Homosexuality

---

Homosexuality & Jesus Ethics

The Jesus Ethics is a very simple and elegant "diagnostic tool" in regards to human behaviour. Jesus Ethics is concerned with the effects of behaviour: "every tree is known by it's fruit". In this regard, Jesus Ethics demands that all ethical considerations remain open for re-evaluation as soon as new information becomes available.

 On the other hand, traditional religious morality makes a-priori assumptions about what is good or evil, regardless of the effects of each action or behaviour. Because religious morality claims to be revealed by God, it is held as eternally fixed and absolute. 

The superiority of Jesus Ethics in contrast to religious morality is evident in many cases throughout the troubled history of religions like Christianity. A classic example is the religious opposition to medical advancements like anaesthesia, blood transfusion and organ transplants. Religious moralists held such developments as evil because "they went against nature" (which religious people equate with God's will), even though their effects were beneficent. 

 The same is true with homosexuality. To the religious moralist, it is a sin because it goes against nature. 

 From the point of view of Jesus Ethics however, it can be said that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality per se, just as there is nothing wrong with heterosexuality per se. Basically, the same ethical rules that apply to heterosexual adults also apply to homosexual adults:

• to treat and value one's neighbour as one would wish to be treated (be nice!).

• to not be exploitive, dominating, manipulative, controlling, violent, or abusive towards others (don't be an ass!).

• to, above all, leave underage people alone (don't be a paedophile!).

Homosexuality and the Future of Christianity

Homosexuality is one of the most challenging issues faced by the Church, as it moves in the uncharted waters of the 3rd Millennium. The stakes are very high because if the Church gets it wrong on this one, it may well embarrass itself to further irrelevance in the decades to follow. It is only a matter of time before science will unlock all the mysteries of human behaviour, including sexuality. If the traditional stance of the Christian Religion against homosexuality will be conclusively proven wrong by medical science, the Church will be further discredited and discarded by mainstream society. In the past, the world reluctantly accepted the Pope's apologies about past mistakes. This time, the world will not be as kind. 

The stakes therefore are high...

The Religious Right VS The Gay Lobby & the "Homosexual Agenda"

Meanwhile, there is a war going on between the Conservative Religious Right and the Gay Lobby. This war is not so evident in Australia as it is in America. The hate between the two warring sides is very great. Both sides demonise each other in the worst possible way. There must be something wrong here...

The accusations hurled by each side are quite serious. On the one hand, the Religious Right accuses the Homosexual lobby of having a sinister agenda to undermine the institution of family, to convert children into homosexuality and even to openly promote paedophilia. On the other hand, the Gay Lobby accuses the religious right of having a sinister agenda to persecute them through imposed legislation and through insisting open hatred and violence against gay people.

These accusations must be addressed by both sides (Religious Right & Homosexual Lobby). 

 Homosexual people should consider whether the Gay Lobby is actually helping their cause or damaging it, should such accusations (covering up for child molesting, employing school recruiting, etc) prove true. 

 Likewise, Christian Churches should consider whether they should affiliate with and support organizations of the Religious Right, in light of the accusations made against them (promoting homophobia, constitutional persecution, etc). 

Both the Gay Lobby and the Religious Right are caught up in a war mindset, actively seeking to destroy each other. Because in war, the first casualty is truth, both sides do not hesitate to employ deception in order to win. If we were to believe them, we would have to conclude that both gays and religious conservatives are demons in human form. Neither side sees any good in their enemy. They really hate each other!

Christianity & Homosexuality Today

According to the editors of Canadian human rights watchdog religioustolerance.org, the debate on homosexuality is the most recent major religious conflict that challenges Christianity: "Beliefs are rapidly changing. Older teens and young adults who are not religious conservatives have generally accepted homosexuality as a normal, natural, fixed, unchosen sexual orientation for a minority of people. They are far more liberal in their beliefs about homosexuality than their parents. Equal rights for gays and lesbians is merely the most recent major social conflict with a strong moral or religious component. Others, such as human slavery, divorce, universal suffrage, access to contraceptives, racial segregation, inter-racial marriage, and equal rights for women have been largely settled. Other social conflicts, like the right of parents to spank children, equal rights for transsexuals have yet to be fully engaged..." (See: HOMOSEXUALITY AND BISEXUALITY )

As they further explain, "the battle is not so much between persons of different sexual orientations; i.e. gays, lesbians, and bisexuals against heterosexuals. Rather, the two most vocal groups are:

1. Religious conservatives, most of whom favor reserving special rights for heterosexuals. They would restrict the rights of individual gays, lesbians, bisexuals and of same-sex committed couples -- including their right to marry. Some work to restore laws which once criminalized same-sex behavior. Some oppose the adoption of anti-gay bashing laws...

2. A number of groups, including religious liberals, mental health professionals; human sexuality researchers; and gays, lesbians, bisexuals and their friends and families of origin tend to favor equal rights for persons of all sexual orientations, and special rights for none... 

Taking an intermediate stance is a large number (perhaps a majority) of... heterosexuals who feel uncomfortable with the idea of homosexuality, who regard it as intrinsically sinful behavior, who reject the concept of same-sex marriage, but who advocate for many rights and protections for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals -- indeed for persons of all sexual orientations. The latter include legislation giving protection against hate crimes, and restricting discrimination in employment and accommodation..." (ibid)

All three branches of Christendom are currently being forced to deal with the issue of Homosexuality. The recent media furore over the Vatican's latest condemnation of homosexuality ("all homosexual activity is seriously depraved") and the ensuing reaction by various "liberal" Catholic groups around the world is just one example of how the large Christian denominations like Catholicism cannot escape the debate. As the spokesman for the Rainbow Sash (homosexual rights) movement, Michael Kelly pointed out: "The church is saying that homosexual expression is evil. From that everything flows," he said. "You can't collude or approve or give any recognition to what is evil. But people around the world are seeing the lives lived by gay people are not evil... The very strident tone shows the horse has bolted and the Vatican is trying to close the gate, but it's too late for that..." ( Vatican bid to stop gay reforms The Age, August 1 2003)

Let us now see how the major Christian Churches are dealing with "the horse that has bolted" and is now running on the wild side...

Homosexuality and the Orthodox Church

The Eastern Orthodox Church is committed to "keeping the traditions" of the Fathers. By doing this it creates a sense of consistency and security for its faithful. In this sense Orthodoxy is a conservative institution. After all conservativism has to do with "conserving" the traditions and resisting change. There are obvious benefits for any institution that remains loyal to its traditions. There is a down side to traditionalism however. It resists change even when it is necessary. The march of history and the increase of knowledge about reality and about the way life works, is a constant "thorn" in the side of conservative institutions like Eastern Orthodoxy. 

By remaining inflexible and unchangeable, the Orthodox Church has somehow become irrelevant to the modern age. A lot of the assumptions behind its traditional teachings are no longer valid. As a result, Orthodoxy is discredited again and again. Of course the "faithful" remain satisfied with the traditional teachings of the Orthodox Church as they get a sense of security in the midst of a rapidly changing and threatening world.

