Homosexuality; An Almost Inevitable Sin Of Our Century?

Towards a More Compassionate Christian View of Homosexuals and the Issue of Homosexuality

There Are Things Here Which Many Christians Are Still Misunderstanding...





It's High Time For Another Christian Look At This Topic


This Article is NOT 'Liberalizing,' But It Does Face Up To Certain Problems Which Evangelicals Have Generally Not Faced Up To




CAUTION: The following article contains some frank consideration of sexual issues. If you are easily disturbed/offended, this particular article might not be for you.


G od told the ancient Israelites to avoid and abhor homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13), yet, plainly, He expected it to be around (else why even refer to it?). But the point is often neglected that the Lord wanted the people of Israel to become numerous (Genesis 9:7; Exodus 1:12; Hosea 1:10), and homosexuality will not increase a people; hetero-sexuality is required for that, for children represent increase - very simple. In the Bible, large families with many children are indicative of the Lord's blessings.



The Love of David and Jonathan


Scripture does not allow us to get away with suggesting that the love of David and Jonathan was "just good brotherly love" (as some still like to say), they were plainly lovers, with a passion for each other exceeding their passion for women (2 Samuel 1:26). Moreover, Saul's condemnation of the pair seems to strongly infer an unnatural love:

'And Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said to him, You son of a perverse, rebellious woman, do I not know that you have chosen the son of Jesse to your own confusion, and to the shame of your mother's nakedness?' (1 Samuel 20:30).

Nevertheless, Scripture never condemns David or Jonathan and there is no doubt they are among the saved.

Mike deHavilland Parker.


However, let us just think about this at a deeper level for a moment. The Lord could have made it physically impossible for two men to have meaningful sexual relations, or for two women to have meaningful sexual relations - but He did not. We cannot escape the fact that thousands of men and women live in loving and harmonious relationships with people who - at least on the face of it - are of their own sex. There is no question that for some, well probably around 4% of the adult population, a true sexual union of loving intensity, leading to that joyous satisfaction and fulfilment, is only achieved with a person whom they truly love - and who loves them equally in return - of, on the face of it, the same sex. However, the expression 'the same sex' is somewhat dubious as we are going to see. Just consider this: If a man feels himself - to the very depth of his being - to be womanly, sadly lamenting the fact that he was not raised as a girl, could such a "man" truly be one? And, of course, the other way around too. We cannot ignore the fact - and it is a fact - of intersexism here. About 3,000 British children born every year are 'intersex' and could be raised either as a boy, or girl, they are sexually borderline; if raised as female, they mostly will have no womb; if the former they may well fail to have a successful sexual relationship with a woman. These children used to be called 'hermaphrodite,' but that is a poor term and 'intersex' is now recognised to be better. More on that later in the article.

Unfortunately in nearly all modern considerations of the clear fact of homosexuality, only "rights" are taken into consideration, there is little deep consideration of the phenomenon at a deeper level; it is seen purely as a 'human rights' matter and the medical conditions/reasons are commonly ignored. The media are especially guilty here, being primarily interested in the topic of one's "rights," and the very liberal-sounding 'freedom to choose,' and that over-worked phrase "alternative life-style" - much loved by liberals - is regularly bandied about. They seem determined only to consider this matter in a most trivial and superficial fashion - is one gay or straight? This shallow consideration of homosexuality has kept the deeper medical considerations of this problem away from many people. This has also tended to 'feed' a shallow and condemning approach from those who simply hate homosexuality. No one else considers the science and the medical facts so why should they? But we can start to get at some of the truth by considering what was once called 'hermaphroditism.'

Intersexism

'Hermaphrodite' is an all-but-obsolete medical term for a set of conditions characterized mainly by genitalia which are either "ambiguous" (i.e., not clearly male or female) or at odds with the subject's chromosomal gender. But that old-fashioned word suggests having the sexual organs of both sexes, a thing which is just about impossible; more commonly, there will be sexual ambiguity, perhaps an exceptionally small penis, the lack of a womb, or some other impediment, but indications of both the sexes may be expected in the one individual; 'intersex' is a far better word for this. Far from being very rare, this is surprisingly common. Again, in the UK alone hundreds of otherwise normal little girls are born each year with a penis but no womb. Surgery has always been seen as the best remedy but, increasingly, medical authorities are advising caution and encouraging parents to wait.

