IS GAY CHRISTIAN A BIBLICAL OXYMORON?

What Do You Believe?

Paul writes, “The wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God…. Neither the sexually immoral nor idolators nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom.” Fifteen (or less?) years ago, Christians would read this verse and almost universally agree that there was but one meaning; however, today a larger number of Christians would argue that not only can homosexuals be Christians but that God actually approves of it. We are all sinners, born and bred, they argue, so what’s the difference between being a homosexual Christian or a Christian who lies, steals, lusts, and commits any other sin?

 

Before I approached this study, I already had my mind made up (that’s the definition of close-minded btw) and thought, “They are wrong, I am right, there’s nothing to learn here.” A FB friend directed me to a website—gaychristian.net—and encouraged me to read up on the beliefs of gay men and women who proclaim to know Christ. After reading Justin Lee’s (the Executive Director) treatise on his beliefs—written with more Scriptures than most Christian articles—I discovered some great points and insightful, respectful rebuffs of many traditional Christian views. I encourage anyone who is on either side of the fence (there really is no middle ground) to read what “they” (the opposite side you espouse) believe with a desire to learn and study to see if what they teach is true or not (rather than have our minds predetermined).

 

Mr. Lee believes “homosexual behavior is appropriate within the confines of a committed, loving, monogamous, lifelong, Christ-centered relationship” because he sees no difference between male and female or gay and straight as long as they are children of God (1Cor 10.31). He believes that love is the fulfillment of the law and therefore restrictive commands are void when trumped by love. Among his many other beliefs, he also claims that condemning gays is a cultural fallacy similar to how Christians used to restrict women from speaking in church gatherings or supported the practice of slavery.

 

What will follow is my unqualified attempt to answer the major points of Justin Lee’s argument as I try to determine if what I believe is actually what the Bible teaches.

 

Defining the Christian Self: We are New Creations

Paul writes that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God and includes in that definition of “wicked” those who are “fornicators… adulterers… homosexuals… thieves… the covetous… [etc]” (1Cor 6.9-10). We would not call someone a “thief” or “drunkard” for stealing something once or being tempted by beer, but rather when their lifestyle habitually includes activities that become their definition of “self.” (An “accountant” is one who accounts and a “doctor” one who practices medicine, not just people who are good at math or like to “prescribe” drugs on the street corner). Additionally, the Bible doesn’t say that God creates “idolaters” nor “fornicators” nor “adulterers,” so why would we assume He creates “homosexuals” when all are listed with the same condemning label, “wicked?”

 

Context and cross-referencing with the rest of Scripture will help us understand God’s position concerning the Christian definition of self: “Such were some of you; but you were washed… sanctified… justified in the name of the Lord Jesus… and the Spirit of our God.” Notice the past tense “were” as Paul reminds us here, as he does elsewhere, that whatever we were before is “old” and “dead,” but in Jesus, through the indwelling of God’s Spirit, we are “new” and “alive” (2Cor 5.17; Col 2.13). We are no longer defined by the “sinful desires of [our] hearts” and “given over to shameful lusts” (Rom 1.24-27), for when we become children of God, we are “controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if… we belong to Christ” (Rom 8.9). In essence, Christians are not both a child of God and any of the labels listed in 1Cor 6.9, 10.

 

Justin Lee argues, “God designed our ears and mouths… But some people are deaf, maybe because they were born that way…. They can’t communicate the way the rest of us do, so they… use sign language to communicate, even though that’s not what our hands were designed for…. None of us would call that ‘sinful.’” He doesn’t notice that he’s aligning homosexuality with an abnormality or handicap with the expectation that we rearrange our definitions of “normal” based on the minority who are not homogenous to the majority (it is normal for people to see, abnormal for them to not; therefore, we don’t redefine the rules of the road so blind people can drive). Though it is true that some Christians will struggle with sins with more frequency than others (i.e. drunkenness, pride, sloth, lust, or homosexuality), it doesn’t change the definition of sin in regards to the Christian self. We don’t call people “Christian Drunkards” or “Believing Rapists” because they struggle with alcohol or lust, so neither should we, the Church, consider “Christian Homosexual” a biblically accurate term.