What Orthodox leaders are trying to do is make their cake and eat it. They try to remain faithful to their traditional teachings while refining their attitude to suit the sensibilities of our modern age. In regards to Homosexuality, Orthodox leaders remain adamant in their condemnation of it. In their attempt to be as politically correct as possible however, they tend to treat Homosexuality as a "disease", form which people need to be cured: "Given the traditional Orthodox understanding of the Old and New Testament scriptures as expressed in the Church's liturgical worship, sacramental rites, canonical regulations and lives and teachings of the saints, it is clear that the Orthodox Church identifies solidly with those Christians, homosexual and heterosexual, who consider homosexual orientation as a disorder and disease, and who therefore consider homosexual actions as sinful and destructive... Like all temptations, passions and sins, including those deeply, and oftentimes seemingly indelibly embedded in our nature by our sorrowful inheritance, homosexual orientation can be cured and homosexual actions can cease. With God all things are possible... " ( The Homosexual Christian, by Fr. Thomas Hopko)

So there you have it: "homosexual orientation can be cured and homosexual actions can cease...". Since they have no idea how this may happen, they appeal to the miraculous: "With God all things are possible... ". It is this same realm of the miraculous in which the Fathers of Orthodoxy have relied for centuries to pull off other tricks like celibacy. All this took place in the wider context of sex being something "unholy" and defiling, and as unworthy of truly "spiritual" people. The sexual impulse however is such a formidable power that not even God, as history has shown, was not able to combat. What a frightening force has sexuality been for countless would be Orthodox saints!

But now the horse has bolted even for the Orthodox Church...

It is very interesting to observe the way in which Orthodox leaders react to the gradual acceptance of gays within other denominations like the Episcopalians. For example, they could not help but feel a little superior to their fellow Episcopalians when the Episcopal House of Bishops (USA) recently confirmed the election of an actively homosexual priest to be bishop of a New England diocese. That gesture deeply divided Episcopalians, setting "traditionalists" against "modernists". Compared to the Episcopalians who in the eyes of Orthodox leaders "have lost the plot", the later hail the Orthodox Church as obviously far superior. But they urge humility in their moral and spiritual superiority. 

For example, Fr. John Breck, a Professor of biblical interpretation and ethics at the St. Sergius Orthodox Theological Institute in Paris, urged his fellow Orthodox to avoid boasting: "It would be - and has been - easy for us as Orthodox Christians to point an accusatory finger, to condemn outright what we take to be a gross if not fatal misstep on the part of ecclesiastical authorities, and to dismiss the Episcopal Church as hopelessly beyond the pale. We can not and should not follow the path they have taken. That to most of us, I suppose, is self-evident. But we need to avoid the path of the Pharisee as well... Perhaps the most appropriate emotional response we as Orthodox Christians can have to these recent developments in the Episcopal Church is one of sadness.... It would be easy, and fatuous, to say: "Well, let them become Orthodox!" Many of them were born and raised in a tradition they love and cherish. All their life they have prayed, sung and served in "their Church." And now their Church seems to have been taken hostage by forces alien to what they have known, trusted, respected and honoured. As they put it: they have not left the Church, the Church has left them..."

Being an honest person however, Fr. John Breck looks at the other side of the argument: "Nevertheless, however much we may reject the outcome and the reasoning that underlies it, the vote in the House of Bishops reflects an aspect of the Gospel of Christ that we too often tend to neglect. This is Christ's call to minister to outcasts and the marginalized, whatever the reasons for their behavior or their infirmity. How often was Jesus criticized for fraternizing with tax collectors, prostitutes, the blind, the demon-possessed, and others who were deemed worthy only of divine wrath? If we are tempted to cast stones at the Episcopal authorities, it is in large part because of their defence of gays and lesbians. We Orthodox, on the other hand - missing the crucial distinction between disapproval and judgment - have a long tradition of taking up stones against homosexuals, rather than leaving judgment where it belongs, in the hands of God... We in the Orthodox Church have our own issues with homosexual behavior, and we mustn't forget that. Just as we are called to minister to our own, whatever their sexual orientation and behavior, we are called to serve those of other communions, or of none. In this respect, at least, we are called as well to honor the motivation of many in authority within the Episcopal Church: not to pander to the "gay agenda," but to accept every person, without exception, as a bearer of the Image of God..." (see: On Casting Stones: Episcopalians and homosexuality by Fr. John Breck)

In a nutshell, the Orthodox position on Homosexuality is that of strong disapproval, but not "judgement". Homosexuality is seen as a disease from which people affected must be cured.

Where the Orthodox Church gets it wrong

It gets it wrong in at least two points. 

• 1. That Homosexuality is a result of some inherited Original Sin. 

Time and again the Orthodox leaders speak of homosexuality as some manifestation of the Original Sin humanity has inherited from Adam and Eve. To borrow Fr. Hopko Thomashey's words, the Orthodox clergy views Homosexuality as a sickness "embedded in our nature by our sorrowful inheritance".

It is strange that the Orthodox Church still continues to base its teachings on the long time discredited  myth of the Fall. They speak as if the Fall really happened. As incredible as it sounds, in a joint statement by Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople and Pope John Paul II of Rome, (signed 10 June 2002), we read: "At the beginning of history, man and woman sinned by disobeying God and rejecting His design for creation. Among the results of this first sin was the destruction of the original harmony of creation..." (see: God has not Abandoned the World ). 

Have not these men read history and anthropology? 

Of course they have, but they are too scared to admit that the Biblical authors got it wrong about the doctrine of Original Sin. They have lost the thinking people, they don't want to lose the faithful too. The faithful demand an infallible authority by which to get a sense of security, and the religious  leaders know this. They cannot publicly question the "infallibility" of the Bible. The Bible which begins with the creation by God of Adam and Eve in a Paradise of delights, in "a perfect world", followed by their fall and their punishment. From that point, "the Bible, and the interpreters of the Bible in posterior years, have seen human life under this shadow of sin, guilt, pain and death. The narrative of Genesis 1-3 is one of the most important of the Bible, and permeates the whole Old and New Testament. In the Scripture being human is a synonym of sinful, even up to now, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23)". As ex-Catholic priest Jairo Mejia points out however, the Biblical authors didn't know at the time they wrote down these things, that "the existence of Adam and his fall were a myth or legend, not a fact on which to base their interpretations..." (Jesus, the Redeemer - Problems with the doctrine of redemption, by Jairo Mejia)

In other words, the problem they were trying to solve was based on a faulty premise, and if the premise is faulty so are the solutions! (see: Say no to Original Sin /Atonement / Hell )

Jairo Mejia further reflects on the inability of Christian leaders to give up the doctrine of Original Sin: "This compelling evidence (ie that the Fall never happened) has obligated theologians to change the doctrine regarding original sin. Some say now that it was not Adam but the human race which fell. They want to maintain a doctrine of original sin!... The facts are not there; and death is not the consequence of a sin, but a biological fact of nature. Men have died since the homo sapiens appeared on earth, 500 million years before Adam was "created," and not as a consequence of the "fall," as the traditional doctrine of the original sin says..." (See: "Problems with the doctrine of redemption")

The fact of the matter is that Homosexuality was a common sexual practice at least 60,000 years ago, that is 54,000 years before Adam supposedly introduced sin into the world by disobeying God in the garden of Eden: "In Sierra Da Capivara National Park in Brazil archaeologists have uncovered rocks used as tools by man and remains of fires dating back 60,000 years to the Stone Age. Some 1000 families live close to the park, eking out a living by hunting deer and armadillo. The people, most of them illiterate, gave little importance to hundreds of paintings found on the rocks of the mountains. Faded images in red, white, black and gray of wildlife, such as fish and deer, appear alongside stick-figures hinting and giving birth and graphic illustrations of Stone Age sex. Homosexuality, group sex and seemingly impossible positions for intercourse testify to the relaxed lifestyles of the ancient Brazilians. Guidon first heard of the paintings around 20 years ago and has since dated them back as far as 12,000 years..." (Source: Christian View of Slavery Same As Homosexuality)

Furthermore, homosexuality is also common to the animal kingdom and unless we are to imagine that Adam's sin turned animals gay too, we are forced to the conclusion that the Orthodox tradition regarding the roots of homosexuality is erroneous. 

