Gospel Truth and Compassion, answering Objections to Christianity which arise from the Advocacy of Homosexuality and Gender Fluidity
Part One
By Jay Wegter
In this article we will seek to answer biblically some of the common objections to Biblical truth posed by those advocating homosexuality. Is homosexuality an identity or a behavior and a practice? Definitions are so vital. If we are going to compassionately respond with God’s truth, it is necessary to pay attention to definitions. Those who oppose biblical theism embrace a radically different cosmology. And, as a result, the definitions to which they adhere reflect their reigning narrative or worldview. For example, by defining homosexuality as an identity rather than a practice, the proponent can make the ‘logical’ leap that anyone who states that homosexuality is sin is hatefully discriminating against that person’s identity. An erroneous definition opens the door to an erroneous argument. Let’s look at some of the most common objections lodged against what the Bible says about homosexuality:
- How could homosexuality be a serious sin if Moses in the same book of the Pentateuch forbids two kinds of fabric in the same garment—wouldn’t that make homosexuality the same level of sin (i.e. a ‘minor’ offense). Moses does identify violations to Levitical ceremonial law, but clearly moves to a higher rung of the ladder of sin—all the way to the level of an abomination punishable by death: “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination” (Lev 18:22). “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 bloodguiltiness is upon them” (Lev 20:13).
- Wasn’t the sin of Sodom a lack of hospitality? If we don’t know our Bibles, that statement might seem plausible at first blush, for the abuse of the poor was targeted in Ezekiel 16:49, “Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy” (Ezek 16:49). In the condemnation of Judah’s wickedness, the social sins of the Northern Kingdom of Israel (Samaria) are in view here in Ezekiel 16 as Judah is compared with Sodom and Samaria. But this does not mean that Sodom was destroyed by God primarily because of a lack of hospitality. Listen to Jude 7: “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” (Jude 7) (See also 2 Peter 2:6-8). The heart of the issue is exchange—the natural function for what is unnatural (Rom 1:26)— homosexuality is a truth-suppressing exchange contrary to God’s design.ⁱ Out of the suppression of God’s truth emerges an exchange of sexual function; the natural is replaced by what is unnatural (Grk. That which is ‘against nature’). “For this reason, God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural” (Rom 1:26).
They have suppressed God’s truth in unrighteousness and exchanged the ‘fitted-ness’ of male-female relations for those contrary to nature. Homosexuality is sinful because it violates the divine design. Natural law is an extension of God’s nature. That which is according to nature infers natural law. Natural law is not based upon some abstract principle which is outside of God (R. C. Sproul). Thus, to go against God’s blueprint for marriage, family, and church is to go against God’s own nature.
“Truth suppressed doesn’t go away, it resurfaces as error” (Grant Horner). Homosexuality has an accompanying cosmology, or erroneous worldview based upon suppressed truth. Out of the suppression of God’s truth (His infallible revelation of Himself) emerges the worldview which advocates homosexuality. For, homosexuality follows the worship of the creation and the denial of the Creator-creature distinction (Peter Jones). “For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen” (Rom 1:25).
This erroneous cosmology is based upon the denial of the primary distinction between Creator and creature, and the denial of the distinction between male and female (as the image of God). When God-ordained distinctions are abandoned, sameness and ambiguity rush into the vacuum (Latin, homo, same). This denial of God-ordained distinctions can be expressed as follows: HOMO-THEOLOGY nature and the divine are identified with each other (no distinction). HOMO-SPIRTUALITY worships nature, humanity, and self. HOMOSEXUALITY the preferred sexual expression of a pagan, or anti-theistic worldview.ⁱⁱ
‘Natural desire’ (Rom 1:26) speaks to the state of divine design of creation EVEN if the homosexual claims that he or she is being ‘true to feelings’ (desires). The study of God’s design for His creation is known as teleology. Teleology means design, goal. But, in the reigning narrative of Western culture today, we see a militant stance against God’s design (teleology). The devil’s cosmology says: liberty is freedom from design. This counterfeit view of freedom fills popular culture with its constant drumbeat of deception. This primal error is broadcast in every conceivable way: through music, film, social media, fashion, marketing, university ‘studies’, etc. Del Tackett reminds us why this false view of freedom is so readily accepted: “Because we live in a selfish fallen world, erroneous worldviews appeal to the desires of the flesh” (Del Tackett). Ephesians 4:17-24 links erroneous worldview with a desire to ‘free up’ one’s sinful passions:
So, this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart; and they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness (Eph 4:17-19).
