Jump directly to the content

Let's Not Cut Christ to Pieces

Struggling with homosexuality is a paradox, but embracing homosexuality is a contradiction.
Photo by Jeffrey Smith / Flickr

Let's Not Cut Christ to Pieces

Can Christians embrace a same-sex lifestyle and still be members in good standing in a Christian church?

I've been asked to comment on the controversy provoked by a recent interview in the Atlantic with Alan Chambers, the president of Exodus International—an evangelical ministry founded to help Christians and non-Christians find freedom from the guilt and power of a same-sex lifestyle.

Christians may debate public policy, but in this interview, Chambers raises issues that are very clearly addressed in Scripture. Especially when we are dealing with human lives, daring to draw our counsel from God, we need to affirm the simplicity of biblical teaching on the subject while rejecting an over-simplifying of the issues involved.

The problem (sin and death) as well as the solution (redemption in Christ through the gospel) are simple, but hardly simplistic. In terms of sin, Scripture is quite clear about the condition (original sin—guilt, bondage, corruption leading to death) and the acts that arise from it. There are versions of the pro-gay and anti-gay agenda that assume a simplistic rather than simple understanding of the issue—at least from a biblical perspective. Reject it or embrace it: that's the easy choice that makes for great sound-bites but ruins lives.

So let's apply this "simple but not simplistic" formula to homosexuality.

Simple …

First, the Bible's teaching on the subject is simple in the sense of being straightforward and unambiguous. Does Scripture forbid homosexual behavior? Of course it does. Jesus and his apostles taught that God's intention in marriage is for a man to leave his parents and join himself to one woman (Matt. 5:27-32; 19:3-6). Furthermore, the New Testament clearly teaches that homosexuality is immoral (Rom. 1:26-27; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; 1 Tim. 1:10) and that those who embrace a sexually immoral lifestyle will not inherit Christ's kingdom (Gal. 5:19-21; 6:7-9; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes. 4:2-8). Isn't it more complicated than that? After all, doesn't Paul have in mind relationships based on temple prostitution or perhaps slavery, rather than committed relationships? No, the noun arsenokoitēs means "those who practice homosexuality." It is an unusual compound, but it makes Paul's point. And it's not like prohibitions against eating shellfish or pork chops: part of the old covenant law that distinguished Israel visibly from the nations as a theocratic nation, which foreshadowed Christ and is now obsolete since the reality (Christ himself) has arrived.

As with the law, Scripture is also marvelously simple in proclaiming the gospel: Christ has won for us that victory over sin's guilt, dominion—and ultimately, presence—that we were helpless to defeat.

… Without Being Simplistic

However, just at this point the complexity of both sin and redemption come into the picture. If sin were just a behavior, we could stop it. If we had done it a lot, we might need some help in stopping it, but eventually—if we tried hard enough—we could. However, sin is not just a behavior. Long before they made any choice about what to do with it, people were predisposed toward same-sex attractions. Affirming original sin, Christians don't have trouble accepting this. We reject the Pelagian reduction of sin to an action that one can overcome with enough will-power. We are depraved (warped) in every respect: spiritually, morally, intellectually, volitionally, and physically. Long before genetics became a flourishing field, Christians have spoken about sin as an inherited condition. Furthermore, we can inherit specific sins—or at least tendencies—of our fathers and mothers. Then add to that the ways in which people are sinned against by the attitudes and behaviors of others, especially in childhood. So even before we actually decide to take that first drink, place that first bet, unleash our first punch, or fool around with our best friend, we are already caught up in the tangled web of solidarity in sin. At the same time, we are responsible for our choices, which reinforce or counter the specific sins toward which we are especially disposed.


More from Christianity Today
Grieving with the Good Friday God

Grieving with the Good Friday God

Shannon Polson sought healing from her father's death by retracing his fatal journey into the Alaskan wilderness.
Onward, Christian Couple

Onward, Christian Couple

How marriages can survive deployment—with some help from the church.

La complejidad hispana: Todo cambió en el 2012

¿Hacia dónde vamos?—Una palabra para los creyentes hispanos sobre forjar un futuro.
Jesus' Elevator Speech

Jesus' Elevator Speech

Or was it his inaugural address? There's a difference.
Get Instant Access
Christianity Today Magazine
Subscribe now for a year (10 issues) at $24.95 for print, iPad, and instant web access.

International Orders

Comments

Displaying 1–3 of 31 comments

Edward Kotynski

February 19, 2013  7:20am

I find it interesting that most, if not all, Arminians would agree with almost everything that Horton said. And, if I may say so, he didn't have appeal to Reformed theology as Witherington appealed to Wesleyan Arminian theology for his response. However, while Horton affirms the first of the doctrines of grace (Total Depravity), he does not seem consistent with the other doctrines of grace . . . e.g. he says that one must repent in order to be saved. He suggests that there are conditions to our salvation, which does not seem very Reformed. However, it does seem Biblical.

Report Abuse

Colin Smith

September 25, 2012  7:00am

The article is based on the view that homosexual activity is wrong because the Bible says so. The same view was used in the past to say that slavery is okay. It would be better to use the objective no-harm test, based on Romans 13:9-10. If no harm is caused by something, then it is okay. Loving homosexual activity passes the no-harm test but slavery does not.

Report Abuse

Pilgrim Progress

August 10, 2012  8:57pm

He promotes the logic (illogic) of a deeply closeted gay man, fearful of burning in hell for his natural orientation. He gives us all that nonsense about the word "homosexuality" being found in Paul's writings. It is not. This young man is dazed and confused in his own circular logic. He conspicuously avoids the reality of "orientation" reducing it to a choice "to sin or not to sin." No educated scientist or theologian falls into that simplistic misinformation anymore. If he is gay, unhappy, and confused, just say so. If he thinks he can "change his orientation" through prayer, bible reading, fear or guilt.....have at it. Your relationship with God will get even more angry and remote, becaus you will have taken the cure in vain. If you are gay, God made you that way. Strive to find your true self in that. Just don't preach "repair from sin." It's illogical, abusive, and doesn't work.

Report Abuse
See All 31 Comments
You must be a Christianity Today subscriber to post comments
(on articles open to the public, you must at least register for a free account).
Login
or
Subscribe
or
Register

Don't Miss

Forgiving Iran

Forgiving Iran

Long before I knew the true God, he helped me release my hatred.
Diagnosing the Demonic

Diagnosing the Demonic

Can you recognize the presence of evil spirits?

Acting Like Jesus

Acting Like Jesus

An unlikely theatrical role enabled me to connect with unbelievers.

more | current issue

Today's Christian Woman

"One Another"

"One Another"

How 12 New Testament...

Books & Culture

A Measure of Forgiveness

A Measure of Forgiveness

Memories of a British...

Small Groups

Why Small Groups Matter to Me

Why Small Groups Matter to Me

I've had a passion for...

Christian Bible Studies

Mental Illness Has a Face

Mental Illness Has a Face

What I learned while...

Facebook

CT eBooks & Bible Studies


Shopping