Ten years ago who would have ever thought we would be having this discussion today. Traditional marriage is a foundation of the family structure in America. Whenever you tamper with foundations there will be consequences. Much of the debate on this issue needs logical answers for good questions. Even though the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of gay marriage the church has the responsibility to be a voice and continue to address this issue no matter the pushback.
Social media, television, movies and humor have been used as tools to desensitize the American culture. Even a number of churches have stood up and try to justify the sanctioning of gay marriage. We must apply a Biblical worldview paradigm no matter what the issue is. Marriage is defined as a Man + Woman…and there is no room for compromise on this issue. After the ruling by the US Supreme Court we have seen the door open for which can be considered perversions in some cases regarding marriage. It will never be right for a man or woman to marry their dog. Yes, this is being challenged. It is not right for an adult to marry a young child or a brother or sister. We see restraints are being cast off and sexual immorality increasing.
What can we do? Study this issue and look at the videos on this website. Copy the Q/A and distribute it to educate people on this very important issue. Challenger pastor and youth pastor to make a stand and not be ashamed of the Gospel. Use social media wherever you can and spread the word even though there will be possible repercussions. But you must make a stand for truth. We need to preserve the family structure for the generations to come.
“If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (Psalm 11:3)
Rick Warzywak – MI Oak Initiative
CONTENTS ON THIS TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE SECTION
- Defending Traditional Marriage Q/A – Common Questions
- Homosexuality and a Biblical Worldview – Q/A
- The Gay Say Heresy…twisting the Scriptures
- Videos Addressing this Issue
- DEFENDING TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE – Q/A
(Sources: The Heritage Foundation, Family Research Council, National Organization for Marriage, Alliance Defending Freedom, Focus on the Family, MI Family Forum, MI Oak Initiative, Transformation Michigan and other contributors)
“We are losing the younger generation in this battle of traditional marriage. Reproduce and distribute this handout and give it to pastors/youth pastors to teach on Biblical marriage (Matthew 19:4-6, Gen. 2:24, Lev. 18:20-23). We must be educated on this issue and provide logical answers.” Rick Warzywak – Oak Initiative
Most legal experts who specialize in the area of religious freedom see the legal redefinition of marriage and family as the single greatest threat to religious freedom. As we look across the nation, it is hard to argue with their conclusion. The urgency and importance of communicating this fact to leaders across Michigan cannot be underestimated. That’s why Michigan Family Forum has made the passage of robust conscience protections a top priority for years to come. If you care about the future of marriage and the future of religious freedom, now is the time to act. Every leader should take action to protect this fundamental First Amendment right that is enjoyed by every American.” Brad Snavely – MI Family Forum
*QUESTION: What is marriage?
ANSWER: Marriage is a union that brings a man and a woman together as husband and wife to be father and mother to any children their union produces. It is based on the biological fact that reproduction depends on a man and woman, and the reality that children need a mother and a father. It is the building block of all human civilization. Marriage has public, not just private, purposes. When a foundation is destroyed, the house built upon that foundation will crumble.
*QUESTION: What are the consequences of redefining marriage?
ANSWER: Redefining marriage would hurt children. Recent studies in the area of social science for decades have shown that children do better when raised by a married mom and dad. If you redefine marriage, it would further separate marriage from the needs of children. Public policy would be changed from the ideal that a child needs a mom and a dad. Government would then be forced to intervene more often, and welfare programs would grow even larger. The Biblical worldview defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Scripture is very clear.
Redefining marriage would change the law, and new principles would be adopted. One new principle that would evolve is “marriage is whatever emotional bond the government says it is.” This is dangerous….and would eventually lead to perversions. Marriage redefinition will push out traditional views on the family and lead to an erosion of religious liberty in our state. This is already happening around our nation and even in Canada.
*QUESTION: Why should marriage matter to the government?
ANSWER: Government recognizes marriage because it is an institution that benefits society in a way that no other relationship does. Marriage ensures the well-being of children. When government recognizes marriage, it protects children by encouraging men and women to commit to each other and to take responsibility for their children. Government should recognize, protect, and promote traditional marriage as the ideal institution for having and raising children. Promoting traditional marriage doesn’t ban anything. Adults are still free to make choices about the relationships, and do not need government permission to do so. All Americans have the freedom to live as they choose, but no one has the right to redefine marriage for all of us. This is what the homosexual agenda is attempting to do in our state. Pray now as any society will crumble if foundations are destroyed.
