PERSPECTIVE ON HOMOSEXUALITY

PERSPECTIVE ON HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS

 Back in the 1980's, while studying in South Carolina, I was one day listening to a call-in program on a local radio station. The presenter was featuring a psychiatrist who was answering questions from his on-the air audience. One listener wanted to know what to decide about a certain matter. Basically,  the  psychiatrist replied: “If you like it do it, so long as it does not hurt anyone.”  Debbie Boone crooned back in 1977 in her song, You Light Up My Life, “It can't be wrong when it feels so good.”

I suppose feeling good about something or liking it makes it right, huh? Unfortunately, this is the sort of attitude that is current across the local and global scene today. Decisions are made based on feeling rather than on objective truth and timeless principles. A consensus on morality no longer seems to exist. The application is patent when we take into account the attitude that many people have towards sexual promiscuity including homosexuality. Activists and practitioners appear to be driven by subjective feelings rather than by ethical considerations. The psychological, physiological, and social impact of their behaviour appears to be of little concern to them.

How we feel about something or someone is a weak foundation on which to base decisions or actions. The fact of the matter is that feelings never make something right or wrong. Ethics are independent of emotions. Whenever we do wrong somebody always gets hurt one way or another, either ourselves or some other person. In reality, society as a whole is impacted for better or for worse by the decisions and choices that we each make, for we are members one of another. No man lives unto himself. What itches the eye affects the finger that is lifted to bring it relief. Think of the many children that are aborted or born and left fatherless or motherless because two people felt like snuggling up one night in a room or in some lonely place. It may have felt good but what about the repercussions?

With respect to homosexuality advocates seem more concerned about enjoying erotic experiences than finding true fulfillment in life. They may have been deprived of a healthy relationship with significant others and are searching for the fuzzes in same sex unions. They want the freedom to enjoy a practice which feels good to them without due regard for its implications. Its moral or ethical content is of no significance in their estimation. They argue vociferously and claim human right for what they are doing and cannot understand why anyone should be opposed to their way of life.

It was appalling to watch two tall handsome young men in the front of a paper purportedly getting married and then engaging in nasal smooching as a seal of their union. What a poor model for the young men and boys in our society and a tragic affront to all that is decent and sublime! On the other hand two young women were featured wrapped up as heterosexual lovers strutting their stuff with total aplomb.

In answering a question concerning homosexuality at a youth forum one apologist had this to say:  “Sex is a sacred gift of God. We should not violate its sanctity by an aberration.  Having a proclivity or disposition does not justify its expression.” He further mentioned that God designed a woman to specifically meet man's sexual needs. Stolen waters may be sweet but the results are disastrous.

In some countries the law is now on the side of these people and they have the full backing of the U.N. in its charter on human rights. Homosexual rights are now affirmed as a component of human rights in many countries.   Some thirteen states in the U.S. have now legalized homosexual marriage and 51% of the population are in favour of it.  Former U.S. President George Bush Sr. was a witness at the homosexual wedding of friends of his not long ago. Countries such as South Africa, The Netherlands, Britain, France, Denmark, and Sweden are well established as homosexual paradises placing gay marriage on par with heterosexual ones.

There are still many countries which are resisting the trend towards legalizing gay rights. Russia is one of them. Sometime ago homosexuals in Moscow ransacked a Russian Orthodox Church in anger over the stand of the authorities on this matter. The Mayor of Moscow has constantly resisted efforts to hold gay parades in his city and has paid fines imposed by the European Court for failing to accord homosexuals their perceived rights. Patriarch Kirilli of the Russian Orthodox Church has also taken a principled stand on the matter of homosexuality backed by 86 % of the Russian people and supported by President Vladimir Putin. Gay parades will not be held in Moscow anytime soon, at least not within the next hundred years.

Besides Russia there are countries in the Caribbean and Latin American regions that have not given in to the western march towards legalizing homosexuality. However, efforts are being made by activists to gain legal acceptance with the support of U.S. embassies as mandated by the U.S. State Department. Countries in the Muslim pale and in Africa are resisting the homosexual mood on the grounds of religion and culture. Some nations out of economic pragmatism may bow to U. S. pressure to accord rights to homosexuals.  We have now entered the era of sexual imperialism which is reminiscent of the time when western nations in the early 18oo-1900's were using military and diplomatic pressure to force China to trade in opium. The sovereign rights of states are being undermined by the creeping miasma of globalism with its new morality.

As we consider perspectives on homosexuality I want to make it clear that I am not dealing with this theme from the comfort of some ivy tower or philosopher's arm-chair.   In my own pilgrimage I have had the opportunity of touching the lives of people affected by this practice. Besides, from childhood I have grown up with people all around me living in sexual promiscuity. It is only the grace of God why I did not hit the skids as well. My wife and I have been married for over forty-one years and are enjoying the wonder and delights of a heterosexual relationship.

I have had on line communications with an homosexual activist who is  a friend of mine. He has shared his position with me on the matter and asked my opinion. I have critiqued his views in keeping with his insistence and shared my perspectives with him as well. I hope that we understand each other. I have also visited the bedside of a homosexual man who was dying from infection caused by HIV/AIDS and read with him a scripture which he himself suggested from the book of Job. Since he was so well known for what he stood for I can therefore reference “Natasha” who referred to himself as “Mrs. Lightbody.” The reason that I have not had contacts with others of this persuasion is obvious – they have not opened up to me. However, I have seen them holding hands on the street and walking on the beach some of them sporting similar hair-cuts. My heart is open to them with understanding and compassion even though I find it necessary to confront what has been considered an aberrant and perverse lifestyle.

We would do well to examine the homosexual issue from a biblical rather than an emotional point of view for that is the only authentic and authoritative basis from which to look at it. The bible provides the perfect framework from which to determine ethical conduct including matters relating to human sexuality. The biblical grid is also important because of its objectivity in contrast to the subjective approach which people have taken towards this controversial trend. I would have little or no basis on which to confront the issue before us if the Holy Scriptures did not condemn it. Of course, one can also look at it from the natural point of views in terms of what is appropriate as far as sexual relations is concerned. One can also view the homosexual lifestyle in terms of its psychological, biological, medical, sociological, and spiritual connections as well as its cultural ramifications.

It is more than a pity that the cultural consensus that once supported the Judeo-Christian worldview based on the bible is eroding at an alarming rate. This, of course, includes the matter of its ethical teaching on human sexuality. As the Psalmist said, “When the foundations are being destroyed what can the righteous do?” (Psalm 11).  Nevertheless, biblical concepts have so penetrated the culture overtime that it is really part of our inescapable social consciousness whether or not we like it. In our saner moments these principles emerge either to convict or haunt us. In spite of our feelings truth is a stubborn thing and refuses to go away. We cannot will it or feel it out of existence. Wrong may triumph for a while but truth ultimately will win out. As James Russel Lowell articulated so eloquently:

Truth forever on the scaffold,

Wrong forever on the throne;

But that scaffold sways the future

 And beyond the dim unknown,

Standest God within the shadows

 Keeping watch above his own.

There are several biblical perspectives from which I would like us to examine the issue of homosexuality. Logically, we ought to begin with the perspective of Creation. We are told that in the beginning God created mankind male and female. The scriptures declare, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Even secular cultures acknowledge the reality of the two genders in the form of the Yin and the Yan in Taoism, a concept illustrated on the South Korean flag. All over nature male and female examples can be found whether in the realm of botany or zoology, the flora and the fauna. The idea carries over into the mechanical world in the form of nuts and bolts as well as male and female tools.