 

All Christians struggle with sin, but being a child of God means that we are no longer slaves to them (Romans 6).

 

God and Me and He and She

Justin Lee (gaychristian.net) quotes Galatians 3.28, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus,” arguing that there are individuals who struggle with gender identity and since, in Christ, male and female are indistinguishable to the indwelling Spirit, we should allow people to “fall in love with someone who loves them just as they are,” no matter the gender with which they identify themselves. He condemningly writes to those who do not agree: “Yet somehow we’d have to go on believing that gender is crucial to God—so crucial that marrying someone of the wrong gender can keep you out of the kingdom of God.”

 

There are two problems with Lee’s arguments, both of which he ignores throughout his article. First, Paul was quoting Joel 2.29 and making a point to his Jewish readers that Gentiles (and slaves and women) were not inferior to them because they were not physically the “seed of Abraham.” Nowhere does Paul argue that Gentiles, nor slaves, nor men and women, cease to physically be Gentiles, slaves, men or women, because they now belong to Jesus. In the Bible, a spiritual transformation nowhere requires a physical alteration. Second is the very important question that many “non-traditionalists” either ignore or take an illogical opposing stance towards: “Why does God identify Himself with masculine nouns like Father, Husband, and the ubiquitously capitalized pronoun, “He?”

 

Paul writes to men, “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the Church…. For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the Church” (Ep 5.25-32). God relates to us, the Church of God—male and female, Jew and Gentile, slave and free—as His Bride and not as a fellow husband. We understand how we, the Church, should relate to God because we understand how a female wife should relate to her male husband, and vice versa. When the two genders and positions obfuscate (get distorted) and we have two heads—two husbands—or two bodies—two wives—we can no longer use the example of God, and thereby His commands, to understand either our relationship with Him nor our love for those with whom we wed. In answer to Lee’s accusation: Gender identity, especially as it relates to whom we marry, is so crucial to God that He uses it explain how He relates to His people!    

 

I cannot understand the relationship between God and me if I will not accept the differences between he and she. 

 

Traditions Usurping Commands

Another salient argument Justin Lee (gaychristian.net) imposes is regarding the “traditionalist” view of “women speaking in church” and men donning long hair, wherein he demands: “We're going to have to find a clear, consistent way of determining which passages in Scripture we're still obligated to follow, and which ones we're not. And it has to be a standard that we can apply in every culture and in every context, not something that lets us reinterpret things every few years to suit our desires.” His poignant preaching against our common practice of interpreting Scripture based on cultural perceptions presents a loophole wherein he asserts this point: “The only reason we’re having this debate now about same-sex relationships instead of about women speaking in church is that our culture’s standards have changed.” Therefore, he argues, “Any honest Christian has to admit that there are at least some passages that either a) don't apply today; b) still apply but don't mean what they seem to mean on the surface; or c) are overruled by other passages or biblical themes.” Obviously, “homosexuality prooftexts,” as he calls them, are among those verses requiring reinterpreting.

 

Honestly, I completely and wholeheartedly agree with him concerning those who interpret Scripture to match their cultural and traditional beliefs. Jesus said of such people, “You nullify the word of God by your traditions that you have handed down” (Mk 7.13). Unfortunately, Lee—along with the majority of modern Christians—falls under the chastisement of Jesus’ words because of their cultural definition of “the church.” When Lee reads that women should not “speak in church” I assume he envisions a congregational gathering where dozens of men and women literally sit under the tutelage of an “ordained” (seminary trained) pastor, elder, bishop, or professional minister, rather than a biblically-based definition of “ekklesia” that derives from Jesus’ proclamation concerning His discipleship relationship with Peter, the rock upon which “the church” was built (https://mikewarren4gzus.wordpress.com/2015/02/09/how-to-define-the-local-church/). We should define “church” as “two or three [people]” (Mt. 18-15-20) gathering together to teach one another to obey the commands of God (Mt. 28.19,20) through discipleship since this is what Jesus demonstrated and what Paul instructs in Titus wherein he tells older women, “admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be… obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed” (2.3-5). If we define “church” in this manner, we can then understand that the reason a woman should not instruct a man has very little to do with the culture of their day (or ours), but rather with understanding how God relates to us and we to others.