*QUESTION: Hasn’t divorce already harmed the institution of marriage?
ANSWER: There is no doubt that high rates of divorce, cohabitation, and unwed childbearing has led to heart ache and difficulty. The question before us now is whether to reinforce these mistakes or began to restore the traditional marriage culture. Redefining marriage would make marriage about adult desires and not the needs of the children, about adult emotional satisfaction, not a permanent and exclusive union of man and woman intended for child bearing and rearing. We should rebuild and restore marriage, not undermine or redefine it.
*QUESTION: Are you saying that gay parents can’t love and provide for a child?
ANSWER: All people are capable of loving children, but all the love in the world can’t turn a mother into a father or a father into a mother. A child needs a mom and a dad. Children do better when raised by their married mom and dad, and decades of social science evidence shows this. We shouldn’t place the desires of adults over the needs of children.
*QUESTION: Isn’t denying same-sex couples the freedom to marry the same as a ban on interracial marriage?
ANSWER: No. Racism kept the races apart, and that is a bad thing; marriage unites the two sexes, and that is a good thing. Marriage must be colorblind, but it cannot be gender blind. Men and women – regardless of their race – can be united in marriage; and children need moms and dads, regardless of their race.
*QUESTION: Are expanding the rules on who can marry… really pro-family?
ANSWER: Redefining marriage will send the message that marriage is about adult desires, not the needs of children; about adult emotional satisfaction, not a permanent and exclusive sexual reproductive union of man and woman for having and raising children. Declaring by legislation or court decree that marriage is something that it is not undermines the entire institution and weakens society. The most pro-family policy the government can promote is one that reflects the truth about marriage and puts the needs of children first, not the emotional desires of adults.
*QUESTION: Why is allowing same-sex couples to marry bad for marriage?
ANSWER: Redefining marriage would deny as a matter of policy the ideal that a child needs a mom and dad. The debate about marriage is about restoring a culture in which children are most likely to be raised by the man and woman responsible for bringing them into the world.
Redefining marriage to mean a relationship between any two consenting adults is presented as a minor change. But if the law adopts this principle, that marriage can be whatever emotional bond the government says it should be, what stops the government from redefining marriage in other ways? Already a lawsuit in federal court is demanding a constitutional right to practice polygamy; three men got married in Thailand; a man married his dog in Europe…pedophilia???
*QUESTION: If marriage is about children, what about couples who can’t or don’t have children?
ANSWER: Sound public policy is based on the rule, not the exception, and most marriages do produce children. While not every married couple will have children, every child needs a mom and a dad. What about adoption? Childless marriages serve a broader social purpose – showing the potential to create children and to meet children’s need for a mom and a dad.
*QUESTION: Why shouldn’t everyone be able to marry the one they love?
ANSWER: Everyone is free to love all as they choose, but no one is entitled to redefine marriage for all of us. Morally the Bible has provided a standard of marriage. Every marriage policy must draw lines of what constitutes a marriage and what doesn’t. For example, our current marriage policy says that a person cannot marry someone who is already married, or a close blood relative…regardless of love.
Current policy is also based on the idea that marriage is fundamentally rooted in the union of one man and one woman. If that principle is removed, there is no consistent argument for stopping anyone who wants to redefine marriage. What if someone wants to marry an underage child? What about multiple wives? What about marrying your dog or cat? We should stand by the principle that marriage exists to bring a man and a woman together as husband and wife to be a father and mother to any children their union produces.
*QUESTION: Why doesn’t government get out of the marriage business altogether?
ANSWER: Marriage is society’s best guarantee of a limited government that stays out of family life. In fact, enduring marriages are society’s best tool for ensuring that children are born into stable caring families that will care for, educate, and train those children to be good people and good citizens. If fathers and mothers do not fulfill the responsibility for caring for the children they create, then third parties in government will have to step in. Instead, we must promote strong, intact marriages, so the government’s role would be reduced. Government cannot do the job of a solid family which = man + woman!
*QUESTION: Isn’t same-sex marriage in inevitable?
