What does the Bible say about homosexuality? If you have been watching television lately, like me, you may have noticed the profusion of gay and lesbian characters. It feels like there is a not-so-subtle movement toward societal acceptance of the LGBTQ lifestyle as natural. Yet, nature, biology and physiology all tell a different story. Even communities of faith are being affected, resulting in very contentious discussions in churches and entire denominations over, not simply welcoming LGBTQ people into the community of faith, but placing them in leadership roles as well. This article looks at two basic questions. Is homosexuality sinful? If so, is it the action or the attraction that constitutes sin?

My intention is to look at what the Bible has to say about homosexual acts and examine some of the arguments made in support of the compatibility of homosexuality with Christianity. I admit I have gay friends and relatives, so it may be difficult for me to leave emotion out of the process altogether. Yet, I hope to present a biblical case objectively and allow you to draw your own conclusion. A friend once asked me to listen to a sermon on this topic and tell him what I thought about what I heard. I have decided to share my opinion on it with you as concisely as I did with him.

The pastor asserted, “There are not two views on same sex relationships. There are many ways it can be nuanced.” (I assume the two views he referenced were sinful and not sinful.) I also assumed by nuanced, he meant “characterized by subtle shades of meaning or expression.” He implied the matter isn’t black and white, but shades of gray. To my way of thinking, his assertion obligated him to demonstrate that sex acts between people of the same gender are not always viewed by God as detestable—as not being sin. To do that he defaulted to arguments originating with gay, self-professed Christians.

Homosexuality, being sexually attracted to someone of the same gender, is not a sin. It is the sexual acts and thoughts that turn temptation into sin. Based on Scripture, I think the pastor failed to make a strong case. It seems apparent to me that the Bible defines homosexual acts as sin. There may be many ways to nuance sin, but sin is still sin, regardless of context. It is true, however, there have been religious ethics discussions regarding “greater” and “lesser” sin. (e.g. telling the lie that your wife is not home to keep an intruder from hurting her.) But one would be hard pressed to make such an argument regarding homosexual acts. To make the case, let’s begin by examining the texts and arguments used by that pastor.

They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.” Genesis 19:5 | NIV The nuanced contention suggested here is the sinful behavior the Bible condemns is gang rape, not sodomy. Certainly, that is plausible by the context. Rape is about power and domination rather than sexual gratification. When he refused to give them his guests, the crowd threatened Lot with worse than rape. (v. 9) So, violence was obviously one factor. He responded to the men’s demands by calling their intention “wicked.” “‘Please, my brothers,’ he begged, ‘don’t do such a wicked thing.’” (v. 7 | NLT)

Instead, he offered his virgin daughters. If the sin was gang rape, by offering them the young women, Lot would have implicated himself in their sinful, detestable or wicked act. The sin involved more than gang rape. Lot, it seems, considered same sex gang rape more wicked or sinful than heterosexual gang rape of his daughters. And that would be the case under Mosaic law. If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 | NIV)

It is also possible he knew it was only his male visitors the men desired. Otherwise, it seems unlikely he would have so quickly proposed a heterosexual alternative involving his virgin daughters. Jude, a half-brother of Jesus, apparently also believed the sin was more than same-sex gang rape and described the consequences of such sinful behavior. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire. (Jude 7 | NIV)

Interestingly, when Lot’s proposal was made, the crowd accused him of judging them. The same response is typically used today when homosexual acts are judged to be sinful. To support the contention the sin was gang rape, not homosexual acts, a passage from Ezekiel is often tied to the Genesis text. “Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.” (Ezekiel 16:49-50).

That passage focuses on Sodom’s, failure to provide for the less fortunate, arrogance and self-indulgence along with undefined “detestable things.” “Detestable things” might certainly have been idol worship, but it could equally apply to sodomy, which in Leviticus, the Bible calls “detestable.” We simply cannot know for sure. There are, however, other texts that leave no room for doubt.

“Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.” Leviticus 18:22 | NIV That entire Leviticus chapter addresses sexuality, specifically incest, with several notable exceptions: having sex with a menstruating woman, men engaging in sex with other men, child sacrifice and bestiality. Examined in context, sodomy or other homosexual acts would be considered detestable.

“Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.” (Acts 15:20 | NIV) Some people argue Acts 15 and the guidance issued by the Jerusalem Council, does not address homosexuality; apparently holding that unless something is specifically prohibited it must be permitted. Others argue that homosexuality is sexual immorality. It is always dangerous to make any case based on biblical silence. From that passage, it would be difficult to conclude that a moral prohibition defined as detestable under Mosaic law would suddenly become acceptable; especially since the apostle Paul participated in the Council meeting and later condemned homosexual acts.

Those who issued the Council’s directive were Jews, they must have had the two passages pertaining to sexual sin from Leviticus in mind when they included prohibitions against sexual sin. “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” Leviticus 20:13 | NIV There is little doubt in the context of that passage that sodomy is on par with adultery and bestiality, which were condemned in previous verses.

Three types of laws are contained in the Torah: ceremonial, civil and moral laws. Ceremonial laws dealt with Sabbath and holiday observances, sacrifices, food, clothing, haircuts, etc. Civil law had to do with making things right when one’s actions harmed another (eg. civil and misdemeanor courts). Moral law violations offended God and carried a death sentence.

For all practical purposes, Jesus fulfilled Jewish ceremonial law. Jewish civil law disappeared with the dissolution of the Jewish theocratic state and the introduction of a monarchy. Only moral law remained in effect. Jesus followers are expected to adhere to the moral laws of Scripture, however, a problem arises because nowhere does the Bible describe which laws are moral laws covering moral sins.

The Reformed church holds those acts subject to the death penalty under Mosaic law are moral sins. Some gay self-professed, Christians disagree and, standing against Reformed orthodoxy, contend the Holy Spirit, not Scripture, provides all the moral discernment a believer requires. Such a position is called Antinomian, which from the Greek means “anti law.” Antinomians believe it is not necessary for Christians to adhere to the Old Testament moral laws. Obviously, such a view assumes believers have been filled with the Holy Spirit and exhibit the fruit of the Spirit in their lives. The closest practice to that we find in the New Testament is the Nicolaitans.

Rather than transform the world, the Nicolaitans conformed to it by compromising with Roman societal pressure regarding sacrifices to idols and immoral sexual practices. Ironically, those were the two areas Gentile converts were specifically told to avoid by the Jerusalem Council. And for their apostasy, the Nicolaitians’ were hated by God according to Revelation 2:6. Neither the Antinomian nor Nicolaitan view align with the teaching of Jesus who said, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” John 14:15 | ESV If you are still on the fence, I suggest a re-reading of Leviticus 18 and 20 and decide which of the sins described, aside from perhaps sex with a menstruating woman, does not appear to be a moral sin.

The most interesting pro-homosexuality argument is that the sinful homosexual acts to which the Bible refers involved casual sex that occurred in the ancient, pagan temple, not sex between two same sex partners who love each other. It maintains the same sex prohibitions of both Testaments was directed toward ancient homosexual practices versus what goes on in the modern world. On the face, it discounts God’s inspiration of the text and refutes the letters of the apostle Paul. Finally, it doesn’t hold up under academic scrutiny.

Ancient practices were nearly identical to what we observe today.  Professor John Boswell asserts, “Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories.” The Bible means what it meant and there is little confusing about, “. . .a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman.” The author of Leviticus was crystal clear in describing a simple sex act.

The apostle Paul was not writing about same-sex relationships that differ from those of today. “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.” Romans 1:26-27 | NIV Historically, he was pointing backward and forward. Recall Genesis 19, those men were struck blind at the time and destroyed after Lot left the city.

The progressive argument against homosexual act shaming employed by the men of Sodom can be used for any sin. And it is, even today. Consider this argument. Suppose I am an alcoholic. I can be outraged if you call me a drunk, but it doesn’t change the fact that I am. If I can refuse the first drink, but not the second. I am naturally, perhaps even genetically, drawn to drink. But if I choose not to drink, God provides the strength to quit drinking. The temptations in your life are no different from what others experience. And God is faithful. He will not allow the temptation to be more than you can stand. When you are tempted, he will show you a way out so that you can endure. (1 Corinthians 10:13 | NLT) If you need confirmation, ask anyone who has stopped drinking, drugging and other sinful habits through Celebrate Recovery.

