In my last post, I discussed the prevailing evangelical attitude towards homosexuality in regards to a lack of love. In this post, I want to discuss the prevailing evangelical attitude on whether homosexuality is a choice or not. Typically, evangelicals are quick to point out that homosexuality is a choice, against the testimony of homosexuals who say they never had that moment where they decided to be homosexual. I think this is unhelpful and destructive, because it fails to listen to what they have to say. Certainly, some would admit that it was a choice that they made, but the majority that I’ve talked to do not. I think the main reason that evangelicals insist that it is a choice is because they cannot defend the sinfulness of homosexuality against “this is who God created me to be.” It is my opinion that one can defend the sinfulness of homosexuality, even against the idea that someone can be born a homosexual. I also think that while some may be born homosexual, that the statement “this is who God created me to be” is misleading at best, and absolutely incorrect.
I think at this point it is critical to understand the difference between being homosexual and performing homosexual acts. Homosexual acts, by its very definition, are a product of volition, that is, a choice. One chooses to perform those acts. It is the belief of this author that homosexuality and its acts are a sin, therefore homosexual acts that one chooses to do is in fact, sin. I think Paul is clear in regards to this. Homosexuality, however, is not an act, but a state of being. The acts flow from that state of being. So does that mean that if homosexuality is found to be a biological issue, that we must disregard it as sinful? Is that how “God created some people to be” since it wasn’t their choice? I think the answer to both of these questions, to use a Pauline example, is “μὴ γένοιτο” - may it never be! No, we do not disregard what the Bible says about homosexuality, and no, it is not right to say that is what God created you to be.
Let me give a parallel situation which I think can make this more apparent. The bible teaches that we are all sinners. This is not merely by an act of volition, but a statement of our nature. We are, by virtue of the truth in the doctrine of original sin, sinners by nature, which results in our volitional (or willfull) sin. We are not sinners because we sin, we sin because we are sinners. Would we then say that we are not accountable because that is who we are by nature? Of course not! That is the very reason why we must have a savior! Is our sin excused because we are sinners? No, but our will is enslaved and must be freed through regeneration. The problem that I see with saying that homosexuality must be a choice is that we have become pelagians in regards to homosexuality- that every one must be born without this particular sinful nature of homosexuality, and that we become homosexuals by choosing it. Would it not make sense that if we are born with a sinful nature, that some may also be born with homosexual tendencies as a result of that sinful nature? We attribute various other issues that occur in newborns as effects of the fall, yet we cannot see that this might also be one of those effects of the fall?
In regards to the statement that “this is who God created me to be,” I think another parallel is easily drawn here with original sin. Are we created to be sinners? Is that what God wants us to continue to be? Of course not. We are created to glorify God, enjoy God, and be a reflection of Jesus Christ, which, you might remember is the opposite of being a sinner. Sin is also the opposite of glorifying God and enjoying God, as it glorifies self and enjoys things as being better than God. We would not accept that being born as a sinner means that is who God created us to be, so why would we automatically say that if someone is born homosexual, that is who God created them to be?
The fact that someone is born with certain tendencies does not excuse that nature and essence as being moral, nor the acts that spring from that nature. I think this is plainly shown in original sin, and I think the parallel is made with homosexuality, which is an outcome of the fall as well. As I argued in the last post, it is a perversion of the natural order that God intends for His creation. We cannot get around the fact that the revelation of Scripture is plain in teaching on the immorality and sinfulness of homosexuality. If we were to find out that homosexuality is biological, that should not shake our belief in morality and immorality any more than saying we are all born into sin, and by virtue of our sinful nature, commit acts of sin. God’s standard of morality is still absolute.
Is homosexuality a choice? For some, yes. For others, maybe not. That should not in anyway make us question whether it is or is not a sin. The thrust of my last post was that we should love homosexuals, regardless of whether they convert or not. One way to love them is to listen to them, and not just pull out the “act of volition” card before they even are able to tell you their story because you’re afraid that you can’t defend the sinfulness of homosexuality if they were “born with it.” Actually, if the Bible is true, and I believe it is, you don’t have anything to be afraid of.
