The issue of homosexuality and same-sex marriage just won’t go away these days. Thus, Christians need to make sure they are well-equipped to meet the challenges of the post-Christian world we find ourselves in.
There have been many good books written to address this subject, but one of the most original I have seen is the recent volume by Don Fortson and Rollin Grams, Unchanging Witness: The Consistent Christian Teaching on Homosexuality in Scripture and Tradition (B&H Academic, 2016).
Don Fortson is the Professor of Church History here at RTS Charlotte, and Rollin Grams is professor of New Testament at Gordon Conwell.
What makes this book unique is simple. This book responds to those who claim homosexuality is compatible with Christianity by considering both the evidence from church history and the evidence from the Bible.
In other words, it considers not only what the Bible says, but what Christians have said the Bible says throughout the ages. I know of no other recent volume that does this.
And I can tell you, the result is absolutely devastating for the claim that Christianity and homosexuality go together. A person might be able to convince themselves that the Bible allows it (by reinterpreting even the plainest of passages), but it is a bit hard to explain away 2000 years of absolutely consistent church history.
And that is exactly what we find in the historical record. From the very beginning of the church, all the way to the modern day, Christians have uniformly declared homosexuality to be incompatible with the Christian faith.
This consistency is particularly noteworthy in the earliest centuries because the church was quite diverse and represented a variety of cultures, ethnicities, and pagan backgrounds. Yet, with one voice, the church was unified it its opposition to homosexual behavior.
In essence, this forces the pro-homosexuality camp to argue that only in the modern day, really only in the last few years, have Christians, for the first time, finally understood what the Bible really teaches about homosexuality. And, every other Christian generation, for two-thousand years, has been bigoted, discriminatory, and oppressive.
The arrogance and audacity of a claim is stunning. But, that is precisely what the pro-homosexual camp is forced to believe.
Of course, some who are committed to the superiority of the modern will no doubt respond by saying, “Just because the church believes something doesn’t make it right.” True. But, the key issue in this case is that the church believes something that is also clearly the plain teaching of Scripture. Thus, we have both the testimony of Scripture and the church on the same side.
And if the Bible and the history of the church both seem to be saying the same thing, then that is a compelling reason to think it is true.
For those who are intellectually honest, this just becomes too much to bear. After reading Fortson’s and Rollin’s book, they may not agree with what Christians have always believed. But, they would have to admit that Christians have always believed it.
Scott Roper says
Does the book address the Trail-of-Blood-like approach to history put forth by some advocates?
William Fisher says
Yes, it is doubtless true that, up until comparatively recently – and with the possible exception of only a very small number of dissentients of whom history has left us no record – Christians generally have believed that any homosexual behaviour in any circumstances is morally wrong. But we have finally moved on, thank God.
Michael Kruger says
Thanks, William. But, not sure who you mean by “we.” If you mean “we” Christians, then you are mistaken. As I observed in the article, Christianity is fundamentally opposed to homosexuality and so it cannot “move on.” If you mean that you personally are happy about the advance of homosexuality, then you are free to hold that view. But, that is not a “we” thing. That is simply a “you” thing.
William Fisher says
Yes, that was bit sloppy of me, I must admit. By “we” I mean more and more of us, including more and more Christians – not all, obviously.
Luke Wayne says
Certainly there are more and more people who want to retain the title of “Christian” while rejecting the teachings and Scriptures that the word necessarily entails, but if words have any meaning at all, such are not actually “Christians”
Chris Ratcliffe says
I agree with William.
Michael Kruger says
That’s fine, Chris. But, I can only assume that you have renounced Christianity as well. As shown by my article, there is not a compatibility between Christianity and the embracing of homosexuality. You are free to embrace the latter, but at the expense of the former. You are not in a position to simply rewrite the Bible and rewrite all of church history.
William Fisher says
You don’t need to re-write things in order to move on. You just move on.
Michael Kruger says
That’s fine. But you are moving on without Jesus and without Christianity. As long as that is clear.
William Fisher says
On that we shall just have to agree to disagree.
Michael Kruger says
You are free to disagree, but your disagreement is without a foundation. For you to continue to claim Christ himself and the Word he delivered and the church he planted, all three of which definitively reject homosexuality, is beyond stunning. You reject all three under the banner of “I know better than Jesus, the Bible, and all of church history.” I would think that reality would at least give you a little cause for self-reflection. Are you really so confident in yourself? I challenge you to be honest and just admit you believe something that is at odds with everything Christianity stands for. That is a more honorable, more rational, and more sensible path than insisting, against all reason and history, that Christianity embraces what you believe.
