Christians, Homosexuality, and Same-Sex Attraction

Some people who have been involved in homosexuality in the past but are now Christians have taken to calling themselves “gay Christians”. Please note: I am not speaking of those who proudly embrace, celebrate and endorse homosexuality yet pretend they are Christians.

What I am talking about here are evangelical Christians who know that homosexuality is a sin, yet say they still deal with same-sex attractions. Some of them think it is just part of who they are, and it can fit in with their Christian life. But is it ever proper to call oneself a “gay Christian”? While some think it is OK, I still find it to be problematic.

Let me say that I have written on this matter before. I have tried at various times to lay out my thoughts on this issue – an issue that can be somewhat complex, and one that requires some care and precision when discussing. See these two earlier pieces for example:

But let me look at this topic some more. The statement under question is really one of identity: in saying this, you are saying you identify not just as a Christian, but as a homosexual. Given that homosexuality is a sin and is always viewed negatively in Scripture, this is not very helpful.

One might as well identify as an adulterous Christian or a fornicating Christian. Sorry but this is what we call a contradiction in terms. Christians not only should flee all sin, but they should also refuse to identify themselves in terms of sin.

But, it can be asked, what about calling oneself a “heterosexual Christian”? Some folks will say we should not identify as heterosexual or homosexual, but simply as Christians. Well, yes and no. It seems that this is slightly different. That is because this is how God made us to be: heterosexual. His intention from day one was to have man as male and female, who are attracted to each other, generally leading to marriage.

So that is the norm. That is the ideal. However, being homosexual, including having same-sex desires, was never the norm and never the ideal. Heterosexuality is not a part of the Fall, but homosexuality is. In terms of God’s original creational intent, it is an unnatural condition – it is a disordered state.

It is not how we are supposed to be. But the “gay Christian” will argue that everything is now fallen, including all sexualities. Yes that is true. So there are now a myriad of sexual sins. And yes there are more than enough heterosexual sexual sins. We all sin, and we all sin sexually.

And yes the Fall impacts everything and everyone. Because of the Fall, one can be born with only one arm. And I suppose one can therefore refer to oneself as a “one-armed Christian”. But this is morally neutral, and is simply a true descriptor, not a proclamation of intent. You cannot help that you were born this way, and it is not morally evil per se to go through life with just one arm.

One can argue however that one is not born homosexual. And that I have argued in great detail in books and articles. That a person may from very early on have a predisposition or orientation to same-sex attraction is another matter. But the original creation of man and woman still stands, and this attraction therefore is also a result of the Fall, and not morally neutral.

As such it is not something to surrender to nor celebrate and affirm, but to resist. But too many Christians are not doing this. They are proud about being a “gay Christian”. I think this is wrong, unbiblical, and unhelpful. But I am aware of how complex so much of this discussion can get, and how some Christians can and do differ on this matter, so we need to dig even deeper.

Taking a closer look

Having written two and a half books on the topic of homosexuality, as well as over 900 articles, I have spent a fair amount of time thinking about and discussing the issue. Much of what I have written on it has had to do with public policy issues, as well as biblical and theological concerns. Let’s look some more at the latter.

Most conservative, evangelical Christians know that homosexuality is sinful, and that homosexual acts can never be defended. But something that is still being debated and discussed is the issue of same-sex attraction. Is that too fully sinful? What about temptations along those lines?

Can homosexual attraction be completely eliminated? What about ex-homosexuals who still struggle in these areas? Plenty more of these sort of questions arise here. Not only do ex-homosexuals differ amongst themselves on some of these matters, but individuals can evolve and change their position over time somewhat as well.

Terminology is crucial here, and there is too much lack of clarity when Christians debate these issues. Key terms and concepts such as identity, orientation, predisposition, behaviour, acting out, desire, lust, attraction, affection, temptation, and the like can all be used and understood differently by different people. Unless there is some agreed upon definitions we may easily go in circles here, with people talking past each other.

