Changing Tide

Introduction

Over the last few years, we have witnessed a Changing Tide in our modern society. Some of it for the good, but a lot of it not so good. It seems as if morals and values have been totally turned around.

I am reminded of Isaiah 5:20:

“20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!”

Or perhaps Proverbs 17:15:

15 He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the Lord.

Some of signs of this changing tide are reflected in the movie and television industry. Over the last few decades, we have seen a rapid increase in depictions of sex, graphic violence, and coarse language, not to mention general themes that tend to embitter and divide people rather than lift them up.

In that same period of time as a society, we have seen a sharp increase in couples living together without benefit of marriage. According to the US Census Bureau, the number of cohabiting unmarried partners increased tenfold between 1960 and 2000. That’s about 21 million people.

We have seen a major shift in the way average Americans view this trend with 55% of Americans approving of men and women living together without being married according to a recent Gallup poll. So many things that were scandalous 50 years ago, hardly raise an eyebrow today.

We have seen massive protests in the name of the LGBTQ and gender fluidity community. Just last month Oklahoma issued its first non-binary birth certificate. That is a birth certificate which lists no gender of the baby, presumably so the baby can choose its own gender at a later date. That move is being protested by the governor and certain state lawmakers, but its legality is already settled in 17 other states.

Today, I want to touch on a difficult subject that has affected each and every family gathered here today in some form or fashion. It is a issue that has been discussed informally in this church many times and is an issue that I believe needs to be addressed from the pulpit. This issue is that of homosexuality.

No matter where you turn in the culture today, the issues of homosexuality and “gender identity” are being hotly debated. Gay rights activists continue to seek after legitimization and approval, not just tolerance, of homosexual behavior which contributes to rapidly changing social mores and values. This has a great impact on our day to day lives regarding our relationship with our family, our neighbors, our co-workers, and our church family.

A lot of this activism is directed at the church because the church is really the last defense of a traditional moral code. If they win, or intimidate, the church they have attained their goal. The pressure has been so great that a lot of churches are now ordaining openly gay ministers and many churches have been founded by homosexuals claiming to be Christians.

I want to examine the reasoning used by the so-called gay Christians and gay churches, and provide for you a sound Biblical theology to counter those arguments. And I also want to address how I expect this church to respond to those confused individuals who may find their way to our church.

In general, there are several broad categories of arguments that gay theological revisionists are employing to cast doubt on God’s Word concerning homosexual behavior:

1. Christians’ prejudice against homosexuals leads them to misread biblical texts about homosexuality.

2. Scriptures that supposedly condemn homosexual behavior have actually been mistranslated.

3. Scriptures that supposedly condemn homosexual behavior have been taken out of context and do not apply to our present society.

Scripture is very clear to lay out the only sexual relationship that is approved by God in the very opening chapters of Genesis:

English Standard Version (Chapter 2)

24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

It seems pretty clear to me that this passage leaves little room for any other interpretation.

I want to give you some verses from Scripture and then explain how the gay theology revisionist try to explain away the clear meaning of the Bible.

Let’s continue in Genesis, Chapter 19. This is the account of the two Angels who came to Sodom, met Lot, and ended up being his house guest:

Genesis 19:4

English Standard Version Chapter 19

4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. 5 And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.”

To us, this is pretty clear indication of the nature of the vile inhabitants of Sodom, and justification for the Lord to destroy the city. The argument of the gay revisionist is that the men of Sodom did not want to have sexual relations with the Angels but merely wanted to investigate these strangers who were in there midst so their city might remain secure.

On the surface, this argument seems to make some since as the word “Know” - yaw-dah' appears about 947 times in the Old Testament and in only about 15 of those occurrences are it related to sex. This word “know” is more commonly translated as understand, or perceive.

The argument against this interpretation can be drawn from the very context of the chapter. Lot tells the men “do not act so wickedly,” or “do not do this evil thing” and then even offers up his own daughters in the place of the Angles. Hardly a stance Lot would take if the men were only interested in investigating these strangers.

Next let’s look at Leviticus 18:22

Leviticus 18:22 ESV

22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

And Leviticus 20:13

Leviticus 20:13 ESV

13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

The gay theologian states that this word “abomination” does not usually mean something that is intrinsically evil, but rather something that is ritually unclean for the Jews and since we are no longer bound by the Jewish law, the warning does not apply to us. They take it on par with things like the prohibition against eating pork, something that was prohibited in the Mosaic Law but does not bind us in the liberty we have in Christ.

