Update (Disclaimer) 15 years later in 2025: This is an old post, written almost 15 years ago, but it links to another post which is of higher value to me, Are There Different Degrees of Sin? The Greater Sin of John 19:11 , so I chose to keep this post active. If you are coming here today, my posts now generally stay away from politics and almost completely concentrate on photography. For me this debate belongs in 2010 and I really have no interest in it today as I did back then.
Contrary to what the world says, views change and mature, and people do have the ability to evaluate their own heart. While I did write the post below in 2010, I would say looking back at my 2010 self, my heart has changed, in general, and a lot of what I wrote I would not write today (mainly because I loath politics and divisive topics now).
I have witnessed other people of faith be theologically correct while at the same time be very judgmental, harsh, and unloving, and that is not who I am or who I want to be today. Timothy calls for patience in 2 Timothy 4:2, and I think loving others through being very patient better describes what I write today.
2 Timothy 4:2 …be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. (ESV)
The links below are almost all broken links now, but I have kept the links the way they were in 2010 just to preserve where they pointed at the time.
Original Text on Prop 8
California’s “Prop 8” proves that same-sex relationships are acceptable to Christians and compatible with scripture. Of course this is utter ridiculousness, but, that severely flawed logic seems to be what is prevailing in our culture today. This topic, which I usually just tend to leave alone, is overpowering the news, blogs, and culture lately (and is certainly nothing new under the sun, gay’s have been trying to justify their actions for millennia, see Why is Being Gay a Sin? for a civil discussion, Does Romans 1:26 Condemn Lesbians? for the absurd justification, and then an honest “Christian Perspective”, not forgetting to throw in Anne Rice who recently “quit” Christianity on Facebook [comments in pdf,] with Mark Driscoll’s response for the Washington Post, because she didn’t want to be “anti-gay anymore”, and the countless trash talk about Proposition 8 in California).
With Proposition 8 being overturned by the California courts, this seems destined for the Supreme Court (where they probably don’t want to deal with it either). The Boston Globe did a huge photo spread called Same Sex Marriage about a week ago and the responses to that article show why this, unfortunately, is THE topic of our day for Christians and the church. This discussion really wasn’t intended to launch into whether being gay is a sin or not, but to show the absurd arguments on both sides, which lack any careful thought.
This comment below is typical when reading trash talk on the news sites, and was made by someone who used the title “I Feel Drawn Towards Christianity, But I’m Gay”, which then received very complimentary responses, with little question for the lifestyle itself, or with sound argument for or against Christians and the homosexual lifestyle, and what scripture has to say about it’s effects and consequences.
I was surprised in a few ways, one by how openly acceptable the Christian responses were to this person. Not that they were accepting of the person, that’s great, but accepting of all aspects of the persons lifestyle, with not much need for contemplation (although some did suggest the person generically seek God’s direction). The other surprise was how utterly weak the reasoning and arguments were that were used on both sides.
I am certainly no expert on this topic whatsoever, and there are many who can soundly argue, on both sides, but those seem to be few and far between. No gay person I talk to (and many Christians for that matter) can give a sound theological argument, backed and based on scripture (since this person “feels drawn to Christianity”). The majority of the arguments put forth are emotional arguments, which are impossible to argue against in a rational manner. This is the argument that was given in this particular case:
The Bible also condemns divorce, the eating of pork and shrimp, and says that men shouldn’t sit on the same chairs as women who are menstruating.
The argument seems to lack even a surface level study of scripture, but most Christians responded with nothing other than an emotional response. As with much of Scripture in our culture today, these verses are taken so much out of context for the use of the argument for a homosexual lifestyle I am surprised they were made? I am not being mean or hateful in spirit here, but seriously, if you are gay, this is your argument?
- The Bible condemns the eating of pork.
- We eat pork today.
- Therefore, homosexuality is ok in the sight of the Lord.
There are so many things that could be addressed but at the basic level, in Mark 7:18-19 Jesus declared all foods to be clean, he didn’t declare all forms of sex to be clean. A better argument that perhaps shows a little more clearly why scripture says that the homosexual lifestyle is sinful in God’s eyes (and there are many things that are actually still seen as sinful in God’s eyes today, besides homosexuality), would be:
Point 1 on Sin:
- The Bible says sin is detestable in God’s eye’s.
- Therefore any continuous sinful act is not honoring to God.
Point 2 on Marriage:
- The Bible defines sex outside of marriage as sin.
- The Bible defines marriage as a monogamous union between a man and a woman.
- Therefore any nonrepentant sexual relationship of any kind outside marriage is sin in God’s eyes.
- Therefore a nonrepentant homosexual lifestyle is sin.
- Therefore a nonrepentant adulterous relationship is sin.
- Therefore any sexual relationship before marriage is sin.