A highly experienced nursing tutor told me that - in her opinion - most such 'intersex' babies will grow up to experience some sexual identity confusion; she had little doubt that the homosexual community is mainly (though perhaps not entirely) made up of these people. It simply makes sense. It is strange indeed how modern society loves to talk about "gays" and to consider their predicament but never gives any consideration to the fact of intersex people, at least a substantial proportion of whom will develop sexual identity issues. That is the first factor. So this first point (like our second point) is that there are valid medical reasons for bisexualism and homosexuality.For some reason which is not yet clear, some babies in the womb undergo hormonal confusion and, at birth, their sexuality is ambiguous. Little is understood about this at present but it is known that a third or fourth son born to the same mother and the same father has a high chance of being somewhat sexually ambiguous, if not decidedly intersex. It seems that some mothers 'run out' of the ability to produce strong, masculine sons, but this does not suggest that it is not also partly a problem emanating from the father.

Sperm Count Crisis

The second factor which is frequently ignored in our modern society's highly-selective consideration of this topic is the dramatic 20th century drop in the typical fertility of Western men. Frankly if a man has a very low sperm count he will be more feminine, or 'womanly,' however one might wish to describe it. In their eagerness to condemn homosexuality, I have never known a fundamentalist gay-hating preacher give any serious consideration to such matters, but to write at a deeper, more philosophical, more Apologetics-based level, a writer must consider these factors. Unfortunately it is simpler for some just to offer condemnation as "sinners" rather than to offer any real insights and pastoral care.

As The Independent reported on 26th April, 2010,

As many as one in five healthy young men between the ages of 18 and 25 produce abnormal sperm counts. Even the sperm they do produce is often of poor quality. In fact only between 5 and 15 per cent of their sperm is, on average, good enough to be classed as "normal" under strict World Health Organisation rules, and these are young, healthy men. By contrast, more than 90 per cent of the sperm of a domestic bull or ram, or even laboratory rat, are normal.... it's a minor miracle men are able to sire any children at all. In fact, an increasing number of men are finding themselves childless.....next year marks the 20th anniversary of the WHO conference where a Danish scientist first alerted the world to the fact that Western men are suffering an infertility crisis. Professor Niels Skakkebaek of the University of Copenhagen presented data indicating sperm counts had fallen by about a half over the past 50 years. Sperm counts in the 1940s were typically well above 100m sperm cells per millilitre, but Professor Skakkebaek found they have dropped to an average of about 60m per ml. Other studies found that between 15 and 20 per cent of young men now find themselves with sperm counts of less than 20m per ml, which is technically defined as abnormal. In contrast, a dairy bull has a viable sperm count in the billions. (source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/out-for-the-count-why-levels-of-sperm-in-men-are-falling-1954149.html).

The causes of this modern western sperm crisis are unclear as is the fact that this is less of a crisis (generally speaking) in many eastern countries. But what we can say is that the average western male is far less virile that his grandfather's generation. This fact alone should cause us to expect more men of reduced virility/manliness in the present generation.

So our second point of the 'sperm count crisis' is a valid medical and scientific reason why many more effeminate men should be expected in the West from something like the beginning of the 20th century. This is precisely what we find; in fact, the number of 'men' awaiting transgender operations in order to become 'women' grows all the time. In contrast, comparatively few 'women' seek such operations in order to become 'men' - some do, but not too many. There has also been a mushrooming of interest in bisexual and homosexual behaviour by modern men as numerous sources will tell us. Pressure from people of this type has led to legal changes in many countries and only a few countries now operate a complete ban on homosexuality. Like it or not, sometimes we just have to face up to facts.

