Skip to comments.Why Gay-Affirming Christians Can't Accept the Inspiration of the Bible
Posted on 07/02/2014 5:59:50 PM PDT by ReformationFan
The simple fact is that is impossible to fully affirm the divine inspiration of the Scriptures, which includes a full affirmation of the deity of Jesus, while at the same time claiming that God approves of committed homosexual relationships.
For example, gay-affirming Christians commonly claim that while the Bible's prohibition of homosexual practice is categorical, it is not talking about homosexuality as we know it today. Instead, we are told that the biblical authors were speaking against abusive homosexual relationships involving pederasty or prostitution or rape or excessive lust. (Another argument would be that they were denouncing homosexual practices involved in idolatrous rites.)
It can be easily be demonstrated that this is not true, as other scholars have done, and as I seek to demonstrate as well in Can You Be Gay and Christian?
But for the sake of argument, let's say that this was true and that Moses and Jesus and Paul knew nothing about long-term, committed homosexual relationships or that they had no notion of modern concepts of allegedly inborn, fixed homosexual orientation. That would mean that God inspired the biblical authors to write in such a way that homosexual men and women would be rejected and marginalized and judged for almost 3,500 years (from the time of giving of the Law to Israel until the late 20th century).
It would mean that God inspired Moses to write that it was an abomination for a man to lie with a man even though he didn't mean committed men lying with committed men, and even though Old Testament Israel (and religious Jews to this day) and the New Testament church (including conservative Christians to this day) would think God was prohibiting all homosexual relationships.
That is what a loving God would do? That is how He would inspire His children to write?
The same could be said for Paul's clear words in Romans 1:24-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. Why would God inspire him to write in this way if He knew that the words would be so terribly misconstrued and misused?
You might object and say, "Well, that's exactly what happened with slavery!"
Actually, that's not true. (I have a whole chapter in Can You Be Gay and Christian? where I address this; for a free video lecture on the subject, go here.)
God did intend to legislate slavery in ancient Israel, but in a humane way and as part of a larger economic system, but already in the Old Testament, there were seeds planted for the long-term liberation of slaves. (Let's not forget that every Sabbath, slaves rested as the nation remembered Israel's deliverance from Egyptian slavery.)
And in New Testament times, God did inspire His servants to address slavery in the Greco-Roman world pragmatically, knowing that there was no way that this new movement in its infancy could tackle the customs of the entire empire. At the same time, seeds of liberation were planted in the New Testament as well, along with calls for fair and humane treatment of slaves by their Christian mastersas brothers in the Lordwhich is why the abolitionists used the Bible as their textbook for liberation.
There's also not a single verse in the Bible praising slavery itself, nor is there anything in the Bible that could rightly be used to support the African slave trade. (Old Testament law explicitly condemned kidnapping.)
In contrast, there is not a single verse in the entire Bible that says one positive thing about homosexual relationships (I hope we're beyond people trying to claim Jonathan and David were gay) while every reference to homosexual practice is entirely negative.
This means that gay-affirming Christians must believe that God, who certainly understood "sexual orientation" and was aware of every human relationship that would ever exist, inspired His servants to write words that, if fairly and honestly interpreted through the centuries, would be used to condemn homosexual practice.
What's more, gay-affirming Christians must believe that Hebrews 4:12 is not true, since it claims that God's Word "is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart."
Put another way, the Word of God reaches to the very depths of our nature and yet somehow, according to gay-affirming Christians, it entirely missed and misunderstood homosexual men and women.
This also means that Hebrews 4:13 is not true, since the verse states that "no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account."
In contrast, gay-affirming Christians must believe that some human creatures have been hidden from His sight and have not been naked and exposed before God, since the writers of Scripture didn't write with sufficient inspiration to really understand committed homosexual relationships.
Even in terms of practical life application, gay-affirming Christians must say that Paul did not give valid instructions, since he wrote, " 'It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.' But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband" (1 Cor. 7:1-2).
Over and over, I have heard gay-affirming Christians quote Paul's words, reminding us that he wrote that it's better to marry than to burn with lust, which is why we need to allow two homosexual men or women to "marry." But that's not what Paul wrote, and if you want to quote him in part, then quote him in full: "each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband."
Once again, you have to say that Paul wasn't really inspired, since he still leaves out same-sex partners. Instead, he was inspired to write words that leave out homosexual relationships.
Of course, we're told that Paul had no concept of long-term, committed homosexual relationships, but that the position is easily refuted. (I plan to address this at length in a future blog post or article.) But again, even if that wrong argument were true, it would mean that God didn't really inspire him to write these words but rather allowed him to write harmful words that reflected the spirit of the age.
It would also mean that the biblical writers didn't really understand human nature, since sexual desires and romantic attractions are deeply ingrained in our nature, yet again, according to gay-affirming Christians, the prophets and apostles just didn't get this right. As other Christian leaders have pointed out, this has grave implications for the gospel.
Worst of all, gay-affirming Christians must believe (and do believe!) that Jesus Himself, who saw into the hearts and souls of human beings, really didn't "get it."
We're not talking about the Lord having limited knowledge about future events before His resurrection. We're talking about the Son of God not understanding people, not hearing the heart-cry of a desperate same-sex attracted person who came to Him, not recognizing that the person He was looking atand looking intowas cast out because he or she was "different."