But gay animals? Really how would the Orthodox theologians explain that? A Zoo Director, Dr Maarten Frankenhuis asks: "What do the humans make of gay animals? Are they considered weird or strange? Or freaks of nature even? "Not by biologists, but possibly by very religious people. It was a real shock to many when homosexuality in animals was first written about. It was always thought it didn't occur. They had the idea it was unnatural. But many visitors here are surprised, they suddenly realise that it is natural. They realise that they themselves, or their sons or daughters are not strange at all, they just belong to a minority. Like people with red hair, they belong to a minority. And, of course, there's nothing wrong with red hair." (see: Animal Queeries )

• 2. That Homosexuals can and should be changed into Heterosexuals.

Orthodox leaders insist that Homosexuals can and must be changed "healed" into Heterosexuals: "Like all temptations, passions and sins, including those deeply, and oftentimes seemingly indelibly embedded in our nature by our sorrowful inheritance, homosexual orientation can be cured and homosexual actions can cease. With God all things are possible. When homosexual Christians are willing to struggle, and when they receive patient, compassionate and authentically loving assistance from their families and friends - each of whom is struggling with his or her own temptations and sins; for no one is without this struggle in one form or another, and no one is without sin but God - the Lord guarantees victory in ways known to Himself. The victory, however, belongs only to the courageous souls who acknowledge their condition, face their resentments, express their angers, confess their sins, forgive their offenders (who always include their parents and members of their households), and reach out for help with the genuine desire to be healed..." (see:  The Homosexual Christian , by Hopko, Fr. Thomas).

Both Homosexual activists and Conservative anti-gay crusaders seem to miss the point when they argue whether a Homosexual can change into a Heterosexual. They forget that not all gays are the same. Some seem to be soooo gay! Others are not even sure themselves what they are... And what about bisexuals? But more on this in the relevant section below.

The point is not whether homosexuals can change but whether they "should" change. Going back to "the Jesus Ethics", is it the humane thing to do when we demand from homosexuals to become heterosexuals? Countless case studies imply that many such religiously attempted conversions in sexual orientation have ended in disasters and lots of human pain. As ReligiousTolerance.org reports: "there exists a lot of anecdotal evidence that failed therapy can drive many gays and lesbians into deep depression; some commit suicide..." (see: REPARATIVE AND SIMILAR THERAPIES). In the end of many such cases, the subjects ( homosexuals that underwent a religiously inspired conversion attempt to heterosexuality ) were far, far, worse off than they were before. Again, we must ask, is it humane to subject our fellow human beings to such ordeals, all in the name of a religious dogma? Or is it better to let them be, and instead teach them the Jesus Ethics (ie., do not hurt or coerce anyone, be kind and compassionate, do not take advantage of people, etc) 

The Orthodox Church has a long way to go in order to become relevant to modern society. Its attitude on homosexuality is one of the areas that require a comprehensive revision. This will probably never happen de juro, since Orthodoxy is a die hard conservative institution, committed to infallibility and absolute truths. It will however happen de facto, as it is already happening keeping thus everyone happy. Not the most honest approach, but for the time being it seems to work... One wonders for how long Orthodox leaders will be able to avoid admitting the obvious, that is, "we got it wrong here and there".

Homosexuality and the Catholic Church

According to the Vatican, "all homosexual activity is seriously depraved" ( See Vatican bid to stop gay reforms ). With statements like these the leaders of Catholicism get themselves into more trouble they are allready in. In effct they are saying, "many of our priests are seriously depraved"! 

American Catholic priests are five or 10 times as likely to be homosexual as ordinary American men. In 1990, an American Franciscan priest mailed a survey to 500 priests selected at random. Forty-five percent of 398 respondents identified themselves as homosexual. "Studies suggest that perhaps 30-50 percent of priests (especially those under 50) are homosexual in orientation, compared with about 5 percent in the population at large," wrote Professor Donald Cozzens of John Carroll University. While the ratio of gay Catholic priests is lower in other countries it is no secret that they are plentiful.

Homosexuality and Mainline Protestant Denominations

The state of the current debate within the ranks of traditional Protestant denominations (ie Uniting, Anglican, Episcopalian, Lutheran, etc) suggests that they are definitely moving towards full acceptance of Homosexuality. For example, the National Assembly of the Uniting Church in Australia has recently voted to allow presbyteries to ordain practising homosexuals as ministers in the church.

Homosexuality and Evangelical Protestantism

Views range from "God hates the sin of homosexuality but loves the homosexual sinner" to "God hates fags". In effect, "Bible believing" conservative Christians denounce homosexuality as "an abomination to the Lord". They quote Scriptures like: "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination" (Leviticus 20:13). 

 Christian Homosexual Groups

• Christian Lesbians Online
• Christianity & Homosexuality
• Gay Christian Readings
• GayChristians.Org
• Lesbigay Christians
• Whosoever: An Online Magazine For Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual and TG Christians
• Rainbow Baptists
• Integrity | Gay & Lesbian Episcopalians and Our Friends
• United Methodist Affirmation
• Lutherans Concerned/North America
• Evangelicals Concerned With Reconciliation (ECWR)
• Radical Experiences in Faith: Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Catholics
• Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Catholic Handbook
• Steps To Recovery From Bible Abuse

The Central Issue: Can (and should) Homosexuals be turned into Heterosexuals?

The common denominator in the traditional rejection of Homosexuality by the Christian Church as a "depravity" is the belief that Homosexuals can and must be "healed" or "saved" from such depravity. Homosexuality is basically seen as a choice people make, otherwise it could not be denounced as a sin. Even when Homosexuality is seen as a "genetic curse", ie punishment by God (see Romans 1:26-27), homosexuals are still held accountable for being born that way and are told to repent, or else...

So the current debate involves questions like, are people born Homosexual, or do they choose to become Homosexual? Or do both explanations apply in varying degrees? Can Homosexuals change into Heterosexuals, and should they change? Should practicing homosexuals be fully accepted into communion by the Church?

As we saw earlier, Orthodox, Catholic and Evangelical Protestant leaders claim that homosexuals can be "healed" and become heterosexuals. as a result they have created what is called REPARATIVE AND SIMILAR THERAPIES for homosexuals. They really believe that homosexuals can change (see: Statements by conservative Christian groups promoting reparative therapy)

The Medical Community however has a different opinion:

After more than 40 years of research on gender identity and sexual orientation, John Money, director of the Psychohormonal Research Unit of the John Hopkins School of Medicine, has observed that "it is no more possible to change a homosexual orientation into a heterosexual one than it is to change a heterosexual orientation into a homosexual one." He reports that claims of change in orientations when carefully examined turn out to be those of "persons who are bisexual to some degree, but are not 100% homosexual, nor 100% heterosexual." (see: So Called Ex-Gay Conversions)

The American Psychological Association released a Statement on Homosexuality in 1994-JUL. Their first two paragraphs are:

• The research on homosexuality is very clear. Homosexuality is neither mental illness nor moral depravity. It is simply the way a minority of our population expresses human love and sexuality. Study after study documents the mental health of gay men and lesbians. Studies of judgment, stability, reliability, and social and vocational adaptiveness all show that gay men and lesbians function every bit as well as heterosexuals.

