The post Am I a Weak Person Headed for an Abusive Marriage? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.

Most people don’t sexualize their awareness of the beauty of children or of other people of the same sex. But for reasons that aren’t entirely understood, the sexual longings of some people are drawn towards persons of the same sex or towards children. This desire is clearly not a natural expression of the mating instinct, as it can’t result in reproduction, and medical and psychological evidence shows that people who struggle with such desires do so for a constellation of physical, environmental, and cultural reasons.¹ For such people, these desires feel natural, even though they are clearly unnatural in terms of instinctive purpose and reproductive design. However, the fact that the desires feel natural is usually no comfort to people who experience them, but is the source of deep feelings of confusion, shame, and guilt. (See the Questions, Do People Choose to Have Same-Gender Sexual Attractions? and What Does the Bible Say About Homosexuals Who Were Born That Way?)

This tendency to sexualize feelings towards children or people of the same sex is an aspect of fallen human nature in a world tainted by sin. Yet by itself, unnatural sexual temptation isn’t a sin we will be held accountable for, nor can it harm us and others if we don’t yield to it. As in the case of people with heterosexual desires, only willful surrender to temptation is sinful.²

Although no one will be held accountable for unnatural desires alone, they must be taken with the utmost seriousness. There is a sense in which yielding to the temptation to do something that is inherently unnatural will have even more serious emotional, spiritual, and physical consequences than succumbing to heterosexual temptation. Since yielding to any kind of temptation increases both temptation and the compulsive power of wrongful desire, one who yields to paraphilic or homosexual temptation will inflame his/her unnatural desires still further. The sexual desires of such people may become so badly distorted that it might become impossible for them to ever experience the kind of wholesome heterosexual marriage for which sexual feelings were designed, and the psychological damage inflicted on the objects of unnatural desire—whether children or vulnerable adults—will be profound. (See the ATQ article, >What Should Our Approach be Toward Homosexuals?)

1. David Greenberg, for example, sides with the dynamic view in that he rejects the idea that homosexuality is a fixed, pre-social given common to different societies and different periods of time. Against the “static” theorists, he notes that sexual practices and the conceptual categories through which people understand them—including practices involving persons of the same sex—vary greatly from society to society. Hence, the contemporary Western concept of homosexuality as a fixed, biologically based sexual orientation that is “normal” for a select group of people is in fact the product of a constellation of ideas present in our society and not the transcultural reality proponents assume it is. Like other proponents of the dynamic view, Greenberg argues that homosexual behavior is learned. But he quickly adds that this learning always occurs within a specific social context. In his view, cultural conditioning is able to override whatever seemingly innate factors might otherwise be operative in a person’s life. He writes, “Where social definitions of appropriate and inappropriate behavior are clear and consistent, with positive sanctions for conformity and negative ones for nonconformity, virtually everyone will conform irrespective of genetic inheritance and, to a considerable extent, irrespective of personal psychodynamics” (Welcoming But Not Affirming, pp. 29-30). Back To Article
2. In its widest sense, “sin” refers to every aspect of human life that fails to reflect the design of God. Viewed from this perspective, fallenness means that we are sinful in the totality of our existence. At the same time, we generally use the word more narrowly; thus, we speak about “sins,” that is, specific actions, even transgressions.The word sin immediately conjures up another idea that likewise carries two related yet distinct meanings: “judgment.” On the one hand, insofar as God will one day transform every dimension of creaturely fallenness, human fallenness comes under divine judgment. On the other hand, the biblical writers consistently reserve the idea of a divine judgment leading to condemnation for sinful acts (e.g., Rom. 2:3; 2 Cor. 5:10; Rev. 20:12).Putting the two together leads to the conclusion that as the great physician, God will heal our fallen sinfulness in the new creation, and as our judge, God will condemn our sinful actions. Hence, our fallen disposition is sinful in that it is foundational to our sinning. But it is our sinful acts—which bring God’s condemnation upon us—that are what mark us as guilty before God (Stanley Grenz, Welcoming But Not Affirming, p. 120). Back To Article

The post Are Homosexual or Pedophilic Desires Sinful? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.

Because homosexuality has become an identity issue for many people, powerful political and cultural pressures are being brought to bear on Christian denominations to view homosexuality as a natural, normal, and legitimate form of sexual expression.

