Gays in the Church

Posted on March 6, 2013

3


Gay and ChurchAuthor: Andrew Kerbs

I have long hesitated getting into this debate, but feel it is now time to weigh in. How are we as a church to deal with homosexuals? Yes, of course, we’re to love the sinner hate the sin. But what happens when culture and society at large make it a package deal? In other words, by not condoning and accepting the sin, we’re accused of rejecting the sinner? What happens when sin goes by a different name such as alternative lifestyle?

I realize some of those are loaded questions and the reader probably already knows where I stand on the issue. To put it bluntly—no, I do not think it is consistent to be a practicing homosexual and a genuine Christian. But before you crucify me in the comments below, PLEASE keep reading and allow me to explain.

I would like to begin by stating that there is certainly a trend of homophobic venom circulating in the church today as well as society at large. This is wrong. Frankly, those who proclaim the institution of marriage with their lips and then defile it with their actions are greater sinners than a homosexual who joins in a monogamous relationship. Society (especially in the Bible belt where I reside) wants to lament the loss of sanctity of marriage, then proceeds to point fingers at the gay supporters. The sad part is I could write you an exhaustive list of church members and elders who are on 2nd and 3rd marriages after going from one unbiblical divorce to another. They proclaim Christ with their lips and deny Him with their lives.

This all is true, and I have heard it numerous times coming from the camp of those who support homosexuality in the church. However, it does not justify yet another sin—homosexuality.

Here are my thoughts on a few arguments in favor of homosexuality in the church:

  1. I was born that way, thus to act heterosexually would in fact be acting “against nature.”

Many Christians cry foul over this one and try their hardest to prove that homosexuality is ALWAYS a choice, therefore negating the argument that anyone could be born that way. First of all, this is an ongoing debate, and from a physiological and bio-chemistry aspect, there is a legitimate possibility one can be born as a man in the physical external sexual sense, yet physiologically be female. The vice versa is also true. We need to get that behind us and just admit it. This world is a sinful fallen place and there are many genetic anomalies that make people certain ways God did not intend. Again, this does not justify sin. To this I hear the protest, but surely God would not allow an otherwise good person to have to spend the rest of their life alone. What about those who are born with physical defects? Is a man born with one arm intended by God to only have one arm? We need to understand the difference between God’s order and His permissive will. Sin is not God’s order, but it is His permissive will. Saying otherwise is to misunderstand the Great Controversy altogether.

  1. In the Bible, references to homosexuality are not in the same content and understanding of that same term today.

In some instances this could be argued. Temple prostitution was rampant in apostate Israel and the surrounding nations practiced it regularly and often these prostitutes engaged in homosexual acts. Thus, the argument would be homosexuality is not being condemned per se, rather illicit sex and promiscuity. Though the latter  is certainly condemned in Scripture, it takes some acrobatics to really prove that these texts in no way condemn homosexuality in principle without entirely drawing into question the validity of the Bible as a whole—which many have already done on numerous areas, such as Creation, the Sabbath, and the Sanctuary.

God’s order, His original design, was a monogamous, heterosexual union. Read the creation story of Adam and Eve and this is evident and is admitted as being true even by some of the strongest proponents of the gay debate.

By using God’s permissive will in allowing sin and dysfunction into the world as a justification of acting upon sin, is treading on thin ice. Just because someone is born with certain tendencies does not justify him acting upon them in God’s view. The commandments of God are enablings. God will not ask you to do something that He will not help you finish. These genetic tendencies we are born with is the problem with original sin altogether. We have inherited a fallen nature. Sin Adam, sin has run rampant through the world. It is this genetic predisposition Christ died to give us the power to overcome, not indulge in. In the scheme of the Great Controversy, God has permitted things to play out to a great degree, but do not make the mistake of confusing His permissive will with His order. They are absolutely not the same thing.

With that said, I will summarize and be very straightforward simply or the sake of clarity. I believe a man or a woman can be born with a homosexual genetic makeup. This does not justify acting upon that makeup any more than I am justified in acting upon a predisposition to alcoholism. It is called sin and unfortunately every human being has it. Christ came to help us overcome it. If a homosexual individual feels comfortable marrying heterosexually, great! If they feel the better option is to remain single and celibate, great! That is between them and God! However, I do not believe that biblically they are justified in marrying homosexually, regardless of whether they were born that way or not.

Remember, God asks nothing of us He will not help us achieve.

There’s my .02 for what’s it worth. Feel free to disagree with it.

Posted in: Sexuality