Early Christians wouldn't recognize today's version of love, one that is devoid of moral standards, righteousness and truth. Can you imagine what Jesus or the apostle Paul would've said to a man in the church who left his wife and two small children for another man and demanded they fully embrace it?Within that text is a cite to their own June, 2016 piece at WND; “Our personal prayer for Christian rocker Trey Pearson.” Did Mr. Pearson ask the Benhams, or anyone else for that matter, to pray for him?
The Benham Brothers devote considerable time and energy to judging other people by the arbitrary standards they adhere to while being resistant to being assessed for their own dishonesty. They are inherently dishonest because no one knows what Paul would or would not have said given his understanding of human sexuality circa 50 CE. Moreover, it is a rhetorical question. What they are really asking is: Do you know what we, the Benhams, think of a gay man who leaves his wife for a gay partner? They are dishonest because they were not offering a prayer for Trey Pearson last June. Rather, they were using their construct of prayer to express their disapproval of Pearson.
What is the point of all this? An opportunity to shame gay people? And what is the point of that? Their constituency need little encouragement. Their world does not include much room for doubt. Indeed, were they critical thinkers they might very well ponder the societal elements that might have motivated a gay man to marry a woman in the first place. The opinions of the Benhams are not going to alter the sexuality of Trey Pearson. Those same opinions have little or no potential for influencing Pearson in any way whatsoever. Nor, for that matter, are those opinions likely to influence anyone in circumstances similar to Trey Pearson. It is also abundantly clear that the Benhams are impervious to criticism. Negative people draw strength from opprobrium.
My theory is that the purpose for all of this noise is the Benham brand and that is about economics. The Benhams are financially invested in disparaging gay people. Where is the shame in that? For that matter, in a discussion of morality, where is the virtue?