The Scriptures on Homosexuality

It has been request­ed of me to share what the Bible has to say about homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, so if you are read­ing this and are think­ing that I’m just pick­ing on gays (or one of my read­ers in par­tic­u­lar)… I’m just ful­fill­ing a request. (Because, you know, I take requests!)

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abom­i­na­tion. Leviti­cus 18:22

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have com­mit­ted an abom­i­na­tion; they shall sure­ly be put to death; their blood is upon them. Leviti­cus 20:13

Inter­est­ing­ly enough, the word “abom­i­na­tion” is only used twice in all of the Levit­i­cal code, both times refer­ring to homo­sex­u­al sex. The word trans­lat­ed “abom­i­na­tion” comes from a Hebrew word mean­ing “an abhor­rence” or “dis­gust­ing” and can also refer to idol­a­try. Much lat­er in the Bible, as we will see in a bit, the Apos­tle Paul very much links homo­sex­u­al­i­ty with wor­ship­ing the crea­ture rather than the Creator.

Do you not know that the unright­eous will not inher­it the king­dom of God? Do not be deceived: nei­ther the sex­u­al­ly immoral, nor idol­aters, nor adul­ter­ers, nor men who prac­tice homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunk­ards, nor revil­ers, nor swindlers will inher­it the king­dom of God. 1 Corinthi­ans 6:9–10

One of the ques­tions posed to me ear­li­er was if I thought there was for­give­ness for some­one who has been gay; to answer that, I’ll quote the next verse from the pre­vi­ous passage:

And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanc­ti­fied, you were jus­ti­fied in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spir­it of our God. 1 Corinthi­ans 6:11

Who com­prised the ear­ly church? Who were the Chris­tians Paul was writ­ing to at Corinth?

They were a group filled with peo­ple who had once been gay or thieves or idol­aters or drunk­ards… peo­ple who were on the fast track to Hell but were res­cued — indeed, trans­formed — by He who is pow­er­ful to save. 

Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it law­ful­ly, 9under­stand­ing this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the law­less and dis­obe­di­ent, for the ungod­ly and sin­ners, for the unholy and pro­fane, for those who strike their fathers and moth­ers, for mur­der­ers, 10the sex­u­al­ly immoral, men who prac­tice homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, enslavers, liars, per­jur­ers, and what­ev­er else is con­trary to sound doc­trine, 11in accor­dance with the glo­ri­ous gospel of the blessed God with which I have been entrust­ed. 1 Tim­o­thy 1:8–11

A few of my read­ers may have won­dered about the quotes from Leviti­cus ear­li­er… Is the Old Tes­ta­ment law still valid? I don’t blame you. Plen­ty of peo­ple like the New Tes­ta­ment quite a bit bet­ter — after God took some anger man­age­ment cours­es, so to speak. ((How­ev­er, it does­n’t take much read­ing in the New Tes­ta­ment to real­ize that God is just as indig­nant against sin­ners as He ever was.))

Writ­ing to Tim­o­thy, Paul points out that yes, the law is in fact good! Yes, the Old Tes­ta­ment com­mand­ments are still valid!

The law, after all, shows just how short we fall when mea­sured up against God, how des­per­ate our sit­u­a­tion is, and how need­ful we are of a Sav­ior. The law is giv­en for the ungod­ly, the unholy, the sin­ners, the pro­fane, the law­less, and the dis­obe­di­ent so that they may see their need for Christ.

Because of that, Paul could include homo­sex­u­al­i­ty in the list of sins giv­en to both the Corinthi­an church and to Tim­o­thy. Per­haps it is because homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is classed as an abom­i­na­tion over and above all the oth­er sex­u­al sins men­tioned in Leviti­cus that Paul includes it sep­a­rate­ly in his lists, exclu­sive from the more gen­er­al “sex­u­al­ly immoral.”

For this rea­son God gave them up to dis­hon­or­able pas­sions. For their women exchanged nat­ur­al rela­tions for those that are con­trary to nature; 27and the men like­wise gave up nat­ur­al rela­tions with women and were con­sumed with pas­sion for one anoth­er, men com­mit­ting shame­less acts with men and receiv­ing in them­selves the due penal­ty for their error.

28And since they did not see fit to acknowl­edge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. Romans 1:26–28

This pas­sage scares me on behalf of gays even more than the two vers­es in Leviti­cus do… Being put to death? That isn’t that harsh by com­par­i­son when you con­sid­er that the wages of any and all sin is death — it’s grace and grace alone which keeps any of us alive after telling a lie, steal­ing even some­thing small, or any of a great num­ber of oth­er things.

Here in Romans, how­ev­er, Paul details the plight of the unre­pen­tant homo­sex­u­al: God gives them up. Now, I can­not pre­tend to ful­ly grasp the impli­ca­tions of that — like­ly, we’re not meant to.

What we find in Romans, how­ev­er, is that homo­sex­u­al acts are not only against the law of God but are also unnat­ur­al. Just as a man is not meant to have sex­u­al rela­tions with a beast, so is man not meant to have sex­u­al rela­tions with anoth­er man. Homo­sex­u­al behav­ior is an aber­ra­tion from the cre­at­ed order, and God so dis­so­ci­ates Him­self from it that He turns over unre­pen­tant homo­sex­u­als “to a debased mind.”

In addi­tion to homo­sex­u­al­i­ty giv­ing rise to any num­ber of oth­er sins ((As list­ed in Romans 1:29–31.)), Paul reveals the homo­sex­u­al’s hard-heart­ed­ness toward God:

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. Romans 1:32

Such is the spir­i­tu­al state of so many in our world today.

Paul says that the future holds “wrath and fury … tribu­la­tion and dis­tress” for those who do not obey right­eous­ness and who do evil. ((Romans 2:8–9.))

I’ll take a moment to address some­thing which may come up… You may have noticed that these vers­es deal with homo­sex­u­al actions. Being homo­sex­u­al is not in and of itself con­demned; rather, it is part & par­cel of being born a sin­ful human. We are all born inclined to lie and to steal, to be self-cen­tered and self­ish, to hate and to cov­et. It’s no mys­tery why such things are so much eas­i­er than love and respect or why peo­ple so often empha­size that rela­tion­ships are “hard work.”

Sin is easy.

For a homo­sex­u­al male, is it eas­i­er for him to just act on his impuls­es? Exclud­ing pres­sure from soci­ety, yeah, it’s going to be eas­i­er for him to live out his desires. The same, of course, goes for het­ero­sex­u­al men and women. ((It is also no mys­tery why so few vir­gins are marrying.))

In Eph­esians 2:3, Paul says that we are all “by nature chil­dren of wrath,” and he even ties that right to liv­ing “in the pas­sions of our flesh, car­ry­ing out the desires of the body and the mind.”

God demands chasti­ty, and He has pro­hi­bi­tions against for­ni­ca­tion (sex­u­al actions out­side of mar­riage, and don’t fool your­self into think­ing this only applies to inter­course). Sex­u­al­i­ty, as is made clear through­out the Scrip­tures, is only accept­able to God with­in the bonds of marriage.

And mar­riage, as defined by cre­ation (Adam and Eve), is some­thing which only exists between a man and a woman. ((And there may be cer­tain oth­er bib­li­cal require­ments which reveal that many who think they are mar­ried nowa­days may in fact be liv­ing in sin rather than mat­ri­mo­ny. Oh, and a man may be hus­band to more than wife, as well, but I’m uncer­tain of that one… I just haven’t found a way yet to argue against it biblically.))

What this means is that a homo­sex­u­al per­son is for­bid­den by Scrip­tures to both engage in sex­u­al­i­ty out­side of mar­riage and to mar­ry. Giv­en the sever­i­ty with which homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is treat­ed in the Scrip­tures, I hope you can see just how depraved our soci­ety is becom­ing as homo­sex­u­al­i­ty (and/or bisex­u­al­i­ty) not only becomes ever more en vogue but as mar­riage is rede­fined to include gay unions as true marriage.

So what is a homo­sex­u­al to do, then, if they can­not live out the desires they feel with­in, whether he or she was born with them or whether they devel­oped lat­er in life?

They must do the same thing the liar, the mur­der, the hate­ful, the idol­ater, the sex­u­al immoral, and the drunk­ard must do: Repent.

They must repent, for the king­dom of God is at hand, and they will either encounter the King as a mer­ci­ful Sav­ior or as wrath­ful Conqueror.

God is more than able to give homo­sex­u­als a new nature, to remove from them the unnat­ur­al affec­tions and to replace them with god­ly desires.

I’m not say­ing the process will be easy; indeed, every­one from myself to the great apos­tle Paul strug­gles with sin, even after hav­ing expe­ri­enced trans­form­ing grace. No one’s say­ing the ter­mi­na­tion of homo­sex­u­al incli­na­tions will be immediate.

Per­haps you’ll be able to refrain from ever again act­ing upon homo­sex­u­al ten­den­cies, but the ten­den­cies will still be there. Then the goal is to refrain from act­ing, to refrain from even lust­ing after anoth­er per­son (whether of the same sex or dif­fer­ent, actu­al­ly), lest you com­mit adul­tery in your heart.

While it may seem right to have the feel­ings and be for­bid­den to act upon them, all I can offer is that the eter­nal reward for obe­di­ence is unbe­liev­ably worth it.

Gay Pride Necklace on a Bible
Linked to Image Source

The alter­na­tive is to suf­fer the fate of Sodom & Gomorrah:

Now I want to remind you, although you once ful­ly knew it, that Jesus, who saved a peo­ple out of the land of Egypt, after­ward destroyed those who did not believe. 6And the angels who did not stay with­in their own posi­tion of author­i­ty, but left their prop­er dwelling, he has kept in eter­nal chains under gloomy dark­ness until the judg­ment of the great day–7just as Sodom and Gomor­rah and the sur­round­ing cities, which like­wise indulged in sex­u­al immoral­i­ty and pur­sued unnat­ur­al desire, serve as an exam­ple by under­go­ing a pun­ish­ment of eter­nal fire. Jude 5–7


74 thoughts on “The Scriptures on Homosexuality”

  1. Ok, the clos­est you have ever come to con­vinc­ing me! I don’t think homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is en vogue as you state. I still have trou­ble believ­ing peo­ple are bad by nature. Damn­ing peo­ple to hell for actions that seem to me to not be as bad as oth­ers. I know, I know‑I am not the judge! Not telling the truth, mur­der­ing, drink­ing are all choic­es you make on how to live your life. I am still uncer­tain as to whether homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is a choice or the way you are born. Anoth­er friend point­ed out to me today that maybe there was abuse (or some oth­er pro­found event) in the child­hood of homo­sex­u­als that influ­enced their beliefs. Some­thing I have nev­er thought about before and will have to mull over. I know for some­one who is not homo­sex­u­al I am trou­bled a lot by thoughts for those who are. Those who are fam­i­ly mem­bers, lov­ing sons, good mothers…

    1. if you would have read cor­rect­ly. ACTIONS of homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is a sin. Peo­ple CHOOSE to engage in actions. rather were innate­ly born to sin, we still choose what sin we do. homos CHOOSE to engage in the BEHAVIOR. like adul­ter­ers choose to com­mit it. thieves choose to still. women choose to abort babies. peo­ple choose to abuse and dis­re­spect their par­ents. etc. don’t get me wrong a lot of peo­ple whom say they were “born” gay still choose not engage in homo acts

  2. A wom­an­iz­er has victims.

    Vio­lent behav­ior has victims.

    A con­sen­su­al homo­sex­u­al rela­tion­ship has no victim.

