 50% of American Christians engage divorce. I understand the non-practicing Christian divorce rate is about the same percentage. The ease of divorce in our society is just as great a Biblical moral failure as homosexuality (I suspect the LGBT would not view a moral failure).

So it appears the hurdle for the Biblical-centric Christian is too stand up for Chrisitanity while sharing the Good News of deliverance without human condemnation.

Holy Spirit "Conviction" should draw sinner and redeemed alike to the God-like lifestyle.

JadedSapphist said...

You certainly did not come across as offensive. We just disagree on that particular aspect of theology.

While I certainly believe that all scripture is inspired by God and profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness – I don’t really see the issue of homosexuality as being as central to Christianity as the death, burial and resurrection of Christ.

I would assume that this belief system is what gives rise to the belief that LGBT people cannot be Christians.

For the sake clarity – it is not my intention to attempt to persuade you or anyone else reading your blog that they should change their views on homosexuality. I have spent all my life in conservative Christian churches – and it has long been my prayer that my theology would guide my morality, rather than my morality guiding my theology. I have not arrived at my conclusions regarding homosexuality without a great deal of prayer, study, and reflection.

No matter who you are, where you come from, or how perfectly you manage to follow the principles set out in scripture your righteousness is stinking filthy rags in the presence of an Almighty, Holy God.

So the Christian (whether he be involved in adultery or fornication, or if he happens to be living a life that others would call blameless) who condemns his brother for homosexuality and treats him disrespectfully, maligns him, and/or fails to offer him the love/grace of God has fallen short of the righteousness of Christ and is guilty of sin – which incidentally (without the blood of Jesus) is worthy of death in hell (eternal separation of God).

those that reinterpret the basic agreed interpretation of the Bible are embarking on a path of sophistry to revise morality to fit their life.

Does that not sound imposing the will of the creation on the will of the Creator?

That statement assumes that the “basic agreed upon interpretation” of scripture is not an “interpretation” in and of itself.

Just because a lot of people agree on something doesn’t, by itself, establish it as Truth.

Throughout history there have been many things about which a large number of people have agreed upon as established fact, which now have been largely dismissed.

The earth was once believed to be flat, and to be the center of the universe; scripture was used to support such beliefs. Those who disagreed were even branded heretics.

The Bible has been used to support treating some people as less than human (e.g. slavery, genocide), and to support racist laws.

So while I can understand how those who believe in the inherent sinfulness of homosexuality could conclude that those who disagree with them, are in fact disagreeing with God - I find that a little on the arrogant side.

It assumes that their own interpretation is not an interpretation, but rather the words of God himself. It assumes that all dissenting views are less valid, and ill motivated. Sadly it seems to be a source of pride for many.

That said: I don’t believe I am imposing my will on the Creator by dissenting from popular “traditional” opinion.

I don’t claim to have all the answers. I don’t claim that I’m always right. I don’t even claim that my interpretation is “Truth” – because I’m not God. I rely upon the Holy Spirit to reveal his Truth to me, seek answers, read the scriptures, and read/listen to others’ interpretations.

But at the end of the day I have to come to conclusions and trust that my standing with God is guaranteed by the blood of Jesus, and not anything that I can offer in and of myself.

So it appears the hurdle for the Biblical-centric Christian is too stand up for Christianity while sharing the Good News of deliverance without human condemnation.

Agreed :) Whole heartedly!

Theway2k said...

Well JadedSapphist I think we are at the point to agree to disagree because we would simply be trying to convince each other of our postions. I know I am not going to budge. Certainly if you have decided in your heart is the correct path, you will not change your position.

I just cannot resist one more point though.

You talk of the agreed position that the earth was flat did not make it flat. What changed that position was the inevitable discover of facts that would make the traditional view of a flat earth to be absurd.

On the other hand Scripture is not a matter of changing facts, rather Scripture is a matter of interpretation something that new facts do not change. Thus a consensus of a traditional view is way different than acquiring better data which transform a perception.

Anyway we could rehash this forever.

Be blessed in Jesus.

JadedSapphist said...

I apologize if my comments gave the impression that my intent was to persuade you to abandon your convictions, or to change your theological position.

I engaged in the discussion on homosexuality=sin, merely to affirm that I have not arrived at my conclusions in a whimsical fashion – and despite what many of my brothers and sisters may choose to believe, this is not a position of convenience for me.

The intent of my comment was to respond to the way the church responds to the LGBT community in general and Christians who happen to be LGBT in particular (e.g. Ray Boltz).

It does not require one to change their belief in the inherent sinfulness of homosexuality, in order for them to treat LGBT people in a Christ-like manner, nor does it require me to change my belief system in order for me to treat those who disagree with me in a Christ-like manner.

While it is difficult for me to resist responding to your “one more point,” I will refrain from doing so – because, in Truth we have much more in common than this discussion might indicate. And that was my point from the outset.

Theway2k said...