Is mankind most free when operating BY God’s design, OR, is mankind most free when setting aside God’s design? The Word of God says: liberty is within divine design. This is where our young people are utterly stranded today. For the most part, they are ill-prepared and unequipped to refute the ancient lie whispered in the Garden of Eden. For, in his prevarication to Eve, Lucifer inferred that our first parents were not bounded creatures. His lie was an offer to transcend the good and wise boundaries set by our Creator. The vast majority of young people today have never been shown the differences between, and the consequences of, these mutually exclusive worldviews of theism and paganism. As a consequence, when they hear the lie that freedom is found in unlimited self-expression, and unbounded individualism, they tend to accept it as true.
God’s design (teleology) has a goal, the glory of God and our freedom. God’s social laws are not ‘advice.’ They are the means by which we acknowledge His Kingship over us. Therefore, freedom is found in God’s design. Sadly, our culture has relegated marriage to a social construct which may or may not be viewed as the context for sexual expression. How different is our sovereign Creator’s definition of this foundational institution of marriage. Heterosexual monogamous marriage is a divine gift. Marital oneness is like a cord of five strands. a) It is sacred, blessed by God, solemnized, covenantal, ‘til death’.
b) It places procreation into a nurturing covenantal home or community, and thus it is the building block of a just and compassionate civilization. c) It is spiritual—making the two into one because marital love is possible by means of the celebration of gender difference. d) It is pleasuring (the act of marriage) for the purpose of bonding. e) It is a picture of Christ’s sacrificial love for His church. Each of these five cords has teleological significance. For, God has determined that the human race be made up of families defined as He defines them. Teleology is unto blessing, for His divine design is essential to human flourishing.
- What about the sins toward which the church seems to turn a blind eye: gluttony, adultery, immodesty, fornication, rampant divorce, no fault divorce? Aren’t conservative Christian churches singling out homosexuality for repentance so as to judge selectively?ⁱⁱⁱ The church is a place of broken people. God saves people out of immorality, including saving out of homosexuality (1 Cor 6:11). Are we really singling out homosexuals as the most needy candidates for repentance? Not really. Actually, regret over personal sin is very common. What is not common is true repentance. Many people agree with biblical truth, but few die to self so as to obey the truth. “Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (Gal 5:24; Jas 1:21-27). True repentance is a change of mind about God, your sin and your life. And it is a change which translates into newness of life and transformed living.ⁱᵛ Homosexuality is cited by the Apostle Paul as an ‘index sin’ in Romans 1:26-28. By ‘index’ is meant how far a culture has moved into nature worship—how far a culture has moved morally under the present revelation of wrath—as well as ‘what time it is’ in that culture in terms of facing the judgment of God as a civilization. God’s response to the three exchanges described in Romans chapter one (truth for the Lie (v. 23); the worship of creation instead of God (v. 25); and the exchange of the proper use of our sexual bodies(v. 26) is three ‘givings over’. God’s present wrath is revealed now in giving people over to: be ruled by the lusts of impure hearts (v. 24); to sexual perversity and degrading passions (v. 26); and to a depraved mind (v. 28).
