Ethical Issues Facing American Society 1: Homosexuality

I. Introduction
A. Today we begin a four week series on what the Bible says about five moral issues facing American society:
1. Jan. 8 Homosexuality // Jan. 15 Racism // Jan.22 Abortion // Jan.29 War and capital punishment
B. Homosexuality is THE hot moral issue of this generation
1. So important to give attention to this. Listen carefully. I have worked very hard to prepare this message.
2. Please give me the grace to listen carefully before you condemn what I’m saying.
3. If you think what I’m saying is contrary to Scripture then disagree with me. But try not to judge what I say based on your own feelings or your own sense of what’s right.
a. Feelings and personal opinions are not the basis of Christian belief. The consensus of the community is not the basis for Christian belief. It is the Bible.
b. “The Bible can be used to argue for ANYTHING.” I suppose there’s some truth to that, but that doesn’t mean the Bible is flawed. God didn’t give us His word so we could justify what we already believe. He gave us His word to tell us His truth. If it’s impossible to tell what the Bible says on a given subject, then it’s useless and it must not be the word of God.
c. But if it is the word of God, and not just the word of men, then it must actually say things — true things, true things that we can understand, and though we might sinfully twist it and claim it says something it really doesn’t say (which has certainly happened many times in history), we would be claiming the Bible says something it actually doesn’t say.
d. So our task on any question is to grasp what the Bible says, carefully, objectively, open-mindedly, humbly, knowing that only with the help of the Spirit can we be successful. Be like the Bereans.
C. I can’t address all the aspects of this and answer all the questions in one sermon, even if I had all the answers. So, I invite you into the process of struggling with this difficult issue.
1. Let us not be afraid to put it on the table and think about it in light of God’s holy word.
2. Let’s not make this the end of our conversation, but just the beginning.
3. I would like to be involved in follow-up discussions.
D. I send out an email announcing that I was preaching on this. Someone in the congregation wrote me an extremely thoughtful note about this that I would like to read from, in a slightly edited form.
1. “I think it’s important that they know there are a number of people in our congregation who experience some degree of same-sex attraction, even though it’s the last thing they would have wanted, and this has been the case for 30+ years. I know it might shock some people, but I think it’s totally worth the shock and totally important. When you shared a couple years ago that there have always been people in our congregation who have had abortions in the past and that we should remember this when we talk about abortion, it totally changed my perspective on it, and changed the way I think about it and talk about it. I think being aware that this is very painful and personal issue for people in our own circle will greatly help people be sensitive and loving in the way we talk about it. It feels far from welcoming when an issue you live with is thrown around in a mocking or teasing way. It’s the same with any stereotyping. If we’re constantly saying, “Oh, that’s so gay!” or even just talking about the issue like it’s just about ‘those people out there’…it makes us insensitive, unwelcoming, and unloving. If a gay person (in or out of the closet) walked into GPC and heard this, I strongly doubt they’d ever consider coming back. Gay people are not all the same, just like tall people, or black people, or single people are not all the same. We need to remember how much damage we are capable of doing in the way we talk. We need to have the warmth in our eyes and in our speech that Jesus had toward blind Bartemeus, or the Samaritan woman at the well.”
2. Many have committed suicide because they have feelings they don’t want to have & feel humiliated.
II. The two verses in Leviticus which condemn homosexuality
A. There are only a handful of verses about homosexuality in Bible, & the place where most discussions start is in Leviticus.
1. Leviticus 18:22 “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.”
2. Leviticus 20:13 “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”
3. These verses have been the foundation of the Jewish and Christian view of homosexuality down through the ages.
B. However, in recent decades there are a number of arguments that have been raised which question the meaning and application of these verses.
1. The first claim is that these verses don’t refer to a faithful, committed, natural homosexual relationship, but to homosexual prostitution or rape or reckless homosexual activity.
a. What are the reasons to come to this conclusion? What evidence is there for this interpretation?
b. It doesn’t say that. It says“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.”
c. It’s the gender that’s the problem. Making male/male relationships like male/female marriage is the problem, not the solution. (And you certainly wouldn’t want to use that interpretive model on all the verses around it pertaining to adultery, incest, bestiality, etc.)