RSS/XML Feed:
Email:
Jesus still defines sin as lack of love (Matthew 22:36-40). Those concerned about the sanctity of marriage should insist on outlawing adultery, divorce and abortion. All are sinful because each has an unloved victim. Marriage must be for love, not pregnancy. What is unloving about a couple in a homosexual love relationships? Neither is victim, neither is unloved. Where is the hurt? Who is the victim being sinned against? The Gospel writers and prophets do not mention homosexuality because it is not a sin. “Homosexual” was coined about 1865, so any translation using a form of that word is a lie that needs to be emended. In 1946 it premiered in an English Bible. If God didn’t want men (or women?) to have sex with other men, He would have said “Man shall not lie with man PERIOD That whole “…as with a woman” thing condemns straight men (such as prisoners) pretending to make it with a woman. Gay men know nothing about sex with women. [edited for content]
IS TH1S YOUR CONTEX FOR ROMANS1?…………………… For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of HOMOSEXUALS, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to HOMOSEXUALS, because God has shown it to HOMOSEXUALS. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So HOMOSEXUALS are without excuse. 21 For although HOMOSEXUALS knew God, HOMOSEXUALS did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but HOMOSEXUALS became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. .22 Claiming to be wise, HOMOSEXUALS became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave HOMOSEXUALS up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,25 because HOMOSEXUALS exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen
26 For this reason God gave HOMOSEXUALS up to dishonorable passions. For HOW DO HOMOSEXUALS HAVE WOMEN. IN MOST CASES HAVE BEEN ATTRACTED TO THE SAME SEX SINCE EARLY CHILDHOOD. their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the HOMOSEXUALS likewise gave up natural relations with women.THEYHAVE NEVER HAD NATURAL RELATIONS WITH WOMEN, ARE NOT ATTRACTEDTO THEM, DO NOT DREAM ABOUT THEM AND HAVE NOT NATURAL URGES TO BOND WITH THEM. IN FACT THOSE THAT CAME OUT OF THE CLOSET RREMARKED HOWTHEY FELT RELIEVED A OF A BURDEN OF DECEIT AND HAD PEACE OF BEING ABLE TO FINALLY BE THE PERSON THEY WERE CREATED TO BE . HOW CAN ONE HAVE PEACE AND BE UNBURDENED IF THEY ARE DOING SOMETHING AGAINST THERE OWN NATURE?and were consumed with passion for one another, HOMOSEXUALS committing shameless acts with HOMOSEXUALS and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.THERE IS NOTHING IN BONDED COMMITTED RELATIONSHIPS THAT IS ABOUT SHAME.
28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave HOMOSEXUALS up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 HOMOSEXUALS were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.IF THIS TRUE OF HOMOSEXUALS THEN THEY WOULD WITHOUT A DOUBT COMPARED TO HETEROSEXUALS WOULD BE WANTING IN ALL SECTORS OF SOCIETY AS NEIGHBORS, FRIENDS, FATHERS, MOTHERS, FRIENDS, PASTORS, SOLDIERS, COUNSELORS,ADMINISTRATORS,MANAGERS DOCTORS ETC. AS WOULD BE TRUE OF THOSE GIVEN OVER TO THE SIN NATURE IN GAL 5………….. 19The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy……………. BUT WE KNOW THE REVERSE IS TRUE. WE KNOW THEM TO IN SOME CASES, TO BE EVEN BETTER IN AREAS THAN MOST OF THE HETEROSEXUALS WE KNOW………………………..YOUR INTERPRETATION COMPLETELY FALLS APART.
IN ADDITION, DO YOU HAVE WITNESS OF THE SPIRIT TO SUBSTANTIATE YOUR UNDERSTANDING.
REMEMBER WE ARE” LEAD BY THE SPIRIT”. WITHOUT A SPIRIT WITNESS, YOUR INTERPRETATION IS UNSUBSTANIATED.
A SPIRIT WITNESS IS DESCRIBED IN 1JOHN1. OUR WITNESS IS TRUE IF WE ARE WALKING IN THE LIGHT, IF WE ARE WALKING IN THE LIGHT WE ARE IN FELLOWSHIP WITH AROUND US.
which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.
