God and Gays: 
Is Homosexuality a Sin?

How can someone dare to speak out against another person’s lifestyle?  Especially within the church, are not Christians supposed to be loving and accepting?  Does not the Bible teach that we are to reach out to people instead of being judgmental or self-righteous?

These are the questions Christians are commonly asked by those in the gay community when Christians contend that homosexuality is a moral issue rather than merely a lifestyle choice.

The Bible does speak of homosexuality as a sin, but there are those in our community and in the church that claim otherwise.  They say that it is a lifestyle choice and that gay-ness is more a factor of genetics than personal choice.  How can there be such a difference of opinion?  How do proponents of the gay church interpret Bible passages related to homosexuality?

In a moment, we will examine four passages of scripture commonly discussed in the debate over homosexuality.  First, however, there are three foundational issues that frame the debate and contribute to leading the two sides to such different conclusions.

Foundational Issues

First, anyone who examines the scripture must state how they understand the scripture.  Conservative Christians, like me, view the scripture as the true word of God.  It is God’s direct revelation to humankind and is without error either in its transmission or in its current content.  Humans authored the various books, but God spoke through them at a particular point in time.  What they wrote, therefore, is considered to be the word of God.  When we study the scripture, we seek to understand it by asking, “What did the author mean when he wrote it?”  Doing so requires us to examine the culture and personal background surrounding the author and the passage.  Then, we seek to understand the transferable principles and truths so that we can apply them to our lives today.

Denominations that have accepted the gay lifestyle typically have a lower view of scripture.  These denominations deny inerrancy and, most importantly, they see scripture as the written record of people who experienced a revelation of God in their world.  However, they typically believe that what was recorded was the writer’s response to the event, a response laden with opinions, tainted by their own lack of understanding of God and reflecting their narrow cultural context.  The interpreter’s task is to determine which portions of the written word reflect the actual revelation of God.  Put another way, contemporary readers are left to discern which parts of the scripture are truth and which are not.  Unfortunately, this means that they tend to interpret passages too much through the lens of their own culture and values and they tend to throw out positions that do not conform to “their more advanced understanding” of the real world and spiritual things.  This leads to our second foundational issue.

The second issue pertains to genetics and modern science.  Those who condone homosexual behavior claim that there is a gay gene or genes that predetermine one’s sexual preference.  This “better” understanding of science, they say, could not have been understood by the Bible’s writers, therefore, their writings against homosexuality are not well informed and simply reflect the position of their culture.

The presence of a gay gene is definitely a new concept, believed for only a few decades at best.  It is important to note, however, that there is no conclusive scientific evidence at all of a gay gene.  Anyone who claims there is definitive evidence is misinformed or is not being genuine.  Furthermore, from a biblical perspective, the idea of being born gay is a totally foreign concept in the scripture.  Genesis 1-3 gives the foundation for human sexuality.  The creation of a male and a perfect female partner as well as the establishment of marriage between a male and female indicates God’s intentions clearly. 

From a scientific perspective, it is also important to note that a gay gene would easily die out due to the impossibility of passing itself on from one generation to another since same sex reproduction is impossible.  Even if it was passed on occasionally by gays who consented to heterosexual intercourse, thousands of years of reproduction (or millions of years in the evolutionist’s view) would clearly have meant the demise of this ill-fit gene.

Third, gay activists claim that there are far more homosexuals in society than many people believe.  Most commonly, they claim that 10% of the population is gay.  The only place this statistic is documented is in the highly acclaimed, but highly flawed, Kinsey Report of 1948.  In that study, 25% of those studied were prisoners.  44% of the prisoners said they had homosexual experiences in prison.  Kinsey himself admitted that several hundred of the sample were male prostitutes. This is definitely not a reliable study and most researchers admit this today.  More recent studies show only 1 to 1.7% of people have ever had homosexual intercourse, and less than 1% of people are exclusively homosexual.

Scripture References

There are four scripture passages commonly invoked in the debate over the sinfulness of homosexual behavior.  With each of these passages, I will not provide all of the details required for a good study of the passage.  I will leave that kind of study to you.  I will simply state how the two sides tend to interpret the passage.

Genesis 19:4-13 (NASB)
⁴ Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; ⁵ and they called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.” ⁶ But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, ⁷ and said, “Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly. ⁸ “Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof.” ⁹ But they said, “Stand aside.” Furthermore, they said, “This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them.” So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door. ¹⁰ But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. ¹¹ And they struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they wearied themselves trying to find the doorway. ¹² Then the men said to Lot , “Whom else have you here? A son-in-law, and your sons, and your daughters, and whomever you have in the city, bring them out of the place; ¹³ for we are about to destroy this place, because their outcry has become so great before the Lord that the Lord has sent us to destroy it.”

This passage describes the attempt of Sodom ’s residents to have homosexual (in this case, male on male) relations with the angels God sent to visit Lot and his family.  The sinful intent of the men of Sodom is readily apparent.  They wanted to rape the guests with homosexual acts.  Their especially hideous behavior served as an illustration of why God would destroy the city.