There are many reasons to have empathy for those who are in the grip of sexual attraction to people of the same sex. Such people are likely to have experienced an unusual amount of developmental trauma including some combination of the following factors:

• Peer pressure created by the propaganda of sexualization in media and school ¹
• A distant, hostile, abusive and/or alcoholic father
• Parents who failed in some significant ways to encourage same-sex identification (i.e., failed to encourage boys to identify with father and other male role models, and girls to identify with mother and other female role models)
• An overprotective, needy, or demanding mother
• Rejection and mocking by peers in childhood because of poor hand-eye coordination, incompetence in sports, and reluctance to engage in rough-housing and team sports
• Sexual abuse or rape
• Separation from parent during key developmental years
• Loss of parent by death or divorce
• Extreme shyness and social phobia²

Yet while we should have empathy and compassion for anyone who has developed a homosexual orientation, the Bible makes it clear that homosexual behavior is a form of sexual sin (See the ATQ article,  What Is the Sin of Homosexuality?), and that we cannot allow our empathy for people tempted to sexual sin to displace our awareness of its dangers both to them and to others. The Bible places sexual sins in a unique category because they are sins against the body.

“Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ Himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, ‘The two will become one flesh.’ But he who unites himself to the Lord is one with Him in spirit. Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body” (1 Corinthians 6:15-20).

Because they are sins against the body, sexual sins utilize the body’s powerful instinctive drives to create degrading forms of addictive behavior that wreak havoc both for the sinner and everyone within his/her sphere of influence.

The Bible exalts human sexuality within marriage. It uses the image of husband and wife to portray the intimacy that exists between Christ and the church (2 Corinthians 11:2; a href=”https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+5:21-33″>Ephesians 5:21-33; Revelation 19:7), which is why Paul describes sexual sin with special concern. By means of sexual sin, the human will becomes the instrument by which the body’s reproductive instincts are misdirected to destructive ends, and, in turn, the body’s wholesome physical drives become complicit in enslaving the human will. The personal and social repercussions of sexual sin are extreme.

Like other sexual sins, homosexual behavior isn’t innate or unavoidable. (See the ATQ article, What Does the Bible Say About Homosexuals Who Were Born That Way?) It is essential that Christians hold each other accountable within their community to protect young people whose traumatic backgrounds and existing same-sex attractions might make them vulnerable to being drawn into this addictive and destructive kind of sin.

1. After his departure from a homosexual lifestyle, the one-time founder of Young Gay America Magazine acknowledged the powerful social pressures that are coming to bear on Western young people to view homosexual behavior in a positive light:
   
   

   YGA [Young Gay America] Magazine sold out of its first issue in several North American cities. There was extreme support, by all sides, for YGA Magazine; schools, parent groups, libraries, governmental associations, everyone seemed to want it. It tapped right into the zeitgeist of “accepting and promoting” homosexuality, and I was considered a leader. I was asked to speak on the prestigious JFK Jr. Forum at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government in 2005.
   

   It was after viewing my words on a videotape of that “performance” that I began to seriously doubt what I was doing with my life and influence.
   

   Knowing no one who I could approach with my questions and my doubts, I turned to God; I’d developed a growing relationship with God, thanks to a debilitating bout with intestinal cramps caused by the upset stomach-inducing behaviors I’d been engaged in.
   

   Soon, I began to understand things I’d never known could possibly be real, such as the fact that I was leading a movement of sin and corruption—which is not to sound as though my discovery was based on dogma, because decidedly it was not.
   

   I came to the conclusions on my own.
   

   It became clear to me, as I really thought about it—and really prayed about it—that homosexuality prevents us from finding our true self within. We cannot see the truth when we’re blinded by homosexuality.
   

   We believe, under the influence of homosexuality, that lust is not just acceptable, but a virtue. But there is no homosexual “desire” that is apart from lust.
   

   In denial of this fact, I’d fought to erase such truth at all costs, and participated in the various popular ways of taking responsibility out of human hands for challenging the temptations of lust and other behaviors. I was sure—thanks to culture and world leaders—that I was doing the right thing.
   

   Driven to look for truth, because nothing felt right, I looked within. Jesus Christ repeatedly advises us not to trust anybody other than Him. I did what He said, knowing that the Kingdom of God does reside in the heart and mind of every man.
   

