Are People Born Gay? (Part 2)

In my last post, I considered most of what Bishop Swiley had to say about homosexuality in the OT.  The only other OT figures he mentioned in his statements were David and Jonathan (about the 31:00 mark). With no biblical justification, the Bishop simply states that while David probably wasn't gay, "I'm sure Jonathan was gay."  No explanation of how he arrived at that conclusion, but apparently no explanation is required.  It should be enough for us to accept it just because the Bishop believes it.  Forgive me if I'm not so apt to accept everything the Bishop believes.

I have a pastor friend who has said on many occasions, "It's not just what false teachers say that gets them in trouble - often it's what they fail to tell you that really derails them."  The same is true in this case.  I wonder why the Bishop didn't deal with other OT texts such as Deut. 23:17, 1 Kings 14:24, 22:46, and 2 Kings 23:7.  My guess would be one of two reasons:  Either he doesn't know those passages exist, or he has no acceptable interpretation of them.  I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he doesn't know that texts are in God's Word.

Moving now to the Bishop's thoughts on the New Testament.  For starters, he doesn't even mention what Christ had to say about Sodom and Gomorrah (S & G).  Our Lord actually mentions S & G five times in the Gospels (Matt. 10:15, 11:23-24, Mark 6:11, Luke 10:12, 17:29).  While some of those may be parallel passages, it doesn't change the fact Christ used S & G as an example of God's wrath against human sin.  Again, I found it interesting that the Bishop couldn't bring himself to mention these passages.

I will give the Bishop some credit though.  At least he did mention Romans 1 in his discussion of the issue.  His statements concerning this text are among the most eye-opening of all (about the 32:00 mark).  In essence, he says that while Paul may have been "dead on" concerning the doctrine of Christ, he was dead wrong about relationships and human sexuality.  After butchering what Paul taught about Christian marriage, he then says that if a person follows Paul's teaching to its conclusion then he'll be led to believe that "if you don't worship you turn gay."  In passing, he also surmises that "most worship leaders are gay."  I didn't know the Apostle Paul was talking about music ministers in Romans 1.

Then comes his most telling admission of all:  "While the Bible may be inspired, it is not infallible."  In other words, we simply can't trust everything the Bible teaches.  This is the heart of the issue.  Either we believe the Bible is God's Word or we don't.  Listening to the Bishop, it's clear that he can't successfully explain away what the Bible has to say about homosexuality.  So then, when he can't win his argument on the grounds of sound biblical interpretation, he is left with one final resort - charge the Bible with being a book of errors.  I'd like to say that I've had this discussion/debate with many liberal thinkers, but this is the first time someone has actually come out and said that the Bible simply can't be trusted.  This is by far the most telling revelation of all the Bishop's remarks.  The statement really speaks for itself.

Before I conclude this second post, allow me to briefly mention two NT passages that the Bishop must've overlooked (and who can blame him if he believes the Bible is really a book of errors).  1 Timothy 1:10 clearly condemns the practice of sodomy.  And 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 couldn't be any more plain:  "Do not be deceived.  Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites...will inherit the kingdom of God."  So the Bible is very clear that homosexuality is sin.  Either we can receive what God has said as being truth, or we can explain it away by putting it in the category of error.  I choose to receive Scripture as the divinely inspired and inerrant truth of Almighty God (2 Tim. 3:16).

Up to now, I've simply dealt with the question of this post from a biblical/theological perspective.  In the upcoming posts, I'll be dealing with the issue from a philosophical and scientific perspective.  I hope you'll "stay tuned" and share these thoughts with others.