John 2:25 tells us that Jesus "knew what was in man." Gay-affirming Christians tell us He did not.
The choice then, is simple: You can embrace the full authority and inspiration of the Scriptures, in which case you will be filled with love and compassion for those who identify as LGBT and proclaim the good news of forgiveness and new life to them, or you can endorse same-sex, committed relationships. But you cannot do both.
Given time, gay-affirming Christians will make their rejection of the authority of God and His Word all the more clear.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
This regretfully is not going to happen while the Media and 99% of the politicians keep bleating that sinful behaviour does not matter. Just 'celebrate' the differences...
Sorry, but there is no such animal as a “Gay-Affirming” Christian.
You cannot be Christian and support a sin that God called an abomination.
Just because a man calls himself a tomato, doesn’t make him a tomato.
Likewise, you cannot call yourself a Christian (Christ-Like) and support what God calls un-Godly.
Words have meaning, let’s quit muddying up our language by proclaiming falsehoods, no matter how innocent the motivation.
More like Sodomite life-shortening false Christians.
I agree. I don't like the way the headline is written. We need to stop using the language of the left.
ALL Christians "affirm" that homosexuality exists, so yes there are "Gay" people. Any person who claims same sex relationships are fine and dandy and blessed by God is NOT a practicing "Christian", however.
"Gay-affirming Christians" makes as much sense as "Murder-affirming Christians"
Oh, so they now admit male pedophiles who target little boys are now homosexuals? During the non-stop news about Catholic priests sexually abusing altar boys, it was a big NO-NO to call those priests homosexuals.
** Bookmark for an excellent analysis ***
 And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.  And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply..."
Oops, I guess that this means Contracepting and divorce-Affirming Christians (i.e. Protestants) can't accept the Inspiration of the Bible either.
Much thanks to A more perfect union for helping me to tear this apart and showing the errors to a friend of mine. He literally spent several hours helping me the other day and I really appreciate it and want to publically acknowledge his assistance on this matter. There have been numerous things we have disagreed about in the past and will be in the future, but he really came through.
Yes RM it is a personal comment, but it is a positive one, I hope you will let it stand.
I don’t want to click on that link but I think a good refutation of pro-homosexualist revisionism of the Bible is this simple question: does anyone really believe that both the original Biblical authors and the primary audience the books were written for would have ever thought that Scripture was teaching any sexual behavior outside of marriage(defined back then only as one male to at least one female) was acceptable? It anyone answers yes then he seriously needs not only accurate Biblical teaching or preaching but accurate history lessons as well.
Love the sinner and hate the sin is the only acceptable Christian, Biblical approach.
Christianity is full of people who just cannot bring themselves to accept the truth of Scripture.
For an easy example, despite how easy it is to document that Xmas is a pagan syncretic event for which there is no authority in Scripture to observe, many people refuse to repent of observing it. The same can be said for the pagan holiday in the spring, the government-sponsored and enforced Easter.
So, it doesn’t surprise me that people who want moral justification for homosexuality will ignore the plain meaning of Scripture on the subject.
Should we just pretend that all the Contracepting, ABORTION and divorce-Affirming Roman Catholics don't exist - all those that vote for Liberal Democrats??? Seems it is Roman Catholicism that has the problem with accepting the inspiration of the Bible seeing as it places human traditions and its own "magesterium" as equal in authority with the Word of God.
“Much thanks to A more perfect union”
verga, when two people always agree on everything, one of them is not necessary. :-)
We worship the same Savior - just in different ekklesia. I support your decision as God leads you. Glad to stand with you.
“Seems it is Roman Catholicism that has the problem with accepting the inspiration of the Bible...”
No. Catholicism is fine. But yes, many Catholics do not abide by the Faith.
And many "Protestants" fail as well. Genuine Christians recognize the authority of the Divinely-revealed Scriptures and understand that what GOD says is a higher authority than what men say. That is why the Reformation stressed the priority of the sacred word over the traditions of men that, through the centuries, came to replace Scripture with traditions and rules proclaimed by fallible men as if they were as infallible as the Word of God.
I guess you missed the point. I quoted Scripture. Catholics who ignore Scripture go to Hell just as do Protestants who ignore the Church which Scripture tells us Christ founded.
I imagine you would LIKE to say I missed your point, but I didn't. I also didn't miss your lame attempt to smear all those you label as "Protestants" by concluding "Contracepting and divorce-Affirming Christians (i.e. Protestants) can't accept the Inspiration of the Bible". Actually, ANYONE who ignores the Gospel (i.e., those who reject the grace of God that brings salvation to all those who believe or who boast of their own merit and works to save them) will go to hell and this is so regardless of what they might think concerning contraception and divorce and even homosexuals.
The Roman Catholic church, however, is certainly NOT the church Christ "founded", so such statements can be ignored when her adherents make such claims of exclusivity. Those who reject the truth that the body of Christ is made up of those who are born again into the family of God through faith in Jesus Christ, need to unlearn such heresy if they will spend eternity in heaven.
Sounds like you believe in yourself more than the Gospel.
Sounds like you believe in your church more than the Gospel.
My Church wrote the Gospel under inspiration of the Holy Ghost.
So did mine! :o)