2. The second argument is that the Book of Leviticus contains many laws which pertain to things which were peculiar to the Jews in the OT times, and not to us today.
a. Surrounding verses which condemn eating unclean animals and mixing cloths and planting two kinds of seed in the same hole, and the proper calendar for temple sacrifices.
b. “Why do we choose to apply this law and not that one?”
c. There are lots of different laws. Do we get to pick which ones to keep and which ones to discard? We have must think about this more...
III. Are these verses in Leviticus which forbid homosexual activity supposed to apply to us today?
A. Contrary to what some have said, these two laws in Leviticus 18 & 20 are not found just mixed in with laws which don’t apply to us today.
1. They are both found in the context of a long list of laws concerning human sexuality: laws condemning incest, adultery and bestiality (zoophilia).
2. The only law in the 30 verses of Lev.18 which does not pertain to sexual morality is a law forbidding child sacrifice (v.21).
3. Lev.20 contains a greater variety of laws: about child sacrifice, sorcery, cursing of parents, all of which the Christian church still follows today. But Lev.20:13 is in the midst of a smaller section about sexual morality (10-21), again forbidding adultery, incest, and bestiality.
B. But the claim is correct that Leviticus as a whole includes lots of laws, including some we don’t follow anymore. What does that mean? What does God want us to do about that?
1. It can’t be that we just get to pick which ones to follow and which to set aside. If that were the case, we’d be following our own laws, not God’s.
2. There has to be a right way to approach these laws.
3. I think the way we learn how to approach these laws is by how our Lord and the NT writers approached them. So, how did Jesus and the apostles handle these laws?
C. In the OT law, we are given laws about all kinds of things, they are sometimes but not always ordered by subject.
1. And yet the laws fall into different categories. We know this not just by observation but by the way Jesus and the NT writers handle the law.
a. For instance, the Bible authors speak of the food laws as one, even though those laws are spread over many different chapters of different books: in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy (e.g. Ex. 22:31; Lev. 11:1–47, 17:13–15; Deut.14). (E.g. Mark 7:18-20; Luke 11:41; Acts 10:14-15; Col.2:16-17; 1Tim.4:1-5.)
b. They speak of the sacrificial law as one (e.g. Heb.10:1).
c. They speak of the ceremonial calendar laws as one (e.g. Col.2:16-17).
d. They speak of the clean/unclean laws as one (e.g. Heb.9:10).
e. They speak of the laws regarding temple worship as one (e.g. John 4:21-23).
f. And they speak of the laws regarding sexual morality as one.
2. So the question is: What category does a given law belong to? And what does the NT say about that category of law and how it is affected by the coming of Christ?
a. Is it reaffirmed by Christ, like the law that we must love God with our whole heart, soul, mind and strength?
b. Or does it come to its fulfillment in Christ, like the food laws and the sacrificial laws, and the “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch” laws (Col.2:21)?
c. Or is it perhaps transformed by Christ (that is, reaffirmed but also adjusted), as the Sabbath laws are?
3. The law forbidding homosexuality belongs to the category of sexual morality laws.
4. The OT contains many sexual laws: forbidding adultery, fornication (premarital sex), incest, bestiality, rape, homosexuality, and premarital sex.
a. (Polygamy is different. It is never dealt with as a sexual sin. I think there’s enough to conclude that it is not the way the Bible directs us to go, but it’s certainly not only the level of these others. It is treated as a deformed and unfortunate form of marriage, but it IS treated as marriage.)
5. So what does the NT say about the laws pertaining to sexuality?
a. First of all, there is nothing in the NT to indicate that they’ve been changed or set aside. (When Jesus breaks unto the scene, there are certain shockingly new things He proclaims, things which represent major shifts in the way God’s people are supposed to think, things which stirred up a lot of controversy. But there is none of this regarding sexuality.)
b. Secondly, every OT law pertaining to sexuality which is mentioned in the NT is reaffirmed (e.g. in John Jesus refuses to condemn the adulterous woman, but He reaffirms the OT condemnation of adultery when He tells the woman to go and sin no more. He also says in Matthew that it is like adultery for a man to lust after a woman, but He still condemns adultery.)
c. Thirdly, there are a number of OT laws regarding sexuality which are not specifically mentioned in the NT: e.g. incest, rape, bestiality.
