Ronnie W. Rogers, “Taking every thought captive…”

Here is a paper by Toby Harmon presented in the Ethics Round Table. I thought it might be helpful.

Is Homosexuality Biblical or Moral?

By Toby Harmon

Presented To

The Roundtable in Ethics

January 31st 2011

 

Biblical Arguments for the pro-homosexual camp

1. Sodom’s sin was not homosexuality, rather inhospitality

a. Lot’s concern, appealed to in Genesis 19:8,¹ was the Canaanite custom of guaranteeing the protection of guests under your roof.

Rebuttal:

- While this may be part of Lot’s concern, why would there be concern at all if the townspeople merely wanted to meet and greet Lot’s visitors, as we see in the pro homosexual’s next argument?

b. Yada- “to know” simply means “to get acquainted” with (Gen. 19:5). The overwhelming use of this word in OT has no reference to sexual relations.

Rebuttal:

- However in the same context in verse 8 Lot uses the term “to know” of his daughters in referring to their virginity and having not known any man. Clearly a sexual reference. The point is that Lot’s solution was that the Sodomites “know” or have sexual relations with his daughters instead of his visitors. Surely the townspeople were already “acquainted” with Lot’s daughters. Also, out of the 12 times this word is used in Genesis, 10 of these instances refer to sexual intercourse (Gen. 4:1; 25).²

Genesis 4:1 says “Now Adam yada Eve his wife and she conceived and bore Cain.”))

- The Septuagint translates the Hebrew term chatta “sinner” in Genesis 13:13,³ describing Sodom, with terms that only refer to sexual activity.⁴

c. Ezekiel 16:49 clarifies that Sodom’s sin was selfishness, not homosexuality.

Rebuttal:

- Mentioning Sodom as selfish and prideful does not preclude other sins.

- Genesis does mention their homosexual sin. Ezekiel does not have to so in order for it to be. Only one reference in Scripture to Sodom’s sin is needed to make it so.

- Verse 50 mentions Sodom’s abomination which describes homosexual practices elsewhere in Scripture (Lev. 18:22, 29).

- Jude 7 mentions the sin of Sodom referring to it as “sexual immorality,” and “unnatural desire.”⁵

2. OT law no longer applies to Christians; Leviticus 18:22

a. Dietary laws have been done away with (Acts 10:15), they are found in same book of the law as the prohibition against homosexual activity.

b. The only reason homosexuality was frowned upon is because the Jews saw barrenness as a curse, therefore since homosexuality prevents the bearing of children it was looked down upon. It was merely a cultural mandate for this reason.

Rebuttal:

- Just because other culturally relevant prohibitions are listed in Leviticus does not make all listed prohibitions culturally relevant. For instance adultery “with your neighbor’s wife” (v.20), offering child sacrifices to Molech (v.21), and bestiality (v.23) are also included in the laws of prohibition in Leviticus the immorality of these prohibitions transcend culture, these acts are universally wrong.⁶

- Jesus also made clear that marriage between a man and a woman was not merely a cultural mandate but one that also transcends all culture, since this design was a creation mandate, at a minimum of 4000 years removed from Jesus’ own culture, (Matt. 19:4-6).⁷

- The prohibition against homosexuality was also a command reiterated in the New Testament⁸ therefore it does apply to Christians. In Romans 1:32 Paul says that the penalty for homosexual acts is death, the same penalty that Leviticus 18:29 and 20:13 prescribes.

- Barrenness cannot be a sin since both Paul and Jesus exemplified and taught that celibacy was a spiritual gift (Matt. 19:11-12; 1 Cor. 7:8).⁹

- Homosexuality was also a sin for which God declared Gentile nations as “unclean” not just Israel (Lev. 18:24).¹⁰

- Jesus, Paul, Peter and James all quote from Leviticus 18-20 as authoritative in the NT. (Matt. 5:43 actually refers to Leviticus 18:20 for the principle of loving one’s neighbor; James 2:1; 1 Peter 1:16; 1 Timothy 5:18).

3. Homosexuality was connected to idolatry

a. Temple prostitutes were associated with idolatry and their homosexual acts were associated with it as well, but homosexuality not associated with idolatry was not forbidden.