- Isn’t marriage equality a just argument for civic fairness? Aren’t believers out of step with this change in the acceptance of homosexual marriage—aren’t Christians on the wrong side of history, much like the South during the civil war? Aren’t Christians regressive, stuck in the past, biased, judgmental, discriminatory, blockers of civil rights? One of the myths of the Enlightenment is that of endless progress—but this is willful blindness to man’s nature. The question is: will man’s use of science usher in a utopian existence? Among constitutional governments this myth of endless progress shows up as optimism about the endless progress of democratization—the legislation of 'new freedoms’. This theory of endless progress runs parallel to Darwin’s theory of endless progress in evolution—a companion of utopianism (the belief that mankind has the potential to create social conditions that are increasingly ideal for human flourishing).
A shift in definitions has historically been a ploy used to depart from the absolutes of God’s moral truth. God’s settled anger justly falls upon those who willfully advance corruption through redefinition. In documenting Judah’s wholesale move into apostasy, the prophet Isaiah declares God’s judgment against ‘re-definers’, “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter” (Is 5:20).
In his excellent book, God of Sex, Peter Jones asks, “Is ‘liberated sex’ a spanking new idea? Or, in reality is it a return to an ancient worldview born of pagan religion?” The answer is that according to Romans chapter one, monistic understandings of God issue forth in a form of spirituality which produces deconstruction of sexual norms. Polytheism produces poly-gender—behind many sexual choices are many gods. This provides the clues necessary to help us understand what is going on in our culture.ᵛ
What comes along with normalizing homosexuality? Peter Jones comments on the hidden danger with the following illustration: a warning sign seen at train tracks in Europe is, “watch out for the unseen train, one train hides another.” In other words, a passing train may hide another passing train on the tracks parallel to it. In the sexual revolution, the ‘hidden trains’ being: the deconstruction of normal heterosexuality in marriage and the accompanying new spirituality. As the progressives frame the issue, the shrill cry is “you’re being homophobic is your problem,” “who are you to oppose love between two people”—the ideological imposition of homosexual orthodoxy IS the new ‘free speech’ and the new test of free speech.ᵛⁱ
The ‘hidden train’ in this analogy is the new spirituality. The train of civic fairness hides the train of deconstruction of heterosexual marriage which hides the third train of religious transformation (which may well be the killer of culture). Pan-sexuality brings in its wake religious paganism. If homosexuality gains global acceptance as part of the plan to bring peace and understanding to the earth; then the future spiritual arbiter of the planet will be pagan religion. This first train (concealing those behind it) is speeding on the track of what is now called tolerance and fairness and democratization and diversity.ᵛⁱⁱ We are ushering in paganism at warp speed in the name of endless democratization (new freedoms).
- Why would God allow same sex attraction then call its expression an abomination? Why would God forbid same-sex attraction romance calling it sin? Thus, is it God’s will for those with SSA to stay unmarried and unfulfilled the rest of their lives? Many who experience SSA claim that celibacy is an unbearable burden, and that its repression is misery. Sometimes we want wrong things—the heart is filled with self-deception and wickedness. “The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it? ‘I, the LORD, search the heart, I test the mind, even to give to each man according to his ways, according to the results of his deeds” (Jer 17:9-10).
Our own sense perceptions of pleasure, desire, yearning, pain, etc. are not self-validating. People choose erroneous worldviews in order to free up their lusts. Scripture states that if we do not think upon the Word of God as illuminated by the Spirit of God, we will by default listen to our flesh.
For people who live by the standard set by their lower nature are usually thinking the things suggested by that nature, and people who live by the standard set by the Spirit are usually thinking the things suggested by the Spirit. For, to be thinking the things suggested by the lower nature means death, but, to be thinking the things suggested by the Spirit means life and peace. Because one’s thinking the things suggested by the lower nature means enmity to God, for it does not subject itself to God’s law, nor indeed can it. The people who live on the plane of the lower nature cannot please God (Rom 8:5-8, Williams Translation).