ANSWER: No. The vast majority of states affirm that marriage is between a man and woman. The future isn’t fixed. Unified prayer can birth a great awakening in a nation. We must depend on divine intervention into human affairs…as well as social activism. Pray for the Supreme Court as judicial activism has taken away the freedoms on what citizens are overwhelming choosing regarding correct definition of marriage, which is between a man and a woman.
- HOMOSEXUALITY AND A BIBLICAL WORLD VIEW – Q/A
If the family structure in America and our culture is to be preserved, we must look through the lenses of a Biblical worldview paradigm regarding homosexuality. If this is to be denied by anyone, it is an attack on our religious freedom in America which is in the Bill of Rights. The Christian church, pastors, ministry leaders, and individuals who claim to be Christians must make a stand on this issue and get answers to basic questions regarding homosexuality. Pastors must not shrink back but teach the biblical worldview regarding traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Yes, we are to love all people, but in that process truth must never take a backseat. This issue is highly critical, and future generations are at stake. All sorts of moral depravity will manifest in society if this issue goes unchallenged. Who will rise up?
The Bible says, my people perish for lack of knowledge (Hosea 4:6). Only righteousness can exalt the nation (Proverbs 14:34). We must carefully look at Deuteronomy 28, which can be called the book of consequences. When the commandments of God are broken, there is a law of sowing and reaping inflicted upon society. Yes, God is merciful and one of love and grace. As we address these basic questions, the word is very clear that God prefers mercy over judgment. We must never turn our back on the word of God (Romans 1:24-32). God’s law is higher than man’s law! The Bible is a standard where all opinions must be measured whether truth or error.
*QUESTION: What would be the impact of homosexual Christian ideology or behavior on the church?
ANSWER: The whole homosexual Christian movement threatens to alter substantially the Christian church in its doctrinal teaching. If one acquiesces to the premises of homosexual Christian ideology, one must ignore foundational Christian doctrine and abandon the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic. The outcome of this debate could radically alter popular views of the authority of Scripture, the family unit, and sexual morality. Abandoning principles of human sexuality as given by God in Genesis and taught by the church for the past 2000 years would have serious implications for societal stability and for the freedom of civic minded Christians to dissent on the issue of public support for homosexual behavior.
This is a direct assault on the integrity and authority of Scripture. The homosexual agenda is attempting to put man in the position of determining what is true in the Bible; it makes a false god of man’s fallen conscience and allows no room for any absolute authority greater than ourselves. We will show the twisting of the Scriptures in later questions.
Historically, Judeo-Christian teaching has provided the basis for our understanding of the family unit by establishing heterosexual marriage…in a lifelong commitment. In contrast, homosexual activism challenges the heterosexual, monogamous union as the norm for human sexual relations and the establishment of a family. Homosexual activism also wants to redefine sexual morality where the Bible has already set a standard.
*QUESTION: What has been the historic Christian position on the issue of homosexual behavior?
ANSWER: It is said that Jesus never addressed this issue of homosexuality. Explicit condemnation or affirmation of homosexual behavior of Jesus is not necessary for a proper understanding, because He address the broader issue of all human sexuality. Instead of telling us what sexuality was not made for, He taught the reason for which mankind’s sexuality was made. Christ looked back to Eden to the original creative intent and to the first sexual union, where God ordained the institution of marriage (Mark 10:6-9 and Genesis 1:27, 2:24). God said, and Jesus affirmed, male and female united as one flesh. All human sexual relationships were to be monogamous, lifelong, heterosexual unions as blessed by God before the fall of man.
We must realize homosexual activity is neither an adequate nor fulfilling expression of sexuality, because it lacks both a true, complete physical union and the life-giving element of procreation. Anything which departs from this original created order falls short of God’s intent for human sexuality, including homosexual behavior, but also rape, incest, pedophilia, premarital sex, adultery, bestiality, pornography, and any other form of sexual expression outside the boundaries of the biblical norm. Both Old and New Testament Scriptures addresse God’s standard in these areas. Paul was a rabbinical scholar whose comments about homosexuality directly reflect Talmudic discussions of homosexuality. Without exception, the Talmud is the central Jewish commentary on the Torah and prohibits any behavior that deviates from biblical sexual morality.
NOTE: Homosexual activist must then attempt to prove the Bible as unreliable and not true. The Bible is true, and the evidence is overwhelming. The question is: what evidence are you willing to investigate as evidence?
