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, 9 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).
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.
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