• Nor is homosexuality a matter of individual choice. Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the life cycle, possibly even before birth. It is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different moral values and standards of a particular culture. Contrary to what some imply, the incidence of homosexuality in a population does not appear to change with new moral codes or social mores. Research findings suggest that efforts to repair homosexuals are nothing more than social prejudice garbed in psychological accouterments. 

In 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American Psychological Association, American School Health Association, Interfaith Alliance Foundation, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Social Workers and National Education Association jointly issued a document titled: "Just the facts about sexual orientation."  They:

• expressed concern about harassment of gay and lesbian youth.

• condemned reparative therapy as potentially harmful and of little or no effectiveness

• describe transformational ministries as representing only one part of Christianity -- those faith groups which view homosexuality as outside God's will, and incompatible with Christianity. They cite other denominations as supporting equal rights, and protection against discrimination, for gays and lesbians... ( source: Professional Associations' statements about Homosexuality )

It is not the medical community alone that debunks the notion that homosexuality is a choice and that gays can be cured. Common sense tells us the same thing: "Christians believe that your sexual preference is a choice, that somehow you can choose to be gay or straight. This is a necessary assumption, for how can being gay be a sin unless it is something that can be chosen? That is why there is so much Christian opposition against the notion that you can be born gay, or that the choice is somehow out of your control. That would remove the activity from the realm of choice. And sin by definition is a choice to disobey God, so any activity that cannot be chosen loses its ability to be classified as a sin. Since being gay is a sin, then it must be a choice. Yet it doesn't take much self-awareness to see that this cannot be true. For example, most of the people reading this are probably straight. So to the straight folks, here is a simple question to ask yourself: did you choose to be straight? In other words, was there a time in your life that you said, "You know, I could go either way. But I think I'll choose to be attracted to the opposite sex?" And if you really are straight (and not bisexual), the answer has to be "no." I can ask myself that question. Did I choose to be straight? Could I ever be attracted to a man? The answer is no. In fact, you can put a gun to my head, and demand that I be sexually aroused by the sight of a naked man. I cannot. Conversely, you can demand that I not be aroused by the sight of a beautiful woman. Still, I cannot. So what does this tell me? It tells me that my sexual preference is not my choice! It is a part of me that I cannot control, that I cannot change. Therefore if my sexual preference is not a choice, how can I expect that it be a choice for a homosexual? The very fact that a person can be attracted to someone of the same sex, shows that they are fundamentally different from me. They do not merely choose to do something that I do not, rather they do something that I can not. So wherever it comes from–be it birth, or behavior learned in early childhood–the reality is that sexual preference is given to us. We cannot choose it. Unless, of course, we are bisexual. In fact, the only way the Christian argument can work is if God created us all bisexual, for only then can sexual preference truly be a choice..." (Sex, by Emery Lee)  

Famous Conservative Christian and evangelist Tony Campolo says the same things. His own research and practice led him to the conclusion that in the majority of cases, homosexuality is not a choice. He also found, upon careful examination, the claims of ex-gay ministries as bogus:

 "...as a sociologist, which is what I am by trade - I got into this analysis of homosexuality back when I was a faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania from '65 to '75, as I talked to my colleagues and I listened and I interviewed over 300 people who were homosexuals, I found that there were certain universal truths. I only interviewed male homosexuals so I can only say I studied that one group. Out of the 300 male homosexuals that I interviewed, I never met a homosexual who chose to be one. That, I have to say right up front. Okay? You can argue over the causes of homosexuality. Let me also add, nobody knows what causes homosexuality. I mean I know that you get these religious publications that talk about this cause and that cause and the other cause. Every social scientist that I know who has analyzed this problem say, we don't know what the causes are. There are those who talk about genetics. There are those who talk about biophysical. There are those that talk about sociological, psychological factors. Nobody knows. And those who are experts say, for the most part, there are a variety of factors that interact with each other to create homosexuality and it may even be that no two people are homosexuals for the same reason. We don't know what causes it. We know this - that at least for the males who I can attest to that I interviewed, the imprintation of the consciousness, the establishment of the orientation occurred so early in the psychosocial development of the individual that the individual never remembers having made a choice. That's important because I often hear rhetoric that says if you just pray and repent and turn away from this that God will honor you and all will be well. And that's the second point..."

 "...We also know that there are very, very few cases where people actually change their orientation. I interviewed significant numbers of homosexuals who, quote unquote, claim to be cures. And I asked them a simple question. Here's the question: Do you ever have sexual fantasies. Now, everybody in this group, except Dr. Horner, has sexual fantasies. Everybody here has sexual fantasies, you see. As a matter of fact, before this program is over, according to, to one study, the average male in this group will have three sexual fantasies. That's why I like speaking in chapel: Where else can you bring so much pleasure to so many people in such a short period of time. The truth is I asked the question of all my homosexuals that I interview and here it is: When you fantasize do you fantasize homosexually or heterosexually? I always get the same answer. We fantasize homosexually. Well, how can you say that you're no longer in a homosexual orientation? So I'm not convinced that you change as easily as some of the televangelists say you're going to change..."

Being an honest man, Tony Campolo concludes that rather than burden his homosexual brothers and sisters with unnecessary pain of "reparative therapies" which he has debunked anyway, he merely calls them to take the burden of celibacy, and this he does, because he believes that as an evangelical, conservative Christian he cannot contradict the Bible:

"As a matter of fact, I would argue that, from my evangelical, conservative position, I'm going to argue that what we really need to do as a church is to provide a framework to help brothers and sister who want to remain celibate, to do so. We need to pray for them. We need to encourage them. We need to support them. We need to stand by them... in the overwhelming number of cases - please, there's always somebody out there that has changed - I am not saying things are impossible. I am just saying, my expectation is that people who are Christian and are homosexual are probably going to remain homosexual.... I call them to celibacy because I've got some problems. There's scripture..." (Is The Homosexual My Neighbour? Tony & Peggy Campolo)

I quoted Tony Campolo because he is a highly respected authority within Evangelical Conservative circles. 

Homosexual essayist Scott Bistrup explains why there is a confusion about the true statistics of homosexuality and why there is an impression among religious groups that all homosexuals may change. He argues that at least for some homosexuals the "swishy queer" such a change is impossible: "Homosexualty and bisexuality, we now know from modern research, is ubiquitous throughout the world. It exists in all cultures, and has at all times in history. A relic of our evolutionary history, homosexuality and bisexuality is very commonly practiced in nearly every culture, whether tolerated or not. The only difference is the openness with which it is practiced... Another thing we know from modern research is that some degree of bisexuality, in the absence of cultural taboos, is not only extremely common in men, but is probably the rule! "Homosexuality of convenience" which occurs in the absence of available female partners (such as is commonly seen in prisons, for example) is widespread even in cultures that frown on homosexuality. Most men, at some time in their lives, experience homoerotic feelings towards other men - whether they choose to admit it or not. The percentage of men who have had a homoerotic experience to orgasm in amazingly high even in America. By the age of 49, fully 60% of American men have had such an experience. We not only know that homosexual experience was ubiquitous, but that it tended to follow certain general patterns, nuanced by local traditions, taboos and prejudices..."