The apostle Paul made a partial list of sins that deny membership in the body of true believers in both the earthly church and the heavenly one. “Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 | NIV) The Greek for men who have sex with men in that verse refers to both passive and active participants.

Some have argued Greek compound words may not mean what they appear to mean, but the obvious meaning in Biblical translation is usually the most accurate. People who begin an argument with, “What if it means . . .” sound a whole lot like “Did God really say . . ?” Men who have sex with other men are violating scriptural standards. Adam was not given Steve. Adam and Eve were directed to procreate. If God had wanted Adam to have a Steve, he would have allowed for same-sex reproduction. But he didn’t.

Faithful Christians can disagree. Even if we do, we must assume the best about one another and disagree in good faith. Unless we can support our position with Scripture it is best to remain silent. The Bible’s position on homosexual acts seems pretty clear, rather than nuanced. Consider what the prophet Jeremiah said. This is what the Lord says: “Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls. But you said, ‘We will not walk in it.’” (Jeremiah 6:16 | NIV) The Church has always stood against homosexuality. But many now are bowing to external pressure and responding as the people did to Jeremiah. “We will not walk in it.”

We are commanded to love LGBTQ+ people as much as we love ourselves. They should be welcomed to join in our worship without reservation. However, loving them does not mean we must accept their lifestyle as being anything but sinful. The church is filled with sinners in recovery. Consequently, we should embrace sinners of every kind and leave any heart-changing to God.

We serve a God that does new things, but he has never redefined sin. Ezekiel 33, warns the watchman of the consequence of silence in the face of threats. It is not a question of inclusion, but approval. The Bible, not emotion should be our guide. We all have LBGTQ friends and family members for whom we are praying for. Please don’t give up on them. Invite them to a church that loves and welcomes them. It breaks my heart that many churches filled with sinners of all types choose to focus on this one sin. All sin is between the sinner and his or her God. Our job is to love without judging and let God do his.

Is divorce a sin. Or is remarriage a sin? Could it be both or neither? What does the Bible say about Christian divorce and remarriage? Critics often cite statistics indicating Christian divorce rates mirror that of the general population. However, a distinction must be made between those who are serious about following Jesus and those who are not. Glenn Stanton asserts, “Many people who seriously practice a traditional religious faith – be it Christian or other – have a divorce rate markedly lower than the general population.”

The Barna Group reported, the  Christian population segments with the lowest likelihood of having been divorced are Catholics (28%) and evangelicals (26%). Born again Christians who are not evangelical were indistinguishable from the national average on the matter of divorce. . .” It is apparent that people who are serious about practicing their faith are somewhat more committed to a lifetime union. Yet, even that group falls far short of God’s expectations for marriage.

The sentence, “God hate’s divorce” may be found in about half of the translations of Malachi 2:16, which establishes a pretty good case for just how he feels on the subject. God only allowed it, according to Jesus, because of their “hardness of heart” (Matthew 19:8). The plan from the beginning was for marriage between one man and one woman to be a lifelong commitment; one not to be entered into or ended lightly.

Many Christian marriage ceremonies include the words from Genesis 2:24, “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” ((NIV) See also Ephesians 5:31 and Mark 10:8.) Malachi reiterated God’s position in an address to husbands who capriciously sued for divorce. Women, of his time and even much later when Jesus spoke on the subject, had little or no say in the matter. Obviously, times have changed. Women may be self-sufficient. And wives are not considered a husband’s possession under the law.

Divorce may have been permitted under Jewish law, but Jesus left no doubt that it violated God’s original intent. The New Testament teaches both the person who initiates the divorce as well as the person he or she remarries is guilty of the sin of adultery. A person unwillingly being divorced is considered a “victim of adultery” unless his or her sexual misconduct prompted it.

