Introduction
I have said before that 1 Corinthians is a letter I have both wanted and not wanted to preach through for the same reason – its practicality. The apostle Paul wrote the Corinth Church about issues it was struggling with, issues which have an uncanny resemblance to those we are facing today. Today, we will consider the issue of homosexuality.
These are confusing times, especially for young people. Today marks the end of Gay Day at Disney World, which in reality is a full week of gay festivities in the Orlando area. Most universities and colleges observe Gay Pride week as do many cities and towns. Homosexuals are now featured in many TV programs, all as positive role models and all of whom are shown as victims of bigotry. I would venture to say there is no TV or movie production that would show a homosexual as being troubled by his condition other than the trouble caused by bigotry.
This is to be expected. What adds further to the confusion is the rise of “Christian” advocates for homosexuality. This has long been a cause of liberal churches, and the only surprise is that mainstream denominations are still battling over such issues as having same-sex marriages and homosexual clergy. But now, even self-described evangelicals are entering the pro-homosexual movement. Mel White, who wrote for Pat Robertson and Billy Graham, came “out of the closet” a number of years ago and is now a minister in the Metropolitan Community Churches denomination, which reaches out to the GLBT community – gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender. He is but one voice of many who profess the orthodox doctrines of salvation and contend that Scripture affirms homosexuality.
Has the church made a mistake? Did it misunderstand Scripture and is guilty of wrong teaching that homosexuality is a sin? What guidance can be given today, particularly to our young people?
Text
Consider our text. The first question is whether or not homosexuality is actually the sin as listed. The two Greek words that the ESV translates nor men who practice homosexuality are difficult to translate. Consider the various Bible translations. The KJV reads “nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind”; the NKJ has “nor homosexuals nor sodomites”; and the NIV weighs in with “nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders.”
The word translated by the KJV for “effeminate” literally means “soft.” It could be used to describe someone with a weak character, who is easily manipulated. It could also describe what we normally would associate with the term – a male with feminine-like characteristics and mannerisms.
The second word used is difficult to translate because this is its first appearance in any literature and rarely used. It is a compound word combining the term for “man” with a slang term for “intercourse,” which accounts for its rare use. By itself, the word could mean a man who has immoral sex of all kinds, or it could mean a man with another man.
These two words are separated by the word “nor,” which separates the other words on the list. That is why most of the translations give two categories instead of combining them into one phrase as the ESV has done. The NIV is probably closest to the mark. The first term likely indicates the passive person and the latter term the active person in a homosexual act.
Even then, we have to be cautious in interpreting these words to apply to all homosexuals and homosexual behavior. It may be that Paul is presenting specific illicit behavior. Certainly, he would be thinking of the religious prostitution that was carried on in the pagan temples, and which, as we will learn later, the Corinth Church men were still availing themselves of.
So, where does this leave us? Is homosexuality a sin? Is the practice condemned in Scripture? Until the last century, it had not been much of a debate. Now, even within evangelical circles, doubt has been raised about the biblical teaching. What is the case for the traditional church teaching about homosexuality?
The starting place is Genesis 2:18-24:
The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”
19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.
But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
23 The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”
24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.
It is this text that forms the foundation for marriage and for sexuality. All of Scripture only recognizes marriage between a man and a woman, and sex only appropriate between husband and wife. There is simply no other teaching nor example of other approved types of marriage or of approved sexual relations. This is a strong argument. How could Scripture be totally silent on same gender relations (except for negative contexts) if they are good? We know that in Jewish culture life in the Old and New Testament periods, homosexuality was never regarded positively, nor is there any hint of the NT church having a different attitude. Why then, would the Bible not give any word of blessing or at least regulate its activity. Even divorce, which Jesus said God disapproved of, was regulated. A positive view of homosexuality, of recognizing its legitimacy, is simply not in the pages of Scripture.