Rebuttal:

- In Lev. 18:22 and Romans 1:26-27 Homosexuality is mentioned completely apart from sins of idolatry.

- Sexual unfaithfulness is often used as an illustration of idolatry (Hosea 3:1; 4:12),¹¹  but is not necessarily connected with it. Just as Gomer’s marital unfaithfulness to Hosea was a sin in and of itself, even though it was used as an illustration of Israel’s idolatry.

- The 10 commandments distinguish between sexual sins and idolatry.¹²

4. Paul was only personally against homosexuality and he was a bigot

a. Paul states in 1 Corinthian’s 7:12, 25 that he is giving his opinion and not a command from the Lord, regarding marriage, only one chapter after his condemnation of homosexuality.

Rebuttal:

- Paul declares in Galatians 1:12 that his revelations are directly from the Lord, not something he made up.¹³

- Paul most strongly condemns homosexuality in Romans 1.¹⁴  Here he is clearly not spouting his own opinion. In fact he states that homosexual behavior is the reason they receive “due penalty” (v.26), calling their behavior “error,” and that homosexual practice is deserving of death (v.32).

- Paul did not mean by saying “I, not the Lord” in 1 Cor. 7:12, that his words are not the authoritative word of the Lord, but that Jesus during His earthly ministry did not speak to this particular aspect of divorce. Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide His apostles into “all truth” after He ascended to the Father (John 16:13). Paul also said that the things he was writing to the Corinthians in this letter should be recognized as “command[s] of the Lord,” (1 Cor. 14:37).¹⁵

- Other writers also condemn homosexuality (Jude 7; Lev. 18:22), not just Paul.

b. Paul also condemned long hair on men (1 Cor. 11:14) and this is merely a cultural mandate, so is homosexuality found in the same book.

Rebuttal:

- Again, sexual relations between a man and a woman are not cultural but transcend time and culture and are based upon God’s design in creation. The uniform teaching of Scripture spanning 1500 years is against homosexual practice, both Old and New testaments.

- Other timeless sins are mentioned in 1 Corinthians; idolatry (10:7), testing God (10:9), grumbling (10:10). Just because Paul addresses some things that are cultural along with some that are not does not make all prohibitions cultural. If I am teaching my sons the virtues of manhood I might mention such virtues as holding the door for women or pulling their chair out for them at dinner and in the same sentence tell them to never hit a woman. Yet the mention of our cultural virtue of holding a door for a woman does not mean that not physically abusing a woman is merely a cultural issue.

5. 1 Corinthians 6:9 is only a condemnation of “homosexual offenders”

a. Paul does not condemn homosexual’s who are not offenders, implying that inoffensive homosexual acts are not morally wrong.

b. Or the two terms used referring to homosexual practices malakos and arsenokoites do not refer to passive and active homosexual participants but rather malakos refers to “general moral weakness” and not specifically to homosexuality; while arsenokoites refers to the active male prostitute (this would also apply to the same word in 1 Timothy 1:10).

Rebuttal:

- The offense spoken of by Paul is the act of homosexuality. It is not just a homosexual who has committed an offense. If this were the meaning then why would heterosexuals who commit an offense not also be included?¹⁶

- Malakos appears four times in the New Testament. Three of these occurrences (Matt. 11:8, 2x; Luke 7:25) the term refers to those clothed in soft raiment with a connotation of a decadent lifestyle. However Adolf Deissmann points out the use of this word in Greek papyri dated to 245 B.C. that clearly means effeminate.¹⁷ This shows that contrary to pro homosexual scholars this word was used to describe homosexual practices during and before the first century.

