Creation Worldview Ministries
 
  Upcoming Events Latest Articles
July 31 - August 19
Brazil Mission Trip
Curitiba and Londrina, Parana
September 3
Evangel Temple Southwest
Middleburg, FL
Education / History
Is Islam a Scientifically Valid Religion?
Education / History
The Exercise of Religious Freedom
More… More…
   
   
   
An Educational Missionary Organization


English
Russian
Portuguese

Articles

 
Homosexuality

  Article Options
Back to ListBack to List
Print ArticlePrint Article

The Christian Biblical Worldview on Homosexuality

It has become politically correct to accept the argument that homosexuality is an acquired trait rather than a learned behavior. Any other view is condemned as intolerant, uncompassionate and even homophobic. This has placed pressure on the Church to fall in line with recent changes in current thinking. Some, point to scientific evidence as the compelling reason for changing our ideas and theology in the Church. Just how compelling is the evidence that gays are born that way?

Recent Legal Developments

In England on Tuesday, February 5, 2013 the House of Commons voted 400 to 175 approving the second reading of a bill to legalize same-sex marriage in England and Wales. [Parliaments in Scotland and Northern Ireland will have to pass their own legislation on the subject].

Three top “Conservative Party” members appealed to get behind the controversial legislation in a letter published in the Telegraph newspaper. The letter, signed by Chancellor George Osborne, Foreign Secretary William Hague and Home Secretary Theresa May, said that passing the bill is “the right thing to do at the right time.” The institution of marriage has evolved over time, the letter said, while “attitudes towards gay people have changed.”

Their attitude was echoed by Kate Green, a Labour MP:

“By recognizing and extending the definition of marriage to reflect today’s greater openness towards, and recognition of, same-sex relationships, the legislation does not weaken the institution of marriage. On the contrary, it takes it forward, it strengthens it. It helps to perpetuate it.”

On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 France’s lower house of parliament approved a bill to legalize gay marriage and allow same-sex couples to adopt children thus handing a major legislative victory to President Francois Hollande’s Socialists. The vote was approved in the National Assembly by a 329-to-229 vote.

In 2012, the States of Maine, Maryland and Washington passed laws establishing same-sex marriages bringing the total to six States. France joined Britain, The Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Spain, Argentina, Canada and South Africa in authorizing gay marriage. While these countries are far more secular societies than The United States, the trend is obvious.

Bible Perverted

At the end of 2012, a “new” perversion of the King James Bible, based upon the 1769 third revision of the KJV, became available. It is entitled, “The Queen James Bible.” The editors changed eight key sections to make the sin of homosexuality supposedly acceptable as “Christian” doctrine.

What Does God Say About Homosexuality?

In Genesis 1:27-28, God revealed His original plan for marriage:

“God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them; and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.’”

God created man and woman in order to have fellowship with Him, and they were to reproduce and fill the earth. God did not make a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, and tell them to go recruit [Besides, who would they recruit?]. In Malachi 2:15, we are told that man and woman are to have godly children, who would raise up godly children, who would raise up godly children.

In Genesis 2:24, God performed the first marriage ceremony. God said: “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.”

God did not say that a man shall leave his father and father, nor that he should leave his mother and mother. A man is to leave his biological father and mother and cleave to his wife.

In the Sixth Commandment [Ex. 20:12], God says: “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you.”

God did not command that a man or woman honor their father and father, nor their mother and mother.

God makes His position very plain in Leviticus 18:22, “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.”

Again, the Creator of humans further emphasizes His clear position in Leviticus 20:13, “If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their blood guiltiness is upon them.”

Jesus, as God, gives us His divine commentary concerning this topic in Matthew 19:3-7:

“Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?’ He answered and said, ‘Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE,’ and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

In His defense of marriage as being only a heterosexual institution, Jesus quoted Genesis 1:27 and 2:24. The basis for marriage is found in the creation account of mankind, firmly anchored in Genesis.

The Apostle Paul wrote his “Letter to the Evolutionists” which may be found within his Letter to the Romans. It is contained in Romans 1:16-32. After making two very positive statements, he makes it clear in verse 18 that “... the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men [and woman] who suppress the truth in unrighteousness ...”

After making his great defense arguing for the existence of the Creator God using “The Argument by Design”, Paul points out what happens when people reject the truths of the existence of the Creator, His creation and the roles that He has given men and women.

In Romans 1:26-27, Paul wrote: “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.”

Paul then continues with a litany of the consequences of the acceptance of evolution within a society. The consequences include, but are not limited to: murder (which includes abortion, euthanasia and suicide), becoming haters of God and disobedient to parents. Finally, Paul concludes with a description of a “Gay Rights Parade” in Rome: “... although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.”