Contrasting genders were necessary in order to ensure complementariness in light of God's purpose for mankind – partnership and proliferation or communion and pro-creation. He did not design the two sexes to be uniform but to be in union corresponding with each other.  Male and female consist of two personalities who as parts in a musical piece were created to blend together. They are different sexually both in terms of their psychological and structural design so that they might be attracted to each other. He established unity in diversity patterned after the Tri-personality God-head. 

God's intent was to create a being that would image him, the human being with its diversity – two genders in one being. And so after making Adam he declared that it was not good for man to be alone. He will make a helper suitable to him. That helper would correspond to Adam both physically and psychologically. Complementariness is critical to all of creation including humans. Eve would share a common being with Adam but will also be a separate entity from him with the potential for cohesion. Note, in making a helper for Adam God did not make another man but another gender in the image of man but with corresponding features that would make an interlocking union possible and physical attraction inevitable. Rather than replicate the male God create a counterpart in the form of the female.

As Denise Hunnel, M.D. states,

“It is interesting that it is often the people who tout diversity as a lynchpin of a healthy society who seek to suppress sexual diversity and create a genderless, androgynous culture. As Pope Benedict points out, this philosophy that radically redefines what it means to be human is at the heart of the assault on marriage and the family. When male and female become meaningless labels then marriage as a union of one man and one woman becomes unnecessary. Indeed, the need to limit marriage to two people no longer makes sense when complementarity is denied. When the unique roles of husband and wife are obliterated, the status of children also changes. They become mere commodities obtained for the benefit of an amorphous adult partnership instead of distinct human persons with intrinsic dignity born of the fruitful union of a man and a woman.” (Male and female He created them: gender is not a choice) by Denise J. Hunnell, MD)

I want to affirm the last statement in light of current trends. “Gender is not a choice. A person is not free to choose his or her gender. It is a given, a constant establish by nature's God. The idea of transvestite is a misnomer in the same category as unisex. God has not given us the freedom to decide what sex we are from one day to the next. Serious sexual damage has been done to those who have undergone operations for sex change. I have read articles in this connection which indicated that suicides and deep regret have resulted from so-called sex-change. It should be noted that famous Olympian Bruce Jenner has decided that he is a woman in spite of the fact that he has married twice heterosexually and fathered children.

Within the relationship of the Godhead there exists community, communication, and cohesion. Love is possible only within that context. God designed man after this pattern. In marriage man and woman share these conditions within a loving union. Just as within the God-head there is a permanent relationship even so God designed marriage to be a permanent covenant union. Out of that union man would be able to fulfill God's commission to procreate himself and proliferate his race unto the ends of the earth. Thus man can only find sexual fulfillment and at the same time reproduce himself within a heterosexual relationship. It cannot be otherwise.

Homosexuals cannot eat their cake and have it. They claim parity with heterosexuals in terms of the right to be married yet, unlike heterosexuals, they are biologically unable to reproduce. They claim parity but lack the corresponding capability. Since they cannot reproduce offspring they have opted to adopt. In my estimation they are playing an unfair game. As a matter of fact they should not even be experiencing sexual attraction because this is a natural response between opposite sexes. Same sex attraction is unnatural and unfulfilling. One sex cannot naturally be attracted to itself unless in sexual terms unless something has gone awry psychologically.   This fact has been recognized by psychiatrists and psychologists for generations until the emergence of the politically correctness era.

 Besides, if only one sex exists why is there the desire to have children? There cannot be maternal instinct in a single-sex humanity because of the absence of the reproductive capacity. In spite of attempts to redefine the family it is still an heterosexual relationship established through marriage with the capability of producing children. All other ideas of family are based on this paradigm. If there were only one sex none of us would even be existing. The human race would have aborted a long time ago, at its very beginning. Adam and Steve or Eve and Olive would get nowhere with the business of reproduction. They would not have been equipped for that role.

And so from the beginning God created both the infrastructure as well as the superstructure of the two sexes and established the natural laws governing their relationship. For people to believe or act otherwise is contrary to his plan and purpose, infringes on the natural order, and violates the  image of God in man. In spite of the claims made by homosexuals they are not happy and gay because they are not functioning God's way. Happiness is the bonus we get when we run with God. Our conscience affirms us and the good feelings begin to flow.

Darlene Bogle practiced the lesbian lifestyle for seventeen years. On coming out of it she spoke of the depression, jealousy, and misery of that way of life. Homosexuality is a gray rather than a gay lifestyle. Like the alcohol and drug scene activists try to put a good face on it but it is nothing more that the comical grin on the features of the Cheshire cat in Wonderland. Same sex unions are artificial or synthetic arrangements that cannot provide the true communion which naturally flows between opposite sexes.

On the global level there is a philosophy with an agenda which drives the homosexual worldview. It is more than just a fad or mood being experienced by members of the pop culture. A two-fold objective emerges when the issue is taken into consideration. Homosexual “marriage” is seen by some as an effective tool in preempting population increase. Many feel that the burgeoning world population poses a demographic catastrophe. To them carbon emissions from humans is adding to global warming. Besides, too many mouths pose a strain on the global economy.

 There are even those in the eugenics camp who feel that selectivity should be exercised in a program of population control. Only the fittest should survive in accordance with their evolutionary philosophy of life. It is therefore felt even by groups such as Family Planning International that world population should be reduced to a “comfortable” 500 million to one billion people. Guys like billionaires George Soros and Ted Turner are all in favour of a drastic reduction in global demographics. Therefore, if same sex co-habitation is generally recognized then persons could respond to the call of their sexual drives in a manner that would be satisfactory to them without compromising the global demographic agenda.

In light of this factor, homosexual marriage is juxtaposed in relationship to heterosexual marriage in an attempt to provide a viable option and eventually replace traditional marriage. Heterosexual marriage, of course, was  the first institution ordained of God. It portrays his very image and promotes his purpose. To destroy it would remove the image of God before the eyes of men an objective that is strongly luciferian. Marriage is one of the major pillars of the Judeo-Christian faith and indeed of western civilization and is a bastion again sexual immorality and cultural death. Heterosexual marriage establishes moral boundaries for the society and preserves it from disintegrating at the seams. Within this sociological framework moral and spiritual values are cultivated and perpetuated from one generation to the next.

The intention of those who seek to restructure and redefine marriage is to undermine and destroy the bastion of the family. In doing so they hope to overthrow the Judeo-Christian foundation of the western world and open the sluice gate to total sexual freedom and lawlessness. The consequences that will follow their success will be incalculable. A brave new world will be upon us sooner than we expect with social and cultural disintegration as well as the loss of human nobility.  At the rate we are going, not long from now, society will implode and civilization will shout its last hurrah as it sinks into the Stygian darkness of the eternal abyss. The western world is on the brink of such a disaster. The symptoms of a sick society is upon us and are similar to those of Pompey, Herculaneum, Canaan, Rome and Greece. Unless, drastic steps are taken and revival comes the current global civilization will  not make another fifty years. Indeed, those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Obviously, homosexuals who are 0ften agnostics and anti-theists have no idea of the nature of the God whom they are opposing. His creative wisdom and power should have said something to them about his capacity but they refuse to consider these things. Their eyes are blind to reality and open only to the virtual reality of their worldview. The God who created all things has the capability to sustain what he has made and bring his purpose for them to  fulfillment. Temporarily, it may appear as if the opposition is winning but that is the way of God. He is the master strategist. At Calvary he permitted Satan to have his way in the crucifixion death of Christ but then came the element of surprise, the resurrection! When Pharaoh had Israel backed up against the impassable Red Sea God opened a way for his people to pass over and literally turned the tide against the Egyptians. In the film, Ten Commandments, as he watches the people of Israel in an apparent quandary says that “the God of Israel is a poor general.” Subsequent events proved him wrong to his own detriment. Those who choose to oppose the plan and purpose of God for man and society will find themselves on the losing end of things. Even now many of them are experiencing the consequences of their resistance to the divinely created order.