    1. You don’t have to have a vic­tim to have sin. A lie does not always make some­one a vic­tim, but the lie is still a sin. Just sayin. a vic­tim can be one’s own self. If you tell a per­son, don’t touch that hot plate, it will burn you. and they choose to touch it and get burned they are their own vic­tim. If you have been told by the cre­ator of all things, don’t lie with a per­son of the same sex, it is detestable in my eyes and you will nev­er seem my king­dom if you do and you do! Well you are your own vic­tim.… But hey, for some the free­dom of choice is easy, do what­ev­er the heck we want to do, I will deal with the out­come lat­er. If mom and dad say you may con­tin­ue to stay in my home but you must live here by my rules or your out, well you have a choice… God says the same thing. Only He will judge weath­er you have been liv­ing by his rules set to be with him. God Bless every­one with wisdom.

      1. sor­ry about the typos, should have been “lay with” and “nev­er see” my apolo­gies. and May God bless you with wis­dom. LOL Long Day!

  3. Senior: Depends on one’s point of view. The end result for those who com­mit homo­sex­u­al acts accord­ing to Romans 1 clear­ly show that the homo­sex­u­als them­selves are the vic­tims… vic­tims of the wrath of a Holy God.

    Claim­ing an act is a‑ok­ie-dokey sim­ply because it has no vic­tims is a dubi­ous moral­i­ty at best — just as any moral sys­tem out­side the Law of God is des­tined to become. Who decides what con­sti­tutes a vic­tim? Does a vic­tim have to be a per­son? Who decides what per­son­hood is?

    Once you get out­side the Law of God, you end up with absolute fool­ish­ness that says it’s ille­gal to kill cer­tain ani­mals yet that abort­ing babies is not only legal but is an accept­able alter­na­tive to an unwant­ed pregnancy.

    1. Rick

      Where are your com­ments about the law with­in this thread. The link is gone. I know it was from 2008. I’m doing a bible study on the issue of homo­sex­u­al­i­ty and love this discussion.

  4. Rick,

    “Vic­tims of the wrath of a Holy God”? LOL!! The gob­lins will get you.

    “Claim­ing an act is a‑ok­ie-dokey sim­ply because it has no vic­tims is a dubi­ous moral­i­ty at best…Who decides what con­sti­tutes a vic­tim? Does a vic­tim have to be a per­son? Who decides what per­son­hood is?”

    All of us, togeth­er, over time, work these things out. We have no choice. You your­self, Calvin­ist, admit that not all of us will hear “Gods” call. We have no choice but to frame an ethics, a moral­i­ty, on the basis of this world.

    “Once you get out­side the Law of God, you end up with absolute fool­ish­ness that says it’s ille­gal to kill cer­tain ani­mals yet that abort­ing babies is not only legal but is an accept­able alter­na­tive to an unwant­ed pregnancy.”

    First, a sec­u­lar ethics is still a work in progress (prob­a­bly always will be). You might argue that the Bible is a final prod­uct, but under­stand­ing it is still a work in progress.

    As for “absolute fool­ish­ness”. I guess it is all a mat­ter of opin­ion as to what con­sti­tutes that.

    But I don’t guess it would take me too much time to come up with a list of absolute fool­ish­ness that is/was prac­ticed by Christians.

    And you would argue, what?, that they had gone astray and were not fol­low­ing the Bible.

    And I would say, there’s the point.

    Even hard­er for the sec­u­lar­ists, since we don’t have a Bible to point at. (not that hav­ing the Bible has done Chris­tians a lot of good in this department).

  5. I watched a show called 30 days where a Mor­mon woman was sent to live with a gay cou­ple who were fos­ter­ing chil­dren. I fig­ured she would come away from the expe­ri­ence with a dif­fer­ent atti­tude towards them because she put a face to what she had been against. Well she stood her ground but she did come away from it a lit­tle wis­er towards oth­er people.
    I was rather intrigued myself while watch­ing because I went back and forth with all these things con­cern­ing this top­ice because it has been on the fore­front in every­thing it seems these days.
    Is it that we love the sin and hate the sinner?
    Or can we con­demn oth­ers by some­thing that they see as com­ing from God?
    I came to this conclusion

    All have sinned
    A per­son who says that they were homo­sex­u­al from birth is telling the truth — not because God made them that way but because of sin. We are all born with a defiled sin­ful nature. We are all born with a pre­dis­po­si­tion to sin but many times our sin differs.

    To me (and I am pret­ty much say­ing what Rick already said) the only answer is Jesus Christ. I decid­ed that I am not going to con­demn oth­ers. I am not going to hate some­one because they are a sin­ner head­ed for hell just like I was. I am going to do my best to let Jesus live through me and tell every­one He brings into my path about Him

    .…but don’t ask me what I think about your sin or what the Bible says about sin espe­cial­ly if you are liv­ing in it because you won’t like my answer

    Well thats my two cents

  6. An appeal to a bio­log­i­cal­ly based ori­en­ta­tion is not a moral argu­ment. As two researchers who have worked hard to demon­strate con­gen­i­tal influ­ences on homo­sex­u­al devel­op­ment have admit­ted: “No clear con­clu­sions about the moral­i­ty of a behav­ior can be made from the mere fact of bio­log­i­cal cau­sa­tion, because all behav­ior is bio­log­i­cal­ly caused” (Bri­an S. Mus­tan­s­ki and J. Michael Bai­ley, “A ther­a­pist’s guide to the genet­ics of human sex­u­al ori­en­ta­tion,” Sex­u­al and Rela­tion­ship Ther­a­py 18:4 [2003]: 432).

    Senior seems to think, maybe I am wrong, there are no objec­tive Truths.
    If I am cor­rect — that view leads ulti­mate­ly to nihilism. A cur­so­ry look at his­to­ry and one will find many folks embrac­ing rel­a­tivism because they think it leads to more tol­er­ance and less per­se­cu­tion. In fact, a look at the very foun­da­tions of any author­i­tar­i­an soci­ety and you will soon dis­cov­er that objec­tive truth is usu­al­ly the first thing that is sup­pressed! What is right and wrong is no longer based on objec­tive truths — it is the mere opin­ions of those in power.

    As far as the author­i­ty of the Bib­li­cal texts:

    “There is no body of ancient lit­er­a­ture in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good tex­tu­al attes­ta­tion as the New Testament.“3
    “There is, I imag­ine, no body of lit­er­a­ture in the world that has been exposed to the strin­gent ana­lyt­i­cal study that the four gospels have sus­tained for the past 200 years. This is not some­thing to be regret­ted: it is some­thing to be accept­ed with sat­is­fac­tion. Schol­ars today who treat the gospels as cred­i­ble his­tor­i­cal doc­u­ments do so in the full light of this ana­lyt­i­cal study, not by clos­ing their minds to it.“4
    “Skep­ti­cism toward the reli­a­bil­i­ty of Scrip­ture seems to sur­vive in many aca­d­e­m­ic cir­cles despite the repeat­ed col­lapse of crit­i­cal the­o­ries. One still finds a dis­po­si­tion to trust sec­u­lar writ­ers whose cre­den­tials in pro­vid­ing his­tor­i­cal tes­ti­mo­ny are often less ade­quate than those of the bib­li­cal writ­ers. Not long ago many schol­ars reject­ed the his­toric­i­ty of the patri­ar­chal accounts, denied that writ­ing exist­ed in Moses’ day, and ascribed the Gospels and Epis­tles to sec­ond-cen­tu­ry writ­ers. But high­er crit­i­cism has sus­tained some spec­tac­u­lar and even stun­ning revers­es, main­ly through the find­ings of archae­ol­o­gy. No longer is it held that the glo­ries of King Solomon’s era are lit­er­ary fab­ri­ca­tion, that ‘Yah­weh,’ the redemp­tive God of the Hebrews, was unknown before the eighth-cen­tu­ry prophets, or that Ezra’s rep­re­sen­ta­tions about the Baby­lon­ian cap­tiv­i­ty are fic­tion­al. Archae­ol­o­gists have locat­ed the long-lost cop­per mines of Solomon’s time. Tablets dis­cov­ered at Ebla near Alep­po con­firm that names sim­i­lar to those of the patri­archs were com­mon among peo­ple who lived in Ebla short­ly before the events record­ed in the lat­er chap­ters of Gen­e­sis took place.“5
    3 F.F. Bruce, The Books and the Parch­ments, 3rd rev. ed. (West­wood NJ; Rev­ell, 1963), p. 178.
    4 Craig Blomberg, The His­tor­i­cal Reli­a­bil­i­ty of the Gospels (Leices­ter, UK; Down­ers Grove, IL: Inter­Var­si­ty, 1987), p. ix.
    5 Carl F. H. Hen­ry, “The Author­i­ty of the Bible,” in The Ori­gin of the Bible, Philip Wes­ley Com­fort, ed., (Wheaton, IL: Tyn­dale House, 1992), p. 17.

    Lat­est from Mark: The real Amer­i­can Idolaters

  7. Senior:

    But if the anal­o­gy is bad, then it does not sup­port your claim.

    The anal­o­gy showed exact­ly what it was sup­posed to show; rarely are analo­gies per­fect beyond their giv­en purpose.

    LOL!! The gob­lins will get you.

    If there is no holy God who is an execu­tor of per­fect jus­tice, then there is no jus­tice and any attempt at it is vain and fleet­ing. As stat­ed before by me (here and on the Hall) and by Mark above, where there are no absolutes, nihilism is all in all — we’re all just ani­mals vain­ly hop­ing that some­how this life mat­ters, des­tined to one day, if the species sur­vives, to be engulfed by the dying sun.

    Also, I find it inter­est­ing that objec­tors to exis­tence of jus­tice (and the then nec­es­sary exis­tence of an execu­tor of that judg­ment) relate the con­cept to var­i­ous absur­di­ties… invis­i­ble pink uni­corns, fly­ing spaghet­ti mon­sters, or in this case, goblins.

    All of us, togeth­er, over time, work these things out. We have no choice. You your­self, Calvin­ist, admit that not all of us will hear “Gods” call. We have no choice but to frame an ethics, a moral­i­ty, on the basis of this world.

    I myself, Calvin­ist, believe that every man is respon­si­ble to the Law of God and most specif­i­cal­ly the call of the Gospel. That most reject it sim­ply con­firms what the Scrip­tures say, and for those who claim “I’m not elect, so I can’t believe,” I can only say, “You won’t know for sure until you die; today you have a choice, believe.”

    No deny­ing that those with­out God stand upon shift­ing sands. Social moral­i­ty must change to fit what­ev­er trends are cur­rent­ly pop­u­lar, just as you point out regard­ing sec­u­lar morality.

    You might argue that the Bible is a final prod­uct, but under­stand­ing it is still a work in progress.

    I do argue that, cer­tain­ly, and every time ear­li­er man­u­scripts of the Scrip­tures are found, they con­cur with what we have today. (Yet peo­ple con­tin­ue to say the Bible has been repeat­ed­ly changed to fit var­i­ous peo­ple’s whims. I won’t deny cer­tain trans­la­tions of the Bible are done with extreme bias — the Jeho­vah’s Wit­ness­es depend on their own ver­sion, for instance — but there’s a long line of reli­able trans­la­tions in many lan­guages… But I digress.)

    Yes, under­stand­ing the Bible is an ongo­ing process; and even if some­one like Charles Spur­geon or John Knox had such great insights into the Bible, even though they are cor­rect, it may take me a great time to come to the same deter­mi­na­tions, not because I’m slow of learn­ing, but because the Bible is much more than a text book of facts which can just be mem­o­rized, it is in a sense alive and life-chang­ing and so much of what it teach­es is direct­ly tied to how mature a believ­er a per­son is.

    It’s no secret that sev­en years ago I hat­ed Calvin­ism, hat­ed every ver­sion of the Bible oth­er than the King James, hat­ed con­tem­po­rary music, and so on. In my spir­i­tu­al youth, I clung to a few eas­i­ly mem­o­rized Scrip­tures and mis­ap­plied them to my life. As I grew in under­stand­ing of the Bible, both my beliefs and my life have been refined in the process. But such sanc­ti­fi­ca­tion is always toward a goal, that of con­for­mi­ty to the image of God as revealed in His Word.

