TMS Journal

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. —Romans 12:26–27

In their efforts to promote their agenda, advocates of homosexuality have gone to incredible lengths to convince us that homosexuality is as natural as heterosexuality. It should surprise no one that most simply write off the Scriptural prohibitions as part of the larger fiction of the Bible. We should expect that. Harder to believe are the claims of those who attempt to manipulate Scripture to support their claims, and normalize homosexuality within the church. Addressing one of the more audacious examples of this Scripture-twisting, John MacArthur writes:

. . . homosexual advocates argue that Paul is speaking [in Romans 1:26–27] of an individual’s sexual orientation (rather than the created order) when he uses the term “nature.” Thus, for homosexuals, “their relationships cannot be described as ‘unnatural’, since they are perfectly natural to them” [it is alleged by some that Paul is not condemning homosexuality, but homosexual acts committed by heterosexuals]. However, such far-fetched interpretations are easily refuted (both from the context in Romans and from the way kata physin [natural] and para physin [unnatural] were used in ancient times). Moreover, the thought of “sexual orientation” would have been completely foreign to Paul, and represents an anachronistic attempt to read modern conventions into the biblical text.

So then, we have no liberty to interpret the noun “nature” as meaning “my” nature, or the adjective “natural” as meaning “what seems natural to me”. On the contrary, physis (“natural”) means God’s created order. To act “against nature” means to violate the order which God has established, whereas to act “according to nature” means to behave “in accordance with the intention of the Creator”. Moreover, the intention of the Creator means his original intention. What this was Genesis tells us and Jesus confirmed. . . . God created humankind male and female; God instituted marriage as a heterosexual union; and what God has thus united, we have no liberty to separate. [Stott, Romans 78. Internal citation from C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegelical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1975) 1:125.]

—John MacArthur, “God’s Word on Homosexuality,” The Master’s Seminary Journal (Fall 2008): 167–168.

Evolution. 3.5 million homeless. Global warming. Listen to the mainstream media, and you will believe these are facts. Yet there is no evidence to support any of them, and much to the contrary. How, and why, do unsupported assertions become “facts,” receiving nearly universal acceptance? The answer has nothing to do with truth, and everything to do with agenda. Some special interest group wants to achieve a certain end, and so the “facts” necessary to support their goals are simply manufactured. A sympathetic media plays along, and voilà, “truth” is born. For example, the “gay gene”:

   On July 15, 1993, National Public Radio (i.e., NPR) reported a new study that was due to be released the next day. The tenor of the report suggested that someone had finally discovered a gene that causes homosexuality. NPR added a few quiet caveats at the end of their report, ignored by most listeners. The next day, the Wall Street Journal headlined their report, “Research Points toward a Gay Gene.” the subtitle says “Normal Variation,” affirming the opinion of the article’s author that homosexuality was a normal variation of human behavior. At the bottom of the last paragraph on the last page, deep within the paper, a geneticist offered his opinions that this gene might only be associated with homosexuality and not the cause of it. Regardless, for most of the world the discovery had been made and now the political wheels began to turn (leading to the push for protection of civil rights, laws against discrimination, civil unions, gay marriage, etc.).

. . .

   All of the above research did not “discover” a gay gene, although many have suggested that. However, these studies that suggest some biological cause for homosexuality significantly influenced public perceptions. As Yarhouse [Mark A. Yarhouse, “Homosexuality, Ethics, and Identity Synthesis,” Christian Bioethics 10 (2004):241.] points out “The more people believe that homosexuality was a biological ‘given,’ the more likely they were to support a variety of issues deemed important to some in the gay community (e.g., ordination of practicing gay, lesbian, or bisexual clergy; gay rights legislation, etc.)”

—Michael A.Grisanti, “Cultural and Medical Myths about Homosexuality,” The Master’s Seminary Journal (Fall 2008): 176, 185.