 

Paul writes, “Let your women keep silent in church… they are to be submissive as the law also says” (1Cor 14.34). The Law Paul is referring to is found in God’s chastisement of Eve wherein He states, “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (Gen 3.16). Paul explains this in more detail as he discusses head coverings, “The head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God…. For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels” (1Cor 11.3-10). Like Lee, I have no idea how the angels play a part, but what is obvious is that this passage only further illustrates the roles God expects husbands and wives to play in marriage in order to enhance our understanding of His relationship with us. To confuse the command that a male is to be the head of a female in a marriage relationship, which cannot occur with two males or two females, is to blaspheme the Word of God by altering His commands to coincide with the cultural definitions of the day: an act Mr. Lee commits while simultaneously condemning those who have done the same.

 

Cultural traditions should enhance the commands of God, not change them.

 

Sinning against God’s Image

In regards to passages which directly condemn homosexuality, Lee says, “The prohibition of male-male sex is pretty straightforward. And at the beginning of the [Leviticus] passage, God tells us why He's giving these rules — because He wants to keep the Israelites pure and separate from the polytheistic cultures surrounding them (Lev. 18:1-4). This helps explain why the Israelites are forbidden to shave (Lev. 19:27), get tattoos (Lev. 19:28), wear clothing made of mixed fabrics (Lev. 19:19), or have sex during a woman's period (Lev. 18:19).” Though he acknowledges that God forbids homosexuality, he also claims, “God seems to change His mind so much in the Bible…. God gives a command for a particular purpose…. Once the command is no longer necessary to accomplish that purpose, it becomes obsolete. Then other considerations (such as compassion) take over.” To Lee, those verses that specifically identify homosexual behavior as contrary to God’s design are among those which modern Christian culture has deemed obsolete.  

 

However, does God change His mind about what He considers sin, like getting tattoos, eating pork, working on the Sabbath, or having sex with a person of the same gender? “God is not a man that He should lie, nor… change His mind” (Num 23.19). God doesn’t change, but people, relationships, cultures, and the world itself does, which means applications change through time, but principles never do. In order to understand why God prohibits certain things, we must recognize that sin is not simply activities one should avoid. Consider the first sin of Adam and Eve eating from the “tree of knowledge of good and evil.” Was the act of eating fruit, sinful? Is sex, or work, or tattoos, or music, or dancing, or killing, sinful? If those acts make one a sinner, then do righteous acts like reading the Bible, praying, serving, loving, and caring make one a saint? Of course not! The first woman ate because she was tempted to “become like god, knowing good and evil [by her own definition and volition]. The motivation for the action is what pushed her into sin, not the fruit itself.

 

God’s commands illuminate Truth so that we might know how to live in accordance with His guidance, but the words themselves are not “Truth.” Paul writes, “the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2Cor 3.6) because words are merely signifiers of otherwise immutable ideas. (The word “love” can never encapsulate all that is meant by the expression). When God presents commands, like “have no idols,” we understand that He doesn’t just mean that wooden or metal images should not be worshipped but that ideologies, people, or objects that come between us and Him are “sin.” When we who are created in the image of God attempt to re-imagine ourselves into someone other than the person He commands us to be, then that is sin.

 

Has God changed His mind about what He considers sin or have we merely redefined sin to be only those things we despise? Sin is more than what we do or do not do: It’s when we allow what we do to redefine who we are in a way that God does not (Gen 4.7; Rom 6.16-19).