QUESTION: What is the scriptural teaching on homosexual behavior?
ANSWER: Homosexual Christian activists have tried to reinterpret passages that warn against the homosexual lifestyle. When carefully studied, in the light of God’s guiding standard of human sexual behavior, it is clear that the homosexual lifestyle cannot be reconciled to Scriptural principles.
Homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God. What does God’s Word say? “Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lust of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves: For this cause God gave them up unto vile affection: For even their women changed the natural use unto that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly” (Romans 1:24-32).
Nature dictates that using the body in unnatural ways will bring death and judgment upon the guilty. Our anatomy was designed by God for particular functions and not for what the homosexual community has deemed acceptable. Men’s rebellion in any sexual sin brings disease such as Aids, STD., shorter life spans and, of course eternal separation from God. Sexual lust is very powerful and leads many individuals to forms of sexual perversion. Only Christ can break this stronghold (John 8:31-32) in a person’s life. Our thought life must be brought under control. These are other Scriptures clearly point out that homosexuality is a sin (Leviticus 20:13, 1 Corinthians 9-10, Galatians 5:16-21) that will lead to judgment.
The passage in Genesis 19:1-29 clearly explains the reasons for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. It was because of sexual perversion, specifically homosexual behavior. Homosexuals claim Sodom’s sin was one of inhospitality and not of homosexuality. Nowhere in the Bible is inhospitality listed as an abomination, but homosexual behavior is (Leviticus 18:22). It is clearly seen that the angry mob is quoted as demanding to “know them.” Of the 12 times the Hebrew word “know” occurs in Genesis, 10 times it means to have intercourse with. Furthermore, the context clearly suggests that the townspeople were looking for sex, not credentials, as homosexual activists claim.
*QUESTION: Where do homosexual feelings and tendencies originate?
ANSWER: So you may ask, where did I develop these feelings or tendencies? God calls it a choice! Lust is a very big factor as many pre-occupy themselves with sexual gratification. It cannot be put into words all that’s involved for every individual. But a few common themes seem to arise amongst homosexuals. They center around parent-child relationships, child abuse, self acceptance, alcohol and drug use, suicidal tendencies and depression. The majority of homosexuals are lacking some type of love in their lives. They have been emotionally scarred at some time in their lives or deeply hurt by someone. This rejection has led many of them to look for acceptance in this community of people. These influences are not a causation behind your will (making you do it) or genetics, so cry out to God! He can HELP!!! The Christian community must reach out to them and not condemn them. They are people who need the love of God!!!!
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.” (John 3:16)
*QUESTION: Are homosexual tendencies genetic…was I born that way?
ANSWER: There is no gay gene. Biased and skewed research has left an impression that such a gene exists. It is a personal and individual choice. The Bible clearly states that God is fair, just, and honest. Since this is so, how could God condemn one to judgment for something he/she had no choice? Is this an act of a loving God? No! What is caused is not free. Homosexuality is a freewill choice. Remember, at birth you are either a boy or a girl: Genetically XY is a boy and XX is a girl. God does not make mistakes. So tendencies, even when people are young will not change the fact that one is a boy or a girl at birth. Environmental factors, parental abuse, neglect, sexual abuse, bullying, rejection, and improper parental upbringing are some reasons for this wrong choice. Many will say they were born that way to self justify what is not natural and against Biblical instruction.
Websites: These sites will give a more detailed response regarding this question above.
*QUESTION: Are the questions above conveying any type of hate speech towards the homosexual community?
ANSWER: No! It’s quite the opposite. We strongly oppose victimization, violence, and hate against any sector of society that disagrees with our Biblical view – as well as honor the dignity and rights of all those who differ from us. It must be realized that warnings are an act of love. God is love and he warns his children of activities that grieve him and will separate them from Him for eternity. As a parent, I have warned my children numerous times when they were younger. Do not talk to strangers. Look both ways before crossing the road. The statements were acts of love towards my children. I am thankful for tornado, hurricane, and severe weather warnings as they are given out to save lives. So the answers to the questions above are really acts of love towards those to whom God wants to extend mercy. This is not hate speech but a reminder of the moral standards God has set up for society.