   What I discovered—what I learned—about homosexuality was amazing. How I’d first “discovered” homosexual desires back in high school was by noticing that I looked at other guys. How I healed, when it became decidedly clear that I should—or risk hurting more people—is that I paid attention to myself.
   

   Every time I was tempted to lust, I noticed it, caught it, dealt with it. I called it what it was, and then just let it disappear on its own. A huge and vital difference exists between superficial admiration—of yourself, or others—and integral admiration. In loving ourselves fully, we no longer need anything from the “outside” world of lustful desire, recognition from others, or physical satisfaction. Our drives become intrinsic to our very essence, unbridled by neurotic distractions. (From the article, “How a ‘Gay Rights’ Leader Became Straight,” by Michael Glatze). Back To Article

2. The significance of trauma in the development of same-sex desires is documented in the paper, Homosexuality and Hope, published by the Catholic Medical Association. Back To Article

The post What Should Be Our Approach Toward Homosexuals? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.

In Romans 1:18-23, the apostle Paul observes that God is deeply concerned about what happens when people willingly turn away from what He as Creator has revealed about Himself in nature.

According to Paul, those who turn away from a grateful relationship with their Creator are likely to worship what has been created. The result is a long list of attitudes and actions by which persons show their lack of relationship with God, while harming themselves and one another in the process (1:29-32).

In the middle of this chapter, Paul makes some very strong statements about same-gender sexual relationships. Before emphasizing even more damaging forms of evil, Paul shows how confused people become when they begin to look for life and satisfaction in a fallen creation rather than in the design of their Creator. So he writes of those who turn their backs on God,

“Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion” (Romans 1:24-27).

It’s important to understand that in Paul’s day,¹ homosexual behavior was recognized as “against nature” by the most universally admired school of pagan philosophy—the Stoics.² Under inspiration of God, Paul therefore saw that same-sex eroticism physically illustrates both the nature and the effects of sin on a culture and its individuals.

Because even pagans recognized the design of masculine and feminine distinction,³ and because common people could see that same-sex intercourse is “against nature,” Paul wrote that the confusion and misuse of gender (Romans 1:26) violates the purpose of sexuality on the basis of natural evidences alone. Paul’s use of such expressions as “the degrading of their bodies” (v.24), “shameful lusts” (v.26), and “indecent acts” (v.27) emphasizes its unnaturalness.

On the basis of the consequences of acting against nature (“received in themselves the due penalty,” v.27), same-sex unions were selected by Paul as a vivid physical example of spiritual sins that confuse, twist, and distort a wide range of heart issues (1:29-31).⁴

1. For Paul, same-sex intercourse was not just a dishonoring of gender dispositions, much less of cultural conventions, but a dishonoring of gendered “bodies” through a disregard of the visible physical (and functional) difference of men and women (Romans 1:24). Further, same-sex intercourse is comparable to idolatry in its deliberate suppression of the visible evidence in creation for the attributes of the true Creator (Romans 1:18-23). (Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, p. 378) Back To Article
2. Here is an example of a Hellenistic Stoic’s view of homosexual behavior, quoted from Gagnon’s The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pp. 165-66:
   

   But of all sexual relations those involving adultery are most unlawful, and no more tolerable are those involving males with males, because the daring and flagrant act is contrary to nature (para physin; XII). (Quotation from first-century Stoic philosopher Musonius Rufus.) Back To Article

3. In Romans 1:24-27, Paul is not appealing to the stories and laws of Scripture—which he could not assume that Gentiles had knowledge of—but he is appealing to “empirical observation of what actually exists” inasmuch as “the world designed by God” still showed the marks of the Creator’s hand. This was true of the grandeur of the created world and was true as well of the anatomical and procreative complementarity of male and female. Hays is correct that “nature” in the sense used by Paul here does not embrace everything that existed as a good. Some things that are innate, such as many of “the desires of the human heart,” listed in 1:24-31, have been skewed by the fall and are not safe indicators of God’s intention for human sexuality. However, in the anatomical and procreative complementarity of male and female, empirical observation of what is, and intuitive understanding of what ought to be, merge because the fall did not obliterate this physical and functional aspect of human sexuality. The Stoics too appealed to empirical observation of sexual differences between men and women as a way of determining right behavior.” (Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, p. 255) Back To Article
4. The context for Paul’s strong language regarding same-sex intercourse “finds parallels not only in the level of disgust towards same-sex intercourse exhibited by other Jewish writers of the period but also in the responses to homosexual behavior in Paul’s Scripture: the narratives of homosexual rape (Ham, the men of Sodom, and the Benjamites at Gibeah) as examples of the zenith of detestable behavior; the intense revulsion against homosexual cult prostitutes manifested in Deuteronomic and Deuteronomistic texts; the special attachment of the label ‘abomination’ to all male homosexual intercourse in the Levitical prohibitions; and possibly the unmentionable character of same-sex intercourse in Ezekiel, who refers to such behavior only by the metonym ‘abomination.’ ” (The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pp. 268-69) Back To Article