    Sec­u­lar moral­i­ty con­tin­ues to evolve as well, but it’s path is as a ship with­out a head­er. Who knows where it’ll end up.

    But I don’t guess it would take me too much time to come up with a list of absolute fool­ish­ness that is/was prac­ticed by Christians.

    You’d have to define “fool­ish­ness” first, and with­out any set of absolutes, just how does one do that and expect the judg­ment to hold fast?

    It’s no secret many who have tak­en the name of Christ have com­mit­ted great atroc­i­ties. Dit­to just about any reli­gion or world­view out there.

    Still, thanks to Chris­tians, untold mil­lions have been fed, housed, and tend­ed to… The print­ing press was invent­ed, mak­ing Guten­berg not only the most influ­en­tial per­son of the past mil­len­ni­um, but utter­ly rev­o­lu­tion­iz­ing the way mankind com­mu­ni­cates. The West was freed from the idea of the divine right of kings thanks to the sec­u­lar­iza­tion by John Locke of the works of Samuel Ruther­ford. Chris­tians gave us ivy league uni­ver­si­ties. Chris­tians gave us hos­pi­tals and orphan­ages and free clin­ics and so on.

    Sure, per­haps some­one else may have stepped up to do many of those things, but peo­ple like to claim the atroc­i­ties of Chris­tians with­out giv­ing “equal time” to all the ben­e­fit done in Christ’s name. It just seems a lit­tle dis­hon­est to me.

  8. Clint: “Love the sin­ner, hate the sin” is what the Chris­t­ian should live by. Indeed, every­thing we do ought to be in love to oth­ers, and that love is first and fore­most to warn of the judg­ment to come; how much love can we claim to have for peo­ple if we don’t tell them that unless they repent, they shall like­wise per­ish? I like what Jude said in verse 23… “hat­ing even the gar­ment stained by the flesh.” Sin of any kind is despi­ca­ble and damnable; if we are not lov­ing sin­ners by telling them the truth, we are by default, I think, hat­ing them.

  9. Well, I just installed The­sis as my blog tem­plate and dri­ven myself crazy try­ing to tweak it (not through yet but giv­ing up for the night.) I went to the The­sis forums, found some of your advice and then found your blog …

    and then found this post. I work for Exo­dus which is a 33 year old min­istry help­ing men and women with unwant­ed same sex attraction.

    :)

    Glad I found your blog.

  10. Randy: Wel­come to King­dom Geek, Randy, glad to have you! Thanks for the com­ment. Awe­some to meet some­one of sim­i­lar belief through The­sis. I get a lot of traf­fic from the The­sis forums; I doubt most peo­ple aren’t as appre­cia­tive of my con­ser­v­a­tive bib­li­cism as you are. In any event, keep up the good work with Exo­dus. I spent a few moments over at your blog; I like what I see and will be subscribing.

  11. Robert: Just a heads up that the King James Ver­sion is a pret­ty out­dat­ed ver­sion that could prob­a­bly be ignored entire­ly and we’d be just fine. It ren­ders a cou­ple of dif­fer­ent words as “abom­i­na­tion” in Leviti­cus. One of those words is פּגּוּל, which means “unclean” or “a foul thing.” Anoth­er, the one used in the Leviti­cus 9 pas­sage you men­tioned, is שׁקץ, which means “filth” or “idol­a­trous.”

    Still anoth­er, תּועבה, actu­al­ly means “abom­i­na­tion” out­side of the “clean vs. unclean” realm of the oth­ers above, and that is the word used in the pas­sages of Leviti­cus per­tain­ing to homo­sex­u­al acts.

    The Law of Moses — which Jesus Christ Him­self upheld and extolled — calls homo­sex­u­al­i­ty an abom­i­na­tion. This is over and above what is lev­eled against such as eat­ing unclean foods. A good trans­la­tion knows the differences.

    I appre­ci­ate your sto­ry about your life being saved by a homo­sex­u­al, but be care­ful not to let that influ­ence your beliefs. Moses may have led the Israelites, but he was still a mur­der­er. King David may have been a man after God’s own heart, but he was still an adul­ter­ess mur­der­er. Judas Iscar­i­ot may have been hand-picked before the foun­da­tion of the world to be one of Christ’s dis­ci­ples, to be one of His cir­cle of friends, but he was still a dev­il incarnate.

    Jesus Christ indeed was a man of love, but He was a man of love who hat­ed sin and hat­ed to see peo­ple remain in it. “Go, and sin no more,” was His call, and one day He will have slain before Him all those who reject His rule. That does­n’t sound like a God who ignores the Old Tes­ta­ment to me.

    (Like­wise, it is illog­i­cal to con­sid­er the Gospels to be con­sid­ered Scrip­ture with­out con­sid­er­ing the entire­ty of the Old Tes­ta­ment to be Scrip­tures first — the Gospels tes­ti­fy of a God, Jesus Christ, who believed the Old Tes­ta­ment, the Law & the prophets — to be stead­fast Scrip­tures which will not pass away. To dis­miss cer­tain of the Old Tes­ta­ment is to make Jesus into a fal­li­ble man who is cer­tain­ly unable to be trust­ed to save any­one, much less himself.)

  12. @Rick
    I have been read­ing through your blog for some time, real­ly fas­ci­nat­ed with your point of view and mes­sage. I am what I affec­tion­ate­ly call a lapsed catholic, but more impor­tant­ly a Red Let­ter Chris­t­ian. I have been blessed to know Jesus and call Him my lord and sav­ior. I think it’s impor­tant that you know that.

    There was a cou­ple of points that I think we both (you and I) need to look up, but I believe that Leviti­cus used the word abom­i­na­tion a whole bunch of times. One of them in par­tic­u­lar put’s shrimp and lob­ster as a food source out of the ques­tion. Leviti­cus 11:9–12 uses the word abom­i­na­tion. In fact, Leviti­cus is full of acts and sit­u­a­tions that are con­sid­ered “abom­i­na­tions”. Some, like that small acne scar on your cheek, would restrict you from pray­ing on the tem­ple steps, or in today’s world in front of the altar, because a mark of the face was con­sid­ered an abom­i­na­tion (might be Deuteron­o­my on that one, got to dou­ble check)

    But my point is this, though con­sid­ered a sin, and I’m not con­vinced on the author­i­ty of all books in the Bible (I don’t think they are all scrip­ture), it seems to be TOO much of an issue.

    It’s just not. We have to wake up as Chris­tians and Humans and see that these debates and fix­a­tions are tak­ing us AWAY from the word of Jesus Christ. His mes­sage was nev­er about abom­i­na­tions or women being sub­mis­sive, or drunk­ards, or debasers, but about love of God, love of thy Neigh­bor, and love of the sin­ner. His rebel­lion of faith was nev­er about any of this, so why do we, the peo­ple of the book (look that one up) have to sit here and throw stones again and again and again, and even start a min­istry about it. Jesus him­self put a stop to throw­ing stones. He was a man with­out fear, so why do we still fear these issues?

    All I know is that I thank God that the day I almost died from a severe trau­ma and blood loss in a bus acci­dent, He sent me a man that saved my live, dressed my wounds, told me to think of my life and my wife and to hold on, while he got me into an ambu­lance and raced me to the hos­pi­tal. Yup, the man was gay (why else would I tell this sto­ry. LOL)

    God love you Rick, thank you for being a per­son of Faith. Just remem­ber, God is the mak­er of the World and the Uni­verse. He cre­at­ed the Moun­tains, the Oceans, the Sky, the Sun, the Moon, Mars, Venus, the Galaxy, Stars, Red Dwarf Stars, Black Holes, White Holes, Math, Sci­ence and Oreo Cook­ies. Do you real­ly think a few words in a book got His mind pegged?

  13. God love you Rick.

    But we are going to stay at ends with this. Though you feel it’s your call­ing to tell me what scrip­ture real­ly means, I’ve been down this path more times than can be count­ed my friend. We should talk again about it in 20 years.

    I’m incred­i­bly impressed with your knowl­edge of the Bible. The trans­la­tion you men­tion is but one, and of course uses the accept­ed for­mat as it’s source. It’s one min­istries ver­sion, no mat­ter how hon­or­able that min­istry is. But bless you and bless them nonetheless.

    When asked which of the com­mand­ments where the most impor­tant, Jesus did­n’t even come close to cit­ing what where hand­ed down by Moses.

    I would love to dis­cuss this fur­ther. It’s refresh­ing to speak to a young man so pre­pared. Be well.

  14. Robert: The impor­tant com­mand­ments Jesus cit­ed actu­al­ly *did* come from Moses. Like­wise, just because they are the most impor­tant does­n’t mean every­thing else Moses was told by God was suit­able to be disregarded.

    I’m curi­ous how you can be sure of any­thing regard­ing Jesus if you have trou­ble trust­ing translations.

  15. Robert,
    Glad to hear some­one else has agreed to dis­agree with Rick. I have expressed to him before that I feel his views will grow old­er and soft­er with him.

    Richard, Jr.,
    Real­ly, “He will have slain before Him all those who reject His rule. ” Does­n’t sound like love to me :)

  16. @Rick.
    You are right. Jesus did cite “Love they neigh­bor as your­self” from Leviti­cus 19:18
    “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own peo­ple, but you shall love your neigh­bor as your­self: I am the Lord.”
    How­ev­er, the Hebrew teach­ers and Rab­bi’s believed this to be some­thing com­plete­ly dif­fer­ent, as in only love your own people,
    Jesus clar­i­fied “who is my neigh­bor” with the sto­ry of the Good Samar­i­tan. As I said before, not even close to what the Wise of the time thought it meant.
    It leads you to won­der what else Jesus would have clarified?
    Would he clar­i­fy Leviti­cus 20 or 21 as well?
    I’m curi­ous how you can be sure of any­thing regard­ing Jesus if you have trou­ble trust­ing translations.
    You are right. It’s dif­fi­cult to be sure of exact­ly what Jesus said, only what we think he said based on inter­pre­ta­tions of the men who know him. Luck­i­ly, Jesus is in his­to­ry. Not just reli­gious his­to­ry, but cit­ed again and again in Roman legal his­to­ry. The Repub­lic was a VERY mod­ern soci­ety in the sense of legal mum­bo jum­bo, and that includ­ed forms, reports, INTERROGATIONS, and a whole bunch of oth­er legal doc­u­ments. So, we have some pret­ty rock sol­id proof on what He said, and how He act­ed, and all of it was pret­ty con­sis­tent with what is said in the Bible.
    So, where Leviti­cus says that a pros­ti­tute must sure­ly be put to death, and Jesus saves a pros­ti­tutes life, teach­es her mer­cy, and to sin no more, there is a pret­ty wide divide.
    Again and again Jesus had to teach us to break with what peo­ple thought they knew of the Lord.
    I don’t dis­re­gard the what Moses was told by God, but I do think that Jesus, God in the Flesh, made some adjustments.
    Bless you Rick.
    @Sandi. Thank you for your state­ment. But I know from read­ing this blog that Rick is sin­cere in his love for God and His teach­ings. Maybe you are right, with age comes clar­i­ty, and from the fire of youth comes hope.

  17. Rick, I real­ly appre­ci­ate your treat­ment of this sub­ject and even more your han­dling of the objec­tions that have been post­ed here. I am afraid that I am often not as patient or as gra­cious. I believe that Senior stat­ed that homo­sex­u­al acts between con­sent­ing adults have no vic­tim or hurt no one. Your answer to this was cor­rect. I would also like to add to this.