From the perspective of creation we move to the perspective of characterization. Homosexuality is characterized in the Holy Scriptures in narrative forms as well as in prohibitive statements or commands. In terms of the narrative form we have the account given concerning Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19. The story in Genesis 19 features Lot the nephew of Abraham who had extended hospitality to two angels in the form of men. They had come to rescue him and his family from the doomed city before destroying it. That night the house was surrounded with local guys who wanted to engage in homosexual acts with the two angels and demanded that Lot bring them out. They claimed that they wanted to “know” the strangers. The word is from the Hebrew “yada” which has a variety of meanings depending on the context. In this particular setting it is used euphemistically as it is in other scriptures such as Adam “knowing”  his wife. In such cases, it refers to sexual union. It is clear from the passage before us that these Sodomites were not merely interested in a social acquaintance. In any event Lot got their meaning and exhorted them that they should not “do so wickedly.” He was placing the worst possible construction on their behaviour. He pleaded with the Sodomites that they should not do this thing and even offered them his virgin daughters instead to satisfy their sexual lusts. But they were not content with this arrangement and threatened to attack him instead at which time the angels rescued him and blinded his attackers.

With respect to this incident Dr. Ken Boa had this to say:

“The account in Genesis 19 is an historical narrative and not a piece of ethical instruction, so we should not expect to find a fully developed “case” against homosexuality. In particular, we do not find a general discussion of the moral status of homosexual acts. Still, the attempt by some interpreters to eliminate homosexuality from the picture in Genesis 19 must be judged unsuccessful. For example, it is often claimed that when the townsmen ask for the men staying with Lot (who were actually angels) to be sent outside “that we may know them” (Gen. 19:5, literal translation), that they are demanding an opportunity to interrogate them and are not asking to “know them carnally” (NKJV). But this reading misses two points in the immediate context. First, Lot’s response to the townsmen is to offer to send his daughters out to them so that they can do whatever the like to them (v. 8). This is obviously an offer to satisfy their sexual demands in an alternative way. Second, Lot describes his daughters by saying that they “have not known a man” (v. 8). Here the same word “know” is used as in verse 5, and here it is clear that Lot is describing his daughters as virgins.3 Thus there is no getting around the fact that the men wanted to have their way sexually with the strangers.”

In the second passage in Judges 19 a Levite had been offered hospitality in the home of a man in Gibeah in the land of Benjamin. He was accompanied by his concubine or paramour whom he had come to take back with him from her father's house. That night some of the men of the city came to the place where they were staying and wanted to “know” (again “yada”) or be sexually acquainted with the Levite. The host tried to dissuade them from this abnormal activity by suggesting that they should have the man's concubine instead, an offer that was similar to Lot's. In the process the old man defined their intent as “wicked” thereby putting an ethical spin on the matter. He felt that although having the man's concubine was an evil thing it was at least natural. In his estimation homosexuality was wicked when compared to heterosexual sexual relations. The men of Gibeah took the woman and gang-raped her all night long like a pack of pariah dogs. By morning light she was dead. Clearly, their first interest was in engaging in homosexual acts with the man and, unlike the case with Sodom, were satisfied he woman. If both Lot and the old man in Gibeah could definitively describe an act or intent as morally wrong how much more God who sets the standards?

Besides being condemned in the narratives presented homosexuality is also prohibited by clearly spelled out biblical commands. Leviticus 18 focuses on prohibited sexual relationships. God makes it abundantly clear what types of sexual relationships are appropriate and which are not. Incest or sexual union with one's next of kin is condemned along with same sex unions and bestiality. God makes it clear that two men should not engage in sexual acts as would be expected of male and female. Also no woman should engage in sexual activity with an animal. These practices were common in the Canaanite culture and God wanted his people to have no truck with them. As his chosen ones they were to be separate from the corruptions of the cultures around them.

According to Ken Boa, “By far the most difficult passages in the Bible relating to homosexuality to explain away are the categorical prohibitions of homosexual acts in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. As J. Gordon Melton puts it, these verses “have proved the hardest to re-interpret. ”Both of these texts forbid men to engage in sexual activity with men, and label such activity an “abomination.” Most writers defending homosexuality admit that these texts condemn same-sex acts, but try to show that they reflect a culturally archaic situation and thus no longer apply today.

The basic difficulty facing any such explanation of the Leviticus texts is that the description of homosexual acts as an “abomination” is in the context referring to God’s assessment of homosexual acts. That is, Leviticus asserts that God himself finds such practices abominable, and makes that the reason they are so strongly forbidden.”

God characterizes homosexuality as an abomination. The Greek word for homosexuality is arsenokoites and is translated abusers of themselves with mankind in I Corinthians 6:9. There is another word in the same chapter, malakos, which is translated, effeminate, or soft.  These two expression define the two same sex agents involved in the homosexual union: the former is the active and the latter is the passive agent. In the Old Testament Scriptures there is not a specific term used for homosexuality, only a description, namely, “lying with mankind as with a woman.” This act itself is classified as wickedness on two occasions in the books of Genesis and Judges.

The second syllable in arsenokoites is used in connection with marriage  in Hebrews 13:4 where it is translated koitos, or “beds.” It is transliterated into English as coitus (sexual intercourse). The scriptures use the expression, “to lie with” in describing the sexual union whether within or without marriage as an act which normally takes place in a prone position (note “beds”). Arsenokoites therefore means a man having sexual relations with a man as if the correspondent were a woman. God describes this kind behaviour as an abomination. What is an abomination?  The term is derived from the Hebrew, toabah which means: morally disgusting, detestable.  If God characterizes a thing as abominable or evil no amount of scholarship, scientific research, or any number of legislative decisions can change that designation. If we reject his perspective then whose can we accept?  No one else is best qualified to pass judgment on any kind of behaviour than the God of holiness and righteousness, the God who has established rules governing our conduct.

But of course the nations have rejected the bible, a book for all cultures, as having any bearing on the issues of the age. In their pride and arrogance they have set up their own standards and laundered that which was once shunned by society as perverse and made it acceptable. The scales have been tipped in favour on evil.

There is a kind of brazenness or hubris which is characteristic of this new morality. It is especially evident in America's declaration of the month of June as Gay Pride month. The President made this proclamation with tremendous aplomb as though he was reading a new Declaration of Independence. Barack Obama gives the homosexual cause the same degree of seriousness which Kennedy gave to the Cuban crisis. This new declaration marked America's descent onto a new level in her moral declension. What they do not realize is that pride is a declaration of war against God. In this case it is vaunting perversion in the face of God and intensifies his wrath against this once great nation. To take pride in what God has condemned is to become an enemy of God. Lucifer fell into this trap and look what he became, the very embodiment of evil.