Gay advocates interpret the passage from another perspective.  They would say, first of all, that rape or such a gross lack of hospitality is indeed sinful.  But reading into the passage the twenty-first century idea that people are born gay or strait, they would say the sin of the men of Sodom was not in their intent to engage in homosexual acts, but their intent to engage in homosexual acts with heterosexuals.  In other words, engaging in homosexual acts is not sinful in and of itself; it is only sinful if one is a heterosexual.  The men of Sodom were heterosexuals (that’s why Lot offered his daughters to them), thus, the men should not have sought to have relations with them.

Leviticus 18:22 (NASB)
²² ‘You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 20:13 (NASB)
¹³ ‘If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.

These two passages in Leviticus make direct references to homosexual behavior.  Such behavior is clearly condemned as an “abomination” and “detestable.”  One can clearly see how it is critical for that those who condone homosexual behavior to have these passages nullified.

The passages occur in the context of a series of laws given to the Israelites designed to show them what it means to be holy.  The overarching theme of the book of Leviticus is, “You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy” (Lev. 19:2).  However, gay advocates quickly note that these two passages occur among other passages that Christians do not follow today.  There are passages that require, for example, precise offerings, dietary restrictions and harsh punishments for wrongdoing.  So, one alternative would be to throw out the entire book as outdated.  The better option, however, is to determine the intent of the book and to interpret it in the context of the New Testament gospel.

Leviticus was written to demonstrate the extreme means necessary for one to go to in order to approach the holiness of God.  Indeed, the book contains many ceremonial, judicial and moral codes.  The question is, which are we to follow today? The ceremonial laws regarding proper sacrifices do not apply to Christians today because these requirements were fulfilled in Christ’s perfect sacrifice on the cross.  The judicial codes do not absolutely apply because, unlike the Israelites, Christians do not live in a theocracy. However, the lessons we can definitely take from Leviticus are the moral ideals that describe how a holy person should behave in everyday life.  These codes are timeless. It is for this reason that the theme of Leviticus is repeated in the New Testament book of I Peter 1:14-16, “As obedient children, do not be conformed to the former lusts which were your in ignorance, but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; because it is written, ‘You shall be holy for I am holy’.”  It is incumbent for Christians to determine what holy behavior is so that we can behave in a way that honors our Lord.

Romans 1:26-27 (NASB)
²⁶ For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, ²⁷ and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

Here we have a New Testament passage that clearly describes homosexual behavior.  Paul is describing what happens when people continually reject God and His ways.  It seems this passage describes the culmination of the unrighteous behavior of one who rejects God, and such behavior is described as sexual relations among those of the same sex.  There’s no doubt that this behavior is condemnable.

Gay advocates, however, focus on the words “natural function.”  They agree that it is wrong for a person who is naturally heterosexual to behave unnaturally.  But likewise, they say, it is wrong for a homosexual (a person born genetically homosexual) to behave unnaturally (against their homosexual nature), that is, to be sexually involved with a person of the opposite sex.

This interpretation clearly reads into the text an idea that has only existed for a few dozen years, the idea that a person is born homosexual.  The author of this passage would not have had any such notion (a notion that, by the way, we have already excused as irrational itself).  Nowhere in scripture is there even a hint that homosexual behavior is acceptable as long as the person is an avowed homosexual.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NASB)
⁹ Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God ? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,...shall inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Timothy 1:8-12 (NASB)
⁸ But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, ⁹ realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers ¹⁰ and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, ¹¹ according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.

These two passages mention homosexual behavior as wrong.  If one examines the Greek words used in these passages, they will discover that there is really no word in the Greek language that can be directly translated as “homosexual.”  There are only words that refer to the practice of homosexual behavior.  Gay advocates point this out and claim that the modern translators have been influenced by their bias against homosexuality and thus have wrongly translated the words as homosexual.  However, this is an invalid claim.

The words used in the passages noted above are malakoi and arsenokaitai.  They are translated above as effeminate and homosexual.  However, in order to determine how to translate a word from ancient Greek to modern English, translators examine extrabiblical literature in order to see how the same words were used in a different context.  That kind of research in classical Greek literature indicates that these two words are almost always used in the content of homosexual behavior.  Two other possible translations would be male prostitute and homosexual offenders.  There is no doubt that the author of these passages had homosexual behavior in mind in their descriptions of immoral behavior.

In closing let me say that there is no doubt that many people today overreact to homosexual sin like it is the most ghastly of all sins.  Homosexual behavior is a sin like every other sin.  All sorts of sexual sin are committed by all people, and no sin makes a person unreachable or untouchable for God.  That is the point of Christ’s atonement on the cross.

The point of this lesson is not to hurl insults at people who call themselves gay, but to define homosexual behavior as a sinful behavior and to give the scriptural evidence that supports such a conclusion. 

However, to do less than call it a true sin does not do a gay person any favors.  We all must recognize our sin in order to see our need for a Savior.  We all also need to recognize sin because it is naturally harmful, destructive and addictive.  And once saved, we need to learn to live righteously in order to honor God by imitating His holiness.

God’s love extends to all sinners.  Gays are not further from God because of their kind of sin.  Yet such sin, like all sexual sin, is very addictive and difficult to get out of one’s mind.  Patterns of sexual sin and dysfunction (homo or hetero) often result from sexual abuse early in life.  Many gays are painfully aware of this and certainly deserve the compassion of the Christian community.  The good news of God’s love and healing is for the gay like it is for all of us.