The only references to homosexual behavior either expressly forbid it or speak negatively of it. Leviticus 20:13 states: If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. Romans 1:26-27 reads: Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
There have been creative attempts to discount or reinterpret these verses: the Leviticus law no longer applies; the Romans passage is speaking of heterosexuals acting out homosexual behavior or the real sin is homosexual lust as opposed to love. None of the interpretations are convincing. There is no debate over whether the moral laws of Leviticus still apply; at least there has not been until modern times. As for the Romans passage, the language and the context are simply too clear to get around the text’s meaning. It is speaking of men and women who turned from sexual relations with members of the opposite sex to members of their own. It, furthermore, is making it clear that such relations are not natural.
Pro-Homosexual Argument
Again, no one can use Scripture to build a direct case for homosexuality. At best, the proponents can raise questions about the scriptures used against it, such as above. And yet, there are those who contend that Scripture supports it. What is their basis? They look to the teaching of the gospel’s free offer to everyone. The gospel breaks down the walls that separate people who are different from one another. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28). If homosexuality is only a matter of being different, then surely the gospel includes that lifestyle.
The second basis for their teaching is Christian love. Proponents acknowledge that there can be homosexual sin just as there is heterosexual sin. As one writer puts it: “When is homosexuality wrong? Homosexuality is wrong anytime heterosexuality is wrong!” This distinction between sexuality and sexual immorality is at the heart of the whole debate, the homosexual proponent contends. It explains, for example, the reason that homosexuality is not addressed in the Bible, at least in a positive manner. The writers did not know of loving, monogamous relations between homosexuals. Their only experience and knowledge of homosexuality were connected with rape, prostitution, and the common practice of pederasty – men (including married men) who had boys for their sexual partners. What the NT writers do teach is that all relationships must practice love. That is what matters, and such relationships can and do exist between homosexual couples. Therefore, loving, monogamous homosexual relationships are condoned.
Do you follow the logic? The homosexual differs from the heterosexual in one way – he or she has a natural attraction to members of the same gender. It is only a difference in natural attraction. Like heterosexuality, it can be abused for immoral purposes. But also like heterosexuality, it can be expressed in loving relationships. It is not something that needs to be repented of; perhaps it may need to be reformed, but it is not sinful in itself.
Response to the Argument
How do we respond? There is a fundamental difference between the traditional approach to sexuality and the pro-homosexual approach. The traditional perspective turns to the creation account that presents the origin of marriage for its basis to discuss the issue. It contends that Scripture presents an order to sexual relations, i.e. that there is a structured framework that determines what is moral or immoral. The pro-homosexual perspective turns to the law of love. It contends that the heart is the heart of the issue. What determines whether a relationship is good or bad is the presence or lack of presence of love.
Who is right? Look at Scripture. It cannot be denied that the Bible only teaches marriage as the acceptable framework for sex. One pro-homosexual scholar, whose writings are foundational for the movement, contends that romantic (eros) love is not taught in Scripture. I would differ, but one must agree that romantic love is not propounded as the basis for marriage. Agape (Christian) love is, but not romantic. What matters is that neither sex outside of marriage nor adultery is practiced. There is a fundamental order to how sex is to be practiced.
What about love? Yes, all relationships must be loving relationships. Husbands and wives ought to love one another. Friends ought to love one another, whether of the same sex or opposite sex. But sexual relations are reserved for marriage. The pro-homosexual replies that marriage can be between same-sex partners. But there is no biblical teaching, example, or inference of that belief. It doesn’t exist in God’s Word.
But just because Scripture doesn’t speak of homosexual marriage, doesn’t mean it is wrong. Why not? Why believe that homosexual marriage is okay when nothing in Scripture teaches that it is, and what references that are made are all negative? The reason for believing it is ultimately because of feelings. It feels right; it feels natural. How can a loving relationship be wrong?
Good question. Consider the implication. How can incestuous relations be wrong if love is involved? How can polygamy be wrong and communal sexual relations? This is precisely what the world contends. As long as love is at the heart of the relationship, it must be okay. You will find the Bible teaching the essential role of love, but you will not find it teaching that love overrules the divine order of sexual relations. Love cannot make sex outside of marriage moral; nor can it redefine marriage to be inclusive of other pairings and combinations.
