Several weeks ago, a friend and I went to one of our favorite diners in Covington, The Anchor Grill. My friend had told me he wished to talk, and he said he would buy me dinner if I agreed, so of course I did. Before our food even arrived, he made his confession: he was gay. This confession came quite as a surprise, and I didn’t know what to say. He felt comfortable talking to me about this, and he said he had always known he was gay, and when he became a Christian, he expected God to make him straight. It hadn’t happened. He had really been struggling with this for his entire life, and he knew that going public with it would jeopardize his chances at being a minister. He would be kicked out of school and rejected by the Christian community. I sat there silently as tears filled his eyes, and I told him, “There is no sin in your attraction to other men.” Such a statement—that homosexuality is not a sin—came as quite a surprise to my friend, and I explained my point very carefully. The church, I fear, has a great misunderstanding regarding homosexuality, and its treatment of homosexuals—within and outside of the church—has been greatly and negatively affected by this misunderstanding. In the same way I spoke with my friend, I speak to you now.
I told my friend, “Homosexuality is not a sin. The sin condemned in the New Testament is homosexual activities—practiced by homosexuals OR heterosexuals.” I must define what I mean by homosexuality. The most basic definition of homosexuality is sexual attraction to members of the same sex. It is an issue, then, of one’s sexual orientation. The concept of a person having a sexual orientation is relatively new—its origin lies in the industrial revolution of Western Society. As to the cause of a person’s orientation—whether gay, straight, or bi—scientists and scholars in nearly every pertinent field disagree. However, there is agreement on one statement: that it is not a choice. The American Academy of Pediatrics states, “The current literature and most scholars in the field state that one’s sexual orientation is not a choice; that is, individuals do not choose to be homosexual or heterosexual.” The public’s conviction that homosexuality being a choice is founded not on any scientific or rational reasoning but upon a psychological one: firstly, it gives people who are not gay security from being gay; and secondly, it avoids the uncomfortable idea that heterosexuals could have been gay.
When it comes to the science behind sexual orientation, there are two main theories. The one most popular in the last few decades is that sexual orientation has its roots in biology: one’s sexual orientation is determined by a complex interplay of genetics and early uterine—in-the-womb—development.
The second most popular theory is that sexual orientation has its roots in a person’s early childhood development. Aristotle, St. Thomas Aquinas, and John Locke believed in what is today called tabula rasa, or the “blank slate” theory, that states that “who we are” is not pre-programmed but is, rather, the result of our experiences and perceptions molding and shaping us into who we are and who we are becoming and who we will be. According to this theory, homosexuality is influenced by the conditions of one’s upbringing and even—if not especially—by physical or sexual abuse in early childhood development.
The American Academy of Pediatrics states again, “The mechanisms for the development of a particular sexual orientation remain unclear… A variety of theories about the influences of sexual orientation have been proposed. Sexual orientation probably is not determined by any one factor but by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences.” Thus we find that, in the end, the reason behind one’s sexual orientation is relatively unknown. However, as stated, scholars and scientists from every field agree on one point: it is not a choice. There is no recorded incident of a heterosexual person choosing to become homosexual, and vice versa; those who are gay did not choose to be gay, anymore than those who are straight have chosen to be straight. People do not choose to be sexually attracted to members of the same sex anymore than people choose to be attracted to members of the opposite sex.”
The question is begged: “If homosexuality is not a choice, then why does the New Testament condemn it as a sin?” The answer may surprise you: It doesn’t! Now before you label me a liberal, let me make it vibrantly clear that I am not one of those fellows who twist key scriptures to promote the gay lifestyle. I am in league with many conservative Christians who condemn this liberal twist, and I am also in league with many well-versed conservative scholars who will concede with the liberals on one point: “Homosexuality is not a sin.” What distinguishes me and my conservative colleagues from the liberals is that we acknowledge that the Bible does condemn homosexual behavior, and to twist the scriptures to promote homosexual behavior or to make homosexual behavior “okay” are ill-founded, illogical, and down-right wrong.
There are two primary New Testament texts dealing with homosexuality. The first is Romans 1.26-27. In this text, Paul is writing about the great escalating evils of humanity. It began with the creature dethroning the Creator, and following that the entire cosmic world was corrupted. Tossing out the truth of God led to an abandonment of conformity to God’s prescribed order of living. Homosexual lifestyles and activities serve as a poignant example of this: it is a way of living that goes against what God intended. It makes sense, in Paul’s Greco-Roman context, to leap straight into sexual sin to give an example of the wickedness of man. In pagan myths, the gods acted immorally, and their worshippers would end up acting like them. Idolatry leads to more sins, which Paul exemplifies by using homosexual activities: women with women and men with men, working that which is “unseemly.” The Greek word for “shameless acts” is askemosune, and it speaks of one’s nakedness and shame, and it is also a reference to a woman’s genitals. Paul is saying that God gave the people over to their idolatry, and their idolatry spilled out into other areas of their lives, including their sexuality, and their sexuality became shameful. God allowed sin to totally warp even the sexual identities of the people; mankind forsook idols, became enslaved to Sin, and then Sin drove mankind deeper and deeper into immorality, driving mankind forward under whips and chains; and yet mankind laughs and gloats and enjoys every minute of it, a sick cocktail of slavery and pleasure.
