It Never Occurred to Paul that People Were Born Gay – Really?

Those who defend the practice of homosexuality have used many tactics to try and justify it — it’s just an “alternative lifestyle,” it’s of no concern to anyone else, people are born that way. The biggest obstacle in our country for those who are pushing this homosexual message comes from those who cite the Bible as their reason for opposing it.

As a result, there has been a great effort to either discredit or reinterpret the passages that condemn homosexuality. Earlier this week in an interview, the first openly gay bishop of the Episcopal church, “Reverend” V. Gene Robinson, tried to explain away Paul’s comments about homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27 by claiming that Paul was condemning heterosexuals from engaging in homosexuality, but that he was not condemning homosexual acts by those who were oriented that way from birth.

First, notice Paul’s words to the Romans:

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for the women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error” (Romans 1:26-27).

Paul is very clear. These “indecent acts” which were committed by those of the same sex (homosexuality) are described as “degrading passions,” “unnatural” and they are classified as “error.” Paul also says there is a penalty due for those who commit this sin.

Now, notice how “Reverend” Robinson explains the passage:

“We have to understand that the notion of a homosexual sexual orientation is a notion that’s only about 125 years old.

“That is to say, St. Paul was talking about people that he understood to be heterosexual engaging in same-sex acts. It never occurred to anyone in ancient times that a certain minority of us would be born being affectionally oriented to people of the same sex. So it did seem like against their nature to be doing so.”

So Robinson believes that Paul condemned heterosexuals acting like homosexuals because it “never occurred” to the people of that day, including the apostle Paul, that people were born gay. After all, we have only understood that concept of sexual orientation for about 125 years. Paul, in his society, was just not sophisticated enough to understand this.

What the “Reverend” Robinson apparently forgets is that “all Scripture is inspired by God” (2 Timothy 3:16). Paul said, “If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment” (1 Corinthians 14:37). Paul was not stating his opinion that had been shaped by his culture. He was revealing the truth that came down from the Lord (John 16:13; 1 Corinthians 2:12-13).

God, having an intimate knowledge of mankind as Creator (Genesis 1:27; Psalm 139:13-16), would know if people could or would be born gay. If that were possible, then even if the first century Roman culture did not understand that, Paul would have been taught those things by the Lord. Yet Paul said the practice of homosexuality constituted “degrading passions” and “indecent acts” which were “unnatural.

If people were born gay, then God would be unjust for condemning the practice. Yet we know that “God is not one to show partiality” (Acts 10:34). If people were just born that way, rather than making the choice to engage in that practice, God would not condemn homosexuality. But instead, the just and impartial God has unfailingly condemned homosexuality from the beginning — during the patriarchal age (Genesis 19:4-5,13; Jude 7), under the Law of Moses (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13), and now under the gospel of Christ (Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9; 1 Timothy 1:10-11).

People are not born gay, and Paul was not blinded by his culture from seeing that. Robinson is simply wrong. But he goes on in his attempt to explain Paul’s words:

“The other thing about St. Paul is that he was also speaking out against a practice known to him and both the Roman and the Greek world and would have been known in the Palestinian culture there of an older man taking a younger boy under his wing, using him sexually, and so on. No one’s — that’s child abuse. No one is arguing for that today. We would all be against that. We would all agree with St. Paul on that.”

First he said Paul was merely condemning homosexuality among heterosexuals. Then he says that Paul is condemning “child abuse.” He says “we would all be against that.” I guess he forgot about the homosexuals who do sexually abuse children, even promoting their alleged “right” to do this. But aside from that, Robinson is simply ignoring what the passage actually says. Paul is not talking about the sexual relationship between men and boys. He is condemning the sexual relationship between men and men.

“Reverend” Robinson then claims that the Bible says nothing that pertains to relationships between people who were homosexuals from birth:

“The question is, are there any answers there for what we’re asking today, which is the rightfulness of faithful monogamous lifelong-intentioned relationships between people of the same sex, and the bible simply does not address that.”

Robinson is wrong again. The Bible does address this sufficiently. Jesus said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?” (Matthew 19:4-5). According to God’s plan, what will a faithful, monogamous, lifelong relationship look like? One man and one woman. The reason why the Bible makes no mention of a same-sex relationship similar to marriage is because God simply does not condone it.

Those who promote the homosexual agenda will continue with their attacks against the Bible and their lies about what the Scriptures mean. No matter what they say, or what our culture accepts, God’s word is the same. Homosexuality cannot be defended from the Bible.

With this sin, as with every other sin, we would do well to quit trying to defend it, or twist Scriptures to justify it, and instead work to conform our lives to the standard God has given to us in His word.

The interview referenced in this article took place on Tuesday, February 2, 2010, and was conducted by CNSNews.com. It can be found at the following link: First Openly Gay Episcopal Bishop Says St. Paul Was Condemning Homosexual Acts by Heterosexuals

Note: The reason why I placed Robinson’s title, “Reverend,” in quotes is because I refuse to acknowledge him by that name. This is not because he is gay, but because the Bible teaches that God alone is “reverend” (Psalm 111:9), and because Jesus condemned the use of religious titles like this (Matthew 23:7-9).


.

Comments

  1. So what if Paul said that. it’s not like he was God. Also in the torah all sorts of things are condemned that Christians ignore today. Homosexuals cause no harm to others. It’s between them & God

  2. True, Paul was not God. But he was specifically chosen by Christ to preach the gospel (Acts 9:15; 26:14-18). As an apostle, he spoke the words that were revealed to him from Jesus (1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 4:2). Therefore, what Paul says is important.

    Regarding the Torah, Christians are not under the Law of Moses today (Colossians 2:14; Hebrews 8:8-12). I do not ignore it however. I even referenced passages from it in this article to show the pattern from the beginning, under every dispensation, that God condemns the practice of homosexuality. The Torah, and the rest of the Old Testament should not be ignored. But it must be used properly.

    I don’t know about your claim that homosexuals cause no harm to others. But I assume your point is that I shouldn’t be critical of the practice of homosexuality because it’s between them and God. However, if I know that God condemns it, should I not try to explain that so they can learn the truth?