    My broth­er is a homo­sex­u­al. He was mar­ried to a won­der­ful woman, but came to the con­clu­sion that he could no longer “live a lie” by deny­ing his homo­sex­u­al­i­ty. He divorced his wife and ripped her out of our fam­i­ly, where she was dear­ly-loved. The dam­age that this did to her was immea­sur­able. The pain that this cre­at­ed for my fam­i­ly was unbe­liev­able. My nephew bare­ly remem­bers her any­more, and my niece has no rec­ol­lec­tion of who she is.

    On top of that, my fam­i­ly is sub­ject­ed to the con­stant reminder that a loved and val­ued mem­ber of the fam­i­ly is on a path to destruc­tion. Our fam­i­ly times are not as safe as they once were because of this bla­tant sin.

    And beyond all of that, my broth­er still feels the alien­ation that his sin has cre­at­ed. He has lost the close­ness of his fam­i­ly that he so desires to have — not because we have stopped lov­ing him or express­ing our love to him, but because light and dark­ness can’t dwell in the same place, and we all feel that distance.

    Based on my per­son­al expe­ri­ence, it seems a bit cav­a­lier to sug­gest that there are no vic­tims between con­sent­ing adults. The dam­age to my fam­i­ly has been devastating.

    Lat­est from Jonathan: Bib­li­cal Worldview

  18. San­di:

    I have expressed to him before that I feel his views will grow old­er and soft­er with him.

    It’s been sev­en years now since Christ opened my eyes, and I’ve only grown more strong­ly devot­ed to Him & His Word. The more I learn, the more I believe.

    For my beliefs to soft­en with age would require my pride in myself out­weigh­ing my belief in the Scrip­tures. It would take a moun­tain of audac­i­ty on my part to think that I can pick and choose what I want from the Scrip­tures or depart from them entire­ly — if I’m ever that pride­ful, I hope my wife slaps me. Hard.

    Real­ly, “He will have slain before Him all those who reject His rule. ” Doesn’t sound like love to me :)

    Bib­li­cal love demands jus­tice; and because true love is so inti­mate­ly tied to God’s char­ac­ter, it stands to rea­son then that those who oppose God are to receive its oppo­site. I believe I’m stand­ing well with­in the grounds set by such as the Psalms, so far as that is concerned.

    But as for these ene­mies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaugh­ter them before me.’ ” Luke 19:27

    That’s the con­clud­ing line of a para­ble, and it’s pos­si­ble that it had its ful­fill­ment when Jerusalem was destroyed, result­ing in the death of many, many Jews, who had set them­selves up as Christ’s ene­mies when they reject­ed Him as Mes­si­ah and had Him executed.

    Or it’s pos­si­ble that at a point in time in the future, those who reject Christ will be slain before Him. For all I know — and this does­n’t seem to be a com­mon idea at all in the resources I’m look­ing at — this refers to the ever­last­ing destruc­tion of the wicked in Hell.

  19. Robert:

    Would he clar­i­fy Leviti­cus 20 or 21 as well?

    That He did not would seem to indi­cate that there was­n’t an issue with how it was being inter­pret­ed. That’s rather bold of you to seek to put words into His mouth, though. I’m not sure that’s a road any­one should be com­fort­able going down. (Those who do come out of it quot­ing ridicu­lous things like “What Would Jesus Do?” or “What Would Jesus Dri­ve?” or “Jesus Loves Porn Stars” — all things which are found in today’s churchianity.)

    So, where Leviti­cus says that a pros­ti­tute must sure­ly be put to death, and Jesus saves a pros­ti­tutes life, teach­es her mer­cy, and to sin no more, there is a pret­ty wide divide.

    Jesus exer­cised mer­cy on some, absolute­ly. On oth­ers, though, He with­held mer­cy, and in an angry rage, over­turned tables and cast peo­ple out with a whip. Jesus Christ the Judge is more than capa­ble of for­giv­ing offens­es com­mit­ted against Him — we are in no posi­tion to do so. We may only for­give offens­es com­mit­ted against us, and some­times I won­der just what an offense against me would be. I know my own deprav­i­ty and that before God I deserve a place in Hell — what more could man do to me that I did­n’t already have com­ing to me? That God through Christ has for­giv­en me by grace through faith, well, it makes any offens­es against me done by men fair­ly incon­se­quen­tial in the scheme of things.

    I don’t dis­re­gard the what Moses was told by God, but I do think that Jesus, God in the Flesh, made some adjustments.

    I don’t real­ly even think He adjust­ed any­thing; He sim­ply returned the peo­ple — those with ears to hear, any­way — to a right under­stand­ing. Mankind being the sin­ful mess that it is, we’re still hav­ing trou­ble with inter­pre­ta­tions. I find the safest path to tread is the path which stays as close as pos­si­ble to the plain read­ings of the Scrip­tures. The faith that Jesus expressed in the Scrip­tures I can­not ignore — dit­to Paul, Peter, Steven, the prophets, and so on.

  20. Jonathan: Thanks for shar­ing that, broth­er. I’ll cer­tain­ly pray for you & your fam­i­ly, that Christ will bring rec­on­cil­i­a­tion if it is His will.

    Based on my per­son­al expe­ri­ence, it seems a bit cav­a­lier to sug­gest that there are no vic­tims between con­sent­ing adults. The dam­age to my fam­i­ly has been devastating.

    Sad­ly, Senior and oth­ers may sug­gest that there is only this dam­age & dev­as­ta­tion because of our beliefs con­cern­ing homo­sex­u­al­i­ty — not because of the homosexual’s.

    Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put dark­ness for light and light for dark­ness, who put bit­ter for sweet and sweet for bit­ter! Isa­iah 5:20

  21. Rick,
    I am not at all sug­ses­t­ing that you will no longer believe in God. I am express­ing that I feel your views will grow in time-with you. Just look at the things that you believed were a must in the past (women must wear dress­es, only cer­tain movies) and how those views have changed as you have grown old­er and wiser.

    This is why I don’t post more often. Pri­vate dis­cus­sions are bet­ter for me.

  22. San­di: Does­n’t get any more pri­vate than a blog’s com­ments on the Inter­net. :P

    Although it should be not­ed that my views have grown more close­ly to Scrip­tures not away from them. Where­as I used to accept the teach­ings of friends, pas­tor, and authors with­out much ques­tion­ing, now I pret­ty much reject what­ev­er does­n’t mesh with the Scrip­tures. I don’t know the Scrip­tures entire­ly nor do I under­stand every­thing there­in yet, so it is in those areas that I’ll con­tin­ue to grow.

  23. And again I say, may God bless you Rick.

    Your faith is yours, and the puri­ty of faith you feel is some­thing to be proud of, and to see it in you makes me proud and hap­py that some­one can be gen­uine in their con­vic­tions and gen­uine to their faith.

    I’m sor­ry that I’ve drawn your blog post about your views on homo­sex­u­al­i­ty away from this ini­tial con­ver­sa­tion. This is your blog, and your faith comes from the per­son­al rela­tion­ship that you have with God. Though our opin­ions might be dif­fer­ent, all I can say is that I have a faith in God and Jesus because of my per­son­al rela­tion­ship with God that brings me hap­pi­ness as well as peace of heart and mind that there is a God that loves me enough to be a light in my life, and to show me the way to His kingdom.

    Your growth toward scrip­ture is a per­son­al one, and that I can­not deny. Where you used to accept what was hand­ed to you, you now look to with your own eye to scrip­ture, and a true heart can­not be denied.

    I’m sor­ry if you think I’m being bold enough to put words into God’s mouth. There are much more learned men and women than I who are clos­er to the scrip­tures than I am, and might make the claim of know­ing EXACTLY what he meant. I can’t, and in get­ting clos­er to scrip­ture your­self, it looks like you’re on the path of learn­ing God in many more ways yourself.

    If God sent a homo­sex­u­al man to save me, it’s obvi­ous that he chose what that which was clos­est at hand to do his bid­ding. But you your­self said that Mose and David where mur­ders, David a murdering
    adul­ter­er. Yet STILL these are the men that God sent to lead his peo­ple. As sin­ners, we all have a chance to redeem our­selves, and as sin­ners, some­how God still finds in us a qual­i­ty worth redeem­ing. Maybe I can dare to say that in each of us, even in the sin­ners, he finds some­thing to love?

    Gala­tians 3:28
    “There is nei­ther Jew nor Greek, there is nei­ther slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

    And in this big ol crazy world, I a Cuban some­what Catholic Red Line Chris­t­ian can seek to find anoth­er man of faith online, and have hon­est dis­course with him. I don’t think the dif­fer­ences between us are walls or things that will keep us from heav­en. I like to think that our dif­fer­ences are the steps we take to get clos­er together.

    It’s your blog bro. It’s just like that joke about piz­za. “Who gets that last slice of piz­za? They guy who paid the bill.”

    Much respect.

  24. Robert: I can respect that you claim to have a rela­tion­ship with God based on hap­pi­ness and such. How­ev­er, I dis­agree that is what a rela­tion­ship with God is based on; Jesus said that we must wor­ship in spir­it & truth, not in emo­tion or expe­ri­ence. The “truth” He referred to is the Scrip­tures — the sure word of God in writ­ten form.

    And the Scrip­tures from start to fin­ish tes­ti­fy that homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is a sin.

    Gala­tians 3:28 says that we are all one “in Christ Jesus”; else­where the Scrip­tures make it clear that unre­pen­tant sin­ners are not in Christ and Christ said Him­self that if we are not for Him then we are against Him. And if you’re quot­ing Paul as Scrip­ture, then I urge you not to ignore his words in Romans 1 or these words:

    Or do you not know that the unright­eous will not inher­it the king­dom of God? Do not be deceived: nei­ther the sex­u­al­ly immoral, nor idol­aters, nor adul­ter­ers, nor men who prac­tice homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunk­ards, nor revil­ers, nor swindlers will inher­it the king­dom of God. 1 Corinthi­ans 6:9–10

  25. No, Rick, you’ve got me pegged wrong.
    My faith is based on the good and the bad. Wars hap­pen, death hap­pens, bad things hap­pen to good peo­ple, and good things hap­pen for the bad.

    The truth is that the world is a big, dan­ger­ous, messed up place where dis­ease takes inno­cent chil­dren, and good fathers die from not enough med­i­cine, because an insur­ance com­pa­ny did­n’t approve it.

    Bad men pros­per, good men loose it all. But some­how, you kneel and pray, and tell God that you’re sor­ry for the sins you’ve committed.

    When you’re on the floor, unable to breathe because of a ripped open gut, pray­ing that you see your fam­i­ly just one more time, then you might under­stand my faith.

    When you know the lone­li­ness and despair of a child in a dirty, third world coun­try hut, dying alone from some alien and hor­ren­dous dis­ease, who only learned the Lord’s Prayer, but prays it nonethe­less, you might know my faith.

    So if I find some hap­pi­ness in faith, I think it’s well deserved. So the scrip­tures say it’s sin. Your right, they do. But we are all sin­ners, the scrip­ture says that as well.

    Thanks for point­ing out the weak­ness in my faith.

  26. Robert: I under­stand faith in weak­ness. Asth­ma almost claimed my life in ’99.

    And you’re right, the world is a bad, ter­ri­ble place. As a friend of mine is apt to point out: It’s jacked up. Even that’s an under­state­ment. We are all sin­ners, and we all deserve the worst pun­ish­ments imaginable.

    It is recog­ni­tion of that which dri­ves me to Christ — and con­verse­ly it is only by His grace that I even rec­og­nize my deprav­i­ty. Apart from Him, I would love dark­ness rather than light just as every­one else who has not believed in His name.

    Expe­ri­ence and emo­tion are a big part of life — no doubt about it. My first sev­er­al years as a dis­ci­ple were spent fol­low­ing emo­tion. Out of emo­tion I “sur­ren­dered” to preach. Out of emo­tion, blah blah blah. As I matured, I real­ized that every believ­er is called to preach the Gospel to the nations. My expe­ri­ences were replaced with a more com­plete knowl­edge of the Word.