"Among these patterns are a tendency of partnerships to form between adolescents of differing ages, with the older male performing the more active (usually insertive) role, and the younger performing the more passive (usually receptive) role. The more tolerant the society, the older the senior partner became, to the point of being intergenerational in some cases, such as ancient Greece. In nearly all cases, however, taboos existed against homosexual rape, and most such societies had taboos or laws intended to protect an unwilling junior partner from an aggressive senior partner... We also know that there is a small minority of men (estimates range from 3 to 7 percent depending on the criteria examined) who seem to be biologically disposed to homosexual orientation, and for whom there is no element of bisexuality at all. Often these men display feminized characteristics (a "swishy" personality, or a tendency to perform in drag, for example), and these men are usually the ones who show no interest in forming relationships with women (and who often consider even the idea to be repugnant). It is these men, the small minority, that are the source of the stereotype of the "swishy queer." Similarly, at the opposite end of the spectrum, there are a similar number of men who never have had any homoerotic experience at all and find the idea to be repugnant. But that leaves the vast majority of men in the middle, who on at least rare occasions, find other men to be erotically interesting..."

"The fact of the ubiquity of bisexuality is probably the source of the rumor that homosexuality is a chosen orientation. The fact that many men have erotic attraction to both sexes to at least some degree and are therefore offered the opportunity (or required by society) to choose is why many religious groups seem to think that sexual orientation can be changed. There is not a shred of evidence to indicate that a significant shift really can occur - "reparative therapies" succeed only in repressing one sexual response in favor of the other, often with pyschologically devastating results..." ( Saint Aelred The Queer: The Surprising History of Homophobia by Scott Bidstrup)

Evidence that "Ex Gay" Ministries are ineffective and do more harm than good

In a devastating critique of Ex-Gay ministries we read: "It's not possible to change someone's sexual orientation, but it is possible to make them miserable over it. Fundamentalists play on the spiritually and emotionally wounded. Using the tenets of born-again fundamentalism, they try to convince dissatisfied homosexuals - usually young gay men just coming out who are stressed out by family pressure and society's intolerance -that they can change by suppressing their orientation... The Fundamentalists prey on people who are unhappy. what they can't see or won't admit is that they themselves are the sources of this very unhappiness they claim to be treating. Countless people have been misled by ex-gay ministries into believing that sexual orientation can be changed, only to find, even years later, that they had found only temporary happiness in the delusion that they had changed. These "ex-gays" no longer call themselves gay but continue to have same-sex feelings, dreams and arousal. Add to that the pain of many spouses of these individuals who thought they had married a heterosexual..."

"Anyone can suppress one's feelings and live a lie, for a time, but it doesn't work in the long run. Besides, living a lies doesn't seem like much of a Christian ethic. I've known dozens of gay men who at one time or another were pressured or lured into the fundamentalist-run ex-gay movement and all it caused them was more pain. No one I know ever changed. Not only that, no gay person I've ever met has known anyone who changed. When you look at someone trying to be an "ex-gay" what you find are rather sad, desperate people playing mind games and semantics, no "cures" or lasting changes. The whole motivation behind the movement to change gays is political - fundamentalist and conservative politics dressed up in a lab coat..."

"The American Psychological Association has published a free booklet "Answers To Your Questions About Sexual Orientation And Homosexuality" I recommend it highly to anyone who wants unbiased information on this. Some so called "ex-gays" claim they have gone straight. However, the research seems clear that trying to change a natural sexual orientation out of fear of God and guilt seldom works. Perhaps it works for the few that weren't really sure or were there orientation was influenced more by emotional issues than biology. It seems clear however, most gays were born that way and trying to change them is forcing them to live a lie. Some may leave the "gay lifestyle" by altering behavior, but that does not make them heterosexual. They simply become non-practicing gays, that's all. Despite "testimonies" to the contrary, there is not one documented, authenticated case of a actual change in sexual orientation. There has only been change in behavior. Healthy skepticism needs to be exercised of those claiming a heterosexual conversion..."

"One of many highly documented books on the failure of conversions is "One Nation Under God" which chronicles 40 years of people trying to find a "cure" for being gay. One example is Gary Busse and Michael Cooper the gay couple who founded Exodus, a "ministry" aimed at turning gays into "ex-gays." After a few years of teaching this dubious gospel - spread in pamphlets with titles such as "Unhappy and gay? Join the Exodus" -- they admitted to each other that they had fallen in love, quit their movement and started preaching tolerance and self-acceptance instead. They thus became "ex-'ex-gays.'" "One Nation" exposes many other such attempts of how change groups appropriate terminology of other fashionable therapies - calling themselves a "recovery movement", while actually peddling Victorian values and using fear of God and intimidation to scare people straight, which often leads to suicide, not change. At their most absurd, some suggest that what gay men supposedly ought to do is play football; and for lesbians, what they supposedly need is a makeover and a good manicure. This would be hilarious if it weren't so destructive to so many whose only sin is being just who God made them. Sadly those that turn to Exodus International or the now defunct Quest are only asking for more turmoil and inner-hatred. There are asking for a life of continued guilt and despair. That is all such groups can offer gays who are struggling to come to terms with themselves in a hostile and rejecting world (including, sadly, a church that often joins in the condemnation based on mistranslation and application of the Bible.)..."

"Another example is Kent Philpott's book, The Third Sex, in which he gives the testimonies of six homosexuals who supposedly became heterosexual. Within a year after the book was published, all six of the people written about sent notarized affidavits to the publisher, stating that the book was untrue and that they were all still homosexuals. Nevertheless, the book continued to be printed and sold to an unwary public for eight years afterwards. To this day, people are "praising God" for changes that never took place. The continued publication of that book, along with its promulgation for eight years after having received written denials from the subjects themselves, highlight the extent of deception fundamentalists are willing to go to foster belief in a goal based on illusion rather than reality. With fundamentalism it appears that honesty and truth are expendable items. The Kinsey Institute has had an open offer for nearly 40 years to report on a single case of a true change in sexual orientation, not just behavior. In 40 years there has not been a single scientifically documented case of changed sexual orientation..." (source: So Called Ex-Gay Conversions)

Some devastating facts relating to the failure of "reparative ministries":

• Exodus International (1978): The ministry selected 30 of their 800 members as having changed from exclusively homosexual to exclusively heterosexual in orientation. Two outside psychiatrists interviewed the 30 and found that only three were actually heterosexual. Subsequent to the study, two of the male founders of Exodus fell in love and were united in a union ceremony. They claimed that the Exodus program was "ineffective...not one person was healed." The conversion rate, based on the study is 3 in 800, on the order of 0.4%

• Masters and Johnson (1979): This study claimed an impressive conversion rate of 50 to 60% which was maintained for 5 years after treatment. Unfortunately, only five of the 67 participants (7%) began the study with a homosexual orientation. From the available data is quite possible that none of these five converted to heterosexuality. No estimate of the conversion rate can be obtained from this study.

• NARTH (1997): They studied 860 clients whose data was sent by 200 therapists who were members of the organization. When the subjects entered therapy, 68% identified themselves as totally or almost exclusively homosexual. It is not clear whether this referred to sexual behavior or sexual orientation. The actual percentage of homosexuals was not reported; most of the subjects might have been bisexual. When they left therapy, 33% said they were exclusively or almost entirely heterosexual. Again, it is unclear whether this refers to behavior or orientation. Again, the percentage of heterosexuals is unknown. Unfortunately, 63% of the subjects were still undergoing therapy at the time of the survey. Of greater interest would be the percentage of subjects who entered with a homosexual orientation, converted to bisexuality or heterosexuality, and were able to sustain their sexual orientation for, say, two years following therapy. The NARTH report did not track the results of those clients after therapy. It is possible that none of the subjects who entered therapy with a homosexual orientation was able to change their orientation. No estimate of the conversion rate can be obtained from this study.