Paul will continue this theme in two of his Epistles. In 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, he writes to the Church in Corinth and speaks directly to some of the Church members:

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.”

In 1 Timothy 1:8-11, Paul wrote:

“But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.”

Finally, Jude looked back to the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah and wrote: “... just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire.”

Having reviewed God’s opinion about the sin of homosexuality, we must be careful to separate the sin from the sinner; and, consider if the cause of homosexuality is genetic or moral.

Is Homosexuality Genetically Inherited?

In the past 25 years we have seen scientific studies which have tried to prove that homosexuality is genetically inherited. All of the studies: starting with the 1991 Simon LeVay gay brain studies; the gay twin study of Bailey and Pillard; the study by Dean Hamer, who postulated the presence of a possible gene which could influence the expression of homosexuality; as well as later studies through which the genes of fruit flies were genetically engineered; research on parental hormones; and, heritable epigenetics studies are riddled with scientific inconsistencies, lack of control groups, the bias’ of the researchers and even gross errors. Indeed, upon peer review these studies have now been either rejected or are considered highly speculative by the medical community.

As the strong feminist advocate, and wife of super-evolutionist Dr. George Wald, Dr. Ruth Hubbard, Professor Emerita in Biology, Harvard University, concluded in her article “False Genetic Markers,” New York Times, 2 August 1993, p. A15:

“... the search for gay genes comes directly out of the success of the gay rights struggle. But studies of human biology cannot explain the wide range of human behavior. Such efforts fail to acknowledge that sexual attraction depends on personal experience and cultural values and that desire is too complex, varied and interesting to be reduced to genes.”

Early “Genetic” Studies

In 1991, Dr. Simon LeVay (an openly gay neuroscientist) published an article entitled “A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men” in Science. The article reported a difference in average size between the third Interstitial Nucleus of the Anterior Hypothalamus (INAH3) in the brains of heterosexual men and homosexual men. He wrote that “This finding indicates that INAH is dimorphic with sexual orientation, at least in men, and suggests that sexual orientation has a biological substrate."[Emphasis added]

LeVay, S. (1991). A difference in hypothalamic structure between homosexual and heterosexual men. Science, 253, 1034-1037.

The gay, lesbian, bisexual and transsexual community immediately jumped on his article as proof that their condition was genetic and irreversible.

To his credit, LeVay tried to curb this enthusiasm in a 1994 interview in which he stated: “It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain. The INAH3 is less likely to be the sole gay nucleus of the brain than a part of a chain of nuclei engaged in men and women’s sexual behavior.”  [Emphasis added]

David Nimmons, “Sex and the Brain”, Discover Magazine, March 1994.

Dr. LeVay’s research has come under great scrutiny for various reasons: small sample size on non-living subjects (only 35 were studied), his personal gay bias, and most of the studied cadavers were from gay men who had died from HIV/AIDS.

A second study done in 1991 is known as the Bailey and Pillard’s gay twin study. Their study supposedly showed that there was a correlation of identical twins being more often homosexual than fraternal twins. This might indicate a genetic basis for homosexuality.

The flaw in their study is that they advertised for participants in openly gay newspapers. How could this be a valid study?

Studies which followed these tried to link chromosomal information to sexual orientation. These studies were supposedly looking for a “gay gene.” These studies included those by Dean Hamer (1993), Hu et al. (1995), and Sanders et al. (1998). All of these claimed to have found an X chromosome marker in homosexual men. But, other studies done by Bailey et al. (1999), Rice et al. (1999), and McKnight and Malcolm (2000) failed to duplicate the results. A recent study of 894 heterosexual and 694 homosexual men found no evidence of chromosomal linkage.                                                                                                               [Emphasis added]

Schwartz, G.; Kim, R.; Kolundzija, A.; Rieger, G.; Sanders, A. (2010). “Biodemographic and physical correlates of sexual orientation in men.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 39 (1): 93–109.

Recent “Genetic” Studies

Other studies have looked at birth order, epigenetics, pheromones, imprinting and brain structure. Currently over 700 studies have been published trying to find a genetic link to homosexuality in order to support the concept that gays are “just born that way.”

Regardless of the results, that there is no genetic link to homosexuality, the underlying driving force in all these studies is the desire to promote an evolutionary agenda and to promote the idea that homosexuals may lead their lives free from any consequences - that they may lead a sinless life without Christ.

If anything can be genetically inherited, such as hemophilia, it can be expected to happen at a certain rate. With homosexuality we find, however, that the prevalence within a community varies enormously depending on the kinds of social control and acceptance that prevail in that community.

Since genetics is not the cause, what is? There is ample evidence to confirm that learning experiences (e.g. seduction, public education, molestation and experimentation) lead young people down the path to homosexual behavior. The homosexual lifestyle is sterile. Therefore, it follows that homosexuals must of necessity, through seduction and public education, recruit their next generation.