Sandra says
“Christ himself” rejected homosexuality? I was asked to cite a chapter and verse once but couldn’t. What are Jesus’ views on birth control and abortion? Haven’t found any quotatations on those critical issues, either.
Tara says
I’m confused as to why you believe this book is original? It’s clear after reading the author’s description of gay sexuality that there is a complete disconnect in the understanding and description gay people. The authors never address the inherent nature of homosexuality, which is key to those who then wish to understand what scriptures really say about human sexuality. There is the all to common confusion of sex, gender, and sexual orientation…which is queer theory 101. Clearly the scholarship here is little to none. Even many conservative Christians today understand the fallacy of conflating pedophilia and homosexuality, which was done over and over again (despite the author’s denial). What use is an argument that fundamentally relies on distorting, dehumanizing, and demonizing people in order to make their point?
I want to hear this argument: how does God create people in his image, give them sexuality (including homosexuality and bisexuality) but then hates His creation? That book would truly be original. This one unfortunately is same ol same ol, misunderstanding the people they are lecturing about. The arrogance is stunning.
Michael Kruger says
Thanks, Tara. But there are two problems with your comments:
1. You have not read my post carefully. What I said was original about this book is the manner in which it combines testimony from church history and testimony from the Bible in the same place. That is original among recent books on this subject. So your comments missed my point entirely.
2. You assume, without any proof or demonstration, that homosexuality is “inherent” and placed there by God. In other words, you assume homosexuals are “born this way.” There is no proof of this, either in science or the Bible. But, even if people were born with a predilection for certain behaviors, that does not make those behaviors correct. For instance, if people are born with a tendency to alcoholism doesn’t make it good or right.
Tara says
1. My point is misunderstanding queer people has been the basis of all faulty arguments against queer people. This book is status quo in that regard. Proper understanding is crucial in speaking about gay people, or anyone for that matter, especially in a Biblical context.
2. There is proof! Twin studies, population studies, association of homosexuality to certain hormonal/intersex conditions. There is also the testimony from the vast majority of queer people. I’m gay, I never chose to be gay, but I feel despite social intolerance and difficulty due to discrimination that it has been a blessing. I would never have the family I have now if I weren’t gay. Although being gay is only an aspect of my life, human sexuality is the major morivating factor in creating a family. Being gay and being called to marriage was a clear command from God, so while you may feel there is no proof gay people like myself know this reality to be true. Alcoholism is clearly harmful unlike homosexuality, nor is it inborn. Even those with predisdisposed to addiction are not BORN addicted in the true sense of the word. People develop addiction as a coping mechanism. This is drastically different from human sexuality.
Michael Kruger says
Tara, you are seriously confused on a number of matters:
1. You never responded to my clarification about what makes this book “original.” You merely repeated your standard trope about how gay people are misunderstood.
2. Your assurance that genetic disposition to homosexuality has proven by science is grossly overstated. There is no such consensus anywhere in the scientific community.
3. Your appeal to your own experience is irrelevant. It assumes that if we feel something it must be right. Where do you get that assumption? Moreover, on what basis do you ever deny or suppress what you feel? Do you always just “go with it”?
4. You quickly dismiss the possibility of genetic disposition towards alcoholism when there actually is better scientific merit for that claim than that of homosexuality being genetic!
5. You assume, without proof, that homosexuality is not harmful. On the contrary, homosexuality is devastating in the harm it causes. As something contrary to the way God created humanity, it destroys the fundamental family structure where kids need both a mom and a dad. It causes serious emotional and psychological harm to those who suppress their conscience in order to engage in these acts (born out by the seriously high suicide rates among homosexuals). It is a seriously risky behavior in terms of one’s physical health (AIDS, STDs). And, of course, it make someone subject to God’s judgment which is a serious indicator that it is harmful (!).
groovyman67 says
“Proper understanding is crucial in speaking about gay people, or anyone for that matter, especially in a Biblical context.”
This is the point Tara, I would say that you are the one who does not have proper understanding. And you are saying vice versa. The Biblical context, as I read and understand it, is that God made everything ‘very good’ but then Mankind sinned in Adam, and God placed his very good Creation under His curse. Now all of His creation is decaying and mankind is a slave to sinfulness due to God’s curse and judgment. So we are born sinners and our inclinations and preferences and desires are by our nature sinful. Only the work of God can truly change us, and that is what Christians and all of the creation eagerly await- the final working out of that redemption.