In his Sermon on the Mount, which was addressed specifically to his followers, Jesus proclaimed,  “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” (Matthew 5:31-32 | NIV) The gender differentiation is a reflection of the prevailing culture, rather than Jesus advocating unequal treatment of women.The thought here is the couple is still married in God’s eyes. The two remain one flesh. And followers of Jesus are held to a higher standard.

Later, in response to the Pharisees who asked if divorce was permissible for any reason, Jesus expanded on his original response, “. . . at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” (Matthew 19:4-6, 9 | NIV)

Luke quoted Jesus as saying, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” (Luke 16:18 | NIV) Notice that Luke omitted the “sexual immorality” condition. Perhaps it was because he assumed his readers already knew that was a valid reason, since Mark was likely the source of some of Luke’s material. Jesus, in effect, declared the writ of divorce ineffective in protecting Jews and Christians, alike, from breaking the seventh commandment, “You shall not commit adultery (Exodus 20:14 | NIV). (Please see also Mark 10:2-12 and 1Corinthians 7:10-11.)

Some sincere Christians believe that the appropriate remedy is for the first couple to divorce their new spouse(s) and remarry. I disagree. In fact it was prohibited in Old Testament times. (See Deuteronomy 24:1-4) This is especially the case should one party may not be inclined to do so. Even more problematic is the unfair penalty imposed on the second spouse, especially if he or she was not previously married. They then become true “victims of adultery.”

Setting aside the practical difficulties, such as children, inherent in divorcing a second spouse and returning to the original, ignores the very heart of the gospel—God’s grace and forgiveness. Our God forgives and reconciles to himself all who repent. When others are involved, undoing mistakes may be more harmful than leaving it with God.

I am admittedly making an argument from biblical silence in concluding divorce severs a marriage without sin as long as believing parties remain unmarried. If divorce, alone, broke the Seventh Commandment, God would never have allowed it. Furthermore, it appears that the act of remarriage constitutes the sin of adultery.

God’s love for us is stronger than his feelings about divorce. Making it right with God requires repenting of the sin that resulted from remarriage and committing to make the second marriage last a lifetime. The New Testament is full of passages of Scripture relating to repentance, reconciliation, and forgiveness.

In the interest of space we’ll consider only three, beginning with 1 John 1:9, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (NIV) Paul reminds we are saved by God’s grace through faith in Jesus. “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” (Ephesians 2:8-9 | NIV)

God’s grace makes it right, not anything else we might do. Finally, from the apostle John again, “My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” (1 John 2:1-3 | NIV)

Marriages disintegrate for a host of reasons. Where abuse, addiction or abandonment is the cause, a strong case may be made for separation, if not dissolution in the interest of safety and security. Remarriage is considered by some to be willful sin. But, technically, isn’t all sin willful?

People do not normally leave a difficult marriage in the expectation of remarriage. Life-long celebacy is the biblical standard, but should they find another believing person to love, marrying, it seems, would be preferable to cohabitation. Remarriage ought not be viewed as being different from any other intentional sin. However, repentance of the sin of remarriage is necessary for God’s forgiveness. And that marriage must be considered indissoluble.

Repentant, remarried couples have no reason for shame. “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death.” (Romans 8:1-2). The take-away from Scripture is marriage should be as permanent as a tattoo. And, if God remains at the center of it, unlike a tattoo, it will become more beautiful with the passage of time.

Glenn Stanton, http://www.focusonthefamily.com/marriage/divorce-rate-in-the-church-as-high-as-the-world/

Barna Group, http://www.barna.com/research/new-marriage-and-divorce-statistics-released/)

What does the Bible have to say about the kingdom of God? Quite a bit it seems. And many of us have not heard the complete story. I am going to tell you something that, as I think about it, is a pretty sad commentary on the churches that I have attended for most of my life. If you consider yourself a Christian, you may have experienced something similar. I gave my heart to Jesus, or at least I thought I did, when I was eight years old. Honestly, I did it because I was offered a choice between heaven and hell. And who wouldn’t chose paradise over punishment?