Pride is the gateway to total moral decay and destruction. One preacher,  Dr. Crawford Lorrits said at a meeting in Trinidad a couple years ago that God goes after the proud with a sword. He has always humbled proud people and proud nations.   God knows the proud afar off and his sword of Damocles is always hanging over their heads. Pride is self, sitting on the throne with no place for God in his own kingdom. The Creator and Lord of the universe will not put up with this insult. When we are proud about our sin and rebellion we make ourselves a target for swift and sure divine judgment.

The United States Government continues to be foremost in promoting the Gay agenda. That nation is “intent on using all the tools of American diplomacy to promote gay rights around the world,” as someone put it in the the New York Times. (New York Times, December 6, 2011). Talk about sexual imperialism!

Dr. David Noebel states:

“So America, already in the business of "queering" elementary school children (thanks again to Obama's appointing Kevin Jennings to czar-ship), has decided now is the time to make the whole world safe for sodomy, thanks to the radical homosexual establishment. Secretary of State Clinton insists that gay rights are human rights and "religious objections to homosexuality should not stand in the way of vigorous United Nations action to promote the homosexual rights agenda."

As a symbol of pride in their LGBT lifestyle homosexual have their own flag in the design of a rainbow. It was created in 1978 by Gilbert Baker and has undergone several revisions. According to Wikipedia, “The colors reflect the diversity of the LGBT community, and the flag is often used as a symbol of gay pride in LGBT rights marches. It originated in California, but is now used worldwide.”

The rainbow was given by God to men after the flood (Genesis 9) as a covenantal reminder that he will never again send another Global flood. It is a great pity that it should be used as a symbol of pride. It was human pride and perversion which occasioned the flood in the first place. How ironic, therefore,  that a sacred sign  symbolic God's mercy should be associated with something that is subject to God's wrath. But, then again this fits right smack into the attitude of many these people towards God. For them there is neither God nor morality nor even sanctity. Anything goes.  Nothing is sacred any more.

Homosexuals are generally atheistic in their religious orientation. Among religious institutions they hate the church the most because it stands in their way of full societal acceptance. Besides, the church posits the existence of God and proclaims his condemnation of the homosexual lifestyle. Of course, homosexuality is not the only worldview which rejects the existence of God. This is the general pattern of the current age, the age of postmodernism. German philosopher Frederich Nietzsche who is the patron saint of postmodernism dramatized the rejection of God in his work The Madman:

“The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes. "Whither is God?" he cried; "I will tell you. We have killed him-- you and I. All of us are his murderers. But how did we do this? How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns? Are we not plunging continually? Backward, side-ward, forward, in all directions?”

God has not ceased to exist but man has killed him in his imagination. Man has willed God out of existence because it was not convenient for him to have a God enthroned in his universe. Such a reality will preempt man's freedom to enjoy pleasure to the full. Aldous Huxley once said that he did not want there to be a God because it would hinder him from pursuing his sensual drives. He reflective the view of his own brother Sir Julian Huxley.  And so homosexuals tend to be atheists for this very reason. They do not like God's attitude towards the things that they enjoy and have therefore ruled him out of their minds and out of his own universe. In fact, as Romans 1 puts it, they have become reprobate in mind. One scientist, Richard Leuwentin in speaking for many of his colleagues declared that he did not “want a divine foot in the door.” A sovereign God with his righteous demands was an inconvenient burden in an age when man has become a free spirit. The idea is to keep him out because to them he is a spoil-sport. He takes all the fun out of real living.

Our current age has gone one better than previous generations. We have embraced atheism with a passion and seem to enjoy the idea that there is no God to whom we are accountable. We can now explore every dimension of our existential lifestyle with a boldness and stridency that is mid-boggling. Those who are involved in sexual promiscuity are partners in crime with secular humanists, Marxists, anarchists, and nihilists in their rejection of God as a factor to be reckoned with.  Their cavalier attitude has spread over a broad spectrum from Hollywood to the White House.

Homosexual advocates, claim that they are the victims of hate speech. To some extent this is true. In their passion for righteousness many Christians have used insulting and disrespectful language concerning homosexuals. They have attacked the people rather than their practice. As Christians we should not hate anyone regardless of their perceived sexual orientation. When we speak of them or to them we should do so truthfully and at the same time with compassion. Truth when articulated should never be devoid of grace. Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. We should model his manner of expressing truth. The terms we use should not be vilifying nor dehumanizing.  We need to repent of all unloving speech and behaviour.  The bible teaches us how to love others and Jesus in particular is very clear on this matter. Dr. Ken Boa in Probe has a very useful article on loving others who may seem unlovable:

“In the New Testament the supreme example of love in action is provided by Jesus Christ, God’s beloved Son. Jesus shows us how to love those our society deems unlovable, whether on account of their own actions (such as the tax-collectors and the sexually immoral) or through no fault of their own (such as the lepers and the Gentiles). Those who are in distress through no sin of their own we are to show compassion and kindness (Mark 1:40-42). Those who are in sin and who recognize their sin we are to offer an opportunity for repentance and to show them tender mercy and forgiveness (Matt. 9:11-13; Luke 15:1-32). Those who are in sin and who proudly deny their sin we are to leave in their blindness (Matt. 10:14-15; John 9:40-41).

The relevance of these principles to the homosexuality controversy should be clear. If Scripture teaches that homosexual acts are wrong, then we cannot paper over that fact or hold back from declaring God’s moral will in this matter, any more than we should in other matters. But our goal as people of love should be not merely to condemn homosexuals, but to reach out our hands to them and offer them the love, forgiveness, and spiritual and moral healing which Jesus also has extended to us.”

On two occasions during his career homosexuals invaded Dr. Billy Graham's crusades. On one occasion when warned of the approach of five hundred of these adherents Dr. Graham went to microphone and informed the congregation of their approach. The police chief who was on stage offered to help but Dr. Graham declined the offer and chose another way. He asked the tens of thousands of people in the congregation to rise and meet these men and welcome them to the meeting. To their surprise the visitors were embraced and received handshakes from the people who crowded all around them. They also heard about a God who loved them and sent Jesus to save them. Later their leader thanked Dr. Graham for having saved their lives from what could have been a violent encounter.

It must not be imagined that homosexuality is the only sexual sin. It is only a small part of the whole orb of sexual immorality common to mankind. The reason it is targeted is chiefly because of the militancy, stridency and cavalier attitude that many homosexuals have taken. A homosexual  mind-set is pervading the current western culture fueled by the media, money, and the vested interest of an oligarchy. This mind-set needs to be confronted in an age of pluralism yet fraught with intolerance for righteousness. God categorically condemns fornication, adultery, pedophilia, prostitution, pornography, bestiality, polyarmoury, and other deviations from biblical sexual standards and from the path of moral rectitude.

Yes, not only do we need to address homosexuality, we must also ensure that we address the broad spectrum of sexual immorality. Dr. Ken Boa appeals for balance in this matter:

“By no means is homosexuality the only, or even the most prevalent, form of sexual sin in our society. For every person who engages regularly in homosexual acts, there are at least five (and probably more than that) who are regularly engaging in adultery or other “heterosexual” sins. Hardly any adult in America today, it seems, can honestly claim to have lived a completely chaste life. (Sometimes it seems hardly anyone even knows what “chaste” means!) Worse, the vast majority of the people who commit sex crimes — rape, incest, and the like — are heterosexual males. To ignore these facts when dealing with the issue of homosexuality skews the discussion and prevents legitimate criticisms of the homosexual lifestyle and movement from being heard.”