I rarely see those “hateful” Christians everyone seems to refer to today that will acknowledge that the last three are equally sin, and equally condemned by scripture, but, that doesn’t mean that either is less or more acceptable to God as a way to live that honor’s God. I do not say that in a hateful manner but in an examination of scripture. I also recognize that many, or most, “gay Christians” will take issues with my argument above and defend it away in some manner. The statements above are all based on scripture and can all be backed theologically with sound argument.
Our culture as a whole is continually refusing to see objective truths in the Bible today. Whether we like to ignore them in our day or not, they still exist, there are still things that God says are good, and those things God says are bad, we just seem to have so much knowledge in everything that we have no knowledge in the actual truth anymore.
61 responses to “Examining Christianity’s Stance on Same-Sex Relationships”
John and Scott,
I am going to take another route here, but first let me clarify my point on Galatians 5:22-23 and the fruits of the Spirit. The wording here is powerful and should never be taken lightly. Paul is talking about eternal damnation to Christians, not unbelievers. In context, let us read:
“But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21 envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.”
Paul is conclusively dealing with the Galatian problem of Judaizers and the Law (i.e. legalism). He is contrasting here, in this text, the difference between living in (or according to) the flesh versus living according to the Spirit. The flesh is filled with the attributes concerning verses 19-21, coupled with a severe admonition concerning eternal damnation for those who believe they are followers of Christ (as he once warned them in the flesh) who are unwilling to follow the Spirit’s guidance.
Let us remember, Paul is writing to Christians, so this is not directed at non-believers. A “believer” cannot be filled with the fruit of the Spirit and the fruit of the flesh. Am I saying that a Christian cannot sin, no; to the contrary, a believer may, and in fact, does, sin. However, it is the habitual sinning of drunkenness, envy, anger, idolatry, or in the context of this argument, homosexuality. Any believer who fails to yield his/her life to the Spirit against the flesh, Paul stated, but follows idolatry, sexual immorality, drunkenness and the like, cannot inherit the Kingdom of God. Why? Well, the person is choosing sin over righteousness and filthy rags over purity.
Since God is holy and pure and cannot be in the presence of habitual transgressions, and the believer’s body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit (the third person of the Trinity) then God cannot dwell in habitual sin and darkness. Paul stated, “What partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God…” (2 Cor. 6:14-16). Darkness and light cannot live together, period. I guess we should clarify the difference between sin and willful sin. Sin is “missing the mark,” which we all do, but willful sin means to break through, or go through (transgression); meaning, in sin, we have made a mistake, perhaps a huge one, but in transgressing (willful sin), we have clearly broken through God’s unconditional command, we have performed an act knowingly and willingly, without fear of retribution. This why Paul stated, “Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body”( 1 Cor. 6:18).
It is undeniable that Paul is contrasting to “believers” that they cannot continue to walk in the flesh and walk in the Spirit. This is not a new argument, sexual immorality has been around since the fall of man. I must also say this; if we have drunks thinking they are going to heaven and continue to be led by the Spirit, that is awful shaky ground. That used to scare the daylights out of me when I used to drink. I need to clarify as well, I am not saying that all homosexuals are not going to inherit the kingdom of God; Paul did, through the inspiration of the Godhead. Paul uses the staunch word for “warn” twice in the Greek, clarifying the admonishment. I realize this is a sensitive topic, but habitual willful sin is not the same as the fruit of the Spirit, and one cannot have both, that was Paul’s warning.
This may be what Jesus alludes to here in Luke 12:47, “And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.” Jesus is talking about “servants” and not non-servants? Just a thought.
His servant and yours,
Matt
everything you have said about sin i dont disagree with.
consider going onto romans. that romans1 is about the basis of all sin.
as paul says in acts 17
24″The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. 25And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. 26From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 28’FOR IN HIM WE LIVE AND HAVE OUR BEING’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’
29″Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by man’s design and skill. 30In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.”
yet as paul said they did not give praise and thanks to god, they traded their eternal relationshipwith god for obsession about their mortal lives, exchanged the truth of his love for a lie and worship served powers and principalities, they did not consider it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of god.