Homosexual “marriage” is clearly against God’s design (nature) and God’s command (Scripture). No homosexual relationship can fulfill God’s intention for this human relationship. Irvin Busenitz (Professor of Bible and Old Testament, TMS), in the latest issue of The Master’s Seminary Journal, explains why this is, looking at Biblical marriage from the reproductive perspective, the one man/one woman perspective, the complementary perspective, the analogical perspective, and the role/relationship perspective. You can probably guess, without any clues, what each of those perspectives addresses, with the possible exception of one: the analogical perspective. If you have no idea what that is about, you’re not alone; I confess that I had never thought of this angle on homosexuality before, even though it is really quite obvious. Busenitz explains:

   Marriage is a picture of the relationship between Christ and His church. Ephesians 5 quotes the creation account , providing a direct link between the two passages. Paul unmistakably notes that marriage is meant to teach, through the one-flesh union, the relationship of Christ and His church (Eph. 5:29–32).
   Because of this incredible bond and the picture it depicts, it is no surprise that same-sex marriage is at the forefront of the attack against marriage. same-sex marriage simply cannot picture the biblical truths that Scripture so vividly paints for marriage. For a couple of reasons, homosexual partnerships are incapable of representing this truth. First, a partnership between two men or two women cannot replicate the essence of marriage in the Scriptures, which is always between a man and a woman. Secondly, homosexuality can never illustrate the spiritual union between Christ and His Bride, the church. Christ is not engaged to be married to Christ; the church is not awaiting marriage to itself. The analogy is absolutely devoid of any meaning if homosexuality is brought into the equation.

—Irvin A. Busenitz, “Marriage and Homosexuality: Toward a Biblical Understanding,” The Master’s Seminary Journal (Fall 2008): 212–213.

Regardless of the particular sins we may see manifested in our children, one fact applies to all: to sin is their nature, and the only cure is the gospel. Rick Holland offers this needed reminder:

Parenting is a multi-level maze of challenges to navigate and sins to mortify—both in parents and in children. The concerns of parenting are as numerous as the number of children. Dealing with the depraved infection natural to our children’s souls on the septic morality of our culture is far beyond the intuitive abilities of loving parents. Sin’s pulverizing destruction comes from both the outside—culture’s moral chaos—and from the inside—the soul’s pervasive sinfulness.
   Parenting can be wrongly interpreted as a process of keeping our children good and pure. The truth is that every child is born sinful. The goal is not to keep children from becoming messed up by sin; instead it is to see their inborn sin covered by the gospel. As a friend of mine puts it, “parents can’t mess up their children; they come that way as a result of Adam’s fall.”

—Richard L. Holland, “Christian Parenting and Homosexuality,” The Master’s Seminary Journal (Fall 2008): 218.

It is difficult to look at our culture today without being overwhelmed by the moral decay we see all around us. Conditions are worse, it seems, than they have ever been before. But the world in which Jesus and the apostles lived was every bit as bad, and the gospel they preached still has the same power to saved souls and transformed lives that it had two thousand years ago.

Imagine a world in which in which sexual immorality is promoted, available, and accessible, a world in which adultery in common, prostitution legal, drunkenness normal, and theft a constant threat, a world in which most children rebel against their parents and fornication and incest are rampant, God is openly hated, the justice system rarely works for the innocent, and Christianity is illegal. Imagine a world in which homosexuality is out of the closet, is publicly recognized, and enjoys promotion and protection from the government. This is not an imaginary world, nor is it a glimpse into the future. It is a description of the world of the NT. Jesus lived in this world and the gospel was cradled in this kind of society. It is at this point that Solomon should be heard: “there is nothing new under the sun” (Eccl 1:9). Homosexuality has not taken God by surprise, but God’s nature is to take homosexuals by surprise with the saving truth of the gospel.

—Richard L. Holland, “Christian Parenting and Homosexuality,” The Master’s Seminary Journal (Fall 2008), 230–231.

Over the last few Fridays, I’ve been sharing excerpts from the Fall 2008 issue of The Master’s Seminary Journal. The theme has been a biblical view of homosexuality. Today and next week will finish that series with Alex Montoya’s “The Church’s Response to Homosexuality.” This is naturally an appropriate ending note. Too often we are zealous to know what is right, but fail to follow through to the application. A biblical understanding of what homosexuality is and what God thinks of it is good and necessary, but useless — and perhaps even harmful — without an equally biblical answer to the question of so what?