6. In Matthew 15:18-20 Jesus said “The things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man ‘unclean.’ For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what make a man ‘unclean’; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him ‘unclean.’ ”
a. The Greek word which is translated here as sexual immorality is the word PORNEIA. It doesn’t refer to one particular form of sexual immorality, but to sexual immorality in general.
b. He also uses it in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5:32), very near the beginning of His ministry.
c. Now how can we tell what Jesus means by PORNEIA in these verses, since He never elaborates on it?
d. I would suggest that He doesn’t explain it because His hearers already know what it means. They know what sexual immorality is from the OT. And Jesus doesn’t offer us any changes of these ideas, but simply assumes them and continues them. He doesn’t try to change the definition of the word that they already have in their minds, which was built on their knowledge of the OT.
e. Some have argued that Jesus never even mentioned homosexuality. And as far as we know, that is true. But neither does He mention incest, nor rape. Why? He didn’t need to. Everyone knew these were included when he said PORNEIA.
(1) The NT doesn’t restate all the sexual laws of the OT, it simply refers to PORNEIA, sexual immorality, assuming we all know what that means.
D. So the sexual laws of the OT don’t need to be repeated in the NT. They are summarized in the word PORNEIA, which Jesus repeatedly uses.
1. The “experts” may say it’s OK! But Jesus is THE expert. Remember that God said, “This is My Son. Listen to Him!”
E. And yet, some of the OT sexual laws ARE repeated & reaffirmed in the NT, and the law regarding homosexuality is one.
1. Rom.1:21-27 “Although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.”
a. Interestingly, there is no mention of female homosexuality, lesbianism, in the OT. The two places in Leviticus and the 2 stories in Genesis & Judges which mention it only refer to male homosexuality. Here in the 1:26 we have the only apparent explicit reference to lesbianism in the Bible.
2. 1Corinthians 6:9 “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality.”
a. “Men who practice homosexuality” There are two Greek words here, and the ESV has conflated them into one. The NIV translates it as 2 things: “nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders.”
b. The second word refers to the active partner of male homosexual activity, and the first word means “soft one” and is taken to refer to the passive partner.
c. And so since they seem to refer to the two sides of the same equation, the ESV combines them into one phrase: “men who practice homosexuality.”
d. Homosexuality is not new.
(1) The Greco-Roman world in NT times was rife with homosexuality, much more than we have. (Interestingly, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle all condemned it as contrary to nature and harmful to society.)
(2) Granted, some of the manifestations of it were different then than now. But there is no reason to conclude that the teachings of the NT, built on the OT, were limited to the first century patterns.
3. 1Timothy 1:9-10 “The law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine.”
a. “men who practice homosexuality” The Greek word here is a compound word made up of the word for male and the Greek word from which we get our English word coitus. It is virtually identical to what is said in Lev.18 & 20, which refer to a man lying with another man.
b. Here Paul mentions the OT law against homosexuality, implying that it still applies.
IV. There is yet more to glean from Matt.15:18-20 “The things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man ‘unclean.’ For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what make a man ‘unclean’; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him ‘unclean.’ ”
A. Where does the sin come from? From the sinful heart. It does not come from our genes. It does not come from our environment or our experiences or our biochemistry. Now all those things have an affect on which direction our sin flows. But it all begins with a sinful heart.
1. The active homosexual and the homophobe actually have a lot in common.
2. The problem with man is that something is unclean in his heart.
3. We’re all in this together. My sin and your sin. We’re all corrupt. We’re all perverse. We’re all depraved. Sometimes I am perverse and corrupt and depraved in different ways than you, but we’re all equally in need of the grace of Christ.
