The Most Glorious Gift.

Although the characters and circumstances here are fictitious, the story is based on various true incidences I have seen, heard and even read about in the past.

                                                                      ***

There were two friends, two men about the same age. One was married, the other single. The married one was Ted, the other, Doug. Ted was the married one. The two had known each other for several years. Then one day, Doug's church closed down due to a combined shrinking congregation and in deep financial debt, and the building where the main services were held went into administration.

Doug, who lived on his own, began to miss the Sunday corporate worship, and he began to feel lonely. One day, he phoned his mate Ted and asked whether he can come around to enjoy the company of his mate and his wife, Sandra, as Doug was also aware that both of his friend's daughters had already flown the nest. Their eldest daughter had just started a career up in Nottinghamshire, the other a student at Bristol University.

Doug was keen on both comedy and documentaries. And so, Doug began to call at Ted's home once a week for lunch and TV, whilst also visiting other churches with a hope of finding one that has permanent suitability.

Both liked to greet each other with a hug, and also to part with a hug too. And it was for this reason that, on one occasion, Ted assured his friend that despite such affection, he was not gay - his years of happy marriage to Sandra verifying this. Sometimes, the two mates went out together. Day trips to London were also common, both with and without Sandra. However, if one of the two boys needed to answer a call of nature at a public restroom, the other usually waited outside. Neither thought otherwise, except for those occasional moments when both had to meet their need.

Yet, Ted slowly began to worship Doug. This was out of admiration for his friend's academic qualities, including a doctorate. Ted was just the opposite. He failed at school and left education to enter the real world of manual work without any qualifications, much to the disappointment of his parents, who were ashamed of their comparatively dim son living in a neighbourhood full of bright kids.

In turn, Doug's high level of education made a deep impression on Ted's psyche, and he began to develop a fetish for Doug's bare arms, as he tends to wear a tee-shirt whenever the weather is mild. For weeks on end, the husband and father felt attracted towards his mate's sleeveless limbs and even stroked them whilst sitting at a table in a bar or restaurant. Doug seemed to enjoy the sensation.

Then, one day, Ted was becoming tired of what he thought was living a lie. Even in his wife's arms in bed, his spirit felt agitated, and he was unable to sleep properly. He knew that he had to confess to his friend what was going on in his mind. He felt that he couldn't go on like this. He then phoned and confessed to the fetish he felt for his friend's upper limbs.

The response was not what Ted had hoped for. What he would have wanted was Doug's sympathetic attitude expressed in a talk concluding in an agreement with a promise from Ted that he won't stroke his bicep anymore, and it would help if his mate wore a long-sleeved shirt or a jumper. But instead, his response was:

Thanks for your honesty. I won't be seeing you or Sandra anymore. And that was it. Ted then realised that Doug was sitting in Moses' seat. By heck, Ted then thought to himself: With Christians like Doug, along with others with similar attitudes representing the churches, no wonder atheism is spreading across this so-called "Christian country" as fast as mould spreads across stale bread!

Yet despite the shock, Ted felt deeply for his former friend. How he now regrets making the confession and how much he wishes to turn back the clock! Doug was the closest friend he has ever had, a mate who cared for him and had none of the snobbery or the arrogance that many well-educated men have over those not so well endowed academically. He was a far cry from many an Etonian, for example, whose privileged upbringing gave him that sense of entitlement - that attitude history has shown to be obnoxious. As a doctor, Doug was never like any of those posh people. And so, Ted sits there and looks around. How he wished that he simply kept his hands to himself and his mouth shut! 

But his conscience wouldn't allow it. Rather, he knew that even as a Christian, he was still accountable to God, and one day he will stand before the Bema Seat of Christ, a rostrum where rewards are given out to faithful believers. It will be no place to shed tears of regret. Hence, his initial confession.

In the nights following the loss of his friend, Ted began to have dreams of his relationship with Doug. The first one was of Doug acting with such hostility that Ted thought that he was about to be killed. A few nights later, another dream Ted had, was of Doug and himself becoming reconciled and the friendship resumes. He was disappointed when he woke up to reality.

With his wife's encouragement, it didn't take very long to re-acquaint to life without Doug visiting, even though he still miss his friend's weekly calls. As he sat and meditated, he knew that he wasn't a homosexual. Although he had a fetish for his friend's arms, that was it. He also knew that the very thought of a naked embrace with another man - any man - was repulsive enough never to engage in such activity, let alone share a bed!  

                                                                        ***

Yet, both Ted and Doug were true Christian believers. With Ted, did he commit a serious sin? I guess that would be up to him to decide. And perhaps it's exactly about this issue that I watched a YouTube video presented by a one-time Christian-turned-atheist. According to the unbeliever, religion binds a heavy burden of condemnation on those who may have such fetishes. In truth, they can't help feeling the way they do, but God will still judge them, nevertheless. Although some gays like to "live it up" - the vast majority would never have chosen to be that way. Had it been entirely up to them, most would have preferred to be "straight" - marry and raise a family. Furthermore, the rate of suicides committed by gay men had always been the highest among all other causes of suicide, according to what I once read. Indeed, given the choice, one doesn't choose to be gay.

But, according to the atheist's worldview, he is still condemned by God and by the Church, and therefore, he will spend eternity in Hell, even if he can't help feeling that way. It does make me wonder: of the two kinds of "sexual deviation" having a fetish for another man but hardly making any form of physical contact or a man who sleeps with other women, or even with a prostitute? Is one more acceptable to other Christians than the other, and thus, have a better chance for salvation?

And so it brings me to ask about Ted and Doug. If Ted, say, out on a gardening or landscaping job, finds the lady of the house attractive and she too likes him, and the two end up in bed, how would Doug react? Would he stay away and end the friendship with Ted? Or would he give him a stern telling off, but decide to continue with the friendship? Or even merely encourage him that we all have weaknesses and these things happen - with reassurance that the church will cover for him?

And so, the debate goes on both within and without the church - campaigns against gay marriage, even a Court case over whether to bake a cake for a homosexual couple, is it right to be friends and associate with a gay person? Is it right for anyone to divorce and remarry? Will he who marries a divorced woman suffer God's judgement? 

And so, the debate is continually thrown back and forth across the table, with fundamental Christians sitting on one side and liberals sitting on the opposite side, the nominal onlooker walks away feeling confused, even discontented, and the atheist hardens his heart as he embraces Darwinism with a greater sense of enthusiasm. 

And so, in his letter to the church in Rome, Paul the Apostle lists a whole plethora of sins, including "men burning with lust towards other men and reaping in their bodies (STD, AIDS etc.) the consequence of their actions" - Romans 1:27. Surely, not quite like Ted's mere fetish for Doug's arms! Or is it?

Then, further on in his letter, Paul quotes Genesis 15:6 -

Abraham believed in the Lord and it was credited to him as righteousness.

This single line is, to my opinion, the most powerful verse in the entire Bible. In his letter to Rome, Paul devotes three full chapters to that quote. He mentions it again in his letter to the churches in Galatia, and James also uses the same quote in his general letter to all Jewish Christians everywhere. In Paul's other letters, especially to the church in Ephesus, further implications of those words can be read.

Most theologians call this doctrine, Justification by Faith. I like to call it Imputed Righteousness - an answer to the Roman Catholic soteriology of Infused Righteousness, where salvation is a gradual process of faith combined with the believer's works needed to get to Heaven. Since I was born a Catholic and thus, fully able to make comparisons, I can see that the whole letter to the Romans is the answer to the future Roman Catholic Church which the Holy Spirit foreknew beforehand of its rise.

In the forensic sense, Imputed Righteousness is to be declared righteous by God the Judge without the need of a single work from the believer. It literally means that God the Father sees the believer as equally righteous and in the same light as his own Son, Jesus Christ. As Paul writes:-

However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. Romans 4:5. 

Imputed righteousness is a free gift from God given to the sinner by grace. It cannot be earned, neither is it for sale. Rather, it's a free gift given to everyone who believes that Jesus of Nazareth died on the cross to make atonement, was buried, and three days later, he rose physically from the dead, thus proving that this Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.

Therefore, is Doug doing the right thing by abstaining from Ted's presence? If Ted is a true believer, and I take it that he is, then Doug has no right to keep his distance from him. Rather, Doug should recognise that Ted has his own set of weaknesses, for whom Christ died to atone and to make an effort to reconcile and restore the friendship. And that means not counting any of his shortcomings against him. Likewise, Ted should also recognise Doug being in Christ and pay him due respect by vowing not to stroke his arms anymore.

The Resurrected Christ, the base for our justification.

Imputed Righteousness, Justification by Faith, Forensic Acquittal, Eternal Security, Once Saved Always Saved, Regeneration, a New Birth, Adoption into God's Family - whatever you want to call it, it all means one thing - salvation is given as a free gift through grace. Such a wonderful gift does not encourage the believer to sin more, rather it persuades the believer not to sin, mainly out of love for both God and his brother.

But, being human, I'm convinced that there is a bit of Ted and Doug in all of us, to a greater or lesser level. The temptation to fulfil a curiosity is never far away, sitting on Moses' seat isn't far from us, either. As if you see another sinner who appears black, you would feel as if you're white, even if you're actually grey.

Unfortunately, that was how Doug saw himself when he discovered Ted's true colours.