Sunday, July 12, 2015

Homosexuality and Scripture

Genesis 2:24                                        Homosexuality and Scripture
7/12/15            D. Marion Clark

Introduction

We have begun a new era in our country. Our Supreme Court has ruled that same-sex marriage is the right of every citizen. We are told that anyone disagreeing with this new development is on the wrong side of history. The real question for us, as Bible-believing Christians, is whether we are on the wrong side of Scripture. Have we misinterpreted what Scripture, which we regard as God’s Word, really has to say? There is now a growing number of people who profess to be Bible-believing Christians who contend that we have gotten it wrong. And so it is time for a review.

The Homosexual Texts

There are a handful of individual passages that refer specifically to homosexual behavior. There are two specific prohibitions in the Old Testament. They are Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13.

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination (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 (20:13).

There is also the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in which men attempted to rape visitors they thought were men, as told in Genesis 19.

In the New Testament, the passages are Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; and 1 Timothy 1:8-10.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and 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 (Romans 1:26-27).

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 (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).

Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding 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, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine (1 Timothy 1:8-10).

These are the texts that all agree make mention of some kind of homosexual behavior. It is obvious, as well, that all are negative. They either directly forbid same-sex relations or classify some form of it as immoral. This is the traditional interpretation of the church. Until our generation there has been little debate on the interpretation, and no official alternative position in Christian churches. But there now has arisen a modern reinterpretation, which offers the following responses.

First, regarding the Old Testament prohibitions, we are to understand them as temporary and applying to a particular culture. There is a law about not wearing clothing of mixed fabric (Deuteronomy 22:11); there are laws about not eating “unclean” animals such as pork, which is even referred to as an abomination (Deuteronomy 14:4). Likewise, the so-called abomination of a man lying with a man should be regarded.

As to the sin of Sodom, Ezekiel 16:49 identifies the sin of the city as pride, refusal to aid the poor and needy. And it is clear in the story that the intent of the citizens was to humiliate the visitors. It was not a case of same-sex desire.

What of the New Testament passages? They are all written by the same author, the Apostle Paul. He is referring to the immoral practices of the pagan society, in which there was immoral homosexual behavior just as there was immoral heterosexual behavior. Why did Paul not then teach about loving homosexual relations? He was a man of his time and culture, and so did not know of such relations, as we do today.

What do you think? Maybe these passages are not so clear-cut as once thought? There are answers to all of the modern interpretations. Bible scholars have always known that the Old Testament laws do not all translate into the New Testament and into other cultures and times. Ceremonial laws that have to do with sacrifices and temple rituals no longer apply now that Christ has fulfilled them by becoming the ultimate sacrifice and High Priest. With these laws are all those that distinguish Israel as the covenant nation of God. Thus they speak of what is clean and unclean. Some animals are unclean, and to eat them is to become unclean. But until now, no one has been baffled trying to distinguish the difference between dietary laws and laws about sexual immorality. No one has tripped over the dilemma of figuring out if wearing clothing of different types of material is in the same category as a man lying with a man. I think even the modernist interpreters realize that, and when I have heard them mention these other laws they always do so in a scoffing tone so as to make the Old Testament laws suspect for verification, just as a defense lawyer tries to cast suspect on witnesses.

What about the New Testament? Is it not notable that Jesus says nothing against homosexuality? And that Paul never even presents the concept of loving homosexual relations? It is notable that Jesus says nothing about homosexuality. It shows that he adhered to the teachings of the Old Testament scriptures. That is the same reason he did not address the subject of incestuous relations. What was understood did not need teaching. If he did believe there could be moral same-sex behavior, why would he not have spoken to it? Surely we do not believe he was afraid to do so.

Paul also was a Jew. He also would have accepted the same moral premises on sexual behavior. The difference between him and Jesus is that he had been raised in a Gentile environment and ministered in a pagan culture. He would have been aware of examples of committed same-sex relations, as scholarly studies have shown.[i] It is clear from the Romans passage that it is the unnatural lust for the same sex that the apostle is condemning.