B. The principle of addressing our own sin before we point out the sin of others applies here too.
1. Homophobia is also a sin. Jesus wasn’t afraid or hateful of sinners. He was the friend of sinners.
2. Mocking, belittling and mistreating people is never the right way to live, whoever they are.
3. And love is more than being nice. It also involves thinking the best. Here’s a little more of the letter I read from earlier:
a. “Part of the stereotype associated with these people is that all they think about or do involves sex. This is so wrong-headed. Too often when we think about a gay man, we assume he lusts after all other men, or that he likes young boys, or he watches gay porn, or even that he’s sexually active. We make really unfair connections. We can’t associate sexual promiscuity with homosexuality, as if homosexual people are necessarily more interested or involved in sex than heterosexual people are, or that they give in to sexual temptation more readily.”
b. I’ve watched videos from both sides of the issue. One side includes clips of Christian preachers which are extreme, harsh, and raging while the advocates of the other side are calm, sensitive, and reasonable. The other side includes clips of fanatical gay parades and screaming, militant, tirading gay advocates contrasted with calm, balanced, loving Bible explainers. Neither is being fair or respectful.
4. How do you feel when others take the worst, most extreme cases of Christian belief and practice and hold it up as an example of Christianity?
5. Well, we must not do this to others. It isn’t loving.
6. Leviticus calls homosexual activity an abomination. In the OT this kind of strong language was used to condemn things like homosexuality. But in the NT the strongest language is used to condemn the opposite kind of sin: self-righteousness, disdain for others, pretending you’re better than you really are, thinking you’re better than others, judging others, not caring about the needy.
7. If you don’t have same-sex attraction, does that mean you’re better than those who do?
8. We’re supposed to be more offended by our own sin than by anybody else’s.
9. I’m no expert in this, but I know enough to know that a lot of Christians are enormously ignorant and that is reflected in things they say, which come across as unloving or just plain stupid.
10. The more a Christian’s opposition to homosexuality sounds like prejudice or disdain, the more our attempt to take a stand for the ways of Christ will end up harming the name of Christ.
V. Conclusion
A. I’d like to respond to two questions:
1. Is the inclination to same-sex attraction itself sinful or does it become sin when it turns to lust or is acted upon? Is the inclination something in the body or does it abide in the sinful soul? In other words, can we expect God to change people’s inclinations or just to move people to surrender their inclinations to God and be delivered from the sin of it? It’s an important question. But on this question I am agnostic. I don’t know. I’ve thought about it, I’ve read about it. But I don’t know enough yet to come to a conclusion. And sadly, I think a lot more people need to be more uncertain about these questions. Unfortunately, some who know little still have very strong opinions on it.
a. All I know is what it says in 1Cor.6:9-11 “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”
b. Homosexuals can be washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
c. Even if a person is inclined toward that kind of temptation for the rest of his life, that’s OK. Lots of us go through life inclined toward certain temptations. Like an alcoholic or a person who struggles with anger or pride or heterosexual lust.
d. We are all unique. We’re given different personalities and different strengths and weaknesses. This means each of us is prone to different sins.
e. One person is more prone to anger and violence. Another is more prone to arrogance and pride. And another is more prone to addictive behaviors, and another to substance abuse. One is more tempted to be a workaholic, while another to be a sluggard. One is inclined to be gullible and another to be cynical.
f. But we are all washed, sanctified, and justified in the Lord Jesus.
g. And the ordinary place for this kind of transformation to happen is the church.
2. What makes one person have same-sex attraction and other have only opposite-sex attraction? Is it genetics? Is it environment? It is relationship with parents? Is it hormones? Is it bad experiences?
a. I’ve thought about and read some of the latest thinking and studies about this question as well.
b. There’s been so much effort put into this in the last few years!
c. But it seems we are not even close to figuring it all out.
d. Here’s my theory: Only God knows. But we don’t really need to know.
B. First and foremost, every person is a beautiful creature made in the image of God. Compared to that, even our sinfulness is secondary in defining who a person is.
1. The second reality which defines each person is that he is a sinner in need of Christ.
2. I’d like to end with one final quote from someone in the congregation who wrote me about this: “Homosexual, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people should never, ever be defined by their sexuality. Personally, I don’t even really like calling someone ‘a homosexual.’ It can sound like that’s a basic summary of who that person is. When we see a Hispanic person, we shouldn’t think of them as if their Hispanicness is what makes them who they are. They are a person first, a creation of God first, and then much farther downstream, they happen to be Hispanic. We need to be careful to not think of these people as if that’s who they are. If we look at a gay man and his gayness takes up most of the picture in our view and we relate everything about him back to that, that’s wrong-headed. His sexual orientation is one part of his personhood, and not the main part.”