Before proceeding, let me offer a few qualifications. One, I am not one who has had such a past, so I cannot speak from personal experience here. But I do know quite a few ex-homosexuals, either personally, or indirectly through things like the social media.

Also, even though I have dealt with some of these matters in some detail in my books, there is admittedly a fair amount of complexity and nuance still to be found in these discussions, and ex-homosexuals can and do disagree with one another as to how best to proceed here.

Lastly, my own views tend to be rather conservative here. So yes I do indeed believe homosexuals who leave the lifestyle can find substantial change and healing, with some even losing same-sex attraction altogether. That does not mean it will be easy, nor does it mean that all people will have the same experience.

But a lot of debate now surrounds things like the concept of “gay Christians,” whether things like reparative therapy are good or bad, and the like. And far too often there are charges of apostasy and heresy being thrown around here. Again, I take somewhat more conservative views, so I am not happy with all the concepts and expressions being promoted by some.

Let me then make a few points. As to temptations – including sexual temptations – they are not sinful in themselves as the Bible teaches. We are all tempted. The key is, what do we do with these temptations? Do we give in to them and allow them to grow and develop within us, or do we resist them?

Temptations will come, and that cannot be helped. But we can and should respond to these temptations. We are not to toy with them nor indulge them. We are told to flee temptations (2 Timothy 2:22), and Joseph provides us with a perfect example of this (Genesis 39:12). As Martin Luther once put it, you cannot prevent a bird from flying above you, but you can prevent it from building a nest on your head.

Also proper romantic feelings are God-given, as is our sexual drive. They are part of who we are, and are not sinful as such. God created us to have them. But we can have romantic and sexual desires for things that we should not have. We were created as heterosexuals, with males having romantic and sexual desires for females, and vice versa. Of course with the Fall everything got messed up.

Now our desires and feelings and attractions can indeed be or become sinful, if not confined to what God intended for us. Outside of marriage between a man and a woman such things can be what the Bible calls “lusts,” and giving in to them is sin. This includes premarital sex, extramarital sex, giving in to impure sexual thoughts, pornography – and practicing homosexuality.

So our sex drive is not a sin as such, and having romantic and sexual attractions for others need not be sinful. They can be properly realised and enjoined within heterosexual marriage. But sin can still creep in. For example, if you are married but have sexual lusts for another woman, that is sinful.

Yes you can still be attracted to the appearance and comeliness of another woman. That is part of what it is to be created as a heterosexual. But as a married man you must resist any temptation to become romantically attracted to, and then sexually involved with her.

And some attractions – whether you are married or not – would be wrong automatically. If you find yourself having sexual attractions for children for example, this is wrong, and needs to be resisted and dealt with. Just as it is amiss in my view to simply proclaim oneself a “gay Christian,” stay celibate, and just accept as normal one’s same-sex attractions, so too here.

It would be wrong and unbiblical to claim that you are a “paedophile Christian” or that you identify that way – even if you choose not to act out your desires, and just accept that those desires are part of who you are. It certainly is not who you are as God intended you to be, any more than saying that since I have constant desires to start fires, I identify as an “arsonist Christian”.

But as I say, it is becoming quite popular of late for some Christians to happily claim the label, and even the identity, of “gay Christian”. I think this is not the way forward. For one thing, far too many others who once were homosexuals but have now left the lifestyle testify to having even their same-sex attractions eliminated or greatly reduced by the grace of God. They reject the notion that we should identify as or call ourselves “gay Christians”.

Moreover, it is never good to identify with something that the Bible calls sinful. Yes I know, these folks will claim that homosexual acts are sinful, but the desires are not. I still think they are wrong here. As I wrote in my book Strained Relations:

Throughout scripture, the condition of the inner man is intimately connected with outward actions. When Jesus spoke of lust as adultery in Matthew 5:28, he was making it perfectly clear that it is not only the act, but the thought, which is sinful, and in need of transformation. Elsewhere Jesus stressed that outward evil actions come from an inner evil heart: “For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man ‘unclean’.” (Mark 7:21-23).

