It is time to examine the issue of homosexuality and Christianity and how Scripture addresses this from another point of view.  As I indicated in the previous post, Peter Gomes is playing what I would describe as a “long game.”  He points out “hard texts” where Christians have taken Scripture and gotten it wrong [e.g. prohibition of alcohol, slavery and the Bible and Anti-Semitism and the Christian faith].  His line of reasoning is inductive, essentially that all these examples are misinterpretations so LGBTQ+ condemnation is also a misinterpretation.  This line of reasoning takes some time as case after case is built one on others, but it is time to look at another point of view that I would describe as direct, Kevin DeYoung and his discussion of Romans 1: 18-32.

Today Romans 1: 18-32 is considered a “text of terror” among LGBTQ+ people.  Some Christians have used Paul’s epistle to bolster their arguments against same-sex marriage, transgender identity, and adoption and parenting by LGBTQ+ people.  Whereas Gomes would decry this type of interpretation, DeYoung uses this text to support his view.

Note how DeYoung starts Chapter 4 of his book* entitled “The Romans Road in the Wrong Direction.”  “The most detailed and significant treatment of homosexuality is found in the first chapter of the most important letter in the history of the world.  Romans 1 reinforces with unambiguous clarity all that we’ve seen up to this point from the Old Testament; namely, that homosexual practice is a serious sin and a violation of God’s created order” [DeYoung, 49].

That phrase “created order” is the crux of DeYoung’s argument.  The “wrath of God” is reserved for all men who are ungodly and unrighteous.  God has given man the path of righteous living through the message of the Gospel.  That message is our guide as we know we cannot be saved by faith apart from knowledge of The Scripture.  God does not condemn the innocent and the ignorant, but “none are innocent because none are wholly ignorant” [50].  Righteous behavior is known by the “the law written on our hearts” and observation of the natural [God made] world.  What the Apostle Paul is saying is that we live in a fallen world.

Wasting no time, DeYoung turns to verses 21-23 where he elaborates upon Paul’s message that ungodly men exchange the glory of the Lord for the “foolishness of idolatry” [v. 23]  We should give thanks for God’s creation for that creation itself guides us in our behavior.  Verses 24-25 talks about lusts that lead man astray.  Lust causes man to perform more and more ungodly behavior, especially sexual immorality. By doing so, man dishonors a wonderful gift from God, the human body.

Verses 26 and 27 deal directly with behaviors contrary to the “natural order,” the idea of same sex intimacy.  DeYoung says “in Paul’s mind same-sex intimacy is an especially clear illustration of the idolatrous human impulse to turn away from God’s order and design” [52].  The main issue here is that turning from the natural heterosexual relationship to same-sex relationships that is a move toward the unnatural.  Paul is blunt and so is DeYoung:  people who are capable of heterosexuality “become dissatisfied with their usual sexual activity, lust after new experiences and seek out homosexual encounters….Homosexual behavior is a sin….Every passion directed toward illegitimate ends is considered excessive and lacking in self-control” [DeYoung, 53].  DeYoung considers the basis for Paul’s argument the idea that homosexual behavior is “contrary to nature.”

The Creator of the world set this world in place.  The creation is a plan that anyone can see in the world of animals, birds and creeping things.  Man is part of this created world and man should follow God’s created order.  When man does not follow that order, he is following a lie and should feel shame.  Hence “homosexual practice is sinful because it violates the divine design in creation” [DeYoung, 55].

Paul goes further in expressing his thought about this sinful practice.  Verses 28 through 32 condemn same-sex practice in very strong terms.  People who do not acknowledge God and practice debased behavior are “full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness.  They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless…[they] deserve to die.”

“They deserve to die.”

Is there a stronger condemnation than that? 

Now I must admit that Paul is not focusing solely on same-sex behavior as “the only sin.”  He’s not.  He points to same-sex intimacy as an example of a heinous sin.  In the larger context of his argument he, is really saying that everyone is guilty of sin; we all fall short of the standard that God expects and the model that Jesus Christ presented for us in His life here on earth.  In the larger context, he is making a case for the fact that we all need a Savior. 

Revisionist theologians point out that excess was the real problem that Paul speaks about.  Excessive use of same-sex intimacy was the real problem that Paul was addressing.  Paul was also trying to set a trap for the super-righteous Pharisees who felt their behavior was beyond reproach. 

DeYoung says no to that.  “There is no way to rescue Paul from his strong condemnation of homosexual behavior.  We can’t make unclean mean ritually impure.  We can’t make contrary to nature mean out of the ordinary….We can’t make this text about nothing more than pederasty, exploitation, or excess passion.”

DeYoung looks at the Apostle Paul and Romans 1 and unleashes the “terror.”  Is it a message that is friendly to LGBTQ+ individuals that seek acceptance by all Christian Churches?  It is not friendly at all.  It is condemning.

Whereas Gomes slowly works toward his message of reconciliation of same-sex behavior and Christian faith, DeYoung says no, this will not work.  The last lines of Chapter 4 express his views is no uncertain terms:  “God’s people ought not engage in homosexual behavior or give approval to those who do.”

*What Does the Bible Really Teach About Homosexuality?