- Arsenokoitai is used in 1 Cor. 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10 only. This is a compound word arsen, “male,” and koite, a couch; by extension, cohabitation; by implication, the male sperm:–bed, chambering (Strong’s 2845). Koite refers to Rebekah “conceiving” in Romans 9:10, and of the “marriage bed” in Hebrews 13:4. The literal etymology of this compound word suggests “males who go to bed with males.”¹⁸

- Paul is writing from a background of the Septuagint and it is from this Greek translation of the Hebrew OT that Paul draws from for these two words. James White says, “Paul draws here two terms from the Greek Septuagint that are found in Leviticus 20:13 in the combination of homosexual: arsinos, meaning male, and koitos, the term from which we get the word coitus, sexual intercourse.”¹⁹

- These words and there references to homosexuality are listed alongside other sexual sins including adultery and fornication in the same verse. Paul then goes on in verses 12-20 admonishing the Corinthians to “flee from sexual immorality,” (v.18).

6. Romans 1:26 condemns heterosexual behavior for homosexuals and vice versa

a. In referring to “unnatural relations” Paul meant that it is sinful for homosexuals to engage unnaturally in heterosexual acts, likewise for heterosexuals to engage in homosexual acts. Unnatural is used only in a sociological sense, not biological. Each person should act in accordance to his/her own sociological tendencies.

Rebuttal:

- Scripture throughout defines sex biologically. It is in the biological sense that God created them “male and female,” and commanded to “be fruitful and multiply,” (Gen. 1:27-28). We see it in the biological sense again in 2:24 speaking of the two becoming “one flesh” in the propagation of their children in the marriage relationship between one man and one woman.²⁰  Becoming one flesh is impossible between male/male or female/female relationships.

- Romans 1:27 defined the “unnatural relations” as the men giving up the natural relations with women and being “consumed with passion for one another…men committing shameless acts with men.” This lust is reciprocated between the homosexual partners.

7. Isaiah 56:3 is a prediction of homosexuals in the kingdom of God, when speaking about eunuch’s being given a better name than sons and daughters, an everlasting name. This is interpreted that a day of acceptance is prophesied and that today we are seeing the fulfillment of this prophecy.

Rebuttal:

- The eunuchs spoken of here are likely those who took a vow of celibacy as is the case in Matthew 19:11-12, when Jesus speaks of those who “have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.”²¹

- Eunuchs were not allowed in the Temple or the congregation (Deut. 23:1), yet in the Kingdom all will be welcome in who “hold fast My covenant,” (Is. 56:4b).

- 1 Cor. 6:9 says that homosexuals will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

8. David had a homosexual relationship with Jonathan, 1 Samuel 18:20

This argument is based upon that Scripture says Jonathan “loved” David (18:3); stripped in David’s presence (18:4); they kissed (20:41); and they “exceeded” (translated “wept” in most translations), interpreted to mean they ejaculated (20:41), That David referred to Jonathan’s love for him as “more wonderful than the love of women” (2 Samuel 1:26). They also throw in that David had many unsuccessful heterosexual relationships.

Rebuttal:

- David had many wives but only one close friendship such as this with Jonathan.

- Jonathan did not strip completely but only of his royal robe and his armor (1 Samuel 18:4).²²  This act by Jonathan was symbolic of transference of Jonathan’s right to the throne or his office to David as God’s chosen heir.²³

- Their kiss in 1 Sam. 20:41 was one of friendship and was a cultural custom.²⁴  We can see this reflected in Paul’s instructions to “greet on another with a Holy kiss,” (Romans 16:16; 1 Cor. 16:20; 2 Cor. 13:12; 1 Thess. 5:26; and Peter in 1 Peter 5:14). Surely the homosexual is not suggesting that the “bigot” Paul is instructing the churches to engage in homosexual activity, or that Judas was “coming on” to Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane (Luke 22:47-48). Cheek kissing is a common practice today in Europe, the Mediterranean, Middle East and Latin America, as well as among the Soviets and other communist countries.²⁵

- Their “weeping” in 20:41 was an expression of deep emotion at the prospect of never seeing one another again. The Hebrew word for “wept” is bakah which is always transliterated as some form of crying or weeping.²⁶  There is absolutely no room for implying that they came to orgasm with one another.

- David saying that Jonathan’s love for him exceeded that which he felt for women is nothing more than a strong commitment to their friendship, as well as the uniqueness of it. There is a similar saying today; “Bros before Hoes.” This saying means that two guys friendship is above any relationship they might have with a girl and that if a friend was to sleep with his friend’s girlfriend they would not end the friendship but would get rid of the girlfriend instead because the friendship is more important than the relationship with the girl.²⁷ When I used to live by this saying it in no way ever suggested that I desired to have sexual relations with my male friend and not with or more than women.