The post Why Did Paul Speak Strongly About the Danger of Same-Sex Intercourse? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.

Generally, most people don’t start out choosing to feel sexual attraction for persons of the same sex.¹This doesn’t necessarily mean that people are born with these desires. Instead, same-gender attractions usually develop out of a combination of factors in a person’s background, often without a person being aware of when and why the desires came about.

Many studies and personal accounts suggest that same-gender sexual attractions often emerge in a context where children feel unaccepted by their same-sex parent. Whether it’s real or perceived, those who eventually feel sexual attractions for the same gender didn’t feel loved by or identify with their same-gender parent. What also frequently shows up in their stories are childhood sexual experiences with the same gender where they felt a strong yet rare sense of love. When these factors are combined, they can confuse emotionally starved children or adolescents about their sexual orientation.

Whether this process of sexual confusion has happened through sexual abuse or peer experimentation, the result is that, while growing up, their God-given desire to feel loved and approved by persons of the same sex were only experienced within a sexual context. Such rare times of feeling loved creates the misunderstanding that they have been destined to fill their desire for same-gender love and approval through sexual interaction. Therein lies the root of the confusion that has deceived countless individuals into feeling sexually attracted to the same gender (See the ATQ article, I Feel Same-Sex Attractions: Does This Mean I’m Gay?).

While sexual desires for those of the same sex are not initially chosen, those who do experience these attractions eventually find themselves faced with a different choice. In general terms, they can either try to understand and confront the misunderstanding behind their sexual attractions, or they can accept and embrace their confusion as if it was their natural identity. With help from God and His people, those who choose to understand and confront the misperceptions behind same-sex attraction are most likely to heal from the wounds that led to unnatural desires. This choice will in time allow them to live more as the man or woman God created them to be and to be open to healthy, nonsexual relationships with the same gender (See the ATQ article, How Do I Deal with My Same-Sex, Physical Attractions to Other Men?). The other choice (accepting the confusion) keeps an individual from discovering God’s design for men and women and usually compels them to give in to their abnormal passions. This is what the Bible refers to as the sin of homosexuality (See the ATQ article, What Is the Sin of Homosexuality?).

1. Some adults (who never felt sexual desire for the same sex) can become so spent in a sexually promiscuous heterosexual lifestyle that out of desperation they willingly experiment with homosexual behavior with the hope of finding their next “high.” And like any addiction, the more they choose to indulge in the behavior, the more they will crave it. These are likely some of the people the Apostle Paul had in mind when he wrote:
   

   “Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more” (Ephesians 4:19). Back To Article

The post Do People Choose to Have Same-Gender Sexual Attractions? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.

The post How Do I Deal with My Same-Sex, Physical Attractions to Other Men? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.

The post Did David and Jonathan Share a Homosexual Relationship? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.

The post What Is the Sin of Homosexuality? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.

Apologists for homosexual behavior often attempt to distinguish between “born” homosexuals and people who engage in homosexual behavior for other reasons. This distinction is usually combined with the claim that approximately 10 percent of the population is exclusively homosexual. Both of these claims are false. Further, they are misleading because they provide a rationalization for “normalizing” harmful behavior.

Science has not yet discovered any genetically dictated behavior in humans. So far, genetically dictated behaviors of the one-gene-one-trait variety have been found only in very simple organisms. . . . But if many genes are involved in a behavior, then changes in that behavior will tend to take place very slowly and steadily (say, changes of a few percent each generation over many generations, perhaps thirty). That being so, homosexuality could not appear and disappear suddenly in family trees the way it does. (Whitehead, Genes, 209, quoted in The Bible and Homosexual Practice)

Desires and inclinations don’t constitute identity. We all have desires and inclinations we must choose to resist. Certainly, while there is overwhelming evidence that genetic predisposition alone is not sufficient to produce a homosexual identity, the biology and early childhood experiences of some individuals strongly combine to give the impression of being “born” homosexual. Such people should never be condemned for such feelings, but viewing such feelings as “identity” would be a serious mistake. Authors Stanton L. Jones and Mark A. Yarhouse explain why in their book, Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church’s Moral Debate.