Time Out 

Let’s take a time out from the debate. Last week I said that one of the responses we should make to the outside world is our own repentance. Everyone accuses us (Christians and Christian churches) of being homophobic, merely because of our stance. We are quick to deny that charge and for good reason. Most of us now have openly gay friends, acquaintances, and family members, and have started to shed the stereotypes and fears of our own and earlier generations. But that has come, not because of our study of Scripture and being convicted by Jesus’ words to love our neighbor. Rather, it has mostly come from living in our modern culture and simply learning through personal experience. It is after that experience that we then look to the teachings of Scripture about loving our neighbor.

That is my experience. To my shame, it has taken the pro-gay movement to force me to look at my gay neighbor as a fellow human being made in the image of God. It has taken personal experience to see that my gay neighbors can be just as mentally balanced, just as kind, just as loving. And there are even Christians who profess to love Jesus, who profess to believe the Bible to be the Word of God, who profess to want to honor God, and yet believe that their same-sex desires can be acted on.

Our church culture has been such that church members could not open up about same-sex attractions. They could not turn to their pastors or fellow members in fear that they would be feared. Recently another pastor met with me to discuss the struggles that his son was having with same-sex desires. He was an associate pastor. He had gone to the senior pastor about it and was told not to let anyone in the church know. Such a sinful response is what has opened us and our churches up to the present disdain we receive and to the ongoing reluctance of our own members to talk to us.

What Is at Stake

Let’s go back into the scriptures, this time looking at the teachings that are foundational to understanding biblical teaching and for understanding what is at stake in the whole debate.

Here is the plea of the Christian gay advocate. “Here I am trying to direct my same-sex desires so that they are in keeping with God’s laws. I remain chaste before marriage, and I subject my desires to a committed, monogamous relationship. How can that be wrong? What is at stake that even honorable intent is still rejected?

Asking what is at stake is the right question. Let’s consider what redefining marriage affects in God’s Word.

We have to rewrite Genesis 2, which presents the foundation and definition of marriage. Genesis 2:24 interprets the story of how man and woman were created: Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. This is the origin of marriage.

The previous verses reveal how essential the concept of man and woman made for each other is.

Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” 19 Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them... But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him. 21 So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. 22 And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. 23 Then the man said,
“This at last is bone of my bones
    and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called Woman,
    because she was taken out of Man”
(2:18-23).

The modernist revisionist wants a footnote inserted. “However, if some men and some women would rather have spouses of their own sex, that will be fine.” They believe that is what God intended, even though he gives no hint of such a radical alternative. He gives no hint in all of Scripture that such an alternative would be acceptable. Even so, we are to believe that is what he approves.

Why? For one reason alone – so that gay Christians can be happy without guilt. Here is what the Christian is saying who is trying to deconstruct and reinterpret the Scripture that they profess to believe. “I have desires in me that, if I cannot act on them, I will be unhappy, and I am not willing to make such a sacrifice.” They want Scripture to condone and to bless their desires, and so they make it do so.

Let’s reinterpret Genesis 2, according to the pro-gay revision. It is not good for man to be alone. So God makes a woman for the man who likes that kind of intimacy. And then, he has an unspoken intention to see that children will be born who will grow up with same-sex desires, which will be good, and he will want them to come together sexually as one flesh. They cannot produce children, of course, but the man-woman couples can furnish them with children so that the same-sex couples can be just like the Adam-Eve couples. This way, everybody can be happy, knowing that God the Creator is smiling down upon them.

This concept of God being loving and just wanting everybody to be happy is silly talk. What do we think Jesus came for? Just to tell us how much God loves us as we are? He died for our sins! He died because the wrath of God was upon us because we were sinners. He took God’s wrath upon himself, and those who will not profess faith in Christ will be condemned in their sins. This is the clear teaching of the gospel and of all of Scripture.

God is holy. Yes, God is love, but we have no right to redefine love into this silly post-modern definition of accepting everybody for whatever they want to be and want to do. God was not created in our image to make us happy in whatever way our natural feelings take us. We are Christians. Our Lord suffered for us; our Lord sacrificed himself for us. He took up his cross, and he calls on any who will follow him to take up their cross.