Other Arguments (non-biblical)

1. No restraints on consenting adults

a. Responsible and consenting adults should not be restrained from expressing themselves sexually with one another. This is their right and free choice to do with their bodies as they please, and to suppress this is a violation of one’s freedom. Only forced sex or sexual abuse of children is morally wrong.

Rebuttal:

- If two adults consent to evil then mutual consent does not negate the evil. Mutual consent does not automatically justify an act, especially if it is an act that God has declared evil. Man is not the standard of morality, which is what this argument suggests,²⁸  but God is.

- Homosexuality is associated with higher than normal incidences of STD’s, with male homosexuals responsible for the majority.²⁹  This is due in large part to the high numbers of sexual partners homosexuals have as compared to heterosexuals; as much as 8x the number of heterosexual college age students.³⁰

- Statistics such as these make homosexuality more than a private concern, but a public health problem.³¹

 2. A violation of civil rights

To pass laws against homosexuals is against their civil rights. Homosexuals see themselves in the light of other minority groups such as Hispanics or African Americans. To deprive homosexuals of their civil rights is discrimination against who they are.

Rebuttal:

- Homosexuality is immoral and immoral acts are not civil rights that people are granted. Civil Law should be based upon moral law.³²

- If we give civil rights or special rights to those with a homosexual orientation, why must we not give them to those with other sexual orientation such as pedophilia and bestiality? Why only the homosexual orientation, who is to decide this?

- Homosexuals do have rights, the same rights you and I have; I cannot marry the same sex, neither can they; I can marry the opposite sex and so can they. Just because they do not desire to exercise those rights does not mean they are granted different rights. I have the right to own a gun, if I choose not to exercise that right because I would rather carry grenades or a rocket launcher this does not mean I should be permitted to.

3. I was born this way, it was inherited

The claim is that sexual orientation is inherited through heredity rather than a learned behavior. A homosexual would not choose to be so, they simply cannot choose different, just like one cannot choose to change the color of their skin.

Rebuttal:

- There is no conclusive scientific evidence that homosexual behavior is inherited genetically. Even if it were it is a result of the fall and is still immoral, (Ps. 51:4-5; Eph. 2:3).³³

- I was born as one who takes a drink of alcohol and cannot stop until I am wasted, others were not. This does not give me the moral right to live a life as a drunkard; it is still sin before God. I can choose against my desire to practice the behavior of drunkenness just as the homosexual can choose against his/her desire to practice homosexuality.

- Studies have been conducted which show that there is no evidence to suggest that “homosexuals or bisexuals of any degree or type are chromosomally discrepant from heterosexuals.”³⁴

- In surveys conducted in1940 and1970, before the gay rights movement became popular, the majority of homosexuals did not claim to be born that way but gave other factors that they believed contributed to the behavior.³⁵  Before the 70’s and the gay movement, only about 10% of homosexuals believed they were “born that way.”

- Many homosexuals change their sexual preferences. In a random sample 88% of lesbians and 73% of gay men who currently engage in homosexual sex claimed that they have been aroused by the opposite sex.³⁶

4. Homosexuality is merely an ancient taboo, times have changed

Culture has changed and become enlightened, therefore our views on homosexual behavior should follow suit. Slavery used to be morally acceptable now it obviously isn’t. Just like we’ve been enlightened to the immorality of slavery, we should be enlightened to the morality of homosexuality.

Rebuttal:

- Moral values have not changed but moral practice has.³⁷  These two should not be confused. If in 1000 years the moral practice of rape becomes socially acceptable this change in practice would not change the moral value that it is immoral to rape others. Slavery was once practiced but was always immoral. Our practice of it did not legitimize its moral value, and our ceasing to practice it did not make it immoral.

5. Nature sanctions homosexuality in other mammals

Since it is natural for other animals it should be also for the Homo sapiens species. After all we share other similar behavior patterns with lower life forms as well.