While we should tolerate people as persons we should be intolerant of unethical and immoral behaviour especially that which is clearly condemned in Scripture. If I saw someone in danger or engaging in destructive behaviour it behooves me as a fellow human to caution them. I am showing love that way instead of allowing them to rush over the precipice without warning.  On their part they would characterize my concern as hatred. Children who are disciplined by their parents for wrongdoing sometimes think of them as unloving. Under the law certain types of behaviour are intolerant because they violate the persons, rights, and property of others. In addition, they violate codes of decency.

Freedom is not being able to do what you want when you want. Freedom involves the exercising of responsibility in what we are permitted to do. Rights must never be seen as simply a personal matter but must operate within the framework of moral and ethical principles given by the Creator and affirmed by the society. If each one of us had the freedom to do as we please chaos and anarchy would prevail in our society and the whole framework would implode and disintegrate. We must be able to wave certain aspects of our rights for the common good and the maintenance of a viable societal structure. Society must be governed by acceptable standards that would not compromise its sustainability.

 In the U. S. constitution we are reminded that the Creator has endowed man with certain inalienable rights such as life ,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. While this is true the statement does not go far enough. The Creator has also established laws by which mankind is supposed to live. These laws govern the extent of our liberty and the nature of the happiness which we ought to pursue. He has not given us a carte blanc for sexual license and boundless promiscuity.

It is amazing how far the pursuit of liberty has taken this great country. Consider the followig poem from the book, A Queer thing happened in America. It is quoted by Dr. Noble in his article which was previously mentioned:

If Obama and his hirelings get their way, children around the world will be reading the poem "Here at School, the Slant is Gay." It's found in A Queer Thing Happened in America by Michael L. Brown, page 86. Here is an excerpt:

Little Johnny [Mohammad, Diaz, Igor, etc.] went to school

There to learn a brand new rule;

No longer could the boys be boys

Or have their special trucks and toys;

Only six, so young and tender

It's time for him to unlearn gender

And break the binding two-sex mold

That hurtful thinking that's so old.

Parents at home can have their say

But here at school, the slant is gay.

In other words, to make this clear

There's nothing wrong with being queer.

Having two moms is mighty fine;

To disagree is out of line.

We'll deconstruct the family

And smash religious bigotry

And keep the church out of the state

By saying faith is really hate.

Even those who claim to be Christian homosexuals (an obvious oxymoron) try to justify their sin by reinterpreting the clear biblical prohibition of this practice. They do not want to appear to be disobedient and so they adjust the commands of scripture to suit their own point of view.  Some advocates have been traveling to different colleges and church campuses trying to gain a hearing and win support for their cause. The intent is to cultivate a taste for the distasteful.

It is unfortunate that there would be those within the framework of the church who secretly practice homosexuality. One of them, Mel White, was a ghost writer for a couple of outstanding Christian authors.  At one time he left a crusade meeting for a rendezvous with a same sex partner. A number of others have either been exposed or have come out of the seller on account of a more accepting cultural environment. In fact, there are even homosexual “churches” (God forbid). The practice has not been confined to any one particular denomination but a number of churches have had cases of persons involved in this practice. Of course, one needs to understand that being a member or leader in a church does not make one a genuine follower of Christ. Christian is as Christian does. In fact, as cited in another section of this paper those who practice sin as a way of life are not even in the Kingdom of God although they may be members of a church body.

What would Jesus have thought about the homosexual affair? He did not address the issue specifically in any of his teachings because it did not feature as a factor in the Jewish society of his day. It was in the scriptures as a moral violation but he did not focus particularly on it. He covered the issue in the broader teaching on sexual immorality including fornication, adultery, and uncleanness. Since he addressed the then current concerns of divorce and remarriage you can be sure that he would addressed contemporary issues if he were here among us today. He traveled up to Samaria and confronted the woman at Sychar with her polyandrous lifestyle resulting in a radical turn around on her part. In fact, the entire village came to believe in him on account of her transformation. He also warned a woman taken in adultery to go and sin no more. He would have spoken to Madonna and Lady Gaga as well as homosexual activists about their lifestyles as well if he were here today. Jesus came to bring us grace and truth. You cannot have the one without the other. Men must be confronted with the truth about themselves and about God's righteous standards before grace can be applied. There is no grace without truth. In Jesus Christ both have their commencement as well as their convergence.

We have previously noted that God's design was that sexuality should be enjoyed within the bounds of a permanent married heterosexual relationship. Having disregarded God's design humans have gone all out in pursuit of the ultimate libido. Logically, they have become bored with the heterosexual relations because it never satisfies outside of the context of marriage. They have used synthetic methods in an attempt to boost their enjoyment of extra-marital sexual activities failing to realize that the problem is not in the act but in the context in which it is committed. As a consequence, they have gone after other exciting experiences. They are seeking the exotic in the erotic in pursuit of the ultimate libido.  God made us for himself and we will never find ultimate satisfaction except in a relationship with him and in obedience to his righteous standards.

Homosexuals often speak about love and the necessity of winning the right to express their love in a union that is recognized and legalized by the society. Obviously, they totally misunderstand the nature and definition of love. Love is really a four dimensional concept which focuses primarily on the well-being of another person rather than on satisfying one's sensual appetite. Over forty years ago while at Bible College, a visiting pastor gave us a definition of love which I have never forgotten. He said, “Love is the sustained direction of the will towards the enrichment of another.”

The Greeks had four words for love: agape, philia, eros, and Storge.  The primary word for love, agape, speaks of sacrificial giving of oneself or possessions for the benefit of others with no thought of reward. It is an attitude that exists within the Being of God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There is a mutual love that exists between them for love is an attribute or property of God. Love is of God and God is love. That love also reaches out to men and climaxes in the self-giving of Jesus Christ for mankind. “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.” John 3:16. God's love for man continues on an everyday basis in his faithfulness in supplying our needs and sustaining us in spite of our ingratitude and disregard for him.

God's command to us is to love our neighbour as ourselves is also a command to express agape. Agape involves the will for God addresses his command to our intelligence as well as to our volition. Emotion has little or nothing to do with loving one's neighbour. One may feel compassion for another but feeling matters little without action. Agape love is an of attitude selflessness and sacrifice that drives us to meet the needs of others. It desires their well-being and wants to give rather than take away from them. Lust (epithumia) by contrast, takes. I Corinthians 13 is the hymn of love. It speaks about loves indispensability as well as its characteristics and permanence.

Agape love can hardly exist within a homosexual relationship because this lifestyle is so narcissistic. Narcissus of course is the guy in Greek mythology who fell in love with himself or his own gender while gazing at his reflection in a clear pool. From that time on he had no time for a heterosexual relationship with Echo who was in love with him because he was so focused on himself. Homosexuality is too erotic in its nature to contain the quality of agape love. This does not mean that one homosexual cannot sacrifice to meet the need of another but because of its basic spirit of self-sacrifice agape love cannot thrive within that type of erotic relationship. Homosexuals are in it for what they can get out of it. They have a yearning for emotional connection and feed selfishly on those who can provide it. Homosexual unions, just like many heterosexual marriages today have a short shelf-life because of the broken connection which postmodern man has with respect to the God of love. As a consequences, practitioners tend to have many different partners. Particular ones do not matter because the focus is more on the experience rather than on the relationship.