When Paul speaks of homosexuality he uses terms like “thoughts”, “desires” and “lusts”, as in Romans 1: 24, 26, and 27. When David prayed his great prayer in Psalm 51, he didn’t ask that he would no longer commit acts of adultery. Instead, he pleaded with God for a clean heart and pure thoughts (v. 10). A person’s disposition (or what the Bible often calls our ‘heart’), is the ultimate driving force behind our actions. As Proverbs 4:23 put it, “Out of the heart are the issues of life.”

Two passages from James also speak of sinful desires. “When tempted, no one should say, ‘God is tempting me.’ For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death” (James 1:13-15). And James 4:1-3 also connects wrong desires with wrong actions.

But I need to wrap things up here. And I must say that quite a lot of time and care has gone into the writing of this piece – many hours in fact, based on many years of thinking and writing on such issues. There should be no room here for glibness, bumper-sticker clichés, or simplistic answers.

Thus I realise that the discussion must still proceed further, as I may not have done the best job in fairly representing the various voices in this debate. Others would offer somewhat different stances on such things. And others might not agree with how I am defining certain terms, or explaining certain things.

And I know that it is indeed rather complex and nuanced, and great care must be taken in how we express ourselves here. So for those reasons I will need to do a follow-up piece to this, going into even more detail. To do that discussion justice, I will have to mention a number of names and books that are involved in this debate.

Such figures (from the various camps) would include folks like Joe Dallas, Sam Allberry, Stephen Black, Daren Mehl, Christopher Yuan, Rosaria Butterfield, Robert Oscar Lopez, Jackie Hill Perry. They all can differ from one another on aspects of this debate, so I want to let them speak. Stay tuned for that piece.

In sum, the idea that there is such a thing as a “gay Christian” has become a rather hotly-debate issue of late. I tend to side with those who are opposed to such a notion, but I think it is important that we accurately and carefully understand and portray the position of those who do take this view.

Simply writing them off as heretics or apostates when clearly most of them are not is not really a helpful way to go. Actually reading carefully what they have written, and listening carefully to what they have said, has to be part of the way we engage with them. So hopefully I will see you soon in my second piece on this topic.

[2333 words]

13 Replies to “Christians, Homosexuality, and Same-Sex Attraction”

  1. Great piece Bill. The world will compromise with evil as they have no answers to sin and disorder. However as Christians we have the answer to the sin problem and need to spread the message of hope to all who will hear. Compromise sounds nice but the destination is hell.

  2. Hi Bill, do you think that people who have struggled with same-sex attraction have the potential of experiencing attraction to people of the opposite sex and marrying them? Most churches do not seem to be very encouraging in this area.

  3. Thanks James. As I mention in my piece, many ex-homosexuals do go on to heterosexual marriage and family. Not all, but some. So the potential is certainly there.

  4. We need more Israel Folau’s in our churches.

    Today’s news. Folau says:

    “If there’s ever a time to stand up for the word of God, now is the time. Otherwise the truth of God will be slowly taken out and it’s our job as born-again Christians to stand up for God, not be scared of persecutions, sufferings.”

  5. There are serious LGBTQI ‘health’ issues, which are not spoken of. Moreover, these issues are not rectified by ‘Marriage Equality’.

    A clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases encountered with unusual frequency in homosexual patients is termed the gay bowel syndrome. The clinical diagnoses in decreasing order of frequency include condyloma acuminata, hemorrhoids, nonspecific proctitis, anal fistula, perirectal abscess, anal fissure, amebiasis, benign polyps, viral hepatitis, gonorrhea, syphilis, anorectal trauma and foreign bodies, shigellosis, rectal ulcers and lymphogranuloma venereum.