The claim that ‘same-sex attraction’ celibacy is a burden too great to bear assumes that desires cannot be changed by God. It assumes that in order for those with same-sex attraction desires to be legitimized or acknowledged, they must be expressed sexually, such is not the case. Scripture is utterly clear—there is a pronounced divide between the Lesbian’s heart and the Word of God. The heart can tell us that something feels natural when God says it is destructive to us and others.ᵛⁱⁱⁱ God warns that following an illicit sexual desire comes with a penalty. “. . . 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” (Rom 1:27).
- Why can’t a Christian be a practicing homosexual? That is answered fully in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, 13). “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” (1 Cor 6:9-11). There is no possible pro-homosexual stance that is derived from the exegesis of Scripture.
“Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body” (1 Cor 6:13). Our culture has given sexual relations an incredibly exalted status. Jesus was fully human, yet He was sexually celibate. The ultimate bliss in heaven will not be from marital relations. Marital intimacy in the grand picture is ‘an unfinished poem’—a shadow if you will of Christ’s relation to His church. So, what are people with same-sex attraction to do? ANSWER: God sets the lonely in families—in which there is structure, love, acceptance, dignity, productivity, discipline, order, communion, and belonging.
The evaluation of our lives is from God’s infallible perspective. He has determined what constitutes ‘good fruit’. The condition for that is only by doing the will of God—no matter what you feel. Jesus stated that only good trees (spiritually healthy trees) bear good fruit. A ‘good tree’ is an individual who has been restored through Christ to function as the image of God (Mt 7:16-20). Jesus was fond of saying hard things. There is a yawning gap between confessed faith and genuine faith.ⁱˣ “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord’. . . .” (Mt 7:21-22). Genuine faith is always that of a true disciple of Christ. His true followers deny themselves and take up their cross daily (Luke 9:23-24; Titus 2:11-14).
- Shouldn’t the biblical phrase, “God is love” settle this whole issue? Shouldn’t the people of God practice love instead of judging homosexuals? After all, how could it be ‘love’ when Christian parents refuse to attend the wedding of their homosexual son or daughter, nephew or niece? The subject of God’s love is vital, but His love does not swallow up His other attributes. God’s essence is also His goodness, mercy, justice, wrath, jealousy, holiness, and power. These attributes are not merely qualities; they are His very essence. God is love, light, spirit, and consuming fire. We do not rank His attributes. We can’t be tolerant of what God hates. We must love what God loves, and hate what God hates.
The church in Thyatira (one of the seven churches of Asia addressed in Revelation chapters 2 and 3) was loving and accepting, but they were not exercising holy love. Church members were blindly affirming—they tolerated false teaching and sexual immorality. Jesus speaking to this church through John warns them that their tolerance is not love, but it is unfaithfulness.
But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent of her immorality. Behold, I will throw her on a bed of sickness, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of her deeds. And I will kill her children with pestilence, and all the churches will know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds (Rev 2:20-23).
Jesus, who is the very epitome of love, is not bluffing here. He is jealous for the purity of His bride the church. He will not brook sexual compromise in His assemblies.
Because our culture has an idolatrous preoccupation with the erotic, sex has been taken out of its sacred context and touted as an ultimate integration point or source of fulfillment. As believers we readily acknowledge that heterosexual monogamous marriage is a wonderful gift to mankind, but it is not of the same magnitude as the gift of eternal life in Christ. The summum bonum (highest possible good) of human experience is not two becoming one flesh in marriage. Marriage brings with it great sacrifices and the demand for self-denial and unselfishness. There are often many conflicts to be settled and resolved. There are many griefs, groans, sufferings, longings, sickness, and eventually death and bereavement. This is all evidence that since the fall into sin, things are not normal.
The highest possible good is life in Christ, now and eternally. “But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, so that the surpassing greatness of the power will be of God and not from ourselves” (2 Cor 4:7). “For momentary, light affliction is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison, while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal” (2 Cor 4:17-18).
- Doesn’t homophobia hurt hearts and damage lives. Christians who vehemently preach that homosexuality is wickedness are actually giving young people the opportunity to practice bullying on school campuses. It is a great offense to have those around you judge your sexual orientation as abnormal and wicked—it can seriously mar your life—even contribute to suicidal thoughts. A rant is not an idea and hurt-feelings do not form an argument. Offended-ness is not proof of the coherence or plausibility of any argument. We need clear thought and careful definition. Jesus would have had no ministry at all if He had edited out every truth that offended people. “[The world] hates Me because I testify of it, that its deeds are evil” (Jn 7:7).
We cannot build a theology upon what makes us look nicer (agreeable, relevant, etc.) Working for the approval of men rather than the approval of God cancels out the ability to believe. The approval of men and God are mutually exclusive. “How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?” (Jn 5:44). Though times and trends are always changing, the Word of God is unbreakable (Jn 10:35). Be careful of false dichotomies such as: “love is more important than religion,” or, “harmony is the result of removing everything that divides us.”
Jesus told His disciples that a mark of following Him was that they would be misunderstood, hated, and persecuted for their message. “If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they kept My word, they will keep yours also” (Jn 15:19-20).
- Christians pose a major hurdle to the freedoms of homosexuals because of their intolerance. The ‘new tolerance’ is socially dangerous and certainly intellectually debilitating. It bears no relation to the historic definition of tolerance which protected the right of disagreement. Why is the new tolerance inherently intolerant? The new tolerance suggests that actually accepting (‘tolerating’) another person’s position means believing that person’s position to be true, or at least as true as your own. This is a shift from accepting the existence of different views to the acceptance of different views themselves. Contemporary tolerance is intrinsically intolerant.ˣ The new tolerance asserts that all beliefs and truth claims are equally valid. In this fallen, broken world of massive idolatry and religious confusion, God has so ordered things that conflicts, idolatries, and confrontations, even about God Himself, persist. We ought to distinguish between legal and social tolerance. Christians should defend legal tolerance (toleration without coercion/violence). But social tolerance in a multicultural society demands that people of different religions mix together without slights and condescending insults, without one wit of social superiority to others.ˣⁱ The three pillars of the old tolerance protected religious freedom and the right of free speech. There are three assumptions in the old view, or traditional view of tolerance. Number one, there is objective truth out there, and it is our duty to pursue the truth. Number two, the various parties in a dispute think they know what the truth of the matter is, even though they disagree sharply, each thinking the other wrong. Number three, nevertheless, they hold to the best chance of uncovering the truth of the matter, or the best chance of persuading people to reason and not with coercion, is the unhindered exchange of ideas no matter how wrongheaded some of those ideas seem—and we might add, and no matter who is offended.ˣⁱⁱ The new tolerance argues there is no one view that is exclusively true. Strong opinions are nothing more than strong preferences for a particular version of reality. In Barack Obama’s 2013 inaugural speech, he stated, “Don’t mistake absolutism for principle.” In other words, to dogmatically hold to absolute truth bears no real relationship to principle. His statement was shaped by the mold of the new tolerance.
The new tolerance functions as the supreme moral virtue. What we are seeing today is the elevation of this new tolerance to the supreme position in the hierarchy of moral virtues. The supreme sin now is intolerance but that has taken on a new definition. Intolerance today is no longer a refusal to allow contrary opinions in public, but is understood as questioning or contradicting the view that all opinions are equal in value and that all worldviews have equal worth and that all stances are valid. To question such postmodern axioms is by definition intolerant.
The United Nations Declaration of Principles of Tolerance in 1995 asserts: “Tolerance involves the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism.” Does this mean that we have no right to hold things to be dogmatically true if they are in conflict with another’s worldview? The national Lambda Chi Alpha position says, “The definition of the new tolerance is that every individual’s beliefs, lifestyle, and perception of truth claims are equal. There is no hierarchy of truth, your beliefs and my beliefs are equal and all truth is relative.” It’s is a short step from this new tolerance to hardened law in which political disagreement is criminalized.