    May your expe­ri­ences, your faith by con­tin­u­al­ly sanc­ti­fied by the Word, as I hope mine con­tin­u­al­ly are.

    And may we join the saints (and like­ly Jesus Him­self) in rais­ing our voic­es with the words of God’s song book:

    The law of the Lord is perfect,
    reviv­ing the soul;
    the tes­ti­mo­ny of the Lord is sure,
    mak­ing wise the simple;
    8the pre­cepts of the Lord are right,
    rejoic­ing the heart;
    the com­mand­ment of the Lord is pure,
    enlight­en­ing the eyes;
    9the fear of the Lord is clean,
    endur­ing forever;
    the rules of the Lord are true,
    and right­eous alto­geth­er. Psalm 19:7–10

  27. Rick,

    Thank you for quot­ing Psalm 19 for me, because I’ve had a ques­tion bug­ging me for a long time.

    The Psalmist in Psalm 19 states, “The Law of the Lord is per­fect, reviv­ing the soul.”

    I don’t know exact­ly what trans­la­tion you used, but there are two points I want to explore.

    1. The Law of the Lord is per­fect, accord­ing to David. That means it is whole, com­plete, with­out need of improve­ment. The Hebra­ic word is “tamiym” which denotes what I just said. There is noth­ing wrong with the Law of the Lord.

    Is the Law to which David refers the Law of Moses? One can only assume it is, since it is almost incon­ceiv­able David knew of any oth­er Law of the Lord.

    If, indeed, David is refer­ring to the Law of Moses, and it being per­fect, then why did we need a new Law?

    In Hebrews 7:18, the author says, “There is a putting aside of a for­mer com­mand­ment because of its weak­ness and uselessness.”

    The author is speak­ing of the Law of Moses, the same Law that David declared to be “per­fect,” with­out need of improvement.

    How can the Law of Moses be both “per­fect” and “weak and useless”?

    2. David says the Law of the Lord is per­fect because it “revives” the soul. The Hebra­ic word is “shuwb” which means, “to return, to turn back.” So real­ly, David is say­ing, “The Law of the Lord is per­fect, turn­ing back the soul.”

    Because the Law of the Lord turns back, brings back, restores, revives the soul, it is perfect.

    But the entire New Tes­ta­ment dis­agrees with this one state­ment. Again, Hebrews says, “For the Law made noth­ing per­fect” (7:19). Indeed, Paul says, “For if right­eous­ness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.”

    If souls can be revived, brought back to God, through the Law, what point was there in send­ing Christ?

    So which is it? Is the Law of God per­fect, or isn’t it?

    If David is right, then Christ died need­less­ly. If Paul is right, then Chris­tians have can­on­ized a heresy (in that they accept the Old Tes­ta­ment as true and what not).

    ~~~

    You also opened anoth­er top­ic which I want to explore, which is more rel­e­vant to your post on homosexuality.

    I can’t remem­ber where exact­ly, but there is a place in one of Paul’s let­ters where he admits that some things he teach­es are not things Christ has taught him, but that he feels are ben­e­fi­cial to the Church.

    How do we know his views on homo­sex­u­al­i­ty are views held by God? Is it pos­si­ble he could just be teach­ing some­thing he feels would ben­e­fit the church, how­ev­er much they lack Divine authority?

    ~~~

    My opin­ion won’t change either way, but I’m curi­ous to see what you believe.

  28. Walt Dick­in­son: Hey, Justin… Good questions. 

    I can’t remem­ber where exact­ly, but there is a place in one of Paul’s let­ters where he admits that some things he teach­es are not things Christ has taught him, but that he feels are ben­e­fi­cial to the Church.

    You’re refer­ring to the things Paul taught on mar­riage. Keep in mind that even those pas­sages which are not explic­it­ly labeled “Thus says the Lord” are Scrip­ture. Paul’s teach­ings on mar­riage are bind­ing — he is an apos­tle and thus has great author­i­ty with­in the church. Like­wise, that God would enscrip­turate the mar­riage teach­ings prove that they are com­pat­i­ble with not only Christ’s teach­ings but God’s will.

    Note that Paul did not pref­ace any­thing regard­ing homo­sex­u­al­i­ty in that man­ner, so there’s no cause to even think that “Well, maybe it does­n’t count…”

    Once you start reject­ing cer­tain por­tions of Scrip­ture, not only are you risk­ing remov­ing your­self from the Lam­b’s Book of Life, you reveal your idol­a­try — if the Scrip­ture’s rev­e­la­tion of God does not whol­ly describe who you wor­ship, there’s some­thing wrong, and trag­i­cal­ly so.

  29. Rick, thanks for such a thor­ough and faith­ful exe­ge­sis! I real­ly appre­ci­ate how you have weighed both Old and New Tes­ta­ment and how any emo­tions that you’ve shared are not ones of dis­gust, but ones of con­cern for the lives of others.

    Walt, I post­ed my thoughts about the law on the forum.

    As for the sec­ond, I think it might be 1 Cor 7:12 that Walt is refer­ring to.

    Rick, you’re right, Paul is an apos­tle, autho­rised by Christ, through the Holy Spir­it, to teach the word of God. I also agree about not pick­ing and choos­ing scripture.

    When look­ing at 1 Cor 7:12, it’s impor­tant to look back at verse 10 and see what he’s say­ing. I think that he’s say­ing, “look, here are some things you need to hear that Jesus him­self already spoke about”. We can see he spoke about them in the Ser­mon on the Mount and he prob­a­bly spoke about it at oth­er times. Then in verse 12 he says “but to this group of peo­ple that Jesus did­n’t already address, I’m telling you this as his spokesman”. I don’t think Paul means that his opin­ions are less impor­tant, and in fact they’re not because he is teach­ing what God has com­mis­sioned him to.

  30. kristarel­la: You’re absolute­ly right, kristarel­la! As an apos­tle of Christ, Paul (and the oth­er apos­tles) had the author­i­ty to speak on His behalf. Just as an ambas­sador for a nation may speak for a nation, so to did the apos­tles (of which there are an esti­mat­ed fif­teen men­tioned in the Bible) have the author­i­ty to speak on behalf of Christ. As Jesus said, they were giv­en the abil­i­ty to bind & loose on Earth, and that their deci­sions would be mir­rored in Heaven.

    Paul did­n’t teach some new doc­trine in Romans 1 when he decreed the ungod­li­ness of homo­sex­u­al­i­ty; rather, he did what every fol­low­er of Christ ought to do: hear­ken unto the Old Tes­ta­ment, just as Christ did. Paul extrap­o­lates and fur­ther explains why homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is such a griev­ous sin — an abom­i­na­tion, in Leviti­cus’ words.

    Homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, as explained by Paul, is a sin which stems from an utter and com­plete rejec­tion of God as Cre­ator. Where­as God cre­at­ed as male & female so that two flesh may be as one (as Jesus also taught with­out apol­o­gy), homo­sex­u­al­i­ty rejects that Cre­ation decree and empha­sizes the rela­tion­ship of two males or two females. It is idol­a­try, for it ele­vates the rea­son­ing of man above the decree of God. There are few sins, if any, which are greater than idol­a­try — espe­cial­ly brazen idol­a­try done despite knowl­edge of the true God, as the Israelites did at Sinai — which explains God’s intense pun­ish­ment upon Sodom.

    The angels in Gen­e­sis 6 went after strange flesh, and they are being held to this day in Tar­tarus, await­ing judg­ment (accord­ing to Peter & Jude); homo­sex­u­al­i­ty entails going after “strange flesh” as well.

    And any attempt to inter­pret the Scrip­tures any oth­er way is an exer­cise in wrest­ing the Word of God to ones own destruction.

    Thanks for the com­ment, kristarel­la, and you post­ed on the Hall? *off to check that now*

  31. It is idol­a­try, for it ele­vates the rea­son­ing of man above the decree of God. There are few sins, if any, which are greater than idolatry…

    Arguably all sins put the rea­son­ing of man before the decree of God. We con­vince our­selves that it’s ok, that it does­n’t mat­ter, or even that it’s good.

    If you class homo­sex­u­al­i­ty as idol­a­try, does that make it sim­i­lar to greed, jeal­ousy, cov­etous­ness? All of which wor­ship things oth­er than God, the cre­at­ed rather than the creator.

  32. I think what Kristarel­la is say­ing shows why it is easy to reduce all of the com­mand­ments to two: love the Lord thy God with all thy heart mind soul and strength and love your neigh­bor as your­self. Dis­obe­di­ence to God’s com­mand, sin, is essen­tial­ly idol­a­try. Is it any won­der then that all sin deserves pun­ish­ment in hell?

    Lat­est from Jonathan: Regard­ing Rus­si­a’s Blitzkrieg In Georgia

  33. Jonathan & kristarel­la: You two are both right: All sins are essen­tial­ly idol­a­try — the putting of our­selves or objects in the place of Yah­weh — and vir­tu­al­ly all of them are moti­vat­ed by pride — we know bet­ter than Yahweh.

    In fact, near the close of Romans 1, I believe, Paul links homo­sex­u­al­i­ty with myr­i­ad oth­er sins.

    For what­ev­er rea­son, though, homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is in a class to itself — in Leviti­cus, it’s the only sin brand­ed as abom­inable. I sup­pose you could link it direct­ly with the sin of “going after strange flesh”; man isn’t meant to lie with man any more than angel with human (Gen­e­sis 6; Jude 6, 7).

    When the angels went after strange flesh and pur­sued unnat­ur­al desires, only a few were saved from the whole Earth. When the cit­i­zens of Sodom and the sur­round­ing areas did the same, only a hand­ful of peo­ple were saved therefrom.

    Sex­u­al puri­ty is clear­ly of para­mount impor­tance to the Lord.

  34. Leviti­cus chap­ters 18 and 20 are two pas­sages used by many to con­demn home­sex­u­al­i­ty. You are wrong in stat­ing the “abom­i­na­tion” is only used a cou­ple times in the bil­ble. The word used is to’e­vah. The bib­li­cal mean­ing of to’e­vah, a Hebrew word, is used to sig­ni­fy rit­u­al unclean­ness and is used quite a num­ber of times in the Mosa­ic Code — but is instead tran­lat­ed as “unclean” when it comes to such things as eat­ing shrimp and shell­fish. Despite being the same word it is trans­lat­ed quite dif­fer­ent­ly only when applied to homosexuality.

    Briefly, the Mosa­ic Code, as the law is called, is com­posed of 613 (that’s right! 613!) laws that the Jew­ish peo­ple were expect­ed to fol­low. It per­mit­ted slav­ery yet pun­ished the eat­ing of shrimp and pork. It was intend­ed to sep­a­rate the reli­gious prac­tices of the Jew­ish peo­ple from the reli­gious prac­tices of the oth­er peo­ples liv­ing around them.

    The upshot today is that “Chris­tians are free to wear tat­toos, eat shrimp, pork or rare meat, wear poly­ester-cot­ton blends, seed their lawns with a grass mix­ture, and get their hair cut. But homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is some­how taboo. We have been unable to find any log­i­cal expla­na­tion that would jus­ti­fy con­ser­v­a­tive Chris­tians con­cen­trat­ing so much on these two laws against homo­sex­u­al­i­ty while aban­don­ing most of the rest.” In oth­er words, out of the 613 Mosa­ic laws, Chris­tians choose to ignore 611 of them (approx­i­mate­ly) and to pros­e­cute just two of them. As you’ll see below, you either observe all of them or you do not but you do not get to pick and choose among them.