In saying this, we realize that many are trapped in this lifestyle and do not know how to get out. Sexuality is a very strong urge within men and women. Repeated wrong choices can produce habits that are very difficult to break. We’re not saying this will be easy, but with proper instruction, prayer, support, and Biblical guidance it can be done.
*QUESTION: Is homosexuality a civil right?
ANSWER: Same-sex marriage or civil unions is not an issue of “civil rights” as we have seen this rightfully applied to discrimination against African Americans. This was a race issue while homosexuality is not! This is a behavioral issue. There are already existing laws regarding marriage such as marrying children, a close blood relative, somebody who is already married, and SAME SEX MARRIAGE! There is no discrimination involved here as we are viewing what is natural versus unnatural in the eyes of God. The vast majority of African-Americans are offended when people attempt to equate Gay Marriage with the Civil Rights issues of the past. Men such as Rev. Martin Luther King fought very hard for these rights that were a race issue. African-Americans are born black and they will remain black; a white person is born white and he or she will remain white; a Hispanic person is born Hispanic and he or she will remain Hispanic; and an Asian is born Asian and he or she remaining Asian. Homosexuality is a behavioral issue as there are many who have turned back to be heterosexual which is natural. It is a choice!
POINT TO PONDER: Homosexual activists (or the LGBT movement) continue to hitch their caboose to the civil rights train, but the fact is same-sex marriage is not a civil right. Today’s homosexual activists are seeking not to fulfill, but to overturn, the principles of family that were enshrined in nature from the beginning of human creation.
When Martin Luther King was asked by a young man to comment on his same-sex attraction here was the response: “Your problem is not at all an uncommon one. However, it does require careful attention. The type of feeling that you have toward boys is probably not an innate tendency, but something that has been culturally acquired. Your reasons for adopting this habit have now been consciously suppressed or unconsciously repressed. Therefore, it is necessary to deal with this problem by getting back to some of the experiences and circumstances that led to the habit. In order to do this, I would suggest that you see a good psychiatrist who can assist you in bringing to the forefront of conscience all of those experiences and circumstances that led to the habit. You are already on the right road toward a solution, since you honestly recognize the problem and have a desire to solve it.”
*QUESTION: Is homosexuality natural or unnatural?
ANSWER: Nature dictates that men and women are different in design. That very design was created for man and woman to come together “as one in the bonds of marriage.” The male and female anatomy is a witness to this. Every part was designed with a particular function and not to be used incorrectly. God defines what is natural or unnatural. It really doesn’t matter what the media, professors, schools, people, or opinions say. The Word of God is our standard of right and wrong. This verse below describes perfectly whether homosexuality is natural or not. My opinion has to align with God’s opinion. He created us and is the Master Designer.
“Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.” (Romans 1:24-32)
Many try to twist, turn, or misinterpret these verses from the Bible, but the truth is clearly seen in them. Culture, modern thinking, or attempts by science do not change the moral standard that has been established throughout the ages, since the beginning of time. God is very clear on various sexual practices regarding His creation and on the relationship between males and females.
“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. 23 Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it. It is perversion. Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you.” (Leviticus 18:22-24)
Do you want to live in and inherit a nation blessed by God or in one that deserves judgment (Deuteronomy 28)? America is at a crossroads, and I believe this younger generation can turn this around if we as adults can assist them. It will take courage, persistent faith, and much prayer. BUT IT CAN BE DONE!!!
QUESTION: Isn’t a same-sex partnership okay if it’s committed and faithful?
ANSWER: This is a common argument that is made today. The gay community may agree that a promiscuous gay lifestyle with multiple partners and one night stands might be wrong, but to people who love each other and are faithful to whatever promises they have made surely that’s okay? Many Christians succumb to this argument as a justification to not stand when it clearly is stated in the word of God.
In 1 Corinthians 5 Paul rebukes the Corinthian church for its acceptance of an illicit relationship. A man is in a relationship with his father’s wife, most likely his stepmother, an arrangement expressly forbidden in Leviticus 18. Paul is dismayed. Even the pagans in Corinthian society would not allow such a thing, and yet here it is going on in plain sight among God’s people.
Paul’s response to the situation is instructive, as much for what he doesn’t say as for what he does say. There seems to be no question about whether the couple in question loves each other. Paul does not ask about their level of commitment or whether they are being faithful. That is not the issue. Whether or not they are in a long term committed relationship is beside the point; the fact remains that it is wrong and should not be happening.