Montoya presents four ways in which the church must respond to homosexuality. I will be bringing you two of them (you’ll have to get your own copy to read the rest):

1. The Church Must Expose Homosexuality as a Sin against God (today)
2. The Church Must Extend the Grace of God to Homosexuals (next time)

The first may seem obvious; we’re already doing that, aren’t we? Well, many are, but I’m afraid many more are simply exposing it. Exposing it as sin, maybe — a sin against decency, a sin against morality, a sin against “family values” (whatever that is) — but not necessarily as sin against God. That it offends us is often the primary message that is sent to homosexuals. The message they need is not why it matters to us, but why it matters to God.

. . . Homosexuality is more than a mere sexual preference, a social choice, a genetic predisposition as some say; it is a sin against Almighty God. It is a willful assault on the person and work of God. Homosexuality is against God in these four ways. First, homosexuality is a sin against God’s creative order. . . .

And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate” (Matt 19:4–6). [also Gen 1:27–28; Gen 2:22–24; Heb 13:4]

   Hence, the Scriptures affirm that any violation of the creative purposes of God is a sin against Him. Furthermore, it proceeds to state categorically that homosexuality is not only sin but a perversion of the creative order:

Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. . . . For this reason God gave them over in to degrading passions; for their woman exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error (Rom 1:24–27).

   A second way that homosexuality is against God is that homosexuality is a sin against God’s law (1 Tim 1:8–11). The Scriptures clearly identify homosexuality as a sin which violates the express law of God. In Paul’s discussion of God’s law, he states,

Realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers and mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted (1 Tim 1:9–11).

The apostle clearly makes homosexuality a sin which cannot be reconciled with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Scripturally, one cannot be a Christian and a homosexual.
   The third way that homosexuality is against God is that homosexuality is a sin against God’s Kingdom (1 Cor 6:9–10). The apostle Paul informs an ignorant mind and corrects a deceived heart by stating clearly that homosexuality excludes one from inheriting the kingdom of God. . . .

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 6:9–10).

   Finally, the fourth way that homosexuality is against God is that homosexuality is a sin against God’s holiness (1 Thess4:3; 1 Pet 1:15–16). The Bible is clear on God’s expectation of His people:

But like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; because it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy” (1 Peter 1:15–16).

This holiness pertains specifically to the area of sexuality:

For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality, that each of you know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in lustful passion, like the Gentiles who do not know God. . . . For God has not called us for the purpose of impurity, but in sanctification. So, he who rejects this is not rejecting man but the God who gives His Holy Spirit to you (1 Thess 4:3–8).

   Homosexuality is called an unrighteous and ungodly act (Rom 1:18; 1 Coi 6:9; 2 Pet 2:9; Jude 4). . . .
   Hence, Christians are under obligation to know and to make known the sinfulness of homosexuality. They cannot be swept away by the tide of public opinion or public decrees; nor can they remain mute concerning the terrible consequences of those who practice homosexuality. . . . As the watchman of Israel was warned not to be silent about the judgment coming upon the nation, so too, Christians dare not be silent about the dangers that homosexuals are facing (cf. Ezek 3:17–19).

—Alex Montoya, “The Church’s Response to Homosexuality,” The Master’s Seminary Journal (Fall 2008), 235–237.

This post is a sequel to one posted two weeks ago, looking at Alex Montoya’s article in the Fall 2008 issue of The Master’s Seminary Journal, “The Church’s Response to Homosexuality.”

In the previous post in this series, I wrote that “Too often we are zealous to know what is right, but fail to follow through to the application. A biblical understanding of what homosexuality is and what God thinks of it is good and necessary, but useless — and perhaps even harmful — without an equally biblical answer to the question of so what?” Today we’ll consider the most important part of the answer to that question.

As I said last time, Montoya presents four ways in which the church must respond to homosexuality, two of which I am covering here:

1. The Church Must Expose Homosexuality as a Sin against God
2. The Church Must Extend the Grace of God to Homosexuals

That homosexuality is a sin against God must never be forgotten. But we must also remember that every New Testament condemnation is followed by the offer of redemption. If we are genuine disciples of Christ and ministers of the gospel, we can do no less.

   If the church is to be involved in bringing homosexuals into the fold of Christ it must be prepared to do the following. The church must first learn to show compassion to the homosexual. . . .
   The church can be guilty of the attitude of the Pharisees towards the sinners of their day. The Pharisees displayed an absolute lack of concern and compassion for those who were lost (cp. Luke 15:1–32). Christ taught compassion for the lost, and this includes the homosexual:

Then it happened that as Jesus was reclining at the table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were dining with Jesus and His disciples. When the Pharisees saw this they said to His disciples, “Why is your Teacher eating with tax collectors and sinners?” But when Jesus heard this, He said, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick. But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire compassion, and not sacrifice,’ for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Matt 9:10–13).