• Schroeder & Shidlo (in progress): This study is aiming at analyzing the experience of 200 people who have undergone conversion therapy. As of late 1997, they had studied 100 subjects. They reported a conversion rate of 0%.

• OCRT pilot study (2000): The sponsors of this web site surveyed each of the 36 websites of the GayChange WebRing.  These are mainly Internet sites created by individuals or small Christian ministries. From the sites' content, all appear to be Evangelical Christian in outlook. Of the 28 accessible web sites, only one reported what they felt were conversion success. They had two clients who entered therapy with a homosexual orientation, and decided during therapy to remain celibate. One entered therapy as a bisexual and has developed a relationship with a person of the opposite sex. Neither actually changed their sexual orientation. The conversion rate of the Christian ministries sampled was 0%.

• Exodus International (2000): On 2000-JAN-21, the board of directors of the National Association of Social Workers issued a statement which condemned all therapies which attempt to change a person's sexual orientation. Exodus International (EI) offered a rebuttal to that statement. In his rebuttal, Bob Davies, North American director of EI wrote that: "Over 250,000 individuals have contacted various EI offices inquiring about a sexual orientation change. This includes "gays, lesbians, family members, friends, counselors and pastors."... and "Thousands of men and women have stopped homosexual behavior. That is, they have decided to become celibate. These are now "in the process of seeking deeper change in their sexual feelings and attractions."... Unfortunately, he does not estimate how many of these thousands of clients have actually changed their sexual orientation. On 2001-MAY-14, we Emailed EI asking for additional information. Davies does mention that some "are now happily married and raising children." However he does not give estimates of their number, nor does he indicate how many were entered EI as bisexuals and have remained with that sexual orientation. No estimate of the conversion rate can be obtained from this study.

• Spitzer (2000): Dr. Robert Spitzer conducted a study of 143 "ex-gays" and 57 "ex-lesbians" who had reported that they had become "straight." In fact, the data shows that few are now heterosexual. He reported that 89% of the men and 63% of the subjects emerged from therapy still having feelings of attraction to persons of the same-sex. 16 (11%) of the men and 21 (37%) of the women report that they now have a heterosexual orientation. Again, it is not known how many entered therapy as bisexuals or as homosexuals. A total of 86 of the 200 subjects were referred to Dr. Spitzer by conservative Christian groups specializing in homosexual ministry; NARTH referred 46 subjects; other sources provided 68. It is apparent that the individuals that Dr. Spitzer interviewed were hand-selected from a very large group of persons who had either a homosexuals or a bisexual orientation. The 46 subjects from NARTH might have been chosen as the most successful patients from as many as 250,000 individuals who entered therapy. Unfortunately, no data has been reported about the total number of persons from whom the 200 carefully selected patients were provided. Assuming that only 100,000 subjects were involved -- a VERY conservative figure, then 37 "success stories" represents a conversion rate of 0.04%

Conclusion: From the available data, four studies reported a "success" rate during conversion therapy of 0.4%, 0.0%, 0.0 and  0.04%. That is, conversion therapy has a failure rate in excess of 99.5% during each study. Considering the anecdotal data which indicates a large percentage of extremely depressed and suicidal clients emerging from conversion therapy, it would appear that this form of therapy is worthless. It may well result in the death by suicide of more gays and lesbians than it "converts" to a heterosexual orientation.  Unfortunately, we cannot be certain of this. The quality of the studies is extremely poor. (source: REPARATIVE THERAPY & TRANSFORMATIONAL MINISTRIES: ESTIMATES OF SUCCESS RATES )

On Prodigy Richard Kennedy Jr we read: "I worked on a national syndicated TV show. We contacted numerous groups to find individuals who were former homosexuals and were "cured." Getting lists of names, we called each one. One of our first questions was "did you consider yourself homosexual or bisexual before going in for treatment?" everyone of the hundred-plus people we contacted (and remember our names came from the clinics) told us they were bisexual. We never found one who (out of 120 people) was "formerly gay" and "now is straight". We also asked the bisexual "cured" if they still have a sexual desire toward same sex contacts. Almost everyone who had been "cured" claimed to still have such desires. The handful of those "totally cured" were asked when they finished their treatment not one had their "cure" last more than 2 months. We never found a candidate for the "cured" homosexual program, so we had bisexuals instead. Thousands of gay and lesbian Christians who previously sought any means to change have now found healing from the self loathing society and the church has taught them to feel. They have gone on to develop Gay Christian organizations such as Dignity, Integrity, Affirmation, Evangelicals United, and the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches where they can truly share the Good News of God's love for all his people. They have further helped Gays and Lesbians learn to life lives of honesty and integrity, something which Exodus and the other "lie about who you are for the sake of acceptance: organizations can never do. No wonder 30% of gay teenagers attempt suicide when faced with this kind of guilt-instilling and self-loathing education. May God save His suffering gay children from the abuse and despair brought on by the well-intentioned, albeit ignorant and destructive, efforts of uninformed Christians and groups like Quest and Exodus International..."

The Gays argue their case

Why are homosexuals often in great pain?

It is commonly claimed that gays should be rescued from homosexuality because it is a destructive lifestyle that causes them a lot of pain. Is this true? A gay person protests: "Who is responsible for many gays being frustrated, angry, alienated and depressed by their situation? Gays would have no problem living their lives in peace and prosperity (they often have highest average income levels), if the majority who are straight would recognize the legitimacy of the sexual orientation most were born with. But straights and the Church especially based on lies and false biblical teachings, discriminate, demean and persecute them - not to mention the extra burden of feelings of guilt, inferiority and despair the church hangs around their necks until they choke and collapse under the load. Lets but responsibility where it belongs for the pain of gays and lesbians - at the door of the homophobic church and society. Homosexuals are six times more likely to commit suicide than heterosexuals and more are alcoholics. These facts say as much about the heterosexual as they do the homosexuals. Sick people in the "straight" community have long been bent on guaranteeing that the life for homosexuals is a living hell..." (source: http://www.lionking.org/~kovu/bible/section11.html#Oprah )

Failed gay cures force many to leave Christianity

There are many personal accounts of those that have tried very hard to change out of the fear of God, but failed to do so. Many leave Christianity "feeling they can't respect a God that would make them gay and then condemn them..."

There Are Some Only Emotionally Homosexual Not Naturally

"A women who was raped at the age of 4 by a man, found much more emotional closeness and understanding with women, and "turned" lesbian. But then she "found" God and "converted" to being heterosexual. She was not truly a lesbian in the first place, her early life experiences caused her to fear and avoid men. Yet some Churches call this proof that all homosexuals can be changed. Similarly many men who had poor childhood experiences emotionally become gay. These situations exist but appear to me very much the minority. Most homosexuals were born that way, did not have some bad emotional experience but are naturally homosexual. Also some people may have a natural born bisexuality, to naturally enjoy both sexes..."

A Test For All Heterosexuals

A gay challenges us heterosexuals to do a thought experiment: "Try to imagine, I mean REALLY try to imagine this scenario. What if the Bible said that heterosexual activity was immoral, sinful, and to be despised and avoided, while homosexual relations were the norm the homosexuals were following the will of God. Now try saying to God: "I realize I am a sinner. My heterosexual life cannot be tolerated any more. I must break off my "wonderful" intimate relationships with my companion/spouse of the opposite sex, and make an attempt to live a normal life loving only those of my gender." Such a shift would be anything but a simple act of recognizing one's "sinful ways" yet that is what many expect homosexuals to do!"

