Intolerant Christians

There are those that believe that Christians, are bigots and prejudicial, because they are not accepting of homosexual behavior, as normal and morally acceptable. It is generally held that in order to not be considered bigoted and prejudicial, we must not only accept homosexuality as normal and natural, but must embrace it as well. It is not enough to simply be accepting and caring towards homosexuals- as people- we must also accept their sexual activity, without regard to what God's Word says on the subject. Having had this discussion more in depth than was initially intended, in the comment section of another post, I am now in a position to state fully what my position is, and what I feel is the position of fundamental Christianity as a whole. (This is my opinion only, and may or may not apply to all that identify as fundamental Christians.)

I do not agree that acceptance of a behavior- any behavior- is necessary, in order to refrain from being a bigot or prejudicial. Nor do I think it should be considered intolerant, simply on the basis of that nonacceptance, as long as we are accepting of the person themselves; for all of mankind is loved by God. Because many Christians will not agree to wholeheartedly endorse homosexuality as right and natural, just as heterosexuality is, intolerant is the label applied to us.

Standing upon the Word of God, as our basis for our stance, is the worst kind of offense to those that would have us turn a blind eye toward homosexual acts- as sin. It matters not if we apply this same rule to all acts deemed inappropriate or sinful in God's eyes (sexual or not.) Does anyone else see this as somehow unbalanced? I do not agree that true Christians that apply God's standard to all sin, in the same regard, and without preference over any, can be considered bigots or prejudicial. Case in point, defining prejudice and bigotry:

Bigotry and Prejudice

The definition of a "bigot" or a "prejudice" are interchangeable, as the definition of "bigot" utilizes the definition of "prejudice' as it's own. So let's define prejudice: the Encarta Encyclopedia strictly defines "prejudice" as:

a preformed and unsubstantiated judgment or opinion about an individual or a group, either favorable or unfavorable in nature. (Now the broad application:) In modern usage, however, the term most often denotes an unfavorable or hostile attitude toward other people based on their membership in another social or ethnic group. The distinguishing characteristic of a prejudice is that it relies on stereotypes (oversimplified generalizations) about the group against which the prejudice is directed. (emphasis mine and some parenthetical comments my own)

Note that this definition says nothing about the actions of the group, but only about the group itself.

"Prejudice" is from the Latin word praejudicium meaning "judgment in advance" and is directed, generally, as hatred or dislike towards a specific group or person, based on race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation.

But note again, that it is a preformed, unsubstantiated opinion or judgment toward a person or group...not their actions. How then could one honestly attribute traits of bigotry and prejudice toward Christians? We Christians are, for the most part, fully accepting of all persons, just not all actions (or at least this how we should be towards all humanity.) They need not be mutually exclusive of each other. This would be akin to having a loved one lie to you, and saying that because we love them, we should be perfectly accepting of their lying behavior. This is preposterous!

Sexual Immorality in Scripture

Scripture defines sexual immorality as any sexual act that occurs outside the bounds of heterosexual, married, consensual sexual intercourse. This includes adultery, sodomy, effeminate male behavior, bestiality, incest, and more. All of these are regarded equally as sin by God, and by Christians that hold firm to His word.


Marriage Defined- Homosexual Unions Are Not Marriages:

Let's look at Genesis 2:20, 22

So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him. Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. (emphasis mine)

This same chapter of Genesis then goes on to state that it is for this reason that a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall be one flesh (this is seen by many as well, to be a reference to the sexual union, though it is not exclusively a reference to it.) A suitable mate for man, is woman; and a suitable mate for woman is man. In addition, marriage is the institution through which God commanded mankind to procreate. Homosexuals cannot do biologically do this, without medical intervention (on the part of a female.) I grant that there are also heterosexual couples that are not able to this as well, but this is not because of anatomical incompatibility, but rather physical or other various reasons. Now for specific Scripture references that support the Christian view.

OT Scripture References Regarding Any Sexual Immorality:

In the Old Testament, we are told not to engage in any kind of lewd or lascivious sexual act- whether heterosexual or homosexual. These activities include adultery, fornication (sex outside of marriage), incest, bestiality, sodomy, and any other act of fleshly lust. There are many references but for the sake of space, I will list those that also address homosexuality, specifically. Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 20:13; and Judges 19:22 (this is a narrative very similar to that regarding Lot and the angels with him, before the destruction of Sodom). The question has been asked how the moral aspect is still applicable, but not the "death sentence," and I shall endeavor to address this in detail in a later post. Suffice it to say that OT law is not applied in the same manner, as it was before the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ; and there are valid reasons for this.

New Testament Scripture References

In the New Testament we have a number of references to both hetero- and homosexual sin, as well. 1 Cor 6:9, 13, 18; Jude 1:7; and Romans 1:26-27 This last one, specifically, addresses homosexual acts, both female and male. I also find it extremely interesting to note, that though homosexuality was something that was known, and practiced by much of the Roman Empire- especially those of higher social status- at the time of Paul's letter to the church there; that there was no word (in Greek- the common language used for international and interracial communication) to describe a loving, committed, equal, homosexual relationship. Perhaps, if no such word existed, could it be because there was no such circumstance? Just a side thought.

Do I believe homosexuality is a choice?

Though I have used the word orientation, to state that I believed it to be a choice, I would like to try to clarify what I intended to impart. I believe that every sinful thought or desire is a fact of our humanity, and so therefore cannot be a choice. We all, as human, have them, it is a fact of mankind's condition. However, whether or not we act upon them is most certainly a choice. I was also asked if I were shown conclusive scientific evidence, that proved that homosexuality identification was something a person was born with- and had no control over- whether or not I would then be open to changing my stance. The answer is NO. The reason for this, is the fact that all sexual encounters are a choice, period. There are no exclusions. Sex is a choice. It is not a need. Some of us may believe that it is, but we are only fooling ourselves.

This is what I do know to be true, whatever our sexual orientation, it need not be also our sexual identity. If one should choose not to be aroused by members of the opposite sex, then they are free to choose celibacy, in my opinion. The same holds true for those that choose not be aroused the same sex. Self- identity need not be the basis of how we define ourselves. We are defined by who we are, not by what (or who) we do. (Please excuse my use of slang in the previous statement, it just happened to be apt.)

In conclusion, I would state, once again, that my unwillingness to accept and embrace another's sexual activity does not a bigot, make me- or any other Christian, for that matter. Everyone, regardless of any sin they may or may not have committed is loved without condition, by those that would profess to be Christ followers. For those Christians that cannot find it within themselves to do so, I can only say that being a Christian does not make anyone perfect, just more aware of our imperfections- or at least that is what should happen. I believe that most, if not all, Christians would agree with this statement; even if they agree with nothing else I have said here.

One last comment to those that do believe: We should remember that it is not our place to judge any unbeliever's sinful activity. The only "judgment" we are to make is in discerning whether or not it is sin, in order to refrain from it ourselves. The only time we should rebuke anybody's sin, is if they are already a part of the body of Christ, and we should do so according to Paul's instruction to Timothy. Though it is allowable to share what God's Word says about sin, only He can judge a person's heart, and only He knows whether or not they will one day become aware of the sin that holds them captive. Telling an non-seeking, unbeliever that they are a sinner, will do nothing more than cause hatred and revulsion of all that we are to represent. Let's follow Jesus' example in how we relate and communicate our love of all people, regardless of their sin.