Wider Physical Issues to Consider

We know that 'God created man and woman,' and some see this as the bottom line, I mean some see it as, "the Lord created men 100% men and women 100% women," however, Scripture doesn't exactly state this, and science has established that all women also have a more masculine side, and all men also have a more feminine side. It is well known that oestrogen (sometimes spelled 'estrogen'), is the primary female sex hormone and yet a healthy woman also has some testosterone (the male hormone), likewise while most all men have much testosterone, they also have some oestrogen; so we are all indeed a mixture. It is also well-established that certain men tend to have too much oestrogen, making them more feminine, and vise-versa. So, although God created men and women as two distinct sexes, He did not form an unbreakable barrier between the two sexes. As just one example, the mammary glands (breasts) of both sexes are identical in every way; only the levels of oestrogen/testosterone will dictate whether a typical woman's breasts are formed or not - nothing else! Likewise, a man's penis is only a larger form of a woman's clitoris (with slightly different plumbing!). In fact, a man going under the knife in order to become a woman in a transgender operation, goes through what is now a remarkably simple operation; the main difference is in how the hormonal levels need to be adjusted. Yet if a man does nothing else except for taking a large quantity of oestrogen, he will become highly womanly, and often remarkably quickly! He will develop breasts, womanly hips, more shapely legs, and stronger and thicker hair. So there is not - and never has been - some giant unbreakable barrier between masculinity and femininity. The truth is: men and women are surprisingly similar; there is far less of a barrier between the two as is commonly supposed. These medical facts show us that there would always be a few who would be almost of a 'middle sex' - it should be expected. Therefore the term ' bisexual' should be respected. The medical facts show that we should expect many borderline cases - that is, 'men' who are not all that manly and 'women' who are not all that womanly. Why do these issues still seem to surprise us? They should not. Some are still too quick to judge and discriminate, showing no compassion or empathy, when encountering 'borderline sexuality' cases - even when such cases are entirely to be expected. Undoubtedly the usual trivial and shallow media approach to these problems, without considering the science, is one reason for this.

I heard a most interesting case some time ago. A man, secretly believing he was predominantly homosexual but - as a Christian - refusing to accept it, went through a marriage, in which he tried hard to perform his duties. But a few years later his dissatisfied wife left him. Now middle-aged, he finally went to his doctor for a series of tests - he was shocked at the results! Far from being at a mid-sex 'halfway house,' he discovered he was hormonally a woman! About two years later he decided to move to another part of the country and to live the rest of his life as a woman. Can any of us condemn "him" for that? Well, none of us should.

The Age Factor

Within just a few hours of this article being put online, somebody read it and asked the following question:

"You have given the most interesting description of homosexuality I think I have ever read. But I do have one question: Recently I have heard about a few older men who have turned to this sort of 'love,' three widowers and one with a very disabled wife. None of them ever seemed likely to be the sort of men who would indulge in 'gay love,' or whatever one might call it. Why?"

Okay, the age factor has an important bearing on all of this. We should all encourage young people in the direction of heterosexual love and, of course, they usually will not need to much encouragement! We like to see couples marrying and raising families and contributing to society in this manner even as they enjoy the blessings and benefits of marital love. However, for a tiny percentage of young people (as we have seen) because of problems which occurred in the womb they will tend to seek love within homosexual behaviour; little can be done.

But now, to get to the question, older men lose much of their testosterone and are affected by phyto-estrogens which are just about everywhere; these things have the same femininizing effect as estrogen, which is probably why, upon becoming widowers, some such men turn to homosexual love. We should understand that such men will still have a great need for giving and receiving love and affection. One should surely be sympathetic to their plight. This is not to condone sin but to have some understanding and empathy of these problems.

New Testament Issues

We must remember that men who went under the knife in order to change their sexuality back in the first century were welcomed into the New Testament church; we speak, of course, of eunuchs.

Matt.19.12: "For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it."

On this subject, one might also note Acts.8.27,34-39.

True, these people (as far as we know) were made eunuchs in order to guard and protect large numbers of women without temptation being a problem. But they are not dismissed in the New Testament but rather welcomed. Now, of course, there is a difference between men who renounce their sexual status, taking it to a neutral point, and a man (perhaps only 'man' in name) who wishes to live as a woman, a status which his whole body cries out for. This, of course, would apply not only to transgender individuals (who have been through surgery), but highly feminine men who seek to fulfil a woman's sexual role. Nevertheless, the relevant New Testament Scriptures do seem to show us that God does not wish to exclude those who change from their birth sexual status, although 'birth sexual status' might be quite ambiguous in some cases. And we have already seen that there can be an entirely valid medical basis for this.