6If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. 7But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with ONE ANOTHERr, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all[b] sin.
WHAT A BETTER TO DETERMINE WHAT IS OF CHRIST THAN USE THE SAME PROCESS THAT WAS USED TO DETERMINE WHO WAS THE CHRIST.
THERE IS A SPIRIT WITNESS FOR ROMANS 1. THAT IS…………. THAT MOST OF THE SINS LISTED IN 1:29-30 ARE HISTORICALLY THE SINS COMMITTED BY HETEROSEXUALS AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS BECAUSE THEY WERE HOMOSEXUALS.
.HOMOSEXUALS BOND OUT MUTUAL LOVE RESPECT ,ATTRACTION,RESPECT, DEVOTION,AND TRUST, THE SAME AS HETEROSEXUALS. THEIR REFUSAL TO BE PUT UNDER THE LAW MEANS THEY ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PAULS WRITINGS.
AGAIN WHAT IS YOUR PERSONAL WITNESS AS TO THE SPIRIT THAT THESE RELATIONSHIPS ARE UNDER. AND TO THE FRUIT OF THAT SPIRIT?.
YOU PUT THE EMPHASIS ON SEXUAL RELATIONS. BUT AS I HAVE ALREADY SAID. SEXUAL RELATIONS IN HETEROSEXUAL MARRIED RELATIONSHIPS IS USED AS AN INDICATOR AS TO THE HEALTH OF THOSE RELATIONSHIPS. IN A MAJORITY OF CASES ABSENCE OF SEXUAL RELATIONS IS AN INDICATION OF ALIENATION AND DISCONNECTION IN THE RELATIONSHIP. WHICH IF NOT DEALT WITH COULD EVENTUALLY LEAD TO SEPERATION.
DO NOT MARRIAGE COUNSELORS ENQUIRE ABOUT THE FREQUENCY AND SATISFACTION OF SEXUAL RELATIONS.
ANOTHER DOUBLE STANDARD, THE SEXUAL RELATIONS IN ONE COMMITTED RELATIONSHIP IS ENCOURAGED FOR THE HEALTH OF THE RELATIONSHIP, BUT IN ANOTHER IT IS CONDEMNED AS SIN. CAN THIS DUPLICITY BE OF CHRIST?
IF THE ABOVE WAS YOUR CONTEXT OF ROMANS, HOW CAN THEY BE GIVEN OVER TO SOMETHING THEY ALREADY ARE? BY DEFINITION ANYONE WHO IS A HOMOSEXUAL IS HAVING SAME SEX RELATIONS IN SOME WAY. WITHOUT THE SEX THEY ARE NO LONGER HOMOSEXUALS, BUT ARE JUST LIKE HETEROSEXUALS WHO ARE NOT SEXUALLY ACTIVE.
DIDNT PAUL WRITE ROMANS TO SHOW THAT ALL NEEDED A SAVIOR, BELIEVERS AND UNBELIEVERS. NONE WERE RIGHTEOUS, NONE COULD SAVE THEMSELVES.DIDNT HE SAY THAT IN CHRIST WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER THE LAW, BUT ARE UNDER GRACE, AND ARE NOW LED AND SERVE OF THE SPIRIT. WHY WOULD HE THEN PUT HOMOSEXUALS UNDER THE LAW, AND SPECIFICALLY PREFACE THE BOOK BY SPECIFICALLY FOCUSING ON THIS SPECIFIC BEHAVIOR OF SIN. IF HE SAID ALL ARE UNRIGHTEOUS WHY WOULD HE DO A SPECK IN THE EYE OF MY BROTHER APPROACH. EXPLAIN HOW YOUR INTERPRETATION FITS IN WITH THE REST OF ROMANS
DOES NOT JAMES SAY,10For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. 11For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,”[a] also said, “Do not murder.”[b] If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker.
.IT IS MY OPINION THAT ROMANS 1 GIVES THE BASIS FOR ALL SIN.
(1) NOT GLORIFYING AND GIVING THANKS TO GOD
(2) EXCHANGING THE GLORY OF GOD FOR IMAGES OF MORTAL MAN………..