  35. But if you do decide that Leviti­cus has weight in this day and age then don’t con­ve­nient­ly over­look the rest of the Mosa­ic Law — because it’s all or noth­ing. You don’t get to pick and choose the parts of the Levit­i­cal scrip­ture you want to keep. Just to point out a few oth­er places where the death penal­ty applies in the Mosa­ic Law …

    * Lev 20:9 — Any per­son who curs­es his/her parents.

    * Lev 20:10 — Adul­ter­ers … both man and woman. Unless, of course the woman is a slave and then it’s ok (Lev 19:20).

    * Lev 20:15 — For beas­t­ial­i­ty. (Frankly that’s just plain dis­gust­ing! Yuu­uck! … Though some­how if mar­riage for gay peo­ple is allowed it seems that mar­riage with ani­mals must also be allowed. I don’t under­stand why the reli­gious right seems to think they have to approve both if they allow the one. But then again I’m just a sim­ple guy on the street.)

    * Lev 20 (all over) — For incest in any form … and it includes both partners.

    * Lev 20:27 — Medi­ums, spiri­tists, sooth-say­ers and palm readers.

    * Lev 21:9 — The daugh­ter of a priest if she has sex out­side of mar­riage. (I don’t know what is sup­posed to hap­pen to the son of a priest.)

    * Lev 24:16 — Any­one who uses God’s name in a curse.

    * Deut 21: 18–21 — Any and all rebel­lious children.

    The first two items in the list and the last two items in the list should just about wipe out most of Amer­i­ca. Don’t you think?

  36. It is inter­est­ing that in Acts 9:7–11 the apos­tle Peter makes the case that the Law should no longer be a yoke around the neck of any believ­er in Christ. “And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the ear­ly days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gen­tiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore wit­ness to them, giv­ing them the holy Spir­it, just as He also did to us; and He made no dis­tinc­tion between us and them, cleans­ing their hearts by faith. Now there­fore why do you put God to the test by plac­ing upon the neck of the dis­ci­ples a yoke which nei­ther our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.”

    There is anoth­er, big­ger, issue here. If some­one claims to be a believ­er in Christ than there is anoth­er prin­ci­ple in play and that’s sim­ply the fact that as believ­ers in Christ we are no longer under Mosa­ic law.

    Romans 3 says that none are right­eous in them­selves but that, as believ­ers in Christ, we are set apart from the law through faith in Christ so that we are no longer judged by the law. Vers­es 19 & 20 state that those who judge by the law will in turn be judged the same way. If one is to use the law in Leviti­cus as a way to judge oth­ers than one must be care­ful them­selves to keep ALL the law them­selves. In break­ing even one facet of the law you break it all. In break­ing even one tenet of the law you doom your­self and prove once again that human efforts are frag­ile and prone to fail­ure. James 2:10 repeats the same theme, “For who­ev­er keeps the whole law and yet stum­bles in one, he has become guilty of all.”

    Every Chris­t­ian I’ve ques­tioned about this has stat­ed that the Mosa­ic law does­n’t apply any­more. Yet in the next breath they quote Leviti­cus to prove that homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is wrong. Hel­lo!?! Did you not hear what you just said? Do you not under­stand the impli­ca­tions of the law in that if you fol­low it you must fol­low ALL of it? There is no choos­ing of the part you want and the part you don’t want. So which part of the law can one choose to keep, which part can be dis­card­ed? It’s all or none if you are to use it for judgement.

    Even Jesus had a com­ment about that issue, “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For by the stan­dard you judge you will be judged, and the mea­sure you use will be the mea­sure you receive.” (Matthew 7:1–2)

  37. Paul, in Gala­tians 3:1–3 says “You fool­ish Gala­tians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clear­ly por­trayed as cru­ci­fied. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spir­it by observ­ing the law, or by believ­ing what you heard? Are you so fool­ish? After begin­ning with the Spir­it, are you now try­ing to attain your goal by human effort?” The Mosa­ic Law is about human effort. The Gospel is about faith. So, as a believ­er in Christ, why are you going back­ward? Paul is telling the peo­ple to whom he’s writ­ing that their atti­tude makes no sense.

    Ok, so we’re not under the law any­more, does that give us license to sin? Paul says “Heav­ens no!”. Faith is not a license to sin more. But the laws of Gen­e­sis, Leviti­cus and Deuteron­o­my con­cern the reli­gious puri­ty for the peo­ple of Israel that was appro­pri­ate before Christ. If most peo­ple are hon­est they’ll admit they don’t keep the Law any­more either … except as a way to make a point about some­thing in which one does­n’t believe. In order to make that point one must accept and fol­low ALL of it because the law can­not be picked over and the parts cho­sen that one wants to keep or not keep.

    The word used as “abom­i­na­tion” in Leviti­cus is to’e­vah (or to’e­bah)… the same word used for eat­ing shrimp or pork and a host of oth­er things! To’e­vah means “reli­gious­ly unclean”. I find it strange that the Eng­lish trans­la­tions of Leviti­cus and the oth­er books of the law some­times trans­late this word as “unclean” and at oth­er times they ren­der it as “abom­i­na­tion”. We’re using the same word so why the dif­fer­ence. Could the dif­fer­ence sim­ply be the translator’s bias? … It’s just a thought … Is it possible?

    The same word is used by Paul in Romans 1 as well … though it is not trans­lat­ed that way in Eng­lish. So Paul regards the prac­tice as unclean and dis­hon­or­able but does­n’t say it is sin­ful (oth­er than stat­ing, when the verse is put into the con­text of the whole chap­ter, that using any sex in a reli­gious prac­tice or con­text is wrong). Paul, being Jew­ish and speak­ing to the Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ty in Rome, declares it unclean so that he can cap­ture the atten­tion of that Jew­ish audi­ence. Along the way though he turns, instead, to talk direct­ly to the gen­tiles in the church there at Rome, and in Romans 14:14 he comes back to say “I know and am con­vinced in the Lord Jesus that noth­ing is unclean in itself, but to him who thinks any­thing is unclean, to him it is unclean.”

    So at first Paul uses the Mosa­ic code to make a point but then he comes back and states that the sit­u­a­tion is changed … “in the Lord Jesus”.

    There are things that are very clear­ly spelled out in many places in Paul’s writ­ings but, in many instances, what makes a thing unclean? Not the law but our own feel­ings, belief or atti­tude about that thing. There­fore you should not engage in that activ­i­ty. As a young­ster, my par­ents pro­hib­it­ed us from see­ing movies in the the­ater because they felt movies were wrong. They still do not see most movies today because of the same atti­tude. As long as they have that belief than, indeed, it is wrong for them to vio­late that and go to the movies. The prin­ci­ple applies even in small things such as this. Paul told us that the law was tak­en away but it was replaced with a bet­ter guid­ance sys­tem “in the Lord Jesus”.

    Unfor­tu­nate­ly many Chris­tians do not under­stand this because they have no idea what the bible real­ly teach­es. As one per­son once said as she spat the words into my face, “I don’t care what the bible says, I know what the min­is­ter said”. And there­in lays the begin­ning of so many times that some­thing done in the name of Christ has noth­ing to do with Christ at all.

  38. Don: That could have all been post­ed in a sin­gle com­ment… or bet­ter yet, in your own blog link­ing back to this page.

    In any event, you con­ve­nient­ly ignore the sev­er­al New Tes­ta­ment cita­tions of homo­sex­u­al­i­ty being a sin, the fact that Sodom & Gomor­rah were destroyed by God pri­or to the giv­ing of the Law at Sinai, and so on.

    Notice in Romans 1 that Paul isn’t sim­ply equat­ing homo­sex­u­al­i­ty with rit­u­al unclean­ness; he’s stat­ing rather emphat­i­cal­ly that peo­ple who are com­mit­ting homo­sex­u­al­i­ty are doing so in will­ful dis­obe­di­ence to God, who in turn turns them over to their wickedness.

    There’s some­thing a lot deep­er there going on than a Jew eat­ing pork, so to speak.

  39. Don: The men­tion of Sodom by Peter and Jude refer to the men of Sodom going after strange flesh. That’s the same rea­son the angels of Gen­e­sis 6 were con­demned. “Strange flesh” for a man is anoth­er man.

    “Homo­sex­u­al­i­ty” is list­ed as sin twice twice in the New Tes­ta­ment.

    If you believe the trans­la­tors are wrong and that you are privy to knowl­edge they aren’t, then your issue is with them, not with me.

    Also, you keep refer­ring to the Hebrew word “to’e­vah.” Irrel­e­vant. The word trans­lat­ed “abom­i­na­tion” refer­ring to homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is unique. See this com­ment I pre­vi­ous­ly made here.

  40. I don’t have my own blog and it would not let me post it all in one or even two posts here so I broke it up.

    I did­n’t ignore those oth­er things at all. There just was not enough time or room to post more. And, yes, look at the orig­i­nal lan­guage in Romans 1 and you will see that Paul is equat­ing it with rit­u­al unclean­ness … how­ev­er, the trans­la­tions don’t reflect that fact. It is the same with the exten­sive use of to’e­vah in Leviti­cus which is trans­lat­ed “unclean” every­where except a cou­ple instances.

    If you delve into the orig­i­nal lan­guage on Sodom and Gomor­rah … and also read ALL the oth­er pas­sages that men­tion Sodom than it’s very plain to see that it was an entire­ly dif­fer­ent issue for which God destroyed Sodom. Want me to post more here or would you rather I email it to you?? I don’t have your email so let me know what you want.

  41. Rick,
    You ignore all the oth­er scrip­tures about sodom and choose one that you also take out of con­text. Nei­ther of us is going to con­vince the oth­er when that sort of thing happens.

    Take care.

  42. I am not a reli­gious per­son… but I am quite spir­i­tu­al and I believe in a supreme being (God). How­ev­er, I take light­ly, the man made scrip­ture as man has a way of manip­u­lat­ing. I have two chil­dren and quite often they try to get thi­er way with “mama said”. One will believe the oth­er because it it thought to come from a reli­able source when, in actu­al­i­ty, it is not true but it allows their desires to be lived out. I don’t think that God destroyed that city for rea­sons not indi­cat­ed because if they told ever­thing that Sodom and Gomor­rah did, it would dis­prove their state­ment that God detest­ed gays. He loves us all. Noth­ing in my being forces me to be het­ero­sex­u­al and I can­not believe that peo­ple choose to be gay any­more than I choose to be black. Again, we were once looked at as poses­sions, live­stock! It’s all in who you get your infor­ma­tion from. Don’t agree…just think about it!

  43. If I think about it, and if I con­cede that the Scrip­tures are wrong about homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, then I must also con­cede that they could be wrong about mur­der, kid­nap­ping, and any oth­er sins. Ulti­mate­ly, once you remove the absolute author­i­ty of the Scrip­tures, then there is no real basis for any­thing to be a sin.

    It is bet­ter to trust in God than in man.

  44. a con­ces­sion to one scrip­ture does­n’t refute every­thing writ­ten, but you do have to look at the pos­si­bil­i­ty of the infor­ma­tion not being true. As I men­tioned pre­vi­ous­ly, just because my daugh­ter lied to my son does­n’t mean that every­thing that comes from her mouth is false. And one of the oth­er post­ings above indi­cat­ed that Paul said that every­thing did­n’t come to him from God. So, how do we deter­mine what actu­al­ly did. I do serve a high­er being and I must believe that that being is a lov­ing and for­giv­ing , good and made us all in his image.
    How do you know that the lord isn’t talk­ing to me??? because it goes against what “he told” the peo­ple that wrote the bible? How many books were writ­ten that may sup­port my thought that weren’t writ­ten? Maybe none, but who knows. we have the truth that we were meant to have and then i ask, what makes us any dif­fer­ent from the fol­low­ers of Kore­sh or Jim Jones if we close our minds or hearts?