If agape love is sacrificial and spiritual in nature, philia love is social in its dimension.  Philia love describes the special connection which two friends have with each other. It is expressed in enjoyable communication, communion, and mutual care. Unlike agape philia love centres on the attraction of one person to another. It is not a simply physical attraction but one of mutual interest, shared ideas, and pursuits. The self is involved because the relationship rotates on a sense of need.  Homosexuals can certainly enjoy philia love but not on the basis of being homosexuals for philia does not involve sensual or sexual connection.

Eros or sexual love is more the dimension of love which is appealing to homosexuals. As mentioned before homosexuals are seeking the erotic in the exotic. A heterosexual relationship does not cut it for them either because they have lost their taste for it in the pursuit of something more exciting; their natural desire for it has been turned off by some childhood experience; or they are cutting it both ways by what they term “bi-sexual.” Of course, it must be understood that nothing is wrong with eros when male and female are mutual attracted to each other or when it is expressed within the context of marriage. It is what is normally referred to as romance. However, homosexuals are focused on an erotic experience expressed in unnatural ways. When the excitement of one relationship wanes they will then reach out to multiple partners. Neither one partner nor many provides lasting or meaningful satisfaction. Not even a heterosexual relationship can provide total satisfaction.  Man was not designed to live by bread or sex alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God. He made us for himself and our heart is restless until it rests in him according to St. Augustine. Blaise Pascal could not agree more. We were made to live by faith in God and not by erotic experiences. We were designed to adore the God who created us and loves us as the core of our being with legitimate human relationships as an extension of our union with God.

Storge or natural love is the fourth dimension of love and is the bond that exists between members of the same family. It is the tie that binds them together. The word is mentioned in the bible, not by itself but within the structure of its antonym, astorge, or unnatural affection. Storge or natural love cannot exist among homosexuals because their relationship is not natural.  Families tend to bond together, support each other and remain together in spite of attacks on their relationship. Even though they fall apart they are still connected naturally and nothing can change that fact. It is not so with homosexual unions which tend to be more transient and unstable. In summary, in the homosexual community love is not a many-splendored thing. Rather it is a “many-splintered thing” as Time Magazine referred to the Middle East situation a number of years ago.

Are homosexuals born that way? Is it genetically based? Some have gone so far as to do research in order to support the claim that people are born gay. Cynthia Nixon, star of “Sex in the City” does not think so. In a New York Times article she claims that she chose to be gay after having had a heterosexual relationship which produced two children. Genetic homosexuality is a debatable matter according to the following quote:

University of California, Davis, psychologist Gregory Herek, an “expert on anti-gay prejudice,” admits, “The nature vs. nurture debate really is passé. The debate,” he said, “is not really an either/or debate in the vast majority of cases, but how much of each. We don’t know how big a role biology plays and how big a role culture plays.”

“Wheaten College’s Stan Jones, who has written extensively on the subject, says the best research reveals that homosexual attraction is the result of a complex and mysterious interaction of biological, psychological, and environmental factors that produce different results for different people. Jones, and anyone else who has looked at the evidence in an unbiased way, says that there is no “gay gene.”

In November, 2012 the U. N. General Assembly included gender identity in a resolution for the first time. The specification is broad enough to include “transgender.” However, gender is not a choice but a construct of the divine design for creation. No personal decision or organizational resolution can change the fact that each person is born gender specific, fully equipped naturally with organs designed for cross-sexual union. It was once understood that a person's dissatisfaction with their particular sexual identity was a psychological aberration. At least that is what the American Psychiatric Association once held as scientific fact. But they have since changed their position to suit the new mood. Political and cultural correction is now the standard which determines how we think and act about such matters. Some are even trying to do away with an objective supra-societal frame of reference to measure reality/truth including sexual factors. In fact, the pervasive postmodernism of the age rejects the idea that truth exists or can even be discovered. Science has ceased to be guided by natural laws but has become what the political hierarchy decides. Evidence is now interpreted in light of a cultural and political mind-set as data is twisted to suit a particular agenda or worldview.

The sexual confusion that pervades our age is the result of people not knowing who they are and is also contributing to further confusion. A person's sexuality is fundamental to his identity. We relate to each other as persons on the basis of gender. If no clear lines exist between one sex and another everything breaks down in terms of communication. Imagine oscillating between L G, B, and T from one day to the next. Today you are one letter and tomorrow or whenever you choose you can be another; or you can be all at the same time. What a massive gender conundrum! Or, maybe it's a conundrum wrapped in a chimera! This situation exists because individuals refuse to accept what God has ordained on account of their personal preferences.

One day the great German philosopher Schopenhauer was in Trafalgar Square, London, feeding pigeons. One of the onlookers walked up to him and asked, “Sir, who are you?” The old man replied, “I wish I knew.” Schopenhauer had had a very bad family experience including a poor relationship with his father. Here is a man, who, in spite of his vast knowledge and philosophical speculations did not know who he was. He was faced with a massive identity crisis. Such is the case with many in the homosexual community. They need to find themselves in a healthy relationship with others rather than deepen their confusion by creating a false gender identity.

Our society needs a reality check because we have gone adrift psychologically and sociologically since we have cut our moorings sexually. Western society is headed towards life in a mental institution where people hardly know who they are. I have seen this confusion sometimes on the street. My wife would ask me as someone of questionable sexually passes by, “Is that a man or a woman?” I am not always sure. I may look at the chest or gait in order to tell. The hairstyle or dress is of little help in determining who goes by. In fact, in Sweden the gender confusion is even affecting the language. The word “hen” is now used as a non-sex pronoun to refer to people. Sometimes in the Caribbean we try to combine “he” and “she” into “shim.” 

California appears to be outlawing terms such as mum and dad because these are seen as too gender specific whereas the mood is in favour of a single gender which no one can define. They would no doubt opt for parent. But then, again there is a problem. No homosexual can naturally be a parent so the child could not have issued from them. Who then would be a parent?  That would not be very apparent without a heterosexual union. And of course, that would require two sexes and not just one. Humph!

To focus on one sex would effectually eliminate a significant percentage of the human race.  To have only one gender is to render the other unnecessary. Sexual union would be an impossible thing if only one gender exists. Unisex is a feminist aberration; but seeing that it comes from that camp the one sex must either be female or a composite of male and female after the order of a chimera which is a combination of a lion and a goat.

Homosexuality is not just a modern issue. It has a long and notorious history, probably stretching back over the past 4,000 years. Apart from the early biblical  incidents which I have previously referenced in connection with Sodom and Gibeah, profane history also records the practice. Here is one interesting quote that gives the perspective of some Greek philosophers on homosexuality:

“The very idea of Nature and natural law arose as a product of this philosophy, whose first and perhaps greatest exponents, Socrates and Plato, were unambiguous in their condemnation of homosexual acts as unnatural. In the Laws, Plato’s last book, the Athenian speaker says that, "I think that the pleasure is to be deemed natural which arises out of the intercourse between men and women; but that the intercourse of men with men, or of women with women, is contrary to nature, and that the bold attempt was originally due to unbridled lust." (Laws 636C; see also Symposium of Xenophon, 8:34, Plato’s Symposium, 219B-D).