(3) EXCHANGING THE TRUTH FOR A LIE AND WORSHIPPING AND SERVING THE CREATED.
(4) NOT THINKING IT WORTHWHILE TO RETAIN THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD.
(5) KNOWING TO DO THE ABOVE THINGS BRINGS DEATH, BUT STILL CONTINUING TO DO THOSE THINGS, AND TO APPROVE OF OTHERS WHO DO THE SAME.
1) NOT GLORIFYING AND GIVING THANKS TO GOD
when we stop glorifying god and giving thanks we leave ourselves open for all manner of bitterness and desolation.(1thess 5:18)give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.
2) EXCHANGING THE GLORY OF GOD FOR IMAGES OF MORTAL MAN………..when we live in denial of our being created in the image of god but instead our focus is given over to our own mortality we become obsessed with our endulgences of the moment.
3) EXCHANGING THE TRUTH ABOUT GOD FOR A LIE AND WORSHIPPING AND SERVING THE CREATED.
our passions become our god and we worship and serve the powers and principalities that serve those passions.
(4) NOT THINKING IT WORTHWHILE TO RETAIN THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD. we divorce ourselves from living the life of love we are called to in christ, and ignore the laws of life god has written in our hearts and put in our minds and instead focus on all manner of evil for the sake of our own protection and glorification.
(5) KNOWING TO DO THE ABOVE THINGS BRINGS DEATH, BUT STILL, CONTINUE TO DO THOSE THINGS, AND TO APPROVE OF OTHERS WHO DO THE SAME.
THAT IS WHY ROMANS 2 STARTS OFF WITH”1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.
AND IN ROMANS 3
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”[c]
13″Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit.”[d]
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”[e]
14″Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”[f]
15″Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16ruin and misery mark their ways,
17and the way of peace they do not know.”[g]
18″There is no fear of God before their eyes.”[h]
This sets the stage for Romans 1 24-27 that you wish to confuse yourself with. Is this not clear to you? You first reject God through your sinful acts and lack of repentance. You have no excuse. As a result, “God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity”.
AGAIN WHAT IS YOUR SPIRIT WITNESS ARE YOU SAYING THAT HOMOSEXUAL BONDING IS ABOUT LUST WHILE HETEROSEXUAL BONDING IS ABOUT LOVE.
HOMOSEXUALS ARE CREATED THRU THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST(JOHN) AND GOD HAS WRITTEN HIS LAWS ON THEIR HEARTS AND PUT THEM IN THEIR MINDS.(JEREMIAH) IF HOMOSEXUALITY WAS A SIN, TO ENGAGE THAT SIN WOULD REQUIRE BEING FILLED WITH A SPIRIT OF DENIAL, DECEIT, OR DESTRUCTION. THAT DOESNT EXIST.. HOMOSEXUAL COMPARED TO HETEROSEXUALS THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN FOUND MORE DECEITFUL, IN DENIAL OR DESTRUCTIVE. AND YOU HAVE NO WITNESS THAT SAYS OTHERWISE.
WITHOUT ANY WITNESS YOUR BELIEF, REMAINS UNSUBSTANTIATED AND MERELY AN OPINION.
OF WHAT SPIRIT, IS BEING ATTRACTED TO THE SAME SEX OTHER THAN BEING ATTRACTED TO THE SAME SEX. COMPARED TO HETEROSEXUALS WHAT IS THE SPIRIT OF SAME SEX ATTRACTTION THAT IS NOT OF CHRIST?
ACCORDING TO ROMANS1:2O HE PROVIDED CLEAR GUIDANCE THROUGH WHAT HE CREATED. SO THRU WHAT GOD CREATED SHOWS THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS AGAINST HIS SPIRIT?