Homosexuality is not an alternative lifestyle, it is an unnatural lifestyle. This has extremely serious implications for society as a whole and destroys the argument that gay behavior is private and has no effect on others. It would do great harm if the Church, by giving theological approval to homosexuality, becomes part of the problem of expanding this perversion instead of helping people bound by it.

As further proof that homosexuality is not an alternative lifestyle, but an unnatural one, I cite a report from The Family Research Institute (FRI) that conducted a nationwide random survey of 4,340 adults drawn from five U.S. cities in 1983. The FRI found that:

·         82% of those currently lesbian and 66% of those currently gay said that they had been in love with someone of the opposite     sex.

·         67% of lesbians and 54% of gays reported current sexual attraction to the opposite sex.

·         85% of lesbians and 54% of gays, as adults, had sexual relations with someone of the opposite sex.

·         32% of gays and 47% of lesbians had been heterosexually married.

·         Overall, 7.8% of women and 12% of men claimed to have been homosexually aroused at some point in their life. Yet 59% of the once homosexually aroused women and 51% of the once homosexually aroused men were currently heterosexual.

·         5.1% of the women and 9.4% of the men admitted to at least one homosexual partner. Of these, only 58% of the women and 61% of the men were currently gay. 

Almost a third of those who admitted to homosexual relations in adulthood were now heterosexual.

Clearly such findings demonstrate that sexual orientation is not predetermined before or after birth, and that it is not permanently fixed in adulthood.

Is Non-Heterosexual Behavior a “Victimless Crime”

Many proponents of homosexual and non-heterosexual (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and even pedophilia) behavior and same-sex marriage declare that there is no harm to society in participating in such activities. They declare that there are no victims, since supposedly all such activity is by mutual “loving” consent.

But, is this proposition true?

The argument that what happens behind closed doors is none of anyone else’s business is not true. Private behavior often has very public consequences. Statistics clearly show that homosexual behavior is destructive and bears high costs, not only to the individual, but to society.

Homosexual behavior has implications far beyond the bedroom. Last year the U.S. government spent billions of dollars on AIDS treatment, research and programs. AIDS in the U.S. is largely a disease stemming from the unhealthy sexual practices of homosexuals and non-heterosexuals (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and even pedophilia).

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia, has reported time and again that the homosexual community is at increased risk for a number of mental and physical health threats when compared to their heterosexual peers.

On September 12, 2008, Health24 reported that:

“Homosexual and bisexual men and women may face higher risks of depression, substance abuse and suicidal behavior than heterosexuals do ..."

In an analysis of 25 past studies on sexual orientation and mental health, UK researchers found that across the studies, gay, lesbian and bisexual adults were at least 50% more likely than heterosexuals to have a history of depression or an anxiety disorder.”                                                                                                                                                                          [Emphasis added]

Drs. Paul and Kirk Cameron of the Family Research Institute revealed in 2007 that the lifespan of a homosexual is on average 24 years shorter than that of a heterosexual. The homosexual lifestyle is highly promiscuous with many serious health hazards.

Gay and lesbian members of the homosexual community have very high rates of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) including HIV/AIDS; high rates of suicide; increased rates of breast cancer in lesbians and anal cancer in gay men; very high illegal drug use and alcoholism; high rates of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection of which over 20 are incurable; high rates of Hepatitis A, B and C; gay men suffer from Gay Bowel Syndrome; and, high rates of physical violence and murder compared to the married heterosexual community.

We may ask, “Why would any rational human being who wants to lead a long and healthy life want to join such a community?”

What About Same-sex Couples Adopting Children?

Many “couples” within the homosexual community are now adopting children. The promoters of such adoptions claim that there is no harm in such adoptions.

This is not true. 35% of children raised in same-sex marriage homes drop back one grade while in school. Children in homosexual households score lower in verbal skills, vocabulary, composition, and basic math skill; they were less likely to be involved with sports and other group activities; and, they were regarded by their teachers as introverts and loners. Furthermore, the homosexual parents were less likely to visit or volunteer at the children’s schools, or help with homework.

As homosexuality is a learned behavior, it is obvious that children raised in such homes will learn from their environment and have sexual identity problems. There are also problems associated with legal recognition between States; the inherent instability within the home of homosexual partners as the average relationship is only two to three years; and, a shocking 29% of children raised by homosexuals are sexually abused compared to only a 0.6% incest rate among married heterosexual homes*.

*P. Cameron and K. Cameron, “Homosexual Parents,” Adolescence 31 (1996): 772.