In addition, this quote from an unidentified source may come as a surprise to homosexuals who believe that their condition is permanent:

“It is ironic that the proponents of homosexuality so often point to ancient Greece as their paradigm because of its high state of culture and its partial acceptance of homosexuality or, more accurately, pederasty. Though some ancient Greeks did write paeans to homosexual love, it did not occur to any of them to propose homosexual relationships as the basis for marriage in their societies. The only homosexual relationship that was accepted was between an adult male and a male adolescent. This relationship was to be temporary, as the youth was expected to get married and start a family as soon as he reached maturity.”

Homosexuality was rampant in Rome even up to the imperial level. Here I quote from an article on LifeSiteNews.com by Benjamin Wiker:

“And so we hear from Tacitus (56-117 AD), the great Roman historian, of the shameful sexual exploits of a string of Roman emperors from Tiberius to Nero. Nero was the first imperial persecutor of the Christians. His tutor and then advisor was the great Stoic moralist Seneca himself. Unfortunately, Seneca’s lessons must have bounced right off the future emperor. When he took the imperial seat, complete with its aura of self-proclaimed divinity, no trace of Stoic austerity remained.

“In Nero, Tacitus tells the reader, tyrannical passion, the hubris of proclaimed divinity, the corruption of power, and “every filthy depraved act, licit or illicit” seemed to reach an imperial peak. He not only had a passion for “free-born boys” but also for quite literally marrying other men and even a boy, sometimes playing the part of the woman in the union and sometimes the man.

“As Tacitus relates one incident (Grant’s translation): “Nero was already corrupted by every lust, natural and unnatural. But he now refuted any surmises that no further degradation was possible for him. For…he went through a formal wedding ceremony with one of the perverted gang called Pythagoras. The emperor, in the presence of witnesses, put on the bridal veil. Dowry, marriage bed, wedding torches, all were there. Indeed everything was public which even in a natural union is veiled by night.”

The Christians in the Roman Empire was against the sexual promiscuity of the age including homosexuality. The Didache, a catechetical document for the instruction of young believers is adamant against immorality. Wik writes,

“It begins with the ominous words, “There are two ways: one of life and one of death—and there is a great difference between the two ways.” The pagan converts are then confronted with a list of commands. Some of which would have been quite familiar and reasonable to Romans, such as, “You will not murder” and, “You will not commit adultery” (although for Romans, abortion wasn’t murder, and a husband having sex with slaves or prostitutes was not considered adulterous).

But then followed strange commands (at least to the Romans), “You will not corrupt boys”; “You will not have illicit sex” (ou porneuseis); “You will not murder offspring by means of abortion [and] you will not kill one having been born.” Against the norm in Rome, Christians must reject pedophilia, fornication and homosexuality, abortion, and infanticide. The list also commands, “You will not make potions” (ou pharmakeuseis), a prohibition against widespread practices in the Roman Empire which included potions that stopped conception or caused abortion.”

It is widely believed that even King James IV of England command pederasty or sexual relationship with young boys. John Maynard Keynes, the great economist was also a practitioner of pederasty or sexual relations with young boys. In the world of academia discussions are being held with a view to proposing the legalizing of pedophilia and by the same token, pederasty. After all, why should people be restricted from enjoying and expressing their natural drives, some think? Advocates of homosexuality had promised that if their interest was legalized it would not necessarily open the gateway to further perversions of sexuality. It did, and much more. In Germany “animal lovers” are now advocating for the legalizing of bestiality and interest groups in U.S. academia are striving to gain acceptance of pedophilia.

Homosexuality is not only contrary to God's creative order and characterized as wicked and abominable in the bible, like all other sins it is also under divine condemnation. It is part of a process of incremental depravity which began with a divine disconnection. According to Romans 1 it is the logical result of divine anger. When mankind observed the creation which portrays the eternality and power of the God-head their minds became vain and their hearts darkened. Then the responded with ingratitude rather than with wonder and worship. To add insult to injury man returned the compliment of being made in the image of God by caricaturing God in the image of his creation. In their folly, mankind, while claiming to be wise  then proceeded to degrade God and deify his creation so that even trees and animals are accorded rights. 

By extension the entire environment has become sacred and you dare not read on a grain of sand or a blade of grass without some Greenpeace activist taking out a lawsuit against you. In our ecologically conscious age Gaia, the Earth Mother, has become the new goddess and Wicca is in at last. Man himself is also deified just as Lucifer promised Eve: that she shall be as God knowing good and evil. The New Age Movement is simply the Old Age idea of godhood sold to man by Satan in the Garden of Eden. God responded to man's insult by delivering him over to lust and physical uncleanness.

Seeing that man proceeded to serve the creation rather than the Creator God further delivered mankind up to vile affections or homosexual and lesbian desires. The process continued unabated until God gave man over to a reprobate mind with the capacity to indulge in boundless, unfettered iniquity. So it was a matter of up, up, and over. Homosexuality is therefore not a natural condition but an act of rebellion against God's constituted order as well as a link in the process of divine judgment on man for robbing God of his glory. It is not simply a sin like any other but an elemental expression of the spirit of pride and rebellion. It is self-deification reflective of the spirit of narcissism.

 Like any other sinful lifestyle homosexuality keeps a man or woman outside of God's kingdom according to I Corinthians 6. Citizens of God's kingdom practice righteousness and purity matters that are spelled out in many passages of scripture. The believer's body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. Unnatural or forbidden acts belong to the kingdom of darkness no matter who may try to justify them. Unrepentant homosexual practitioners as well as all other unrepentant sinners will be consigned to the eternal punishment:

Rev 21:27  And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Rev 21:8  But the fearful and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolater, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which  burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

God does not desire that anyone should perish.  That is why he sent his Son Jesus Christ so that he might die in man's place for man's sin.  No one  needs to perish for his sins unless he chooses to do so by disobeying God and refusing his offer of mercy.  My ultimate purpose in this paper is to deal honestly with the issue of homosexuality in order to lead practitioners towards God and faith in Jesus Christ. I love people, all kinds of people, and desire to see them experience peace with God and eternal life. God loves those who are caught in the web of sexual immorality and wants to save them as well as other sinners. His door of mercy is still open to us. But like Noah's ark the door will soon be shut and divine justice will fall on unrepentant sinners.

Homosexuals will like us to keep our mouths shut and leave them in their sin. But that will not be an act of love. It would be an act of cruelty. We cannot love a person and at the same time watch them head over a precipice and say or do nothing to help them. They may be unaware of their danger and resist or reject our offer of help but we should try any way. We should say like God said to Israel with respect to its idolatrous practice, “O, do no this abominable thing.”

Homosexuals  claim that they cannot change. The fact is that any habit or disposition can be overcome but we must want to change. Like alcoholics homosexuals must stop denying that they have a problem. In the U.S. some of them have gone so far as taking out law suits against a Jewish psychiatric organization which has helped hundreds of homosexuals who desire deliverance from their evil habit.  Activists are claiming that the group is operating under false pretense because no one can be cured of this disposition. One wonders who is really functioning under false pretense.  What greater fallacy can there be than for a man or woman to pretend to be of another sex when it is obvious to others that they are not? 