Paul does not distinguish between faithful and committed illicit relationships. Faithfulness demonstrated in an otherwise prohibited relationship does not make it less sinful. In many areas of life it is possible to demonstrate good qualities while doing something wrong. A thief in a gang may demonstrate an impeccable loyalty to his fellow criminals during the act of stealing: looking out for them, protecting them from danger, being sure to give them a generous proportion of the takings. None of this in any way lessens the immorality of the act; it just means he is being a good thief rather than a bad thief. As we have seen, Scripture is clear in its prohibition of any homosexual activity. Activity that is faithful and committed is no more permissible than activity that’s promiscuous and unfaithful.
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
POINT TO PONDER: We are never to define the Bible through the lens of our sexuality. We must define our sexuality through the lens of the Bible.
- THE GAY SAY HERESY…Twisting the Scriptures: A Response!
*GAY OBJECTION: Isn’t the Sodom and Gomorrah account in Genesis 19: 4-13 dealing with hospitality, social injustice, and not homosexuality?
RESPONSE: The account begins with the arrival of two angels at the city gate. The angels appear as men and are strongly discouraged from spending the night out in the open in the city square. This is a hint in itself regarding the danger that exists. As the sun sets, things get nasty. So where does the supposed confusion enter in? Later, in parts of the Old Testament, other sins are mentioned such as oppression, adultery, lying, abetting criminals, arrogance, complacency and indifference to the poor…but homosexuality is not mentioned. So the gay community says that Genesis 19 is referring to social oppression, lack of hospitality, and injustice.
They also say that the word “know” just means to get to know someone and not necessarily sexually. This can be easily refuted as Lot made a dreadful attempt to offer his daughters as a sexual alternative. We must also realize that this crowd is not a small, unrepresentative group. It is very clear in Scripture this is the whole male community: “the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man.” Then the Angels warn that judgment is imminent in verse 13. In the New Testament in Jude 7 we see that Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities surrounding gave themselves up to sexual immorality. The book of Jude calls it a perversion and unnatural desire.
This account is definitely showing that the crowd was attempting to satisfy their sexual cravings that were ungodly, but also the nature of the cravings as well. A parallel episode in Judges 19 indicates it is not just pagan Sodom, but also the people of God who commit this kind of sin.
*GAY OBJECTION: The prohibitions against homosexual activity in Leviticus 18: 10-24 and 20: 10-16 are referring only to call “cultic” prostitution associated with pagan temples as the word abomination refers to idolatry.
RESPONSE: The language in these passages refers in general to a man lying with the man as with a woman, without specifying a particular context for that act. Moreover, the surrounding verses in both Leviticus 18 and 20 forbid other forms of sexual sin that are general in nature, such as incest, adultery and bestiality. None of these have any connection with pagan temples or idolatry. These things are morally wrong, irrespective of who is doing them and where they are happening. Many in the gay community also try to write this off as only prohibiting things like gay rape or a forced relationship. Leviticus prohibits even general, consensual homosexual activity. If the practices in Leviticus 18 and 20 are condemned only because of their association with idolatry, then it logically follows they would be permissible if they were committed apart from idolatry. That would mean incest, adultery, bestiality and child sacrifice (all of which are listed in these chapters) are only condemned when associated with idolatry; otherwise, they are allowable. No serious reader of these passages could accept such a premise
It is also important to see that homosexual behavior is not the only sin to be described as an abomination in the Bible. Leviticus refers to other sexual sins exactly the same way, and Proverbs list deceitful speech, pride and murder as equally abominable to God. Homosexual sin is not in a category of its own in this regard.
*GAY OBJECTION: The verses in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10 are referring to Gay prostitution or pederasty (men having sexual relation with boys in the Roman culture) and not homosexuality in general.
“Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders… (1 Corinthians 6:9)
“For fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, (1 Timothy 1:10)
RESPONSE: In both 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10 the apostle Paul states that those guilty of sexual immorality will not inherit the kingdom of God. At the time Paul wrote his letters there was no word in classical, biblical, or patristic Greek which corresponded with our English term “homosexual.” Instead, homosexual behavior was described (Rom. 1:26-27). The words Paul uses here — malakoi (“male prostitute”) and arsenokoitai (“homosexual offenders”) — have been translated in different ways.