 

Love Covers Sin

Lee teaches that “God… in His infinite wisdom, [knows] that mere rules and regulations are not always sufficient to define what is sinful…. Even we humans can recognize this. Killing another human being, for example, is both a sin and a terrible crime. But there are situations in which we would not hold someone accountable for killing, such as if it was in self-defense. There might even be times we would approve of their actions.” If “sin” is simply defined as “disobeying God’s commands” then sometimes we don’t sin when we don’t obey for “good” reasons. If this is the case with some commands, like killing or lying, then it’s probably the same for all, like men sleeping with men or women ruling over their husbands. Basically, Lee is saying that the commands of God can be overruled by rewritten traditions of people as long as one simple rule is maintained: it must be done in love.

 

“He who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. The commandments, 'Do not commit adultery,' 'Do not murder,' 'Do not steal,' 'Do not covet,' and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law (Rom 13.8-10). Lee adds his epiphany regarding “love” usurping God’s commands as commentary to Romans 13: “Paul is saying that if we lived our lives with a truly loving spirit, acting in truly loving ways, we would automatically fulfill every one of God's laws. We wouldn't have any need for specific rules.” Rules like, do not have sex with someone of the same gender, an animal, or another person’s spouse, all dissipate if we just “love each other.” But how does Lee define “love?” “’Love’ here of course doesn't mean romantic love; it means the deep, abiding, unconditional love that comes from God.” As long as we love each other the same exact way God loves us, then rules become obsolete. Lee chastises those who do not understand that love frees us from obedience to rules by adding, ”The very definition of the Traditional View says that even when two relationships are equally loving — even when they're motivated by the exact same selfless desires and the exact same servant hearts — that one of them can be ruled sinful just because of a person's gender. Traditionalists say that this command is from God. But if it's from God, then why does it contradict the rule Paul gives us here — a rule that applies to every other commandment?”

 

John tells us that “This is love: NOT THAT WE LOVE GOD (my emphasis) but that He loves us” (4.10). In simple words: we cannot love as God does because we are not Him (He never sins and is never selfish while we are habitually both). Therefore, He provides us His commands, laws, “rules,” so that we might show Him our love through obedience to those commands, laws, and “rules” (John 14.15,21). John even tells us that “We know that we love the children of God… by loving God and carrying out His commands: This is love for God: to obey His commands” (1John 5.2, 3). If love for God is obedience to His commands then it’s only logical that the best way to show love to those who claim to know God is by “teaching them to obey everything” God has commanded (Mt 28.19, 20). Love is the fulfillment of the Law because love is the reason it was written, but love only fulfills the law when it is done in obedience to it.

 

“God is love” doesn’t mean that “love” is always of God. Just because I emotionally, physically, or philosophically love somebody doesn’t mean that God automatically approves of me (I’m sure Hitler loved his mom). We love God and those He’s told us to love when we do it as He commands.  

 

Defining Words By their Extremes

Another argument Justin Lee succinctly makes (likely because it is quite illogical) was regarding the meaning of the Greek word for “homosexual.” He writes, “The word arsenokoitai is a compound word in Greek, and the parts of the word make reference to "male" and "bed," which indicates that this word probably referred to some kind of male homosexual behavior…..we must be careful not to assume too much; Greek compound words don't always mean what they might appear to mean… Still, I think that it's fairly safe to assume that the arsenokoitai of Paul's day were men engaging in some kind of homosexual behavior. But what kind of behavior?... The most likely explanation is that Paul is referring to a practice that was fairly common in the Greek culture of his day — married men who had sex with male youths on the side.” Can anyone see a danger in defining words only by their extremes?