Rebuttal:

- To argue that because other mammals engage in homosexual behavior supports human homosexuality is disanalagous. First humans are not animals but a distinct creation from them (Gen. 2:20; 1:27-28; 9:2-3, 5-6). Second humans have the capability to make conscious moral choices and are therefore held responsible for those choices both by God and man. For instance, when people murder other people we put them in prison for making an immoral choice; but if another animal murders another animal of its own kind we do not arrest, take to trial, convict, and imprison the animal. This is why God never gives a moral command to animals, but does so over and over again to mankind; one of these commands is not to engage in homosexual behavior. Third, should we really base our sexual practices on the sexual practices of animals? When I have guests over to my house, if my dogs are in the house they will proceed to mount the leg of my guest(s) and attempt to hump their leg. Now if I invite your wife and you over for dinner and when your wife walks through the door, takes off her coat and steps into my range, if I proceed to engage in sexual intercourse with her what would be your response? Would you say “Oh, look at ole’ Toby trying to hump my wife, he is just like the dog?” Or would you be so offended that you would punch me in the face and discontinue our friendship?

Conclusion

The Bible is crystal clear from beginning to end that homosexuality is immoral in God’s eyes. No matter how hard one tries he cannot get around the clear teaching of Scripture in regards to the sinfulness of homosexuality. Walter Wink, Professor of Interpretation at Auburn Theological Seminary, although he is a pro gay theologian, readily concurs saying; “the Bible quite clearly takes a negative view of homosexual activity, in those few instances where it is mentioned at all.”³⁸  In the end the pro gay “Christian” must undermine the authority of Scripture elevating his or her own experience and emotions above the word of God.³⁹