. HUMAN SEXUALITY THAT AFFIRMS THE DEVOTION, COMMITMENT, RESPECT, AND TRUST……..IF IT IS IN A RELATIONSHIPTHAT SAYS CHRIST IS LORD, AND EMBRACES THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT, IS OF GOD. WHERE IN THE NEW COVENANT OF CHRIST, IS GOD CONCERNED ABOUT FORM ……………………… OR IN ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE HEART
AGAIN IF A CERTAIN CONSISTENCY IN THE FREQUENCY AND SATISFACTION IN THE SEXUAL RELATIONS IN HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGE IS IMPORTANT FOR, OR AN INDICATION OF THE HEALTH OF THE MARRIAGE, WHY IN HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGES DOES IT BECOME A SIN. WHAT IS YOUR SPIRIT WITNESS THAT SAYS THIS. IF YOU HAVE NO WITNESS, BUT SAY IT IS THE LAW, THEN YOU ARE PUTTING HOMOSEXUALS UNDER THE LAW WHEN YOU KNOW THEY ARE NOW UNDER GRACE. AND YOU HAVE STILL FAILED TO EXPLAIN AS SPOKEN IN ROMANS1:20 HOW THIS EVIDENT THRU WHAT GOD CREATED.
@Fred:
One, I made absolutely no polictical statement in my post, so the thing about “outlawing…” is unnecessary. But just so you know I’m against adultery, divorce, and abortion as much as homosexuality so it’s rather a moot point anyways.
Two, on your definition of sin, I’ve noticed that you happened to neglect the first of the two summations of the law and prophets: love God. By going directly against what Gods commands, you are not loving God, so if you want to boil it down to Matthew 22 (even at the expense of ignoring Paul’s use of the word sin, and John’s definition of sin as lawlessness (anomia - without law)) then you have left out the most important part: the greatest commandment, love the Lord God with all your heart, soul, and mind.
You ask what is unloving about a homosexual relationship. However, you are starting with a faulty definition of who sin is against. Sin is first and foremost against God, which is why it is listed as the first greatest commandment in the passage you mentioned, and neglected. You ask, “Who is the victim being sinned against?” Well, the answer should be obvious. God is being sinned against, and to reject that you have to reject the majority and totality of the Bible. That is why David can say in the Psalms “only against you, Lord, have I sinned.”
You said: “The Gospel writers and prophets do not mention homosexuality because it is not a sin.” That’s a rather poor argument from silence. The Gospel writers and prophets don’t mention it because it wasn’t on their particular agenda. Do you hold that the Gospels and Prophets are more inspired than the Law and the Epistles? If so, you have pitted inspired writing against inspired writing.
Also, your apologetic for the use of the word homosexual makes no logical sense. Obviously the english term didn’t come about until later, because English wasn’t spoken in the 1st century. But if what you say is true, than homosexuality didn’t exist until 1865 either. The fact is that homosexuality has been around long before then; the acts are the same even if the word for it is in a different language. Check out http://evepheso.wordpress.com/2008/02/24/book-review-dirt-greed-sex-by-countryman/ for a fuller defense of the Greek in Romans 1, etc.
Your point on “as with a woman” is also rather poor. The term used means “like” or “in the same way” not “pretending to be with.” That’s a whole lot of eisegesis on your part to make it say otherwise.
@John
1. No, that wasn’t my context of Romans 1. My context for Romans 1 was… Romans 1.
2. What??
Next time, relax, breathe, and then begin typing with your caps lock turned off.
john,
In reading your response I would like to briefly reply.
We do not have the liberty to read the Scripture how we would like in an attempt to suit our sins. I do not reason away my sins that the Scripture condemns, regardless of how I feel about it. Neither can you. Repent of your sins and believe the Gospel and you shall be saved.
Nice post. I’d like to point out as well that we even have non-revelatory reason for eschewing the idea that simply because you were born with something, that makes it wonderful and beautiful. And that is, the host and plethora of genetic disease. Is God thrilled with my diabetes? My friend’s Sickle Cell? Is it oppressive to address those conditions and try to stifle or reverse their effects, just because we were born with them?
Also, I cannot remember a time when I actively chose to be lazy, selfish, and gluttinous. I’ve been that way as long as I can remember. Therefore, I now hereby demand that you accept those traits as God-honoring and lovely.
[...] on homosexuality. The first asks whether or not homosexuality is the unforgivable sin, and the second asks whether or not it is a choice. I would also encourage you to read the comments to see some [...]