Ex Gay failed marriages

Imagine this, a homosexual male is pressured to become a heterosexual, he tries hard to do so (due to the power of religious fear), and comes to the point of acting like a heterosexual and finally marries a woman. After a while, he finally admits to himself that he is still gay, breaks up the marriage and goes on to live as a gay. This has happened to ex-gays. Imagine the unnecessary pain and suffering to all parties involved (including the poor bride!). 

Further Reading: American Psychological Association ("APA") Warns of "Change Therapy" for Homosexuals
& The "Ex-Gay" Fraud

"Smart Christianity" is the Only Way to the Future

As an advocate for what I call "Smart Christianity" (another name for New Christianity) I believe that in the end reason must prevail. Smart Christianity, which by the way is the only kind of Christianity that has a hope to survive in the future, must always pass the test of rationality and common sense. Smart Christianity is based on the Jesus Ethics discussed elsewhere .

The greatest challenge for Smart Christianity is to demolish the wall of separation between the Conservative Right and the Gay Lobby. This alienation is the saddest part of the whole debate. Each side is demonising the other in their desperate efforts to forward their cause. As a result the vicious cycle of hatred is perpetuated with no end in sight. But nothing is impossible for the gospel of reconciliation. Smart Christianity is called to draw insights and wisdom from the gospel of reconciliation in order to dissolve the whole debate, which is nothing but a wall of separation between people. It goes without saying that Smart Christianity must resist the temptation to adopt the mentality of totalism. Neither Homosexuals nor Christian Conservatives are demons in human form. They are all human beings equally loved and accepted by God. Even if there be Homosexual or Conservative "agendas", they are but side-effects of a much deeper problem, which is nothing else but the alienation between people with conflicting realities, interests and needs. 

What Would Jesus Say To A Gay?

I attempt to answer this question by quoting a real question made by a real person to a real psychologist:

"Question: I am an 18-year-old male. I am worried I may be gay, and I do not want to be at all. I think I may because I have masturbated to gay porn and thought of what it would be like to be with a guy. I have even thought of my best friend when I masturbated. I feel really bad about that. I have a girlfriend, and I am attracted to her. We have done stuff together, but I have never had an orgasm with her, and that worries me. I hope you can tell me that this is normal (I pray to God that it is) and that a lot of guys go through this. I think that I am straight, but I worry about everything, and this has been worrying me a lot lately. I will feel much better if I know this is normal..."

"Answer: It's pretty common for teen-age boys to have some same-sex sexual fantasies, or even contact, without that meaning that they're gay. Of course, without more information, I can't say whether your experiences indicate you might be straight, gay or bisexual ... although the fact that you're attracted to your girlfriend and you think you're straight does suggest to me that you probably aren't gay... But you know what? I don't think there would be anything wrong if you WERE gay. There's no reason to be ashamed of sexual orientation, in my opinion, as long as we're talking about consensual sex between adults. Same-sex attraction is what's "normal" for some people, probably due largely to biological factors. The main problem with being gay (aside from the obvious difficulty it presents in procreation) is the prejudice against it, and what that prejudice often leads people to do...

...Homophobia can fuel violence against gays and lesbians, discrimination of various kinds, and religious condemnation. As a result, many gay people keep their personal life secret, which can be an emotional strain. And some try to deny their sexual orientation even to themselves, getting married and having children -- only to eventually come out of the closet, to their spouses' and children's dismay... Enough about that. You say that you've never had an orgasm with your girlfriend, and that you worry about everything. What if those two things were connected? Anxiety can interfere with sexual desire and performance, just as depression can. How about if you try to ease up on yourself for a while ... about sex and everything else? See if taking some pressure off helps. If that doesn't work, or if you continue to worry (about sex or anything else), please consider seeing a psychologist with whom you can talk further about these issues...." (source: Personal-Sexual Health  )

I think that the above Q&A excerpt demonstrates the difficulty of issues like homosexuality. The complexity of the problem increases when the religious factor is added to the equation. Imagine if the 18 year old male in question was a Christian and he somehow found the strength to approach a priest or pastor about his problem. It depends on how liberal or conservative the minister is. What do we imagine the Christian minister would say? 

We know what a liberal Christian would say, something along the lines of what the psychologist replied. We also know what Scriptures a Conservative Christian would quote... 

But is there a better way? A more intelligent way to address this really difficult topic. Can "Smart Christianity" make any difference in the field of human behaviour? Can we Christians offer any valuable insights to people like this 18 year old male?

To make it more interesting, what do we imagine Jesus would say to this confused young man? 

If we are to be "Smart Christians", how are we to think on these issues?

The Bible & Homosexuality

The Homosexuality debate is one more example of why the Bible cannot and should not be used as an absolute external authority to settle disputes. In the case of Homosexuality this can be seen in the following ways.

1. The Bible can be interpreted to prove both sides of the Homosexuality debate

One can pick and choose which interpretation suits his/her preconceived ideas about Homosexuality. It must be understood that both sides of the debate makel claims to validity in their interpretations of the Biblical Data. Both sides claim Biblical Scholars that support their views. As Religioustolerance.org reports, there are many different conclusions reached about homosexuality by conservative, mainline and liberal Christians. This only just proves the point that the Bible is not to be used in such a way..

I personally think that the Biblical authors understood homosexuality as a sin. But I think that they were mistaken, as they were mistaken on several other points. TVC Weekly News: Only 9% Of Christians Have A Biblical Worldview

2. The Bible fails as an external "infallible" authority on morality

This is amply demonstrated in the following example with "Dr. Laura". Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a US radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. On her radio show recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter, penned by a US resident, which was posted on the internet:

Spong on Homosexuality and the Bible

The retired Bishop John Selby Spong writes: "Again and again over the last twenty five years negativity toward gay and lesbian behavior has been justified by an appeal to something some Christians continue to call "biblical morality," and to assert that there is something called "clear biblical teaching. One wonders what those phrases mean. "Clear biblical teaching" and "biblical morality" are not phrases of recent origin. They have been used in the debates over the centuries on a wide variety of issues. Yet when the smoke of battle over these ancient issues has cleared, it has always been the Christians, bruised and battered, but still clinging to their Bibles, who have been forced to slink away in defeat. But no matter how many times the "clear biblical teaching" has been shown to be dead wrong, the next new insight that challenges the patterns of the past goes through the same hostile process. Religious people do not seem to learn much from history. The Bible had to be proved wrong before the divine right of kings could be pushed aside and the Magna Carta accepted. It had to be defeated before Galileo's ideas about the non centrality of this planet in the universe could usher in the world of astronomy, and before Darwin's understanding of evolution could win the day. The clear teaching of the Bible also had to be overcome before slavery and segregation could be ended and before women could escape their second class status. In a remarkably similar pattern today, a major impediment to the quest for justice and the full acceptance for gay and lesbian people in the life of this society is the Bible, which is quoted over and over again to justify the homophobic prejudice that still so deeply infects our culture... Homophobia is a prejudice largely created and sustained by the scriptures of the Judeo -Christian tradition. However, the Bible is destined to lose this fight also and homophobia will join the parade of other human and religious evils like racism, chauvinism, the condemnation of mentally ill people, left-handed people and anti-semitism as one more dark cloud in Christian history, a killing prejudice that endured far longer that it should have because it was supported by "the inerrant word of God."... But how accurate is the claim that the Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin? At best the record is ambivalent..."