There are Dangers to a Society Accepting Deviancy

In 1973, Dr. Karl Menninger wrote a book entitled Whatever Became of Sin? Perhaps an equal question would be, “Whatever Became of Shame?” In 1993, Senator Daniel Moynihan (D - NY) wrote that when deviancy is normalized by a legislature it decays the fabric of a society.

When a society removes the consequences of individual human actions then we open the door for all behavior to be considered as “normal” and “acceptable.” While I am deeply concerned about the “dumbing down” of our education system, I am also deeply concerned about the effects of “dumbing down” deviancy. The promotion of homosexuality as normal and acceptable in TV shows, textbooks and movies is a clear example of what Senator Moynihan was warning about.

Only God knows what is and is not good behavior, both for individuals and for a society. Biblical marriage is strictly between a man and a woman; there are no exceptions in either biblical example or instruction. We must remember that there is a great deal of distinction between desire and behavior. Same-sex marriage is neither God ordained nor socially healthy.

There are Dangers in Accepting a Genetic Origin for Homosexuality

If Christians truly love their fellow human beings and want everyone to receive and accept the Gospel message, why must we fully realize that homosexuality is not genetically inherited?

1. The argument supporting genetic inheritance implies that homosexuals have abnormal genes and are either defective or diseased.

2. If genes are the cause of homosexuality, and abortion on demand is now common place, prenatal testing might influence heterosexual parents to abort babies likely to carry homosexual genes.

Indeed, the gay lobby in the USA has already expressed fears about this. Strange as it may seem; strange bedfellows though they may be; the gay community is staunchly pro-life. Heterosexuals are seen as baby producers. Where else would the homosexual community find its next generation if heterosexuals were to stop reproducing?

3. Genetic research discoveries are unlikely to stop. While it will never happen, what if pedophile genes, murder genes, rapist genes or bestiality genes were to be found? Would not the Church have to reconsider its ordination or evangelism policies in the light of such new discoveries?

4. If homosexuality were genetic in origin it would mean that the condition is unchangeable. This would infer that “God made them that way.”

If this were true, then God is capricious; He has contradicted His giving of full and total free will to each individual and decided ahead of time who will be saved and who will be condemned. In effect, the gift of salvation is not really for everyone.

There are Theological Pitfalls in Justifying Homosexuality

It is a great overstatement to say that the Church is divided on the homosexual issue. Christians should be clear on the fact that homosexuality is wrong, while at the same time lovingly reaching out to all who might receive the gift of God’s grace. Those seeking to give theological justification to homosexuality and those who have compromised their theology in its favor, need to seriously reconsider their position.

Condemnation of homosexuality in Leviticus is clear and backed up by other passages outside of the Levitical code. Why would the Church wait until the 21st Century to change the accepted meaning of God’s laws and roles concerning sexuality?

Today homosexual proponents want to redefine marriage as monogamous sexual relationships. The homosexual psyche, however, drives its adherents toward constant affairs and cruising which happen outside the relationship. A good example of this is what happened to the Rt. Rev. John Spong, Episcopalian Bishop of Newark, New Jersey. In his 1990 book Living in Sin? : A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality he claimed to base his views on new medical insights, but failed to consider evidence from psychology or the total lack of evidence from genetics. Even the sympathetic Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement concluded charitably that Spong was somewhat out of his depth.

On December 16, 1989, Bishop Spong ordained Robert Williams as a priest, a man openly living with his gay lover James Skelly, who also took part in the service. The hopes of Bishop Spong that Mr. Williams would be a model of holiness, fidelity and monogamy were soon dashed. Williams was put in charge of a special ministry in the lesbian and gay community and immediately claimed that monogamy was as crazy an idea as celibacy.

In I Corinthians 6:9-10 and I Timothy 1:9-10: the two Greek words used are malakoi and arsenokoitai. In I Timothy only arsenokoitai appears. Arsenokoitai refers to men who take the active role in homosexual activity. The word refers to mainstream homosexual activity. Malakoi is a Greek slang term for males, not necessarily boys, who took the passive role in sexual relations. It refers to an effeminate sexually active homosexual.

Conclusion

Those who plead for tolerance and acceptance of homosexuals by accepting their behavior as biblically justified are uncaring about these people who so desperately need our help. True love and compassion would offer the biblical cure for sin. We, including homosexuals, are born with inherent sin but, through God’s love we are redeemed and changed through our Lord Jesus Christ. Sex is a wonderful gift of God and not sinful when used according to the plan that God has so clearly laid out in His Word.

The Church consists of redeemed heterosexuals and homosexuals, neither is worse than the other; both have to forsake their sinful and immoral ways.

Let us hold out the Gospel hope to all: “ ...fornicators, adulterers, effeminate, homosexuals ... such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of God.” (I Corinthians 6:9, 11)

   
   
         
   
   
Trusted Web Site VeriSign Identity Protection