Science has not eliminated responsibility for sexual behavior. . . . The church’s moral concern is with what an individual does with his or her experiences of same-sex attraction. Only in the case of extreme biological determination at the level of individual acts would moral culpability be seen as obliterated. Homosexual persons are not subhuman robots whose acts are predetermined. They are moral agents who inherit tendencies from biology and environment, and who share in shaping their character by the response they make to their life situations. Like all persons, they must ask, “This is what I want to do, but is it what I should do?” The existence of inclinations or predispositions does not erase the need for moral evaluation of those inclinations (pp. 89-90).

Would it be helpful to view some people who have committed murder as “born killers” whose behavior is genetically “caused”? Would it serve any good to hold forth the possibility that some people have no choice but to identify themselves as “killers” who have no other choice but to live out their violent identity? A government report on the origins of violence states:

[Violent behavior is caused by] interactions among individuals’ psychosocial development, neurological and hormonal differences, and social processes. . . . These studies suggest at most a weak role for genetic processes in influencing potentials for violent behavior. . . . If genetic predispositions to violence are discovered, they are likely to involve many genes and substantial environmental interaction rather than any simple genetic marker.¹

A realistic perspective views both violent passion and sexual desire (both homosexual and heterosexual) as inclinations that can either be misused or kept within proper bounds.

Further, the idea that there is a difference between “genuine” homosexuals and people who engage in homosexuality for other reasons is countered by the evidence. Most of those who refer to themselves as “exclusively” homosexual have on some occasion(s) been sexuality intimate with the opposite sex.² In terms of common sense and practical judgment, how could one objectively distinguish between a “genuine” homosexual who has nevertheless experienced sex with a member of the opposite sex, and a person who is “not genuinely homosexual”? For that matter, can one differentiate in any ultimate sense between the passions that aroused ancient Assyrian soldiers to rape their defeated enemies and the passions that motivate prisoners in exclusively male prisons to engage in sodomy? Can we clearly distinguish between the desire of a married adult man for an attractive adolescent male (as was common among the Greeks) and the desperate longing of a lonely, unloved adolescent to be touched? How are these passions less “genuine” than those of people who believe they are “constitutionally gay”?

Sexual passion above all other kinds of passion is likely to generate rationalizations. This is why the Bible doesn’t base the morality of sexual behavior on subjective feelings.³ Many pedophiles insist that they genuinely love the children they abuse. Adulterers often claim that they never were genuinely in love with their wives, but have found true love in the arms of another woman. Some adulterers (both male and female) claim that their love is too great to share with merely one individual, and can only be expressed in an “open marriage” enhanced by other liaisons. There is nothing new about the subtlety of sexual temptation and the rationalization of sexual sin. Scripture takes an unequivocal stand against homosexual behavior because it is an inherent violation of human dignity and barrier to spiritual growth.

1. The 1992 United States National Research Council Report on violence and genes, quoted by Whitehead, Genes, 215-216. Back To Article
2. Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), 53-61, 286-94. Back To Article
3. Finally, we want to briefly return to a matter raised earlier. We quoted McNeil, who stated “Only a sadistic God would create hundreds of thousands of humans to be inherently homosexual and then deny them the right to sexual intimacy.” To this we must respond, “Who made sexual intimacy a right?” Rather than a right, Scripture would seem to paint sexual chastity as an obligation for those who, for whatever reasons, do not find themselves married (whether those reasons are an unwanted divorce, lack of available partners, death of a spouse or because of a religious vow). Homosexual persons have the same capacities for all other sorts of intimacy, other than erotic sexual intimacy, that serve to sustain and nourish us. (Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church’s Moral Debate, p. 90) Back To Article

The post What Does the Bible Say About Homosexuals Who Were Born That Way? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.

The post Why Are There Two Interpretations About the Bible’s Teaching on Homosexuality? appeared first on Our Daily Bread Ministries Canada.