A Wiser Evangelical Christian Approach

While not personally homosexual, I have spent around five years considering how this topic is presented/understood by the more intellectual and informed Christian websites, especially the very biblical ones. I have also looked at several books written from a Christian viewpoint. Following that, I discussed this problem with two medical practitioners, one of them a Christian. In doing all of this, I have come up with about 5-6 points which most of the more compassionate and thoughtful evangelicals seem prepared to subscribe to (although reluctantly, in a few cases):

  1. Homosexuality may well be a curse on modern western men as Paul seems to indicate, perhaps because the West has turned its back on Christianity. This would explain Paul's comments in Romans 1:18-32. However, this would still not make homosexual love especially evil (all sin is evil), simply that where chidren are not being produced, God is witholding some of His blessings from a society.
  2. Most of Paul's comments generally taken to refer to practising homosexuality (1 Corinthians 6:9, for example) are really referring to male prostitution for the purpose of satisfying lust; Paul did not hold any concept of truly loving, long-term non-promiscuous homosexuals in mind when recording his comments. He did not give thought to a truly loving union between two (Christian) men or two women because no such couples had entered the church at that time.
  3. All sexual conduct (of all kinds) is evil when it is exploitative, selfish, promiscuous and purely lust-satisfying, but not when it is a true expression of a truly loving union between two more mature, sensible people who wholly and truly love one another to the depth of their souls. Indeed, whilst none of us can be entirely certain, all the indications are that David and Jonathan had a passionate homosexual affair and yet Scripture refuses to condemn them, although Saul did (1 Samuel 20:30). These men loved one another to the very depth of their souls and their love certainly was not exploitative. (1 Samuel 18:1-4; 2 Samuel 1:26).
  4. None of the above means that Paul, for example, would have approved of homosexuality in any way; undoubtedly he would not have approved, yet - without question - he would have been aware of its existence since it has existed in all societies. Yet - to re-iterate, his condemnations of sodomy and such behaviour were concerned about lust, promiscuity, unfaithfulness, plus possibly a homosexual union's inability to produce children. Paul did not want fine Christian people to be led away from Christian truth through character-weakening slavish devotion to lust. But, of course, he did not say, 'never love another person.' Deep, unselfish commitment to another person of one's own faith can never be negative. It is an entirely positive and meritorious emotion.

Okay, let us see where some of the above points lead us:

My Propositions:

Some might choose to be single because they have complete control over their own bodies desires. There have always been a few such people, but they are in a tiny minority. For the rest,

To Conclude

I am not saying that homosexuality is ideal, or a perfectly fine "alternative lifestyle," no - it is highly regrettable. As a Christian I reject the whole philosophy behind the 'gay coming out' movement.' This thing is not to be celebrated, but neither - in this day and age - should one refuse to admit one's bisexuality or homosexuality. Homosexuals should no longer feel ashamed of the way that they are; it is truly not their fault. It is 95% a medical matter, sometimes acceptance and admittance is better than attempting to live a lie.

God does not hate homosexuals (who never chose to be the way they are), on the contrary, He loves them. But - like heterosexuals - they should always be prepared to examine their choices and lifestyles.

Promiscuity is outlawed among Christians of all types, whether heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual - it is incompatible with the Christian life!

One more point: Do evangelicals have some sort of 'special counselling treatment' to offer homosexuals (as is sometimes claimed)? Personally I doubt it but it is for any individual to decide upon such things. This 'evangelical counselling for homosexuals' idea is based on the (unsubstantiated) view among some fundamentalists that homosexuality is purely a mental/psychological/spiritual problem when - as we have just noted - there now seems little doubt that it is a physical/biological problem in the great majority of cases.

Surely no pastor should ever say, "I won't baptize you if you are homosexual," although - quite fairly - the pastor would not want to rush into such a move without careful counselling and consideration of such a person's life.

So let us offer the homosexual community support, solutions, explanations, biblical teaching and compassion - but not condemnation!

There is One Who will condemn but that task is not ours at the present time. But our God will judge in complete fairness and without partiality, taking everything within a sinner's life into consideration. Of course, the called and chosen are already under His bounteous grace.

Copyright: Mike deHavilland Parker. 2012.

UK APOLOGETICS HOME