Again, we come back to feelings, i.e. sexual feelings. The pro-homosexual contends that sexual attraction is merely the product of nature. This is the never-ending debate. Proponents argue that it’s a matter of genetics, and traditionalists argue that it is not. Traditionalists argue that it results from problems experienced sometime in life; proponents deny the contention, at least for “real” homosexuals. These studies and debates are helpful to a degree, but they do not settle the issue for Christians. Even if traditionalists can show that every homosexual has had something in his or her past that contributed towards homosexuality, it could be countered that everybody has had bad and wrong things happen. That’s the reality of life. And even if the pro-homosexual proponents actually came up with proof that genetics are involved, that would prove nothing more than people can be born with genetic defects.
The reality of the Fall – man’s fall from a sinless state – guarantees that the world and every person is defective in some way. It guarantees that we will feel sin to be natural. Most of the sins we commit, we do so because they feel natural to us. “Everyone does it,” is our rationale, and that is true about our sins. That is why we need the scriptures to correct our sense of what is natural and of what is moral. That is why we need the scriptures to examine our hearts.
Pro-homosexual proponents contend that the heart should be the guide as to what is right and wrong. This is where I believe the crucial error is made. Such a belief, which is the prevalent principle pushed by our society, has led many Christians astray. Never, ever, does the Bible teach us to use our hearts as our guides. Never does it teach us to “follow our hearts.” Our hearts are tainted with sin. They can never be reliable guides. Scripture says, There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death (Proverbs 16:25). It also says, The heart is deceitful above all things (Jeremiah 17:9). We are to examine our hearts, not use our hearts to be examining tools. And we are to examine them in the light of God’s Word, that two-edged sword which ”penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12-13). Homosexuality is but one sin to which Christians are being led astray, because they have bought into the world’s article of faith that we trust our hearts’ feelings.
Lessons
I want to speak to two groups. First, to us traditionalists. You know my position. I believe homosexuality to be a sin. I am not halfway on this issue. I even believe that homosexual feelings are sinful. But we also need to examine our hearts. How much is our objection to homosexuality is the result of being convicted by the Scriptures, and how much is mere aversion to “those kind of people”? Again, I believe homosexuality is sin; we should be concerned with its growing acceptance in society. But we need to consider how much we have contributed to what is going on now, because mine and previous generations created a fear and hate environment.
We are guilty of making homosexuality the sin that should fill everyone with loathing, especially the person feeling homosexual attraction. How many young men and women never got the help they needed because of the shame connected with their feelings? Because of the rejection and hatred which they knew would be leveled at them?
The church is guilty of rejecting sinners, of refusing to love them and help them. The church is guilty of raising homosexuality as the chief of sins, and the church is guilty of grouping all homosexuals under the label of abomination. We are guilty before the Lord of pushing many homosexuals away from us into the world where they receive acceptance.
There are two men in my former church who are supporters of the high school that I had been principal of. They came out of the homosexual lifestyle and joined the church. There was an incident which began their pilgrimage. A couple of students from my school walked by their business and yelled vulgar comments. They complained to the then principal, James Boice, the senior minister of Tenth Church. He called the students into his office, had them apologize to the men and then suspended them. This action by a minister, who took their dignity seriously, began the slow process of melting away their anger and fears about the church. Eventually, they began to attend and experienced the preaching of the gospel and, just as importantly, the friendship of the church members – friendship that was extended before they changed. It is amazing, isn’t it, what unconditional love – the love shown to us by God – will do?
We need to show that love to our homosexual neighbor. We need to let him or her know that though we cannot condone the sin, he will find in us true friendship. If he is in our family, we need to let him know he is still family. Don’t forget the biggest complaint of the Pharisees about Jesus, that he was a friend of sinners.
To you who may be struggling with homosexuality, you are welcome here. You are welcome to share your struggles with me. I won’t reject you; I will not be repulsed by you. And you will not be the first to confide in me. I will help you; I will also lead you to others who can help. There is a couple in town who minister to men and women desiring help. Our denomination endorses a ministry called Harvest USA which ministers to homosexuals and to their families. I extend the same offer to parents and to anyone with homosexual family members or friends.
As a minister of Jesus Christ, I extend to anyone the compassion of the gospel. I extend the welcome of the “Friend of Sinners.”