Despite the perceptions people have of the Greco-Roman world, not all pagans embraced homosexuality, and many philosophers opposed it as disgusting and “against nature”. While some pagans opposed homosexuality, the Jewish people violently condemned homosexuality. In the ancient Jewish document The Letter of Aristeus, homosexual behavior is viewed as equal in gravity and seriousness to the sins of extortion and murder. Philo, a Jewish philosopher from Alexandria, Egypt, believed homosexuality sat right next to bestiality in the level of degradation, and he condemned both active and passive partners, as well as pedastery, the ancient practice of men with boys.
Paul’s view is chiefly Jewish but yet slightly different. While Jewish attacks focused on homosexuality, Paul attacked homosexual activities, not homosexual desires (what we would call homosexual orientation). Paul is not writing about sexual orientation in these verses but about sexual behavior. Sexual orientation is not something that can be controlled. It is not a choice, and thus a person who is gay is not sinning in his or her homosexual desires. Paul doesn’t condemn the desire—or temptation—for same-sex activities but the activities themselves. In Romans 1.26-27, the degradation of man is epitomized not by homosexual attraction but by homosexual activities.
In 1 Corinthians 6.9, Paul gives what is called a “vice list” regarding heinous sins. The heinous sins include sexual immorality (which includes anything from basic lust to fornication), idolatry, adultery, and then he adds the two Greek words malakos and asthenokoites. English translations generally render this as “male prostitutes” or “homosexual offenders,” but the words Paul chooses are much more specific. Malakos literally means “soft one”, or the effeminate partner in the homosexual act; and asthenokoites literally means “one who coiters” males, referring to the active partner. Thus Paul is not attacking the homosexual desire but the manifestation of that desire in actual acts which are sinful.
Thus we find that the biblical testimony is that while a person may have desires for homosexual relations—and thus be identified as “gay” in our society—that person is not sinning if he or she remains celibate. In Genesis 4, God says to Cain, “If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it.” Homosexuals are presented with the same challenge: do what is right, and be accepted by God; do what is wrong, and sin is crouching at the door; sin desires to have the homosexual person, but the homosexual person must master it—not necessarily by “becoming straight” but by leading a godly life absent of homosexual activities. A homosexual Christians who leads a celibate life is more pleasing to God than a heterosexual who engages in premarital sexual relations. One’s sexual orientation does not make him or her a “sinner”: it’s one’s actions that determine that.
“How, then, should Christians relate to homosexuals?” There are two errors the church often makes towards Christians are gay. The first error is blind hatred, seen in the infamous Westboro Baptist Church, a church which pickets different locations with signs saying “GOD HATES FAGS” and “FAGS WILL BURN.” A second error, on the opposite side of the spectrum, is blind acceptance—accept homosexual Christians into the church no matter what. As we see in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, Christians within the church must be held accountable for living godly lives, and when a Christian fails to do this and refuses to repent, that Christian is to be kicked out of the church gathering. An appropriate response involves loving and accepting Christians regardless of their sexual orientation, and holding Christians accountable for living godly lives.
The current state of the church—a mixture of homophobia and homo-hatred—disables gay Christians from entering into true and authentic community with the body of Christ. With such great animosity directed towards homosexuals, Christians who are gay cannot be open and honest, cannot be held accountable, without being condemned and rejected. This has led to the formation of what are called “Gay Churches,” mostly spread out along the West Coast. Many of these Gay Churches are quite liberal, wrongfully promoting the homosexual lifestyle; but there are others that acknowledge homosexual acts as sins, and gay Christians gather together to worship God, serve the community, and to hold one another accountable for living godly, celibate lives. These Christians are honoring God in their celibate lifestyles, and the division erected within the church between Straight & Gay due to society’s rejection of the homosexual is, I believe, an abomination. We must seek to love all Christians—regardless of their sexual orientation—and we must accept them and hold them accountable for living godly lives. As this church grows and expands, there will no doubt be men and women who deal with homosexuality who come to know Christ; and as a Christian community, it is our job not to condemn and judge but to nurture and encourage and hold them accountable.
No comments:
Post a Comment