Because of this those condoning homosexuality have tried to lessen the impact of these verses, saying that all Paul was condemning was either homosexual prostitution or pederasty (i.e., men having sexual relations with boys). Virtually every Greek lexicon, however, including all of the standard English ones, has understood these words (especially arsenokoitai) to be referring to homosexuality. Arndt and Gingrich’s lexicon says malakoi refers to persons who are “soft, effeminate, especially of catamites, men and boys who allow themselves to be misused homosexually.” Likewise, arsenokoites means “a male homosexual, pederast, sodomite.” We also find these terms in classical Greek literature (Lucian and Aristotle) sometimes applied to obviously gay persons. If Paul were only condemning certain types of homosexuality, he would certainly have specified this. Instead, he used a term directly based on the Greek Septuagint translation of the prohibitions against homosexuality in Leviticus: meta arsenos ou koimethese koiten gynaikos (Lev. 18:22) koimethe meta arsenos koiten gynaikos (Lev. 20:13).
Paul, a rabbi thoroughly trained in the Torah, was certainly mindful of these Levitical condemnations and the Septuagint translation of them when he chose his wording in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy.
*GAY OBJECTION: Jesus never mentions homosexuality…so it is not wrong?
RESPONSE: Even though Jesus does not directly mention homosexuality in his teaching on sexual sin, He does address it. Consider the following:
“And He said, “What comes out of a man is what defiles a man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications (sexual immorality – porneia), murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lewdness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within and defile a man.” (Mark 7:20-23)
Jesus says there are things that make someone spiritually unclean before God. In this list Jesus includes examples of sexual sin: adultery, lewdness and sexual immorality. Fornication or sexual immorality translates a Greek word, porneia that comes from the word pornography. It is a catch all term for any sexual activity outside of marriage. This extends beyond intercourse to include any activity of a sexual nature. None of Jesus his hearers would have doubted that His reference to porneia included homosexual behavior.
One other point needs to be made. As well as condemning sexual sin outside marriage, Jesus indicated that the only godly alternative to marriage was celibacy. In Matthew 19, when Jesus had outlined God’s purpose for human marriage, His disciples responded in exasperation: “if this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry” – (Matthew 19:10). See what Jesus said in Matthew 19: 11-12. Eunuchs were the celibates of their day, and Jesus indicates their celibacy might be the result of birth, or human intervention, or a voluntary decision to forgo marriage. Whatever its cause, that Jesus goes there right after His disciples have balked at the commitment in seriousness of marriage shows that Jesus regards it as the only alternative. One marries or remains single. There is no third possibility, whether of a homosexual partnership or a heterosexual unmarried partnership. As far as Jesus is concerned, the godly alternatives before us are heterosexual marriage or celibacy.
*GAY OBJECTION: Aren’t you just picking and choosing which Old Testament laws apply? Why not follow Leviticus 11:7 on pigs? Why not Deuteronomy 22:11 regarding not wearing clothes of wool and linen woven together?
RESPONSE: On the surface this looks like a very strong argument. The problem with this objection is that it assumes Christians have exactly the same approach to every part of the Old Testament law. In fact, the proper Christian view of the Old Testament has a little more variation than that.
The Old Testament is not a flat landscape. It is not just a lineup of instructions and regulations, each of which is equally binding. It has a particular shape to it, a shape whose contours, emphases and priorities are outlined and filled in by Jesus himself, who said: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17).
Jesus did not come to discard the law as nonsense from a bygone age or to enforce it and police it. Nor did He come to fulfill just bits of it, sifting through the pile with a pair of tweezers and picking out the occasional commandment that might still work for us. When Jesus came to fulfill the law, He came fulfill all of it. But as we follow Jesus’ life and ministry, it becomes apparent that He fulfills the various elements of the law in a variety of ways. He ended the cleanliness and food laws. He declared all foods clean in Mark 7:21 and this was reiterated in Acts 10:9-16. He touched lepers and dead bodies, and was not made unclean by doing so.
He spoke of His body as the true temple and His death as the ultimate sacrifice for sin. His death opened up the way for us to approach God, making Old Testament regulations concerning the temple and its sacrificial system obsolete. Through his sinless life Jesus fully embodied all the moral requirements of the law. Through union with Him, the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us as we live by the power of the Spirit (Rom. 8:4).