“therefore you who condemn another you condemn yourselves for you do the very same things.”
our leading is not by law but by the spirit that lives in each believer, because “the law is but a shadow of things to come not the realities themselves”
if you put a bright light in a dark room, if you turn away from the light you see the shadows. the shadows indicate the presence of the light and the direction from where the light comes. but the shadow is not the light, instead it is the absence of the light.
the law is to make us conscious of NOT NOT NOT LOVING our neighbor as ourselves the summation of all new covenant law. the law is not the light but a shadow of the light. the light is actual godloving.
god is spirit. god is love. godlove is spirit. the spirit that lives within us is what leads us.what does godlove look like? it has no image. because it is about spirit, about the fruit of the spirit. spirit creating spirit. surely the fruit of the spirit of christ is different from that of powers and principalities.
the law can tell us what it is not, but it is the light that daily shows and leads us as to what it is.
there is no understanding about sin if it is not about proactive godlove of the 1st and 2nd commandment.
believers have been mislead to think that loving god means being proactive about their in part understanding thru a poor reflection darkly. that’s not true. loving god means godloving their neighbor at the same time they are loving god. how can any believer deny fellowship deny fellowship to another believer not about witness of the spirit but instead about issues ( not issues about the light but about the shadows) of understanding of the law.
the thing that is very apparent is that those who condemn being homosexual as a sin do it without any love for them, because they do it by priding themselves on denying 1john1 fellowship with them.( up close and personnal…….that which we heard, which we havwe looked at, which we have seen with our eyes and our hands have touched). 1john1 says just the opposite that in living in fellowship with one another, christ blood will purify(protect) them from all sin. do suppose that mother teresa’s ministry of hindus would have ever existed if she had thought this way, ministring to those who sincerely believed in all things hindu. mother teresa who told her nuns not to engage in discussions about christ but instead to be christ.
now if living in christ is about spirit, then it is our witness of that spirit that shows us what is of god. if it is about spirit then it cannot be about physicality because as scripture says physicality “the flesh” counts for nothing. physicalities about choices of errogenous zones for expressing sexual intimacy and different pairing of genders accounts for nothing. what accounts for christ is the spirit that those involved have given themselves over to in their heart, their faith in christ, the godlove of the 2nd commandment, and the fruit of the spirit of galatians.
the law is limited in that it merely measures outward expressions, while faith and relationship with christ(the spirit of the one who lives in us) is about conviction of our hearts about not loving. the greater is what leads us. the greater is what leads our under standing of the lesser.
John,
I think we have already shown through proper exegesis that Galatians 5:22-23 is connected to a contrast of how not to live and the ramifications of living in the flesh.
Accordingly, your use of the 2nd Commandment is eisegesis (taking Scripture out of context). Assuredly, God is love, and God is just; God must punish those who accept Him, and acknowledge that His only Son bore the full penalty of sin and was the propitiation of God’s wrath on man, for that sin, and continue to habitually disregard the warnings He has given. The warning in Romans 1 declares that God gave those men and women up (gave them up to their reprobate minds) who had decided to not use their bodies according to the purpose that He created them, which was sexually immoral. Paul was certainly not talking about God’s love, otherwise the covenant Jews had a higher “leg to stand on” than the gentile because God would have loved them more. However, Paul’s argument comes to a divided church.
The emperor Claudius, in 49 AD, had evicted the Jews from Rome (that is how Paul met Priscilla and Aquila in Corinth~Christian Jews), but in 54 AD, when Nero took over, he allowed them to filter back in, lifting the ban for political clout. When this happened, Jews came back into gentile run churches and thought they had favor, the covenant, and were “special;” however, Paul had to “level” the playing field and proclaim that all of humanity have fallen short of God’s glory (Rom. 3:23). Also, he had to inform the gentiles that they came from a rudimentary people who were homosexual and lesbians and God forbade those acts because it degraded His creation. The Jews would have already known that, having the Law.
This is why Paul tell the Corinthians too, “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, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 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 Cor. 6:9-11). Notice, Paul declares to the believers in Corinth, “Such were some of you…” They are that way no more; meaning, they are no longer practice alcoholics, thieves, adulterers, or homosexuals.
John, in all honesty, it comes to this…we were all “born” with a sin nature. I was born with a genetic capability of alcoholism, that makes me no better than you, or less; however, we must conceded to the flesh and realize that we serve a holy and righteous God.
His servant and yours,
Matt
John,
Thanks for responding back. Let me explain Gal 5:22-23:
Paul was warning the Galatians, not only against the Judaizers (who claimed you needed to be circumcised and follow some of the Law to be saved), but he was also addressing those who though that they had “free liberty” in Christ to live as they pleased, even if it violated God’s “un”-conditional Law. Paul mentioned to the “Christians” in Galatia that they could not continue to live in sexual immorality, drunkenness, idolatry, and the like (v. 19-21) as free liberty in Christ, they were warned that living like that meant they would not inherit the kingdom of God. They were to live differently, by the fruit of the Spirit, “AND” as they belonged to Christ Jesus, having crucified the flesh “along with” its passions and desires (22-24). We have to take that entire passage as a whole, not separate; meaning, it is Galatians 5:16-24. So that we don’t confuse answers and questions, lets keep these separated, and I will try an answer your other questions in another post. If you still don’t see the connection between flesh/passion/sexual immorality vs. self-control, patience, faithfulness, then I will continue.