How do we think it sounds to him, “But, Lord, I want be happy, so let me have my personal desires”? “But, Lord, you don’t know how lonely it is for me”? Are we serious? We who are Christians have said that we will deny ourselves, take up our cross, and follow him. And now, we are going to add conditions?

This applies to both heterosexuals and homosexuals who would follow Jesus. “Yes, Jesus, I will follow you, only let me do so with a spouse. I can’t handle being single.” We need to stop this “God wants me to be happy game.” Heterosexual Christians have married unbelievers because they could not bear being alone, and “doesn’t God want me to be happy?” They have left their spouses to marry someone else because “doesn’t God want me to be happy?” 

They question the goodness of God. “Why would God give me desires for the same gender?” “Why would God give me such strong physical desires while I am single?” “Why does God allow me to have desires for someone not my spouse?”

Have we forgotten Genesis 3 – the account of the fall of man? We know sin came in. We know that sin has marred the created world and tainted everything that is good and was meant for good. We know that all of us – every one of us – are born with sinful desires and tendencies. Why then do we act so surprised about our sinful desires? “God would not give me desires that he thought were wrong.”

Well, wake up to reality. The account of the fall in Genesis explicitly teaches that sin is now in our nature. The whole account of Scripture is how mankind acts on our sin nature and how God then comes in to redeem us from our sin nature. How can we possibly turn Scripture and the gospel into a message of God loves everybody and wishes we could just be happy knowing that?

Do not cheapen the gospel. Do not cheapen the love of God, the love demonstrated by which he “sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 4:11). Propitiation means to appease the wrath of God, the just wrath of a holy and righteous God. Now that is love, not some sugary sweet story of how God just wants everybody to be happy in whatever makes them happy. That is a love worth knowing. That is a God worth following and worth worshiping.

Do we think the account of marriage in Genesis 2 is really just an alternative view of marriage? Listen to Ephesians 5:31-32:
 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.

This marital mystery is profound. The very relationship of Christ and the church is embedded in it. Scripture opens with the creation account that has marriage between a man and a woman as the foundational relationship.
So God created man in his own image,
    in the image of God he created him;
    male and female he created them.
28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply…”

Scripture closes with the stunning depiction of the New Jerusalem coming down as a bride to meet her bridegroom, who is no less than the Lamb, the Son of God, our Redeemer (Revelation 21). This marital mystery is profound!

Who do we think we are as Christians to then reinterpret this profound mystery, to add to Scripture words that it not only does not say but does not infer, so that we can feel good about ourselves? Who are we to take the profound love demonstrated on the cross and redefine that love to mean the opposite of what the cross teaches – that we are sinners who need to be redeemed and to be sanctified and to have our natural desires be nailed to that cross so that we might serve God as his holy followers.

The success of the pro-gay movement in the Christian church is due to the appeal of compassion for our gay brothers and sisters. They just want to be happy. I will tell you whom I have true compassion for. No, not compassion – whom I have true respect, true admiration for. It is for the men and women who have committed themselves to obey their Lord whatever the cost. It is for the heterosexual singles who long to be married, and yet remain chaste and will not unequally yoke themselves to unbelievers. It is for the men and women who have come to me, have declared themselves gay, and yet because they have studied the scriptures – which they wanted to confirm their desires - found those scriptures clearly upholding the male-female relationship; that they then determined to obey the Word of God, and to find their joy, a joy much deeper than that of fleshly desires, in their union with Christ and in serving him.

They have not made an idol of marriage, as their heterosexual kin have, who think that to be single is a sentence of condemnation. (How did we ever get to this point? Our Lord Jesus Christ lived as a single man! The Apostle Paul pitied his spiritual kin who did not know the blessedness of being single.) They have not allowed their natural lusts control their spiritual devotion, and they are receiving the commendation of their Lord. If you struggle with same-sex desires, and yet have a greater desire to be obedient to your Lord, I admire you. You are not under God’s sentence. You are following the path of your Lord, and you are one of his blessed.


[i] “Understanding and Responding to a Pro-Homosexual Interpretation of Scripture,” Robert Gagnon, http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/201103/201103_092_hom_understnd.cfm

No comments:

Post a Comment