  45. All Scrip­tures were breathed-out by God; every last bit of it is God’s Word. There’s no bib­li­cal basis to doubt any­thing there­in. None of the por­tions on homo­sex­u­al­i­ty are part of Paul’s “from me, not the Lord” pas­sages (which are few and far between but are still equal­ly inspired); in fact, the teach­ings on homo­sex­u­al­i­ty can be found in the writ­ings of Moses, Paul, Jude, and Peter. When a teach­ing is endorsed by the Law-giv­er and mul­ti­ple apos­tles, per­haps we should pay atten­tion to it?

    Also, one of the prophets — Isa­iah, I think — teach­es that if any voice (even a voice from Heav­en) were to con­tra­dict the Scrip­tures, we are to stick with the Scrip­tures. Even God Him­self can­not con­tra­dict His own word, so if you’re hear­ing voic­es that tell you dif­fer­ent­ly, then I’m sor­ry, but I have to ques­tion the divin­i­ty of such a voice.

  46. You will prob­a­bly nev­er agree with the pos­si­bil­i­ty of these peo­ple being wrong about any­thing. But, I will respect that and I appre­ci­ate you tak­ing the time to cor­re­spond with me. God can­not con­tra­dict his own word but him being the mak­er of all can change his mind and there’s noth­ing any of us could do about it. But to ignore it and do what we want would be idol­try. And as for the voic­es that may be telling me dif­fer­ent why are those not the true voice? Because they’re not writ­ten? I’m sure there were oth­er peo­ple back then that felt this way but because it con­tra­dict­ed what the major­i­ty want­ed for the world, their writ­ings were unpub­lished. Again, thank you for your respons­es and may God bless.

  47. When peo­ple trust voic­es, who is to say which is right? Peo­ple hear voic­es which tell them that they are the one true Jesus. Peo­ple hear voic­es that tell them that they must take a loaded gun into the school. Peo­ple hear voic­es that tell them to go to war. Peo­ple hear voic­es that tell them to be pacifists.

    One of the pur­pos­es of the Scrip­tures was to have a “more sure foun­da­tion” — a basis upon which to judge the prophets, the priests, the kings, the pas­tors, the apos­tles, the tongues-speakers.

    It is a ruler that God has giv­en to us by which every oth­er teach­ing may be mea­sured. With­out the Scrip­tures, con­fu­sion would reign and there would be no absolutes. (This is, of course, what athe­ists want but refuse to pub­li­cize; in a human­ist world­view, all is mean­ing­less — mur­der­ing a thou­sand orphans has the same net affect on the uni­verse as feed­ing a thou­sand mal­nour­ished children.)

  48. Let me pose a ques­tion to the peo­ple who are gay. Why is it that you want to know so bad­ly if God does or does not love you? There should be no ques­tion. Yes, he loves each and every per­son and he has your sal­va­tion in his hand to give. He did­n’t say I love the adul­ter­ous but the one that is gay, leave him out of the king­dom. We have all missed it. Jesus is the mark. Do you think all the gay peo­ple dur­ing the ear­ly church who had received Christ all of a sud­den stopped being gay? Being saved is a con­di­tion of our spir­it and souls, but the body will return to the ground. If you are gay, don’t stop your rela­tion­ship with God or refuse to per­sue God just because you swing the oth­er way. If your rela­tion­ship with God flour­ish­es then don’t wor­ry about it. Remem­ber, Paul had a thorn in his flesh. We don’t know what that was but we all have our own issues with our phys­i­cal flesh­ly bod­ies that crave all dif­fer­ent things. We are spir­its in phys­i­cal cars that get us around on earth. Some cars run off oth­er fuels if you get my drift. Love one anoth­er. The only issue that peo­ple need to be con­cerned with is not what God likes or dis­likes in regards to sin but the fact the he likes us. Hel­lo, he likes us. He does­n’t hate us or have any­thing against us. He made us and he loves us, no mat­ter what. Would you stop lov­ing your son or daugh­ter because they turned out gay? Heck no you would­n’t. That’s why I think this is a stu­pid debate and one that should not be judged by us. I know what Leviti­cus said, but if your going to try and get right­eous by doing the Law, then you bet­ter keep every jot and tid­dle the law requires. Wear your­selves out if that’s the way you want to go, but as for me, the Grace of Jesus and what he did 2000 years ago will suf­fice. I love every­one, even our Holy broth­ers who might like the same sex. If God has cleansed, made right, the peo­ple of God then who are we to come against that.

  49. Josh, I know your inten­tions are good, but you’re a bit off the mark; repeat­ed­ly, the Scrip­tures tell us that God hates (or abhors) the unright­eous. Apart from Christ, there is only wrath, con­dem­na­tion, and hatred to receive from the Lord.

    It is only the elect which He will save, and those will repent of their sins (includ­ing homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, as Paul tells us) toward Christ. Those who will­ful­ly con­tin­ue in what the Scrip­tures con­demn as sin reveal them­selves to be hard­ened against the one they claim to believe in.

    Like­wise, Jesus nev­er done away with the moral Law. Grace is not a license to sin. Cer­tain­ly the cer­e­mo­ni­al and clean­li­ness Laws are ful­filled and fin­ished in Jesus Christ, but the moral Law reveals sin even today. (Espe­cial­ly con­sid­er­ing the New Tes­ta­ment repeat­ed­ly points out the sin­ful­ness of homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, even apart from the Leviti­cus Laws.)

  50. Hi Rick-

    Thanks for your reply. Who’s unright­eous is my first ques­tion? The bible talks about two ways a man can be right­eous. One, by the works of the Law and there is only One who’s been able to do that and I think we both know who that is. Then, there is right­eous­ness through faith in that Man. We are right­eous because Christ made us right­eous 2000 years ago. Jesus came, not to give us a tick­et to heav­en, but he came to give life and that more abun­dant. That means that there was no life before Christ. Sure, there were peo­ple walk­ing and talk­ing, but do you remem­ber Jesus say­ing, “let the dead bury the dead.” He knew that the peo­ple car­ry­ing the cof­fin were just as dead as the ones in the cof­fin. Now, if we did­n’t get a tick­et to heav­en, but instead got His pre­cious life, then don’t you think that oth­ers would like to see that life too. Do you think some­one’s going to want what you have to offer if there are strings attached? Jesus accept­ed you just as you are, just like he accepts all his chil­dren. We are all the elect of God. You know why I know we are all the elect of God? Because we would­n’t be on earth if it was­n’t the case. Where do you think we all came from? Do you think we start­ed liv­ing when we were born? “Where were you when I laid the foun­da­tions of the world.” We came from God and we will all return to God. God’s Word nev­er returns to Him void. The Word was made flesh and is now made man­i­fest in all flesh. Jesus is in the hearts of all men and there is just noth­ing you or I can do about that. He was the corn of wheat that did­n’t abide alone. He did die and is com­ing forth much fruit. He is com­ing through His body, which we are. 

    What do you say to a human being, a man that loves anoth­er man? I can’t com­pre­hend it because I am not gay. But I’m not going to play God and con­demn a man for it. As far as I am con­cerned, he’s accept­ed and loved by God. I’m not going to judge the man nor am I going to judge the act. I’ll leave that to our Father and let him deal with it as he does. Judg­ment is after we die but you’ve got to look back and see when you died. You, like most oth­ers, think your death is some­thing of your future. The Bible does­n’t say that at all. Your dead and your life is hid in Christ. We were cru­ci­fied with Christ 2000 years ago but you may not see that the first time you look at the cross. Then, you’ve got to go back to the cross a sec­ond time and see some­thing dif­fer­ent. The first time you see the cross you see one man dying on the cross. Go back and tell me if you can see your­self dying on the cross with Him? Jesus was lift­ed up on the cross and he drew us all into him­self and killed the Adam race of man so that he could raise up a new race of beings. Every­thing God hat­ed about man he dealt with in the per­son and work of Christ. So, God saw the tre­vail of his soul and was sat­is­fied. The crim­i­nal cru­ci­fied next to Christ looked over at the oth­er crim­i­nal and said we are get­ting what we deserved. Hel­lo. We got what we deserved in Christ 2000 years ago. We have been made joint heirs of Christ. If you look there is a scrip­ture for each. We were cru­ci­fied with Christ. We died with Christ. We were buried with Christ. We were quick­ened togeth­er, or giv­en life togeth­er. We were raised togeth­er and now we are seat­ed togeth­er with him in the heav­ens. I’ll say it this way, you died, you were judged in Christ, you received the seal of God on your fore­head and are now seat­ed with him in the heav­ens. If you do not see that you are seat­ed with him, it is true non­the­less. And if you turn gay one of these days, I promise the same will always be the same. You are his son in whom God is well pleased, because he made you in right stand­ing and holy and blame­less because of what He did in Christ 2000 years ago.

  51. Do you think someone’s going to want what you have to offer if there are strings attached? Jesus accept­ed you just as you are, just like he accepts all his children.

    “Go, and sin no more.” “Repent, for the king­dom of heav­en is at hand.”

    Jesus demands change and obe­di­ence. He is, after all, King. Our trans­for­ma­tive sal­va­tion enables us to live in accor­dance with His com­mands, and those who con­tin­ue in sin show forth that they were nev­er tru­ly changed to begin with.

    Only those who believe in Jesus become the sons of God; every­one else (every­one by default, real­ly) are chil­dren of wrath.

    We are all the elect of God. You know why I know we are all the elect of God? Because we wouldn’t be on earth if it wasn’t the case.

    John 6 tells us that all of the elect will be saved, that none of the elect would fail to be saved. Yet else­where Jesus tells us that a major­i­ty would not be saved. Trust me, all of human­i­ty is not elect. Romans 9 ham­mers that point home.

    What do you say to a human being, a man that loves anoth­er man?

    We should say the same thing that Jesus said to the sin­ners He encoun­tered: “Repent.”

    When we fail to warn peo­ple of the wrath to come and are instead wel­com­ing and accept­ing of them despite their sins, we are not show­ing them love. We are turn­ing a blind eye to their impend­ing destruc­tion — that is an act of hate toward them. We must love peo­ple enough to tell them the truth, no mat­ter how offen­sive they may find it.

    if you turn gay one of these days

    I thought peo­ple were born gay? [/sarcasm]

    Seri­ous­ly, though, I am thank­ful that I have the indwelling of the Holy Spir­it and the wis­dom of the Scrip­tures to guide me in my life, both of which tes­ti­fy that homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is wickedness.

    You seem to know your way around the pos­i­tive, hap­py vers­es of Scrip­tures; I encour­age you to keep dig­ging in, embrac­ing even those Scrip­tures which might offend mod­ern sen­si­bil­i­ties. Homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, divorce, for­ni­ca­tion, adul­ter­at­ing, and much more are still sins which must be repent­ed of at all costs. I’ve no doubt that there are Chris­tians who are still gay, but I trust God and His Word enough to believe that those Chris­tians are strug­gling with their sin. No one who is alive in Christ will be able to enjoy a life lived in pur­suit of sin.

    For more infor­ma­tion, check out James White’s The Same-Sex Con­tro­ver­sy. If you real­ly want to learn what the Bible has to say about homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, you’ll grab that book. It’s a quick read and is very informative.

