Homosexuality; Is there a Gay Gene?
Perversion. Romans 1:26-32
We have seen in looking at
these first two stages of divine discipline that we have seen, that God allows
more of the function of His permissive will than necessarily an active judgment
as He sort of lets people have enough rope to hang themselves. He gives people
the freedom to reject Him and then gives them even more opportunity to follow
their negative volition in their rejection of Him, and it continues to
culminate in increasing stages of degradation and perversion. One the major
themes that go throughout each of the three stages—marked by “God gave them
up”—is the indication that there is some level of sexual degradation and
perversion. It is most clearly seen in the second stage in verses 26 and 27
where it is clear that the rise of homosexuality is a consequence of the
rejection of God and is part of God’s divine discipline on a civilization. Part
of that really fits within a web of different sins that are all related to
sexual identity and gender confusion.
Another thing to be brought
out is this word “nature.” In the Greek there are two different forms of it: phusis [fusij], which
is a noun, and also phusikos [fusikoj], an adjective. In verse 26 there is the natural use which is against nature.
Romans
This
particular passage is one of three or four passages in Scripture that are at
the very center of the debate over homosexuality, sometimes framed, is it
nature or nurture? And it has bled over into “Christian” circles. There are
those who try to use the Scripture to argue for a pro-homosexual position. They
assume what they have heard out in the market place of
As
we look at this passage we see that the sins related to homosexuality are not
singled out or identified in terms of some special class or super class of
sins. In fact the specific revelation related to homosexuality in only in the
second stage of God’s giving people over to their vile passions. The third
stage includes just about any other kind of sin that we could possibly think
of.
Observations
Is there such a thing as a gay gene?
1. The human genome project completed its task in mapping out the
human gene in 2003. They never identified a gay gene. The silence is loud; they
never discovered a gay gene.
2. In the early 90s there was
a study that came out that there might be a gay gene. There was a suggestion of
it. However the way they reported it in the news was that they had identified a
gay gene. In Science Magazine and article entitled Male Sexual Orientation and Genetic Evidence offered by Neil Risch, Elizabeth Squires-Wheeler, B.J. Keats it was concluded that there is little disagreement
that male homosexual orientation is not genetic.
A basic argument on pro-gay web sites is
to say that homosexuality is genetic is one of the most homophobic things you
can say. Basically what they are saying is we are just trapped in this horrible
lifestyle of being homosexual but we can’t help it because it is genetic. So
what they are saying is we are trapped here, we can’t do anything about it so
we are just going to stick with it because that is the way fate has determined
it; that is the way our genetic structure is. Then they said they ought to be
proud of the fact that they had chosen a homosexual lifestyle. So they are out
there promoting choice! They have a number of citations from booklets and
pamphlets supporting the fact that homosexuality was a choice. And that is what
Scripture affirms, that this is a choice. It is a volitional decision like any
other sin. There may be various environmental factors, developmental factors
and genetic predispositions in the sin nature or whatever but that doesn’t mean
that they have to act on those predispositions, temptations, or whatever they
might be; it is a matter of making a decision. Homosexuality and this whole
thing with gay marriage is all fueled by a false assumption and propaganda that
it is the result of a gay gene and so we ought not do anything to take away
from their civil rights. We are witnessing the application of this second stage
of divine discipline before our very eyes.
The third stage comes up in verse 28.
Romans 1:28 NASB “And just as they [those who have rejected God] did
not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved
mind, to do those things which are not proper.” The ultimate cause of this is
their negative volition. As it is translated here, “they did not see fit to
acknowledge,” based on the Greek verb dokimazo
[dokimazw]—a form of this verb shows up three times in these last few
verses—which has the idea of to test something, to accept something as true or
approved. So a better translation of this would be “just as they did not
approve having God in their knowledge.” They have rejected God and so they
don’t approve of having God in their knowledge. What better term to express the
views of so many liberals in the United States who are saying we just don’t
approve of having God in the classroom, we don’t approve of having God in the
pledge of allegiance, we don’t approve of having God in the public square. They
have rejected God and so now they disapprove of God.
The result is that God gives them over, He
takes His hands off His restraining power on sin a little more and gives them
over to debased/depraved mind. The word for depraved is the noun adokimos [a)dokimoj]. The verb for not
approving God is dokimazo. It is
the same root idea, having to do with approval. Each form has a little
different sense to it and here in adokimos
the a at the beginning is a
negative, so it is talking about something that rather than being qualified or
approved is unqualified, not approved, unfit or reprehensible. It is translated
in the sense of a depraved mind, a debased mind, a perverted mind. So God is
giving them over to a perverted or debased mind, He is just letting their sin
nature follow its own course with the result that they do things that are not
fitting or not approved—the verb katheko
[kaqhkw], not fitting, not approved and it is detestable or abominable.
Now that becomes defined through a list of twenty-two sins that come up in the
following verses.
Romans
Several of these are just what we would
identify as general descriptions of sin—righteousness, wickedness, hostility, inventors
of evil, senseless, undiscerning. Then there are the mental attitude sins—covetousness,
malice, envy, deceit, hostility, violent arrogance (also translated “insolence”—acting
out on that arrogance)—without natural affection, i.e. heartless or unloving,
the Greek noun astorgos [a)storgoj]. storge is a Greek word for love, not
used anywhere in the New Testament. astorgos
is the opposite of that, it is unloving and uncaring and it is because they are
given over to arrogance and self-centeredness. Then there are the sins of the tongue—slanderers,
strife, gossip, proud in a boastful, conceited manner as opposed to the next
verse which is just being boastful—and then two overt sins, murder and being
disobedient to parents. Romans
Romans
They not
only practice these things, they deserve death. But God in His grace doesn’t bring
temporal judgment on them; He postpones that so that He can extend mercy and
the offer of the gospel.
These who deserve death not
only practice these things themselves but they also approve of those who
practice them. There is a battle going on, a war going on, and often we forget
this. We are engaged, especially in the culture in which we are in now, in a major
war against the forces of darkness and we are soldiers in that conflict as
believers in the Lord Jesus Christ. It is our responsibility to fight according
to the principles of Scripture. We are tearing down every lofty thought that is
raised against God; we are to fight according to the principles of Ephesians 6:10-18,
and we are engaged in representing God to a fallen world primarily through
witnessing of the gospel and in our own lives. But in order to be well trained
soldiers we have to know the Word because that is our field manual.