Homosexuality & Fellowship (2): Scientific Theory
by Harry Osborne
December 13, 2009

Last week, some among institutional brethren and Christian churches were quoted urging acceptance of those engaging in homosexual conduct. Only a few years ago, such efforts to justify homosexual activity would have been unthinkable among any religious group, especially those claiming some influence from people who rallied under the call to "speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent." Now, some call for those churches to be "Open & Affirming" to sodomites.

How could people once committed to the Scripture as the perfect guide for all faith and practice sink to tolerate actions the Scripture plainly condemns? A simple reading of Bible verses on the subject manifests that condemnation clearly (Rom. 1:26-27, 33; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; 1 Tim. 1:10; Gen. 19:4-11; Jd. 7; Lev. 18:22-30; 20:13; 1 Kgs. 14:22-24; 15:11-12; 22:46; 2 Kgs. 23:7). So how do its advocates argue for acceptance of homosexuality? By casting doubt on the clarity and literal truth of Scripture, then diverting our focus to a supposed historical parallel as a substitute for Bible authority. It is an irreligious shell game! Notice both elements in one supposed brother's attempt to raise the past efforts of those misusing Scripture to reject fellowship with black people and present efforts to use Scripture to reject fellowship with homosexuals:

IF the entire brotherhood could be (with the benefit of hindsight) in error on such an important matter, THEN it may be in error on other important points which have been taken as certain (role of women, homosexuality, baptism, you name it).

Though I would dispute the accuracy of his claim, the agenda of error is always the same -- muddy the water and slip in error!

Casting Doubt on the Clarity & Literal Truth of Scripture

This trick dates back to the garden when Satan tried to obfuscate the simple warning, "In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die" (Gen. 2:17 cf. 3:1-5). The lawyer of Luke 10 tried to escape guilt by appealing to a lack of clarity as to who was the "neighbor" he had an obligation to love. Jesus responded with the story of the good Samaritan to show how clear truth was in practical terms (Lk. 10:25-37). The epistles of John were written to stand as an abiding testimony to the clarity and authority of the truth. Though the gnostics sought to make God's will shrouded in a supposed deeper, spiritual, secret knowledge that only the elites might grasp, John declared that all could "know" God and His will through the commandments of Scripture which they had received (1 Jn. 1:1-4; 2:3-6, 21-26; 4:1-6; etc). The Scripture is sufficient to teach and guide all perfectly without any human addition (1 Tim. 3:16-17).

Compare the above appeal to truth based on Scripture with the following excerpts from the "Stone-Campbell List" by those urging acceptance of homosexuality despite Scripture:

From a historical perspective, I think it's safe to predict that two forces will change attitudes among conservatives regarding homosexuality in the next decade or two, following pretty much the same direction carved out by churches that are more affirming of homosexuals, and also following the pattern regarding divorce.

The first force would be the increasing amount of personal experience with gay and lesbian family members and friends, who will persuade their loved ones that neither their homosexual nor others' heterosexual orientation is a matter of choice. As this issue becomes more personal and as more is learned about how sexuality develops, the old unexamined assumptions will fade away, as will the appeal to Bible verses that support them.

The second force could well be a gradual acceptance of a theology and spirituality of sin that helps each of us recognize our own intractable capacity for evil and hurt, and to deal with our continuing need for forgiveness throughout life, so that if anybody ever started a spiritual housecleaning to get rid of all who are openly and unrepentantly sinful we'd stop before there would be nobody left.

Another professed brother wrote the following to justify accepting sodomites:

Scientific literature and personal acquaintance with gay and lesbian couples inform me that sexual orientation is at the core of one's being, similar to gender identity. Research is underway which thus far suggests that there may be a genetic basis for sexual orientation. The best analogy I can think of is left-handedness.

What is the basis of the appeal? Not Scripture, but to current scientific theory in conflict with the clear and literal teaching of Scripture. Though Romans 1 condemns those choosing homosexuality, they find "scientific literature" that conflicts with Scripture and urge us to reject the Bible and accept "science."

Brethren, I do not base my belief in the free will of man on the current theories of genetics, psychology or any other field of human research. I believe it because God said it in His word -- PERIOD! When God listed homosexuals among those engaged in activity which would separate them from the kingdom of God and commended those who left it as sanctification demands, the issue was settled for all time (1 Cor. 6:9-11). When God called it a "vile passion" which is "against nature" referring to it as an "abomination," I take Him at His literal word (Rom. 1:26-27). For anyone who truly believes God, Romans 1 is not up for reinterpretation based upon so-called "science" (cf. 1 Tim. 6:20).

A Parallel Attempt on Creation

Lest we think such reasoning only exists among ultra-liberal brethren, do you remember the justification heard for teaching contrary to the literal truth of creation by Hill Roberts of the "Lord I Believe" seminars as well as that of some “Bible faculty” members? They pointed to scientific theory about the "Big Bang theory" and geological dating theories which yield results of the Earth as billions of years old. In short, these brethren argued on the basis of accepting the uniformitarian development of the universe to explain its present form rather than it being the result of an instantaneous, miraculous act of divine creation. They told us that we should view the clear, literal Bible teaching about creation as having "other possibilities" in interpretation. We were told that, unless we have backgrounds in the scientific field, we are unqualified to speak on origins. At the very least, we were urged to be more tolerant and accepting towards those who believe and teach differently.

If we are not to insist upon and defend the literal truth of Genesis 1, by what logic are we to insist upon and defend the literal truth of Romans 1? The same arguments are being made to reject the literal truth of both passages. If we surrender truth on Genesis 1 today, the assault on Romans 1 is sure to follow in time. Genesis 1 says God created the heavens and earth as well as all of its inhabitants in six days composed of a morning and an evening each.

Let us defend that truth and insist that it be taught as declared in Scripture, regardless of current scientific theory. Exodus 20:8-11 and Exodus 31:12-17 confirm the literal account of creation to have happened in six literal days. Let us stand on that truth and not be moved.

Psalm 33:6-8 expresses the same truth saying,

By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, And by the breath of His mouth all their host. He gathers the waters of the sea together as a heap; He lays up the deeps in storehouses. Let all the earth fear the Lord; Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him. For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast (NAS).

The Scripture leaves no room for doubt about the literal truth of the creation account. The world did not evolve over billion of years. The word of God made it to be a fully matured and functioning system at the moment He spoke in creation. Let us place our faith there and be unmoved by theories of man. Let us not be moved to accept into our fellowship those who deny the literal truth of the creation account and seek to advance “other possibilities” for the order of the natural world. The topics may differ, but the tactics of error are the same. Do not be deceived.

< Back to Article List