  52. I appre­ci­ate you Rick. I’ve just come to see the wrath of God as some­thing in the past. That’s all. There is no dought that God’s wrath on man was evi­dent. But, that wrath was quenched in Christ 2000 years ago. God has noth­ing against man any­more. Man has things against man but God loves man. Remem­ber there is noth­ing that shocks God. Please under­stand, that I’m not try­ing to give a license to do what­ev­er they want to do, but we have to qual­i­fy peo­ple and not dis­qual­i­fy. That’s all I’m say­ing. Repent means to change your mind. It means to change your mind about the way you’ve thought pre­vi­ous. Why was John the Bap­tist con­stant­ly say­ing repent, or change your mind? Change their minds to what? Well, the King­dom of Heav­en was at hand. Before the king­dom was way off and the promise­land was a blur, but you see, now they had an oppor­tu­ni­ty to grab hold of some­thing that they had only hoped and dreamed of. Change you mind, for the King­dom of Heav­en is at hand. Don’t wait for some sweet by and by, or some glad morn­ing. The King­dom of Heav­en was now at hand. We can preach it bet­ter than John did, because behold, change our minds, because we don’t have to wait to die to go to heav­en, for, the King­dom of God is inside us. The King­dom is here and the King has returned. Just like they missed him 2000 years ago, because He did­n’t come as they expect­ed. Truth holds firm to this day. Jesus is here! He has come! Don’t miss him like they missed him 2000 years ago because he may not have come as you expect­ed. But, believe me, He’s here. To real­ly love some­one, you love them no mat­ter what, peri­od. You take the bad with the good. Besides, don’t you think that the per­son has heard it 1000’s of times that homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is bad. That does­n’t make them stop just by hear­ing that. Those peo­ple must first turn to Christ and he’ll work work on the soul through the Holy Spir­it. You can’t tell a per­son to clean up and then you can have Christ. They must first turn and behold the ser­pent on a pole, just like Moses held up the ser­pent of brass on a pole in the wilder­ness. When the peo­ple looked and believed, they were cured. Jesus was that ser­pent of brass. Peo­ple have to gaize upon the Him and then He takes care of every­thing else. WHat I was try­ing to accom­plish was to encour­age your read­ers to con­tin­ue to chase after him, despite what­ev­er snakes are bit­ing them. There’s just too many snakes to fight off. You have to look at Christ and stay focused on him and he does the rest. You’ll nev­er be able to clean your­self up. He’s the Purifer of our Hearts. He’s the one that works on our hearts. Not us. Just love peo­ple peri­od. You don’t have to be sin con­scious. He’s sprin­kled our mind of a sin con­scious­ness. I’m sor­ry, I just love the peo­ple of God, I love you Rick, and that’s the direc­tion the Lord has tak­en me. I have no motives but to lift peo­ple up in their Most Holy Faith. I present every man per­fect in Christ. There is a scrip­ture for that and we must present every man per­fect in Christ. Until we do, there will always be war and feuding.

  53. But, that wrath was quenched in Christ 2000 years ago. God has noth­ing against man anymore.

    It remains true that those who do not believe in Christ are chil­dren of perdi­tion and God’s wrath abides upon them. The epis­tles and even the Rev­e­la­tion are very clear on this mat­ter. Jesus’ sac­ri­fice was effi­ca­cious only for the elect — only for those that the Father gives to the Son, those who are giv­en life-chang­ing faith.

    Change you mind, for the King­dom of Heav­en is at hand. Don’t wait for some sweet by and by, or some glad morning.

    Repen­tance is indeed a change — it is a change away from sin and the world and toward right­eous­ness and a king­dom not of this world. Jesus and the apos­tles were explic­it: Sin no more. Paul lists a great deal of types of sin­ners, then says that “such were some of you.” The Chris­tians were no longer mur­der­ers, liars, adul­ter­ers, and so on — they changed their ways when Jesus changed them.

    Those peo­ple must first turn to Christ and he’ll work work on the soul through the Holy Spir­it. You can’t tell a per­son to clean up and then you can have Christ.

    Agreed, but for those who do come to Christ, they are expect­ed to clean up. “Sin no more.” Those who remain in sin are sub­ject to exclu­sion from fel­low­ship, as 1 Corinthi­ans 5 illus­trates. Sex­u­al sins being so promi­nent­ly denounced in the Scrip­tures, it is not unrea­son­able to expect a gay con­vert to begin the process of repent­ing from homo­sex­u­al­i­ty rather ear­ly. The Scrip­tures, if they tru­ly believe them and the Jesus of which they tes­ti­fy, real­ly leave no room for unre­pen­tant sex­u­al immorality.

    You’ll nev­er be able to clean your­self up.

    Also agreed, but nei­ther Jesus nor the apos­tles said, “Don’t wor­ry about it, just keep believ­ing.” There are repeat­ed calls to repent, to sin no more, to work out sal­va­tion with trem­bling and fear, and so on. We do those things by Jesus’ pow­er, cer­tain­ly, but telling some­one to not wor­ry about their sin because God loves them any­way is mis­lead­ing and may be damn­ing. We can­not under­es­ti­mate the dan­ger of sin, and we must not for­get that those who remain hard­ened in their sin are accursed of God and that obe­di­ence is praiseworthy.

    I present every man per­fect in Christ. There is a scrip­ture for that and we must present every man per­fect in Christ. Until we do, there will always be war and feuding.

    Only those who have tru­ly believed in Jesus, though, are “per­fect [com­plete] in Christ.” Every­one else are dead, damned, delin­quent sin­ners and will behave as such until such a time as they believe in Jesus or they pass from this earth.

  54. Cool Rick! We’re just deal­ing with two dif­fer­ent mind sets alto­geth­er. We’ll end up in the same place togeth­er. No wor­ries. Take care brother.

  55. To say that some­one is born this way would be call­ing God a lie. We all know that God is not a man that He would lie! And for you to say that the Bible has not done any good is just show­ing that most peo­ple like you con­tin­ue to fol­low the worlds exam­ple. True we all fall short of the glo­ry but face it only what you do for Christ will last. You believe what you want to believe, but as for me and my house we will con­tin­ue to serve God!

  56. Thank you. I feel that your approach is bib­li­cal­ly strong and full of grace and well rep­re­sents our holy and lov­ing God.

  57. I think this is a very well researched and writ­ten piece on homosexuality. 

    Over­all, all sin-whether it is con­sen­su­al sin between two peo­ple or our own per­son­al sins-has vic­tims since we are all mem­bers of the body of Christ. 

    In the end, it is not my duty to judge the liv­ing or the dead, that it God’s job. But as a Chris­t­ian if some­one comes to me regard­ing homo­sex­u­al­i­ty, I have to do what Christ would want me to do–love the sin­ner, hate the sin–and to do what Christ did often when asked about cer­tain issues–he often said “For it is writ­ten” and then quot­ed scrip­ture and then tried to oth­ers to a path­way of Holi­ness with love, for­give­ness and compassion.

    Peace to you,
    Michael

  58. Accord­ing to the bib­li­cal Sto­ry book, when Sto­ry book jesus returns from Sto­ry book heav­en, it is the Sto­ry book sin­ner that is pun­ished not the sins!

    So it is the sin­ner them­selves / per­pe­tra­tor, that is pun­ished, not the sins punished!

  59. God does not con­demn the homo­sex­u­al, he or she con­demns them­selves by choos­ing to go their own way instead of God’s way. You choose Heav­en or Hell. He sug­gests you choose life but he does not force you. If you go to Hell, do not blame God. You only have your­self to blame. Heav­en is under his author­i­ty and the per­son who heads the home makes the rules. Just as if you make a rule for your home, if a per­son choos­es not to fol­low the guide­lines, he or she can­not stay there. But it is their fault because they chose not to fol­low the rules. it’s a sim­ple thing to under­stand unless you who dis­agree think you made your­self and all the rules of the uni­verse. Wake up.

  60. God did­n’t play games when he hand­ed down his judge­ment on this sex sin and we should­n’t also. We did­n’t call it an abom­i­na­tion of the worse kind ‚but God did. If homo­sex­u­als want to be accept­ed into God’s heav­en­ly circle,then they must do what the Lord says and change their ways and repent. Every­body out there try­ing to please this dead­ly sin and move it into a sit­u­a­tion of being nor­mal as a straight rela­tion­ship that’s blessed by God. There are no Chris­t­ian homo­sex­u­als, but homo­sex­u­als can become a Chris­t­ian if they fol­low Gods Com­mand­ments instead of mak­ing their own.

  61. I am a het­ero­sex­u­al male mar­ried 17 years. I used to have a spir­it of per­ver­sion. Today we call it homo­sex­u­al­i­ty or les­bian­ism. I imi­tat­ed sex­u­al acts with men. The rea­son I say imi­tate is because sex was meant for pro­cre­ation. Saton is an imi­ta­tor of God but he does it in a per­vert­ed way: gay imi­ta­tion sex. Efe­menint means a man act­ing like a woman or hav­ing female ten­den­cies. Said per­son will not inher­it the king­dom of God. Say what you will but to imi­tate sex with the same sex is a choice just as it is a choice for me to have sex with the opposite.

  62. Why do you think God Jesus is the sav­ior what is he try­ing to save you from.From going to hell of coarse,he does­n’t want any to perish.but if you want to fol­low the worlds way ‚instead of his way,then you made the choice. Because you can’t serve two mas­ter’s at the same time. Just like the time of Noah and his fam­i­ly of eight peo­ple that’s all that God saved out of a world of 4,000,000,000 or so at the time,when the whole earth was flood­ed by God because his patience ran out and the world kept get­ting worse and worse.Like it is today ‚study your bible for yourself,read Gods love let­ter . I read the king jame’s bible it’s much more accurate,you’ll read in the fol­low­ing verse’s about homo­sex­u­al­i­ty in roman’s 1:24–27 leviticus18:22 you shall not with mankind,as with woman kind: it is abom­i­na­tion. Look for your self .Go to the bible store and get a strong’s concordance.Look up the vers­es on hell,homosexuality,etc, 1 corinthi­ans 6:9–10 that the unright­eous shall not inher­it the king­dom of God see who qualifies.Make sure you are saved .It’s faith plus obe­di­ence and noth­ing else,narrow is the way.You’ll recieve alot blessings.I’m just here to help take or leave it.ther is’t much time left the sign’s are all around us,and one mote thing ‚I know Jesus is the real one and only son of God because of his mir­a­cle’s and his bones aren’t in the grave.

  63. It seems so wr0ng to believe that peo­ple who could be kind and lov­ing and show the best of life to the world could be in sin; but the Word of God says homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is wrong. Frankly all men born are sin­ners. My try­ing to cre­ate an argu­ment for why homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is ok on the plan­et will always result in find­ing a rea­son­able answer. Frankly there is an answer for every­thing on both sides. Most sin and sin­ners can be explained away but just because we can make sense of some­thing does­n’t mean it is right­eous­ness. God is the judge of all right­eous­ness and unright­eous­ness. The line has been drawn and the only answer for all­l­l­l­l­ll sin is to accept Jesus and fol­low Him. My ques­tion is, if it is proven with­out a doubt that homo­sex­u­al­i­ty is unright­eous and just wrong, would the offend­ing lay this sin down? So try­ing to stop or change is a real trans­for­ma­tion. I don’t believe peo­ple should be judged to work or per­form in gen­er­al but peo­ple are peo­ple, and when a per­son takes a mil­i­tant stand to decide they should work or share their opin­ions and behav­iors in places that has reli­gious val­ues that dif­fer from their lifestyle, they are out of place. If one is in a church that con­dones homo­sex­u­al behav­ior and I (reli­gious­ly oppos­ing) come in and insist that I should have the right to teach and preach in their place of wor­ship then I am in error. I should be allowed to be wher­ev­er I choose because I am human; but if I am oppose to their belief I should choose to cre­ate or join an estab­lish­ment that is in agree­ment with my prin­ci­ples. Sin is sin and God will judge. That is the bot­tom line. Most of us need to real­ly take the planks out of our own eye so we don’t fall under that judgment

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Use your Gravatar-enabled email address while commenting to automatically enhance your comment with some of Gravatar's open profile data.

Comments must be made in accordance with the comment policy. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam; learn how your comment data is processed.

You may use Markdown to format your comments; additionally, these HTML tags and attributes may be used: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

The Orion Oratory