 

If “arsenokoitai” only refers to the heinous act of married men sleeping with boys—nowhere hinted at in Scripture but inferred by those who insert assumptions about culture into their interpretations—then maybe the commands to not “phoneuo” (murder) only applies to beheadings and to not “pseudomai” (lie) only to those lies that lead to death. Maybe “poneros” (evil) should only be imputed on those who commit genocide or a holocaust like Hitler and not as Jesus uses with those who speak ill of their parents (Mt 15.4), ask God for signs (Mt 12.39), or are too lazy to do as they are commanded (Mt 24.48). Maybe “agape” (love) should only be used when we die to save a life or “hagios” (holy) only when we exactly mimic God’s character. Defining words only by their extremes is like only driving a car at its top speed, eating only entire animals and not just parts, and having sex with whomever and whatever we want no matter the consequences.

 

Words are like containers that can only hold what their creators intended. Attempting to fill them with more meaning than they can contain or to use them for purposes their creators did not intend is not only unwise, but can lead to misunderstanding and confusion. “But we have this treasure [light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ] in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us” (2Cor 4.6,7). Like words, we Christians contain the knowledge of God and should be careful—increasingly so as we mature—to understand the purpose for which God created and fill to capacity the “cup” that is presented us.

 We use words to give meaning to life; superfluously altering those meanings at whim makes life unreasonably indefinable.

 

Can you be a Gay Christian?

This study began for me as a challenge from a Facebook friend who asked me to read Justin Lee’s magnum opus on his beliefs regarding homosexuality and the Bible’s stance on the subject. It’s shameful for me to say that I already had my mind made up on the topic and would’ve simply replied, “God says it is wrong, so it’s wrong,” as I had many times before. Instead, I am glad I read Mr. Lee’s well written, thought provoking, and scripturally filled treatise as he’s given me a lot to consider as I examined to see if what I believed was true according to God’s Word.  

 

The Bible teaches that a Christian should not believe that they can be both a “new creature” and anything God lists as “wicked,” like a thief, murderer, idolater, or homosexual, and that just as God is different than us, so men are different than women, and that love is not simply accepting people as they want to be, but teaching them to obey all that God commands. The problem is that most Christians—those with truth faith, love for God and His Church, and filled with the Spirit of God—are not as familiar with God’s word as they should be. They are like “infants… blown here and there by every teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming” (Ep 4.14). Or they make up their minds and instead of cracking open the Bible to see if their beliefs match Scriptures, instead, “to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” (2Tim 4.3). Most Christians won’t study but will just assume that God’s Word matches their faith. I encourage us all not to be among the “most.”

 

Those Christians who do not know the Word of God or who are deceived by others or just are not mature enough yet to understand the “mind of Christ” (1Cor 2-11-16) can believe they are gay and yet still a Christian. Just as there are Christians who believe that God demands one to be baptized by water or speak in tongues or attend church on Sundays (or Saturdays) or listen to a pope, priest, prophet, or pastor, or that Christians can’t dance, watch movies, drink alcohol, serve in the military, or wear pants. However, once we know the truth of God’s Word we have a choice to make. Either we can base our interpretations upon “truths” that best fit our lifestyles and traditions or we can “show ourselves approved to God… by accurately handling the word of truth” (2Tim 2.15).

Obviously, when we disagree with the teaching of Scripture, we typically assume that our interpretations are more “accurate” than those who oppose us! Therefore, I encourage any who would read what Lee and I have written to study the Word for themselves, pray to God, listen to the Spirit, and take their time to learn what God might teach, no matter if it agrees with Lee or me. As Mr. Lee rightly says, “If this is an issue that matters to you, please don't base your views on something like ‘Justin says this’ or ‘Justin believes that.’ Take your time to study the Bible for yourself. Read the passages I mentioned, in their context, to understand them better. Read arguments on both sides of the issue, and don't be afraid to ask difficult questions. Most of all, pray. Pray every day for God's guidance in your life and for the wisdom and humility to admit when you're wrong. If you find that you disagree with fellow Christians, remember that they are still your brothers and sisters in Christ. And they may yet have something to teach you. Follow Christ at all costs. Nothing matters more than that.”