From then until I was middle aged, I believed God’s kingdom was only heaven and there was a distinct difference between here and heaven. Heaven was where God ruled and one day I would go there. That was the message I received and believed. Was that your experience, too? Were you taught that following Jesus was all about going to heaven when you die?

In Simply Good News: Why the Gospel is News and What Makes it Good, N.T. Wright asserts the word supernatural as it pertained to Christianity fell into disuse and what was intended by God to be a unified whole was split in two by man. “But with the big split that came about through eighteenth-century thought (where we humans decided we would run the world and that God, if there was a God, could be safely packed off upstairs to heaven, where people could go and visit him if they wished), the word supernatural was also sent upstairs.” (p. 79) It went so far that Thomas Jefferson’s Bible contained none of the supernatural events recorded in other Bible versions and translations. For many, heaven was where God belonged, not here on earth.

So, what is the Kingdom of God? It is the culmination of God’s plan for his creation. In The Kingdom of God: A Biblical Theology, by Nicholas Perrin, the author concludes “the kingdom of God is a liturgical reality rooted in creation, given expression in human history through the successive covenants, and decisively actualized through John the Baptizer and then Jesus.” (p. 33) In ordinary words, it is the promised reign of David’s offspring on earth forever.

When the Pharisees asked him about it, Jesus said, “There is no use saying, ‘Look! Here it is’ or ‘Look! There it is.’ God’s kingdom is here with you.” (Luke 17:21 | CEV) The king was standing in their presence and would soon fill the hearts of his followers. Since Abraham, the Jews had waited for their messiah to arrive, but when he finally did, they rejected him saying, “Away with him, away with him, crucify him!” Pilate said to them, “Shall I crucify your King?” The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar.” (John 19:15 | ESV) 

God began a new thing with the Incarnation. In his book, How God Became King: The Forgotten Story of the Gospels, N.T. Wright, asserts, “The ‘kingdom of heaven’ is not about people going to heaven. It is about the rule of heaven coming to earth.” (p. 43) Jesus’s ministry taught his followers how to live his way in the world he created. Some describe the kingdom as “already and not yet;” beginning with Christ’s ministry, crucifixion and resurrection and will conclude when he returns to rule on earth.

Wright asserts, “the early Christians all believed that with Jesus’s death and resurrection the kingdom had indeed come in power, even if it didn’t look at all like they imagined it would.” (p. 173) After his Ascension, Jesus sent his Spirit to lead believers into all truth. “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.” (John 16:13 | NIV)  

Followers of Jesus today have the same Spirit living in them that the disciples did who walked with Jesus. As we share the gospel and live by the Spirit, God’s kingdom on earth grows. We are doing our part by doing God’s will on earth as it is in heaven. What a God we have! And how fortunate we are to have him, this Father of our Master Jesus! Because Jesus was raised from the dead, we’ve been given a brand–new life and have everything to live for, including a future in heaven—and the future starts now!  1 Peter:3-4 | MSG

The Holy Spirit leads us to emulate Jesus’s character. For now, he reigns from heaven, and communicates through his Spirit, but one day he will return to reign and rule right here. “For the Son of Man will come with his angels in the glory of his Father and will judge all people according to their deeds.” Matthew 16:27 | NLT

What I experienced is the rule, rather than the exception. In fact, Wright contends the real gospel story has been lost. “The story the gospels tell, of a Jesus who embodied the living God of Israel and whose cross and resurrection really did inaugurate the kingdom of that God, remained not only incomprehensible, but unheard.” (p. 161) He ultimately concludes, “The main theme is that, in and through Jesus the Messiah, Israel’s God reclaims his sovereign rule over Israel and the world.” (p. 240)

If we claim to be Christians, we are living in God’s Kingdom and, as his followers, we are expected to look and act like Jesus. “A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher.” (Luke 6:40 | ESV) We are expected to live our lives in such a way Jesus can be seen in us. Finally, if we are kingdom citizens, we must exercise care that our political involvement does not overshadow our kingdom responsibilities or loyalties. (See A Kingdom Choice)