1. Genesis 19:5-8 “And they called to Lot, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.’ Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, and said, ‘I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.’” [↩]
2. John J. Davis, Evangelical Ethics Third ed., (P&R Publishing, Phillipsburg, 2004), 122. [↩]
3. Genesis 13:13 “But the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinners against the Lord.” [↩]
4. Dr. James White, from the transcript of the debate Is Homosexuality Compatible with Authentic Christianity, between Rev. Barry Lynn and Dr. James White, accessed online at http://mp3.aomin.org/docs/whitevslynn.html, December 23, 2010. [↩]
5. Jude 7- “just as Sodom and Gomorrah…which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.” [↩]
6. Norman Geisler, Christian Ethics Options and Issues, (Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, 1989, 2008), 262. [↩]
7. Paul also appeals to the creation mandate thousands of years removed from his own culture, in order to undergird his argument s about husband wife relationships, and against sexual immorality (cf. Ephesians 5:31; 1 Cor. 6:16). [↩]
8. See Rom. 1:26-27; 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10; Jude 7 [↩]
9. Ibid, Geisler, 262. [↩]
10. Ibid. Lev. 18:24- “Do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean.” [↩]
11. Ibid. [↩]
12. Ibid, 263. The first table of the Law in Exodus 20:3-4 lists sins of idolatry, while the second table of the Law listed in Exodus 20:14-17 lists sexual sins. [↩]
13. Ibid. [↩]
14. Ibid. [↩]
15. Ibid. Paul in 1 Cor. 2:13 starts off by telling the Corinthians that he has been given “words taught by the Spirit.” Paul possessed the signs of an Apostle in 2 Cor. 12:12; and in 1 Cor. 7:40 declares that he has the Spirit of God. [↩]
16. Ibid. [↩]
17. Davis, Evangelical Ethics, 128. [↩]
18. Ibid. [↩]
19. White, Homosexuality Debate. [↩]
20. Geisler, Christian Ethics, 264. [↩]
21. Ibid. [↩]
22. Ibid, 265. [↩]
23. Similar language is used in Numbers 20:26 of transferring the office of High Priest from Aaron to his son Eleazar. God commanded Moses to “strip Aaron of his garments and put them on his son Eleazar.” [↩]
24. Ibid. [↩]
25. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheek_kissing, accessed Dec. 13, 2010. [↩]
26. The Lockman Foundation, The Strongest NASB Exhaustive Concordance, (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1998), Strongs 1058, 1370. [↩]
27.  I am not suggesting that this is a good principle to live by, rather it is foolish, but it does illustrate that there is something different between a friendship between guys, and a relationship between a man and woman. [↩]
28. Geisler, 265. [↩]
29. Michael Gross, a homosexual sympathizer as far as I can tell, in his article entitled “The Second Wave Will Drown Us” cites a Center for Disease Control statistic of a 14% increase of HIV/AIDS among male homosexuals in the U.S. between 1999-2001. Note the increase comes in conjunction with the increasing acceptability and openness of the homosexual lifestyle. A Dean Byrd, Ph. D., M.B.A., M.P.H, The American Journal of Public Health Highlights Risks of Homosexual Practices, retrieved online at http://www.narth.com/docs/risks.html, December 28, 2010. [↩]
30. John J. Davis, Evangelical Ethics, 120. 50% of new cases of syphilis occur in homosexual population, having a 5x higher chance of contracting this STD. Rectal gonorrhea and Hepatitis B are prevalent among homosexual men. Homosexuals and intravenous drug users account for 76.4% of all AIDS cases in the United States. One study by Bell and Weinberg found that 43% of 575 homosexual men had had at least 500 different sexual partners since they had been sexually active. [↩]
31. A study printed in the Omega Journal of Death and Dying http://www.baywood.com/Journals/PreviewJournals.asp?Id=0030-2228, obituaries in gay publications were studied in contrast to a control group of heterosexual people over the same time period and the results were astonishing. -For married heterosexual men the median age of death was 75 years old, with 80% living past 65.
    -Single or divorced men lived to the median age of 57, with only 32% living past 65.
    -Homosexual men without AIDS and no long term sexual partner median age of death was 42 years old, 9% making it past 65.
    -Those without AIDS having a long term sexual partner median age of death was 41 years old, with only 7% living past age 65.
    -Those homosexual men with AIDS faired far worse. For lesbians the median age of death was 44.
    White, Homosexuality debate. [↩]
32. Geisler, Christian Ethics, 266. [↩]
33.  Ephesians 2:3 says specifically that as natural born sinners we “carried out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.” All mankind has the same problem of being sinners by nature, with natural inclinations towards sinful desires of body and mind. “But God,” (v. 5) offered all of us a solution to this problem, namely faith in Christ. The homosexual is offered this solution as well as the drunkard or the liar. Both can choose to accept this offer of grace. [↩]
34. Davis, Evangelical Ethics, 117. This was a study conducted by “Dr. John Money a researcher at John Hopkins University and leading authority on the physiological aspects of human sexuality.” [↩]
35. [1]  Dr. Paul Cameron, What Causes Homosexual Desire and Can it Be Changed,”Family Research Institute,” accessed online at http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron3.html, December 15, 2010. Various reasons were given for why they believed they were homosexuals including, early homosexual experience(s) with adults and/or peers – 22%; homosexual friends/ around homosexuals a lot – 16%; poor relationship with mother – 15%; unusual development (was a sissy, artistic, couldn’t get along with own sex, tom-boy, et cetera) – 15%;  poor relationship with father – 14%; heterosexual partners unavailable – 12%;   social ineptitude – 9%; born that way – 9%. [↩]
36. Ibid. 85% of these lesbians and 54% of homosexual men admitted to having sexual relations with the opposite sex in adulthood. 67% lesbians and 54% of homosexual men claimed they were currently attracted to the opposite sex. 82% of lesbians and 66% of homosexual men claimed to have been in love with the opposite sex. [↩]
37. Geisler, 266. [↩]
38. Walter Wink, Homosexuality and the Bible, Accessed online at http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-walter-wink, December 17, 2010. [↩]
39. I have experienced this elevation of experience at the expense of God’s word three different times now. Barry Lynn did it in his debate with James White, Michael Brown’s opponent did it in their debate and a gay man I debated at theology web campus in “A Pro Gay Theology” forum did the same thing. Once their scriptural arguments have failed and all been refuted they must resort to emotionalism and their own “experience of the Holy Spirit.” [↩]