"There are seven biblical passages that are regularly cited by fundamentalist Christians and their fellow travelers to justify their condemnation of homosexuality. Three are in the Old Testament and four are in the New Testament. However, three of the four found in the New Testament are highly suspect and appear to refer to sexual anomalies such as temple prostitution, pederasty or forced sexual activity which are quite unrelated to homosexuality. So the biblical texts that actually condemn homosexuality as we today understand it, are only four in the entire Bible and none of them, interestingly enough, is found is the Gospels. According to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. Given the all consuming nature of the current ecclesiastical debates on this issue that fact comes as a shock. Jesus does talk about those who are victims of prejudice like the Samaritans, and those who are marginalized and rejected like the lepers, but he never says a word about anyone's sexual orientation. Perhaps church leaders should contemplate the possibility that they are, as one man once suggested, "making much of that which cannot matter much to God."... When we turn to examine these four biblical proof texts, other insights develop. The first passage is found in the Book of Genesis, and relates the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. That narrative has given us the rather inelegant words sodomy, sodomite and sodomize. It is a strange story about ancient middle eastern hospitality laws and the right of the people of any town to harass and to violate sexually, any strangers to whom no fellow citizen has extended the protection of hospitality. This failure of hospitality left strangers at the mercy of the base elements of the city. Humiliating an unprotected visitor by forcing him to act like a woman in the sex act, was the supreme insult in these cruel and insensitive days. That is the underlying reality described in this biblical episode. Lot, Abraham's nephew, gave his protection to two male visitors at the end of the day when preparations for sexual abuse had already begun. The men of Sodom were furious and sought to take their intended victims by force. It is interesting that every time this story is referred to in other texts of the Bible it is the sin of inhospitality not homosexuality that is its focus. The climax of the story comes when Lot is judged by God to be righteous and is thus spared when the city of Sodom is destroyed. Yet Lot, seeking to protect these male visitors , who were said in the text to be angels, from being violated, offered to make his two virgin daughters available to the mob to be gang raped. After all they were only women! Later in this same story the "righteous" Lot has sex with these same two daughters and impregnates them. I never hear this narrative quoted to affirm incest! Yet this strange biblical passage continues to be used to condemn homosexuality. Perhaps those who quote it in this manner might want to read the whole story!"

"Next there are two passages in the book of Leviticus which are part of the Torah. Leviticus 18 condemns a man for 'lying with a man as with a woman" and Leviticus 20 requires the death penalty for this offence. First, it needs to be noted that even John Paul II, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson, all of whom regularly condemn homosexuality as a sin condemned by scripture, refrain from calling for the death penalty as the punishment for this offence. They know that a campaign for the execution of homosexual people would not be tolerated so in a pattern of what might be called "selective literalism" this verse of the Bible is simply ignored..."

"Second, one wonders why several other Torah rules have been generally ignored while this one is elevated to the status of "the word of God." The Torah prescribes a kosher diet which fundamentalists today ignore. The Torah says that a person cannot make a garment of two different kinds of fabric. It says that those who worship a false god should be executed and so should those children who are disobedient and who talk back to their parents! It orders people to observe the Sabbath by refraining from all activity save worship on Saturday. It assumes that slavery is a legitimate social institution, while defining women as the property of men. A book containing this kind of dubious ethical teaching hardly seems to be a competent authority to be used to make moral judgements about homosexuality..."

"The premier New Testament passage condemning homosexuality is found in Romans 1 and is from the hand of Paul. It is the strangest of all the biblical arguments. Paul suggests in this passage that God will punish those people who do not worship God properly. The punishment will be that God will confuse their sexual identities so that men will lie with men and women with women. What a strange God! Thus saith the Lord; "If you don't worship me properly I will turn you into being gays and lesbians." I have a hard time imagining any one worshiping such a capricious and egocentric deity..."

"Quoting the Bible is not a legitimate argument to deploy in the current ecclesiastical and cultural debate on homosexuality. It is nothing more than an outdated and ignorant appeal to the prejudices of yesterday. It is an illegitimate and even a profane way to approach scripture. It does not illumine the complex issues of sexual orientation. This approach to the Bible should either cease forthwith or the Bible used in this manner should be relegated to the same dustbins of history where the text in the Book of Joshua, stopping the sun in the sky to prove that Galileo was wrong, now resides. Quoting the literal Bible in the service of one's prejudices must be named as incompetence even if it involves a proof text from "the world of God." ( The Bible and Homosexuality by John Shelby Spong )

Wink on Homosexuality and the Bible

Renown Biblical Scholar Walter Wink writes: "There is no biblical sex ethic. The Bible knows only a love ethic, which is constantly being brought to bear on whatever sexual mores are dominant in a given country, culture or period. Despite ones revulsion against homosexuality, nevertheless, it appears, for some persons, to be the only natural form their sexuality takes.... No more divisive issue faces the churches of this country today than the question of ordaining homosexuals. Like the issue of slavery a century ago, it has the potential for splitting entire denominations. And like the issue of slavery, the argument revolves around the interpretation of Scripture. What does the Bible say about homosexuality, and how are we to apply it to this tormented question? " ... "Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13 leave no room for manoeuvring. Persons committing homosexual acts are to be executed. The meaning is clear: anyone who wishes to base his or her beliefs on the witness of the Old Testament must be completely consistent and demand the death penalty for everyone who performs homosexual acts. This was in fact the case until fairly recent times -- hence the name “faggots,” which homosexuals earned while burning at the stake. Even though no tribunal is likely to execute homosexuals ever again, a shocking number of gays are murdered by “straights” every year in this country... Romans 1:26-27,  like Leviticus 18 and 20, unequivocally denounces homosexual behavior: For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. No doubt Paul was unaware of the distinction between sexual orientation, over which one has apparently very little choice, and sexual behavior. He apparently assumes that those whom he condemns are heterosexual, and are acting contrary to nature, “leaving,” “giving up,” or “exchanging” their regular sexual orientation for that which is foreign to them. Paul knew nothing of the modern psychosexual understanding of homosexuals as persons whose orientation is fixed early in life, persons for whom having heterosexual relations would be acting contrary to nature, “leaving,” “giving up” or “exchanging” their usual sexual orientation. ... Paul believes that homosexuality is contrary to nature, whereas we have learned that it is manifested by a wide variety of species..."

"Nevertheless, the Bible quite clearly takes a negative view of homosexuality, in those few instances where it is mentioned at all. And the repugnance felt toward homosexuality was not just that it was deemed unnatural but also that it was considered unJewish, representing yet one more incursion of pagan civilization into Jewish life. But this conclusion does not solve the hermeneutical problem of our attitude toward homosexuality today. For there are other sexual attitudes, practices and restrictions which are normative in Scripture but which we no longer accept as normative" (see: Biblical Perspectives on Homosexuality by Walter Wink )

Disclaimer: This site is not intended to be a substitute for proper medical, professional or spiritual advice for those who suffer from the type of problems that the site covers. The site or its editors cannot take any legal or other responsibility for visitors and readers' responses to the site. It is the responsibility of visitors whether they choose to read the features and articles, and whether they choose to follow any advice therein. The site and the articles are intended to be helpful and positive. Also please note that we cannot take any responsibility for the quality or nature of the external links to other web sites which are found on this site.