If you structure your life around the new tolerance, liberty is ultimately lost. The new tolerance demands that a person must be morally arbitrary in order to be tolerant (i.e. there is no transcendent authoritative Law-giver, therefore there is no universal transcendent moral code). Sounds familiar doesn’t it—much like the truth-suppression exposed by the Apostle Paul in Romans chapter one. The denial that the Creator is the transcendent Lawgiver is the assumption behind the new tolerance. How did the moral ambiguity of the new tolerance become the moral high ground of today? Reexamine the ‘exchanges’ made by unbelievers in Romans chapter one and you will detect the redefinition ‘shell game’ that has been foisted upon our culture. Truth-suppressing speculators pronounced themselves ‘wise’ (v. 22).
Christians ought to boldly expose the false ‘moral high ground’ of the new tolerance. For, the arrogance and hypocrisy of the new tolerance is truly breath-taking. It is cut free from truth and morality yet claims to be the final arbiter of both! It poses as the guardian of free speech, but, is killing free speech. Absolute truth and true tolerance are friends. The new tolerance has twisted this through a clever ploy of redefinition—claiming that tolerant societies hold to non-dogmatic definitions of truth.ˣⁱⁱⁱ
Let us not forget that Jesus’ ministry was filled with antithesis. He majored in absolute truth— He continually taught and proclaimed that truth and error are mutually exclusive. Here Jesus overturns the misconception that outward religion is genuine: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. So, you, too, outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness” (Mt 23:27-28).
The issue in the new tolerance is not about substance (truth), but that no one should be offended. Today’s political correctness suggests that it’s not a matter of being intolerant of substance, but of intolerance itself. They believe that intolerance is wrong because no one deserves to be offended. The old tolerance draws its limits on the basis of substantive arguments about truth, goodness, doing harm, protecting society and its victims, while the new tolerance draws its limits on the basis of what it judges to be intolerant, which has become the supreme vice.ˣⁱᵛ
Reductionist sophistries such as the new tolerance always tend to frame the issues within their worldview without owning their worldview. Jesus warned that the world despises those who are committed to holiness. “Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you” (Mt 5:10-13).
There is a great and irreconcilable difference between ‘God is love’ versus affirming our culture’s understanding of ‘lawless love’ or love without justice. The Lord has told us in His Word that love keeps God’s commands. Jesus said, “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments” (Jn 14:15). God’s moral law is the safeguard of love, for love is the fulfillment of the law.
Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For this, “You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not covet’ and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this statement, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore, love is the fulfillment of the law” (Rom 13:8-10).
Genuine love does not write its own ethics. Love does not make sexual sin ‘acceptable’. Homosexual sex is sin no matter whether a life commitment is involved or not. It is still sexual immorality no matter the level of commitment between partners.ˣᵛ
It is not compassion, or love on the part of Christians when they suggest that God accepts homosexual behavior. For, God has told us that sexual sin not only damages those who engage in it, but also that sin alienates a person from God and brings judgment to the impenitent. The glorious news of the gospel is that God’s power is engaged in making new creatures of sinners who believe and repent, for in so doing, God glorifies His grace in bestowing new life through Christ. “He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved” (Eph 1:5-6).
Endnotes:
i Kevin DeYoung, What does the Bible really teach about Homosexuality? p. 55-56
ii Peter Jones, One or Two?
iii DeYoung, pp. 91, 93
iv Ibid, pp. 97-100
v Peter Jones, God of Sex, p. 17
vi Ibid, pp. 68-69
vii Ibid, pp. 70-73
viii DeYoung, pp. 110-117
ix Ibid, pp. 117-119
x D. A. Carson, The Intolerance of Tolerance, pp. 2-3
xi Ibid, pp. 4-5
xii Ibid, pp. 6-7
xiii Ibid, pp. 11-12
xiv Ibid, pp. 13-14
xv DeYoung, pp. 126-129