So to say that because I have a desire that has been present as long as I can remember (ie I didn’t ‘choose’ it) doesn’t mean it is a good desire. On the contrary, in the proper Biblical context inborn desires are bad. The change in our desires is so dramatic, so radical, so trans-formative of our entire being that Jesus calls it being ‘born again’. It is true that people are born with homosexual desires, and many other desires. Everyone alive has been born, but what is needed is a new birth. And that new birth changes our desires. You must be a new creation, which changes our desires from self-centered pleasures to Christ centered worship.
So for example, The Bible says ‘And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.’ But I have always been stubborn, I don’t want anyone forcing me to do anything that is unjust. It is my nature. this is a context where repressive Romans are forcing someone to walk this extra mile for no good reason, it is completely unnecessary it’s only because they a follower of God. So because this is an unjust forcing, and because I am born to resist injustice should i not obey this command of God? Why would he want me to go against something that I feel is a badge of honor and inborn in me? Because God wants mercy more than justice, and I need to repent.
So could you please tell me where my understanding is not the proper understanding of Biblical context?
Another thing about homosexuality that confounds me is that people deny the clear design of God. Before the Fall of Adam, before the curse, from the beginning of the Creation God made them ‘male and female’. It is a self-evident truth of nature and biology that male and female go together physically and sexually, while same sex do not. You don’t even have to believe in any God, it goes against the natural order.
Phelim says
Not surprised to see the usual pro-gay nonsense in the comments. Sorry Tara, there is no evidence for the inherent nature of homosexuality – something Peter Tatchell, the World Health Organisation, and the Gay Lesbian and Bisexual Special Interest Group at the Royal College of Psychiatrists admit along with thousands of others including gay gene researcher Dene Hamer and gay brain researcher Simon Le Vay. The fact that the pro-gay lobby holds onto discredited science shows how unstable their arguments are.
As for the homosexual behaviour condemned in the Bible, while homosexuality is a modern term (and concept) we read of Nero having a marriage service with a male lover. Historians from the time of Paul speak of other weddings between two men or two women. Paul makes no difference between the context of the homosexual act calling all such acts sin. But as the pro-gay lobby ignore scientific fact we should not expect them to recognise historical fact, let alone Scriptural fact (hence the use of names such as Changing Attitudes).
William Fisher says
No, Phelim, you’re right: the inherent – if by that you mean congenital – nature of homosexuality has not been proved. What of it? The “inherent” nature of heterosexuality has not been proved either. Despite any number of theories, ranging from at least prima facie plausible to downright silly, the precise causes of sexual orientation remain unknown. There is no unified “pro-gay lobby” which holds any collective opinion on the matter.
JMH says
“The ‘inherent’ nature of heterosexuality has not been proved either.”
Well, there’s a pretty good indication that all rational discussion has ceased.
Rob Johnson says
To those that have “moved on”‘ you do so without Scripture, and without Jesus. He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, – Matthew 19:4 Here Jesus affirms the created order by using……scripture. Shocking, I know to those who wish to let those living in sin, define themselves by said sin. “Homosexual Christian”……”Go, and sin no more”…..
William Fisher says
Yes, of course he made them male and female. We all know that. Otherwise there wouldn’t be heterosexual males and heterosexual females, would there? And there wouldn’t be homosexual males and homosexual females either, would there?
Rob Johnson says
Keep ignoring the rest of the passage and Gods created order and His purposes for man and woman. You seem to be good at just shrugging it off…..
William Fisher says
The real situation, in this real world in which we live, is that the vast majority of people, both men and women, are heterosexual, and a small minority of men and women are homosexual. If that is God’s purpose – and I see no reason to think otherwise – what would he do? Exactly what he has done, of course: he has created the human race male and female.
Rob Johnson says
The “real” situation is you still fail to take Christ’s words in context. You are picking and parsing to fit your world view. The “real” situation is God created them man and woman and it was good…..then came sin, which corrupted the created order. But it does not invalidate what God created and meant for man and woman in terms of human sexuality. It does not invalidate the teachings from the Holiness Code or NT on the subject.
Dean says
People have been “moving on” since before Noah & Babel. Its only in moving into Jesus abode that we get family & sexuality sorted out. Boundries are given for out good yet somehow we assume we know more than or better than God.
God doesnt single out homosexuality either, there are manifold acts that distort the image in which we were first created.
Kelly O says
I suggest you get on your knees and ask for Truth and Understanding then begin reading Second Peter ch 2. I pray for you