    * extensive article *

  6. Well done Bill. I think it can be summarised with your graphic, with an emphasis change: “and such WERE some of you”.
    Agree heartily with John Miller’s quote from Folau:
    “If there’s ever a time to stand up for the word of God, now is the time. Otherwise the truth of God will be slowly taken out and it’s our job as born-again Christians to stand up for God, not be scared of persecutions, sufferings.”
    So far we have failed dismally to stand for the pragmatic truth re the physical and mental health problems that plague LGBT individuals and ‘families’. Sadly key Christian movers and shakers in the SSM debate refused to discuss (and actively suppressed) truths that SS relationships are detrimental to the mental and physical health of adults and children involved. Why? Was it not because we are “scared of persecutions, sufferings” and so chose to ignore the dangers of SS relationships to the physical and mental health of adults, children, and to society as a whole?
    We need to repent of such cowardliness and stand for the truth. OK we’ll get flak as being hateful bigots etc, but that’s a price we should be prepared to pay to show true love for those in danger.

  7. Hi Bill
    So good to have access to a clear thinking website in this crazy world. I do almost daily. keep it coming.
    I agree wholeheartedly that christians should not use the prefix “gay” which is identifying a negative and self destructive trait with the message of Jesus. (oxymoron?) A clever satanic tactic to keep up the pressure on churches to capitulate to the agenda of the gaystapo.
    Before our marriage in 1977, both my wife and I had experienced intense and traumatic gay experiences that could have resulted in both of us living the gay lifestyle to this day. My wife was delivered from a homosexual spirit and I was set free from a bondage to a homosexual scizcofrenic by an intense conversion experience.
    We met soon after these events and were engaged after dating for 10 days. We limited our intimacy to kissing only and kept sex till we were married. We produced 4 wonderfull kids , who all are viable taxpayers and committed christians. (10 grandchildren so far). I feel our married life is a testimony to the abundance of God’s blessings because we decided to honour the rules set out in the 10 C,s ie, ANY sex outside a heterosexual marriage is taboo and there WILL be negative consequences if you break this rule.
    Bill, there must be thousands of cases like mine around, I suspect that you don’t here about them because it is such a shameful and negative thing to reflect on let alone share it publicly.
    I believe it is time for us to come out of the closet and proclaim the wonderful healing power that only God can provide

  8. Thanks Bill.
    As you say terminology is crucial here. Words really do matter.

    When a term such as “gay” or “christian” is used we must be aware not only of what we mean by the term but what others will probably assume it to mean, i.e. what the term will mean to the hearers.

    It is more important to make sure those who are listening get our understanding, and to do this we will have to use words and terms that get the ideas across.
    If we fail in that, we are talking sense only to ourselves.

    Certainly we cannot cover every eventuality for misunderstanding, for then we could never really say anything.

    Both the words “gay” and “christian” have a wide range of meanings and it seems that those people that Bill describes here are wanting to add some more.

    I agree fully that the term “gay” has an undeniable common meaning that is fully incompatible with the proper use of “christian”. As much as we might want our friends to be able to express themselves and their issues in life, they should find another way of saying it rather than just “gay christian”.

  9. It really bugs me that there are those who consider themselves “gay Christians” and make out that they are somehow a special class of believer that deserve a pass for their continued sexual sin and behavior while the rest of the Christian population are supposed to reject the temptation to sin and should “flee temptation.” They make like their particular temptation is special and they deserve some sort of ‘dispensation.’ We are to flee temptation and rely on the Holy Spirit to deliver us out of our temptations but they have a ‘get out of jail free’ card.

    That’s bologna and a brazen display of arrogance, egomania, and utter “in your face” rebellion toward God. I’m not buying what they’re selling and I resent them thinking we are too stupid to understand what’s going on here and/or we are the odd ones out who need to ‘suck it up’ and accept them on their terms. If that’s the case, all of us can find some excuse for caving into our temptations and just go out and sin it up, as it were. That boat might float with a few people who have an inch thick of dust on their Bible, but try running that one past a Holy God. I’m just tired of all that bologna.

  10. I happen to come across a book about a researcher who spent 2 years tracking 200 homosexuals on Fire island. The book outlined his findings and the one thing that stood out above all others he said was that they definitely were not gay. In fact, they were the most unhappy people that he had ever met.

    To call them gay is a lie it seems.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *