Campolo stirred things up by saying that he was against California’s recent successful passage of Proposition 8 affirming a traditional definition of marriage. Robert Dilday offers this report on Campolo’s comments in his Baptist Press article (see the ABP article also by Dilday):
Interpreting the meeting's theme "Who Is My Neighbor?" Campolo said, "The Samaritans were those who were considered spiritually unclean, abominations in the eyes of God." Some of today's "Samaritans," he said, are the poor, Muslims, illegal immigrants and gays.Campolo called himself "a conservative on the issue" of homosexuality, but said he opposed Proposition 8.
Campolo is more than a little confused in his argument. First, our primary concern should not be whether or not sinners will be upset when Christians stand up for godly values. We should be concerned with how God views our actions and not man.
Second, Campolo’s method does not seem to agree with that of Christ’s. When Jesus met the woman at the well he did not hesitate to expose her sin: "for you have had five husbands and the one whom you now have is not your husband" (John 4:18). His final word to the woman caught in adultery is "Go and sin no more" (John 11:10). Campolo seems to think that the loving thing to do is to ignore sin. This is not the track Jesus took.
Finally, Campolo can say he takes a "conservative" view on homosexual practice all he wants. In fact, he often notes that he disagrees with his wife who promotes full and uncritical acceptance of homosexual practice (By the way, where is his spiritual leadership in the family on this issue?). But, in truth, his view is far from any definition of "conservative" that I know. He clearly does not see homosexual practice as an abominable sin in the way the writers of Scripture do (see Gen 19; Lev 18:22; Rom 1:26-32; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 1 Tim 1:8-11).
To illustrate, let’s say that California had a proposition that would ban incest, bestiality, or pedophilia (things that also are clearly denounced in Scripture). Would Campolo say of Christian support of the civil authority’s efforts to ban such activities:
"I don't know how we're going to reach these brothers and sisters … but I'm an evangelical and I'm going to win them to Christ.... And we're not going to win them to Christ if we keep sending them bad messages, and we've sent them a bad message. I think the decision in California was in agreement with how I believe, but sometimes you've got to consider the person before you bang them over the head with your principles."
Would he worry about "sending bad messages" to pedophiles or warn Christians against banging the incestuous "over the head with your principles"? The very nature of his argument reveals that he does not truly believe homosexual practice to be a vile abomination before God.
Do those who claim to be conservative, Bible believing Christians need any more evidence as to why they and their churches should leave the BGAV as soon as possible? Conservative Pastors in BGAV churches: Copy the Dilday article and give it to your laypeople to read. Let them put the pieces together.