The problem with this explanation is that if this is true, it is was only ritually prohibited, then now it is also permissible to engage in:

o Incest with family members (Lev. 18:6-18)

o Sex with children (Lev. 18:17)

o The commission of Adultery (Lev. 18:20)

o having Sex with animals (Lev. 18:23)

o practice Prostitution (Lev. 19:29)

So, clearly, that interpretation has no merit.

Another argument that has been made is the fact that Jesus never specifically addresses homosexuality. This argument lacks authority in a couple of different ways.

First off, there are a lot of things that Jesus does not address specifically. We can’t infer that if Jesus does not specifically address it, it must be permissible. Jesus does not specifically address Ponzi schemes or wire fraud, but that hardly justifies those activities.

My teenage son tried to use this argument with me one time. We had left him home alone for a couple of days for a brief camping trip. He expected us back late in the evening, but we arrived much earlier in the day. We found teenagers sleeping all over the house and a fairly generous collection of empty beer bottles scattered around the house. His argument to me was that I never told him he couldn’t have a big party in the house while we gone.

Another way that this approach lacks authority is that, in fact, Jesus does address this issue in Mark Chapter 10 were He says:

English Standard Version Chapter 10

6 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ 7 ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Now that we have established the authority of Scripture regarding the gay revisionist, what should be our attitude toward people who identify as gay? How should we treat them? What should we say to them? What if they find their way into our church?

The answer is much more simple than you might imagine. Primarily, we must keep Matthew Chapter 22 in mind:

English Standard Version Chapter 22

36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

It doesn’t say “love your neighbor if he is straight,” or love your neighbor if he is the same color as you, or love your neighbor if he is a nice guy, it just says love your neighbor. The second greatest commandment is that we love each other.

I believe we have clearly laid out the fact that homosexuality is a sin. I am speaking here of those vile acts that go against nature and God’s law. Homosexuality is a sin, but you know what? Adultery is a sin, robbery is a sin. Un-forgiveness is a sin.

We tend to view homosexuality as some kind of “super sin.” It is not. It is just sin. Let’s look at

1 Corinthians 6:9–10 ESV

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

There are many people who may feel an unnatural affection from someone of the same sex, but they don’t act on those feelings. It is hotly debated as to why some people have those temptations. Some would argue that they were born gay, so God must have had this in mind for them from the beginning, but a study in 2019 reported in the journal Science, proved that there was no genetic component to homosexuality, you are not born gay as some argue.

Sometimes the roots of homosexuality are environmental in nature. A person born with an absent father, or an overly domineering mother. Sometimes the root lies in an occurrence of molestation that occurred in that person’s life before their core values and believes were solidified.

The point is that having those temptations that you do not act on is not sin, no more than any other temptation that may be visited on anyone of us. Imagine you are walking down the street and discover a wallet laying there unattended. You open it up and it contains several hundred dollars.. It also contains someone’s driver’s license. At this point I might be tempted to commit an act of theft, but I would hope that I would do the right thing and return that wallet to its rightful owner.

You can firmly believe that you are a homosexual and not convert that into a sinful lifestyle by acting on your temptations. Just as an un-married, or divorced person should avoid any kind of a sexual relationship with anyone outside the bonds of marriage. The man who commits adultery is just as guilty as the practicing homosexual.

Just like any sin, there is deliverance if you have the faith to trust your situation to the Lord. There are those who argue that it is impossible, but there are hundreds of examples of people who overcame those sinful temptations with a relationship with the one true God.

Now, suppose a practicing homosexual would find his or her way to our church? I like to think that we would welcome that person to our assembly as we would any other sinner. Does that mean that we would accept their sin, not at all. We would continue to teach and preach God’s Word, we would, with love and compassion, explain why we believe what we believe based on an accurate interpretation of Scripture. We would love the sinner but hate the sin.

As to the work of the church, we would deal with that person as we would with any unrepentant sinner. You are welcome to be here, you are welcome to study with us, but you will not be considered a member and you will have no official capacity or leadership role in our church so long as you are in that category of unrepentance.

Conclusion

These are difficult topics, and it is likely that before too long tremendous pressure may be brought against us because of our stand against sin. The enemy, who is the driver of this movement, has already won the government and Hollywood and most of the media and quite a few churches, but as long as I have any authority over this church we will continue to teach and preach the unchanging Word of the Lord.