Even former homosexuals are coming under the wrath of these misguided people. Recently, a bill was submitted in the U. S. House of Representatives to protect the rights of former homosexuals who were facing vicious attacks.  Misery seems to like company and does not want anyone to upset the apple cart. Change is not only possible it is also available. If any man enters into a relationship with Jesus Christ he becomes a new creature.  (I Cor. 5:17). Change is a choice. A person must desire it and pursue it. I thank God for those who are bold enough to all the homosexual bluff. From the Drudge Report comes this news concerning Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty:

“In rather graphic terms and blunt language, Phil Robertson describes the complementary anatomy of men and women leading to natural attraction.”

When asked, “What, in your mind is sinful?” Robertson replied, “Start with homosexual behaviour and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and those men.”

“Don't be deceived,” he added, paraphrasing the scripture, “Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers – they won't inherit the Kingdom of God. Don't deceive yourself. It's not right.”

Boy, did the Duck dynasty patriarch get a bashing from media outlets and LGBGT activists for his remarks! Robertson made it clear that he is a product of the 1960's and had been on skid-row with drugs, drunkenness, rock 'n roll, and sex until his life was changed by Jesus Christ. Now he seeks to proclaim Christ as the means whereby men can be changed. In spite of being cut off temporarily from the A & E show Robertson remains unrepentant with respect to his position on the issue. He has since apologized for any coarse remarks made but retains his conviction concerning homosexuality.

We must speak out in support of the truth in spite of the cost to themselves. Courage seems to be almost gone in these times except among those who are bold enough in proclaiming and promoting evil. People like President Obama and Hilary Clinton believe that they are such champions because they are advancing the cause of gay rights in the name of human rights.

They are promoting human rights without due regard for what is morally right. 

The homosexually charged environment in Europe and North America reminds me of the Emperor's New Clothes. The sovereign was convinced by his tailor that new threads had been created for him. The emperor then went through the process of getting dressed in his snazzy sartorial finery. He then went into the streets and paraded among his citizens who had been brainwashed into thinking that the emperor was sporting his new robes. But in reality he was naked. Nobody wanted to question the official position on this matter and therefore kept their mouths shut. Only a little innocent child on the street who saw things as they really were dared to say the politically incorrect thing. “But the emperor is naked.”

The homosexual line and lifestyle have become such a part of mainstream culture in some countries that it is neither politically nor culturally correct to oppose it on pain of being charged with hate speech or intolerance. The individual, who like the child in the crowd recognizes that the Emperor is naked, sticks out like a sore thumb. They are deemed improper in speech and observation. We are all supposed to forget what being clothed is all about and accept nakedness as normal.  Many are persuaded that it is okay and there is nothing to worry about. Why speak the truth when everyone else is believing a lie? Society is morally naked and hardly anyone seems to notice.

 Of course, this is not limited only to homosexuality. It is the general pattern of thought in terms of the way people do sexuality in these times. We should not call a spade a spade any more. That is obscurantism. We need to be avant garde in our thinking and roll with the times. Obsolescent morals, they believe, belong to the Dark Ages or in the period of Victorian prudishness. Yet, some things simply do not change and come back to haunt us time and again, either in terms of an awakened conscience or in their inevitable judicial consequences. Lex talionis is a law of history and as a moral constant cannot be voided. It refuses to go away. The course of historical events bears me out on this. Nations have risen and fallen based on their moral perceptions and practices. Where is Neronic Rome with its decadent morals? Where is ancient Greece which tolerated sexual immorality with its homosexual component? Where are the Canaanites who were so sexually obsessed that the Sovereign Lord warned the chosen people against their practices and ordered their cultural cleansing.  Both the Sodomites of Lot's day and the Benjamites who savaged the Levite's concubine paid dearly for their evil deeds. The tribe of Benjamin was almost decimated while Sodom was immolated by divine fiat and its ruins now lie at the bottom of the southern end of the Dead Sea.

Who has not heard about Humpty Dumpty? The delicate egg-man was sitting on a wall one day when he became distracted and fell from his lofty eminence to the rocky ground beneath. Not having the necessary infrastructure to resist hard objects he broke into several pieces.  As he lay in his desperate condition some soldiers from the king's palace were passing by on patrol. In my version of the story they offered to help the poor fallen creature but he declined their offer. “Thanks, but no thanks,” he replied. “I think that I shall stay just as I am. I was genetically designed to be a broken egg and that that I shall continue to be. I do not wish to be changed. A broken egg is a very normal thing and can be used for a variety of purposes such as omelets, cakes, drinks, pancakes, etc. Why should I change? It feels good to be me, broken and all. I must be true to myself and not pretend to be someone else.” And so he remained a broken egg for the rest of his life.

In summary, we have observed that homosexuals are morally fallen and psychologically broken people. Yet they wish to accept their condition as normal and have no desire to change.  They like being queer because it feels good. And after all whatever feels good in their estimation must be right and good. They ignore the fact that a father, a brother, a step-father, or a friend may have introduced them to this vile lifestyle. They even pass over the influence of a dysfunctional family as a contributing factor. Hardly would they remember that a father or mother either did not want them or preferred another sex than the one which Heaven gave them in the person of their child. They gave in to the peer group pressure in their pursuit of more exotic sexual experiences. Could they possibly imagine that the pop culture could have pushed them in the direction of aberrant sexual behaviour? Then what about their refusal to accept the gender assigned to them by the Creator? They could never love themselves until they love the self in which they were naturally designed.

But there is hope for all fallen mankind including the homosexual and all of us who are morally bankrupt. That is why Jesus Christ came to earth. He came to take the fall and in so doing thought of us. In fact, he thought of us lovingly way back in eternity. He went lower than any man ever did so that he might lift us higher than any man ever could. He went came down to the gutter-most to save us to the uttermost. He became low that he might lift us up from the pit. King David fell into a moral pit which he called “the miry clay.” By the grace of God he recovered and was established once again on a foundation of righteousness. He was given a new lease on life.

The technique for change lies is being willing to admit that you are fallen morally and need help. Then cry out to God with a repentant attitude. Believe that he has sent Jesus to save you for Jesus laid down his live that you might live. Then he will forgive you and lift you up to a new plain of life. He will also give you His Holy Spirit to keep you from falling again. His word, the bible, contains resources of truth to rebuild your thought processes and replace the false data that once occupied your mind. No longer will you live by your subjective feelings but by the objective truth of God's word. Your focus will no longer be on feeling good but doing good.

Homosexuals need to realize that the Good Shepherd whom English poet, Francis refers to as the Hound of Heaven is out looking for sinners including the immoral. He bounds up the mountains, descends into the lowest valleys, enters the honky-tonks and low dives. He visits the communes, cabarets, and houses of prostitution. He is ever seeking the lost, the last, and the least. He pursues the hopeless, the hapless, and helpless. He says to them all, “Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy-laden and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn of me for I am meek and lowly and ye shall find rest unto your souls, for my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

 ADDENDUM

 ROME, January 21, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The secular media is abuzz with comments from Archbishop Fernando Sebastián Aguilar, recently named as a cardinal-elect by Pope Francis, that homosexuality is a mental disorder that can be treated.

Sebastián told the Spanish newspaper Diario Sur on Monday that: “Homosexuality is a defective manner of expressing sexuality, because [sex] has a structure and a purpose, which is procreation.”

“A homosexual who can’t achieve procreation is failing,” he said. “Our bodies have many defects. I have high blood pressure, a defect I have to try and correct in whatever way I can.”

“To say that homosexuality is a defect is not an insult,” he added. “It helps because in many cases of homosexuality it is possible to recover and become normal with the right treatment.”