Homosexuality is unnatural. This is a fact of life that should be obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of human anatomy. Our bodies are definitely not designed for sexual relations with members of the same sex. Furthermore, such relations preclude reproduction and would consequently lead to the extinction of the human race if generally practiced. Granted, homosexuals will argue that such is not necessarily the case today, thanks to modern-medicine’s artificial insemination; but the key word here is “artificial,” which means unnatural.

Whether we’re talking about copulation or reproduction, homosexuality leaves its practitioners without natural options. It is therefore perversion, plain and simple. There is no doubt about it and no getting around it, no matter the quantity or seeming quality of countervailing arguments.

Homosexuality is wrong. It is a sin, as the Bible clearly teaches. For instance, consider the following:

1. The word “sodomy,” which originally meant unnatural sexual relations with a member of the same sex, was derived from the homosexual proclivities of the men of Sodom, whom the Bible describes as “sinners before the Lord exceedingly” (Genesis 13:13). According to Genesis 18:16-33, God determined to destroy the Sodomites because “their sin [was so] grievous.” Following an attempt by the city’s male inhabitants to forcefully have sex with a pair of angels, God destroyed Sodom with “brimstone and fire…out of heaven” (Genesis 19:1-28).

2. In the New Testament, Jude refers to God’s destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah with fire and brimstone as a warning of the punishment of “eternal fire” that awaits all who are guilty of sexual perversion (Jude 7).

3. In both Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, the Bible calls homosexuality “an abomination”; that is, “a detestable thing” in the eyes of God.

4. In Deuteronomy 23:17-18, God forbids the inclusion of “sodomites”—male prostitutes—among His chosen people.

5. In Judges 19:22, homosexuals in Gibeah, who demand that a visiting Levite be handed over to them for their sexual pleasure, are condemned as “sons of Belial,” which means “wicked” or “worthless men.”

6. In Romans 1:18-32, the sin of homosexuality is condemned in no uncertain terms. Paul identifies it as a sin that is characteristic of people who have been given over by God “to a reprobate [depraved] mind.” According to the Apostle Paul, once homosexuals begin giving into the “uncleanness” and “vile affections” of their sinful “lusts,” they proceed to “dishonor [degrade] their own bodies” by doing that which is “against nature” and “unseemly.” Despite the fact that they know “the judgment of God”—“that they which commit such things are worthy of death”—homosexuals persist in their sin and even “have pleasure” in others who do the same.

7. In 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (NIV), Paul makes it plain that no one practicing the homosexual lifestyle—“male prostitutes or homosexual offenders”—will “inherit the kingdom of God.” Furthermore, Paul intimates that no Christian is a homosexual. Although some Christians “were” homosexuals before being “washed…sanctified [and] justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of God,” no true Christian will ever be found living the homosexual lifestyle subsequent to conversion.

8. In 1 Timothy 1:8-11, Paul numbers homosexuals—those “that defile themselves with mankind”—among “sinners” who are “lawless…disobedient…ungodly…unholy and profane.”

Just as a basic understanding of human anatomy leads to the inevitable conclusion that homosexuality is sexual perversion, a basic understanding of the Scripture leads to the inevitable conclusion that homosexuality is a sin against God. Refusing to acknowledge these obvious truths is neither helpful to homosexuals nor proof that we’re not homophobic. Instead, it is harmful to homosexuals and only proves that we don’t love them enough to tell them the truth (Ephesians 4:15).

In Galatians 4:16, the Apostle Paul asked the church in Galatia, “Have I become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” Far from making him their foe, Paul’s persistence in speaking the truth proofed that he was in actuality the Galatians’ friend. Only those who genuinely care for you can be counted on to always speak the truth to you. Anyone who refuses to tell you the truth, because he is more concerned about your feelings than your general welfare, should never be counted among your true friends.

Contrary to popular opinion, those who refuse to pass out permission slips to the sexually promiscuous of our day are not hatemongers wishing ill upon the practitioners of sexual perversion. In the case of Bible-believing Christians, they are simply people genuinely concerned for the sakes and souls of the sexual immoral. Far from being a bunch of hate speech-spewing, hate crimes-scheming hatemongers, Bible-believing Christians are really homosexuals’ best friends. After all, who else cares enough for homosexuals to tell them the truth?