We do not honor all the Old Testament texts in the same way. We take our cue from Jesus. It is because of what He claimed his death would achieve that we do not follow all the Old Testament laws. To do so would be to undermine His work on the cross. So the Old Testament’s teaching on sexual ethics, through its restatement in the NT, is still binding of Christians today.
GAY OBJECTION: Doesn’t the apostle Paul in Romans 1:24-32 address cultural issues in Roman society such as: homosexual acts being conducted during idol worship; sex with children; or Roman slave owners abusing slaves?
RESPONSE: Paul’s aim in these early chapters is to demonstrate that the whole world is unrighteous in God’s sight and therefore in need of salvation. He focuses on the pagan Gentile world, describing its turning from God and embracing of idolatry and wickedness. He is most likely using the Greco-Roman culture surrounding his readers as a case in point.
Gentile society faces God’s wrath because it has suppressed the truth that God has revealed about himself and creation (Rom. 1:18-20). In the verses that follow, Paul illustrates how this has happened. He gives three examples of how what has been known about God has been exchanged for something else: they exchanged the glory of God for images of creatures (vs 23); they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, leading to full-blown idolatry, worshiping created things (vs 25); and they rejected the knowledge of God (vs 28), exchanging natural relations for unnatural ones (vs 26-27). Will the interpretation applied to the verse 26-27 also apply to verses 29-30? Any sort of intellectual integrity demands it. If verses 26-27 apply to people who commit homosexual acts in connection with idolatry, and thus homosexual acts are not sinful if not committed in connection with idolatry, then the same must apply to verses 29-30 as well.
Paul clearly describes both lesbian and male homosexual behavior as unnatural. Some have wondered whether unnatural might refer to what is natural to the people themselves. If so, Paul would be talking about heterosexual people engaging in homosexual activity and thereby going against their natural orientation. Paul would therefore not be condemning all homosexual behavior, but only that which goes against the person’s own sexual inclinations. Additionally, the fact these men were “burning in lust” for each other makes it highly unlikely they were heterosexuals experimenting with homosexuality. Their behavior was born of an intense inner desire. The words for natural and against nature do not describe our subjective experience of what feels natural to us, but instead refers to the fixed way of things in creation.
Again, there is nothing in his wording to suggest he even recognized such a thing as a “true” homosexual versus a “false” one. He simply describes homosexual behavior as unnatural, no matter by whom it is committed. His wording, in fact, is unusually specific. When he refers to “men” and “women” in these verses, he chooses the Greek words that most emphasize biology: arsenes and theleias. Both words are rarely used in the New Testament. When they do appear, they appear in verses meant to emphasize the gender of the subject, as in a male child (arsenes). In this context, Paul is very pointedly saying the homosexual behavior committed by these people was unnatural to them as males and females (arsenes and theleias). He is not considering any such thing as sexual orientation. He is saying, in other words, that homosexuality is biologically unnatural – not just unnatural to heterosexuals but unnatural to anyone.
This shows us why it is not true for those with same-sex attraction to say: “But God made be this way.” All of us have desires that are warped as a result of our fallen nature. Desires for things God has forbidden are reflection of how sin has distorted us, and not how God has made us.
Regarding the arguments that this passage refers to Roman men preying on young boys (pederasty – love of young boys) are simply not true. Paul made reference to lesbianism as well and not just man-boy relationships that are known to have occurred in Roman culture. I am sure many male Roman slaveholders also sodomized or sexually abused their slaves. Again, Paul is focusing on what is natural and unnatural, inclusive of both sexes.
We must also realize the passage here in Romans unpacks a long list of behaviors or sinful acts that lead to judgment. It is important to recognize that Paul is talking in societal rather than individual terms. He is describing what happens to culture as a whole, rather than particular people.
- Videos Addressing this Issue
This video list will grow over time. Share them on Facebook and other forms of Social Media. We must educate and provoke discussion…especially our younger generation. We can turn our nation around on this issue if you will be a voice that will be heard.
*The Case for Traditional Marriage:
*Audacity the Movie:
Tremendous movie by Ray Comfort (Living Waters) regarding the sensitivity of homosexuality in a storyline – great live interviews with dialogue. Is Gay marriage morally OK – find out!