R. Albert Mohler writes, “Homosexuals are waiting to see if the Christian church has anything more to say after we declare that homosexuality is a sin.” Homosexuals are hurting people and need more than condemnation; they also need compassion.
   In the second place, the church must be willing to associate with homosexuals. Here is where the church displays its ignorance and its arrogance when it comes to reaching out to homosexuals. The church can misunderstand what it means to be in the world but not of it. We may think that it means for Christians to have absolutely nothing to do with homosexuals. The Bible speaks of the opposite. It shows that it is unavoidable and in many ways necessary to associate with homosexuals if we are to present the gospel to them. Paul corrected the Corinthians when he said,

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world (1 Cor 5:9–10).

Clearly we must dispel the label of being “homophobic” by not refusing to befriend and associate with homosexuals. We have nothing to fear and everything to gain for the gospel’s sake.
   Thirdly, the church must have the conviction of the power of the gospel to convert the homosexual. That homosexuals are such by nature and therefore cannot change nor should society try to change them into heterosexuals has been exposed as utterly false. The power of the gospel has been rendered ineffective by the deception placed upon the church that homosexuals cannot be changed. Prior to the “sexual revolution,” no question existed about homosexuals being able to change. . . .
   The Christian church has . . . always believed the gospel “is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Rom 1:16). It is a truth in Scripture that wherever the sinfulness of sin is mentioned, the power of the gospel is also mentioned as that force which counteracts the power of sin to enslave and to condemn.
   After the condemnation of homosexuality in Romans 1, Paul wrote, “ all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Rom 3:23–24).
   After the condemnation of homosexuality in 1 Cor 6:9, Paul adds, “Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor 6:11). The homosexual can experience regeneration through the Holy Spirit, the power to triumph over indwelling sin as described in Romans 6, and the assurance offered to all believers in the justifying work of Christ (cf. Romans 8) . . .
   After the condemnation of homosexuality in 1 Tim 1:10, Paul magnifies his own sin above all sins and says, “It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all” (1 Tim 1:15). If God can save the worst, then He can obviously save a homosexual.
   Wherever man’s depravity and sinfulness are magnified, so also is the grace of God magnified so as to more than make up for man’s fallen nature. Consider the testimony of Eph 2:1–10 and Titus 3:3–7. These promises apply to homosexuals as well.
   The fourth way that the church can extend the grace of God to homosexuals is for the church to provide special discipleship for homosexuals. The New Testament testifies to the possibility and frequency of a believer’s relapse into their former way of life. The convert from a homosexual lifestyle is no exception. Christians should not be surprised by the difficulties encountered by some in overcoming their former lusts, nor should they give up in their efforts to disciple them into the new life in Christ.
   The rise of numerous support groups for homosexuals is testimony to the necessity of the church to focus on those who desire Christ and who desire to live a victorious life in Christ. . . . Andy Comiskey of Desert Stream Ministry writes, “We must renounce the unbelief prevalent in certain evangelical circles that resigns homosexual strugglers to little if any release from their tendencies. That perception of God is too small.”
   . . .
   Finally, if the church is to extend the grace of God to homosexuals, the church must effectively incorporate converted homosexuals into the Body of Christ. At times the church has allowed the stigma of homosexuality to follow the converted homosexual into his new life in Christ. . . . The Corinthian church serves as a model in the way it was composed of all sorts of sinners. Note how Paul addresses the church: “Such were some of you; but you were washed . . .” (1 Cor 6:11). The “some” refers to the fact that the church contained some ex-fornicators, some ex-idolaters, some ex-adulterers, ex-effeminates, ex-homosexuals, some ex-thieves, etc. The phrase “such were some” indicates the conversion from a life of sin to a new relationship with Christ, and acceptance into the fellowship of believers in Corinth. The church cannot adopt an arrogant attitude toward converted homosexuals, but instead deal biblically with their conversion, and in fact, rejoice that God saved has “some.”

—Alex Montoya, “The Church’s Response to Homosexuality,” The Master’s Seminary Journal (Fall 2008), 238–241.