You may be horribly offended by what the Bible says about homosexuality, especially if you or a loved one is homosexual. As a result, you may choose to discard the Scripture as the mere musings of an antiquated text. I, for one, recognize your God-given right to do so. As a Southern Baptist, one of the cardinal tenets of my faith is the doctrine of soul competency. Soul competency is the belief that each individual soul is seen by God as competent to decide for itself what authority to ascribe to the Scripture, as well as competent to answer to God for whatever decision it makes.

You, like all men, are free to discount the teachings of the Scripture as sheer nonsense and to ascribe to the Bible no authority whatsoever. You should be aware, however, that the Bible you discount warns of a day when you will give an account of yourself to God (Romans 14:12). Furthermore, on that day, the Bible itself will prove to be the standard by which God judges you (John 12:48). Granted, you may write-off this biblical warning, insisting that it is void of all trepidation due to your dismissal of the Bible as balderdash. Still, in spite of such smugness, I suspect that this biblical warning will ever remain as a haunting specter in the back of your mind.

While everyone has the God-given right to reject the Bible’s teachings, no one has the right to revise its text. Rather than rejecting what the Bible says or changing their beliefs to fit into what the Bible says, many people today are trying to change what the Bible says to fit into their beliefs. In other words, they insist upon putting their words in God’s mouth and turning the Bible into proof texts for their personal beliefs. All who take such license with God’s Word are referred to by the Apostle Peter as “those who twist the Scriptures to their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16).

God is serious about His Word. According to the Bible, it is the one thing that He honors above His own name (Psalm 138:2). I’ve always been intrigued by the way the Bible begins and ends. It begins with the story of the subtle serpent ensnaring mankind by stretching God’s Word further than God ever intended for it to go (Genesis 2:16-17; 3:1). It ends with a solemn warning against altering the Scripture by adding anything to it or taking anything from it (Revelation 22:18-19). It is as though God purposely sandwiched His Word between two sure warning signs; the first showing us the Satanic inspiration behind all perversions of God’s Word and the second showing us the divine indignation awaiting all who pervert God’s Word.

In light of the above, the Bible warns all who propose to speak for God on a given subject to confine their speech to what God has actually said (1 Peter 4:11). We can do this by carefully staying within the confines of what is written in the Scripture (1 Corinthians 4:6). Whenever the Scripture is silent on a subject, no one should propose to speak for God; instead, everyone should follow their own conscience and recognize the right of all others to do the same (Romans 14). On the other hand, if a subject is addressed by the Scripture, no one saying anything more or less than what the Scripture says is truly speaking for God.

Many in today’s homosexual community are taking atrocious liberties with the Word of God. By doing so, they are not only leaving themselves culpable before Christ of sexual perversion, but of Scriptural perversion as well. Knowing full well that the Bible clearly condemns their so-called “sexual orientation” and calls upon them to repent of their sin and to turn to Christ, many modern-day and unrepentant homosexuals are attempting to either silence the Scripture on the subject or to twist the Scripture into justifying their sin rather than condemning it.

SILENCING THE SCRIPTURE

In their attempt to silence the Scripture on the subject of homosexuality, today’s gay community maintains that the Scripture’s condemnation of their sin is antiquated and ambiguous. First, they argue that it is antiquated. According to them, the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality is only found in the earliest writings of the Old Testament, writings that they staunchly insist are applicable to ancient cultures alone and totally inapplicable to modern-times.

As we’ve already shown, this assertion by the gay community is patently false. The Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality is found throughout the Scripture, not just in the earliest books of the Old Testament, but in the New Testament as well. Besides, if Scripture’s condemnation of homosexuality was found in the Old Testament alone, as many homosexuals falsely contend, this would not in and of itself reduce it to modern-day irrelevancy. The Ten Commandments are only listed in two of the Old Testament’s earliest books—Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21—but no one today argues that the Decalogue is antiquated, irrelevant and inapplicable.

A good example of the kind of subterfuge employed by today’s gay lobby to dismiss the Scripture’s “antiquated” condemnation of their sin is the following piece of popular propaganda. Supposedly, this widely circulated piece originally appeared as a response from a University of Virginia professor, Dr. James M. Kauffman, to Dr. Laura Schlesinger, an orthodox Jew and popular radio talk-show host who referred to Leviticus 18:22 in her renunciation of homosexuality as an abomination.

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law.

I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. ... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Law and how to follow them.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Leviticus 1:9. The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Leviticus 15:19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

Leviticus 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states that he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Leviticus 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

Leviticus 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Leviticus 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Leviticus 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Leviticus 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? – Leviticus 24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Leviticus 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan,

James M. Kauffman, Ed.D.

Dr. Kauffman’s disdain for the Word of God is made apparent by his concluding sarcastic stab at the Scripture: “Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.” His letter, like most defenses of homosexuality, is more than an attempt to legitimize the gay life-style. It is also an attempt to demean the Bible and all Bible-believing Christians. As a Bible-believing Christian myself, I’m obligated by Scripture to respond to the good professor (1 Peter 3:15; Jude 3).

While Dr. Kauffman’s letter is strewn with cute quips about Scripture texts, it is also proof positive of its author’s biblical illiteracy. Obviously, neither the good professor who penned this popular piece of pro-gay propaganda or the gay community that continues to propagate it care anything about adhering to the divine mandate: “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).

Like Dr. Kauffman, many people today forgo any serious study of the Scripture. All too often they pay no attention to the Bible because they have an ax to grind against it. Their dismissal of it is due to their disagreement with it, which inevitably leads to their utter contempt for it. Despite the fact that they refuse to give the Bible a fair reading, these Bible-bashers are ever ready to offer up to others their prejudiced critique of what they know little, if anything, about.

It is often said that you can make the Bible say anything. For instance, in one place the Bible says that Judas went out and hung himself. In another place the Scripture says, “Go do thou likewise.” In spite of this, no serious student of Scripture would ever argue for the Bible’s advocacy of suicide nor be bamboozled by some Scripture-twisting-twit into believing that the Bible commands us to do away with ourselves.

As previously pointed out, the Scripture cautions us about twisting it to our own destruction (2 Peter 3:16). Many, like the good professor, run right through this biblical caution light without any concern over the eternal consequences. Just imagine for a moment how much you would be offended by someone misrepresenting what you say in order to persuade others to dismiss you as a crackpot. Well, just imagine how offended God is when someone misrepresents His Word in order to persuade others to dismiss it as sheer nonsense.

The Scripture references contained in Dr. Kauffman’s letter are all taken from Leviticus, with the exception of two references from Exodus. Both Exodus and Leviticus are part of the Torah or Pentateuch, which is comprised of the first five books of the Bible. These books, authored by Moses, are believed to be the oldest books in the Bible, with the possible exception of Job, which may have been authored by Abraham. Thus, the good professor’s cunning critique of the Christian Bible is based solely upon a few handpicked ancient verses.

What would you think of a critique of our modern-day judicial system that was based exclusively on a few carefully selected excerpts from the ancient Code of Hammurabi? Obviously, such a critique would be absurd, not to mention most disingenuous. Equally absurd and disingenuous is Dr. Kauffman’s analysis of the Bible, which is solely based upon a few specially selected scriptures that were written fourteen-hundred years before Christ and the birth of Christianity.

As any child in Sunday School could explain to the good professor, Christians are not under the Old Covenant, which is found in the Bible’s Old Testament, but under the New Covenant, which is found in the Bible’s New Testament. Now, this doesn’t mean that the Old Testament is irrelevant or that all of its precepts and prohibitions have been invalidated. What it does mean, however, is that much of the Old Testament is intended to provide us with physical illustrations of the spiritual truths that we are taught in the New Testament (1 Corinthians 10:6, 11). In other words, the Old Testament served as both a signpost pointing to the coming of Christ and a schoolmaster preparing the uncivilized people of the ancient world for Christ’s coming (Galatians 3:23-24).

Once the fullness of time had come; that is, once the world was prepared for Christ’s coming, God sent His Son, born of a virgin, into the world to save us from our sin and to reconcile us to Himself (Galatians 4:4; Matthew 1:21; 2 Corinthians 5:19). Now that Christ has come, we are no longer to live in the shadows of the Old Testament, but in the substance of the New Testament (Colossians 2:17).

Perhaps, the best way to show Dr. Kauffman’s misunderstanding of the Bible is to turn our attention to Jesus’ famous Sermon on the Mount. In Matthew 5:17-48, Jesus makes it plain that His purpose for coming into the world was to fulfill “the law” (the Old Testament), not to do away with it. Christ then proceeds to repeatedly contrast the external regulations that came with the Old Testament—“You have heard that it was said by them of old time”—with the internal transformation that comes with the New Testament—“But I say unto you.” Whereas the Old Testament’s commandments, which were carved on stone, demanded that we love our neighbor and not commit adultery or murder, the New Testament’s commandments, which are written on our hearts (2 Corinthians 3:3), demand much more; namely, that we even love our enemies and refrain from lusting and anger.

Folks like the good professor love to relegate Bible-believing Christianity to what “was said by them of old time.” If you really want to understand the Bible and the Christian faith that is founded upon it, however, you need to do more than read a few handpicked verses from God’s instructions to Israel’s ancient Levitical priesthood. You need to read the words of Christianity’s High Priest, Jesus Christ (Hebrews 3:1; 4:14).

If Dr. Kauffman ever bothers to seriously study the Scriptures, he’ll learn that there is no need for him to “burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice,” since Jesus has offered Himself as a sacrifice for our sins once and for all (Hebrews 7:27; 9:25-28; 10:10; 1 Peter 3:18). He’ll also learn that there is no need to kill his “neighbor who insists upon working on the Sabbath,” since we’re no longer under Old Testament shadows and judged by our observance of “Sabbath days” (Colossians 2:16-17). Indeed, everyday is a Sabbath for believers in Christ who are resting in Him (Hebrews 4:1-11). Dr. Kauffman will even discover that he can go ahead with his friend and eat those shellfish, since all food is good if received with thanksgiving (1Timothy 4:3-4). Of course, if the good professor really wants to understand the Bible, he needs to meet its Author, who alone can explain to him the true meaning of the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 2:11-14).

Well, so much for Dr. Kauffman’s assessment of the Scripture and the gay community’s assertion that the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality is antiquated. But how about homosexuals’ other Scripture-shushing assertion, that the Bible’s condemnation of their sin is ambiguous?

As earlier enumerated, the Bible couldn’t be clearer in its condemnation of homosexuality, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. How could the Bible be any more explicit than it is in the Old Testament Book of Leviticus—“If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both [men] have committed an abomination”? Or how could the Bible be any more unequivocal than it is in the New Testament Book of Romans—“For this cause God gave them up to vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly”?

SLANTING THE SCRIPTURE

As atrocious as it is for today’s gay community to attempt to silence God’s condemnation of their sin by accusing the Bible of being antiquated and ambiguous, it is even more atrocious for today’s gay community to attempt to slant the Scripture into championing homosexuality rather than condemning it.

In a myriad of ways, today’s gay activists are guilty of indefensible distortions of the Word of God. These distortions have no basis in fact, but are fanciful misrepresentations of Holy Writ intended to convince the credulous that the Bible’s text is actually contradictory to its teachings. If today’s gay lobby had its way, no one would believe what the Bible says, that homosexuality is condemnable, but only what gay activists say about what the Bible says, that homosexuality is commendable.

Let’s look at a few of the loathsome liberties today’s homosexual lobby takes with the Scripture.

1. They distort Ruth’s devotion to her mother-in-law Naomi into a lesbian “love affair” (Ruth 1:16-18).

 2. They twist the friendship of David and Jonathan into a homosexual relationship (1 Samuel 20).

 3. They suggest that the Prophets Elijah and Elisha both raised dead boys back to life by stretching themselves out on their corpses and performing an ancient homosexual ritual (1 Kings 17:17-24; 2 Kings 4:8-37).

4. They make the Roman Centurion’s servant out to be his gay lover and Jesus’ miraculous healing of the servant out to be a divine sanctioning of same-sex marriage (Matthew 8:5-13).

5. They insist that it is not the celibate—those who forego marriage and the bearing of children for the kingdom of God’s sake—who are commended by Christ in Matthew 19:12. Instead, it is Christ’s homosexual disciples that are singled out by Him for this special commendation.

6. In what is undoubtedly their most despicable and blasphemous distortion of God’s Word, they twist the Apostle John’s references to himself in his gospel as the “disciple whom Jesus loved” and his leaning on “Jesus’ bosom” during the Last Supper as evidence that John and Jesus were gay lovers (John 13:23; 19:26; 21:7, 20).

7. They even indifferently dismiss the Apostle Paul’s incontrovertible condemnations of homosexuality in the New Testament by chalking them up to the fact that Paul himself was a repressed, self-hating homosexual.

One cannot help put feel the need to be hosed off after wading through the mire of such vile misrepresentations of God’s Holy Word. Still, spelling out the sullied perversions of Scripture being perpetrated by modern-day gay activists is necessary. By doing so, we alert everyone daring enough to oppose today’s gay agenda of the abject profaneness with which they will certainly and constantly be confronted. Truly, there is nothing sacred to the modern-day gay rights movement, nor is there any fear of God before their eyes. They are, as the Apostle Paul points out in the first chapter of Romans, unrepentantly irreverent and unapologetically profane.