Monday, June 12, 2006

The Myth of Homophobia

I don't believe in homophobia.

I know there are people who don't like homosexuals. I know there are people who are incredibly uncomfortable with the thought of being "hit on" by a gay person. I know there are people with all kinds of bizarre ideas about what "causes" one person to be homosexual while the majority of people remain straight. But I don't believe in what is commonly referred to as homophobia.

People throw this word around as a term of derision at anyone who expresses discomfort or displeasure or disapproval with the prevalence, common acceptance, and forceful agenda-pushing of homosexuality. It somehow seems ironic for "them" to give such a derogatory label to those who disagree with them. Isn't it they who desire for openness?

The common use of this word "homophobia" is propaganda, plain and simple. If you disagree with the proposition that homosexuality is a "legitimate alternative lifestyle" then you are a homophobe. No one wants to be a homophobe. So if it's a choice between the two, people will just simply choose to accept homosexuality--not because they feel comfortable with it, but because they don't want to be labelled "bigot", "homophobe", "religious fundamentalist", etc.

Like any sin, homosexuality is built off of and continues to feed off of pride. If I can make everyone else accept my sin then maybe I'll feel better about myself and my conscience will quit bothering me.

The truth of the matter, however, is that homosexuality is sin. It flies in the face of all that God created humanity to be. It pushes men to not be men and women to not be women--but God created us to be those so that we could bear his image! Being gay destroys the image of marriage as a picture of Christ and his bride (if you read Eph 5 carefully you'll see that the marriage of Adam and Eve was designed in order to represent the relationship that God would one day have with his people... it's not like God saw marriage and then one day thought, "hey that's kinda like a metaphor for me and them!").

It is natural that what remains in us of the image of God would be repulsed by what is so blatanly ungodlike. This is especially true for Christians, because we have seen the wonder and the beauty and the infinite wisdom of God in his creation. We have seen from his word the kind of people--men and women distinct, yet equally wonderful--he wants us to be. We have seen that there are reasons for all that God requires of us, and that all these things are beautiful.

In this culture, in this day, in this city everyone says it is wrong to be repulsed by homosexuality. "Don't speak about it loudly... someone might hear." It has gotten to the point now where I've caught myself (a) not being repulsed by blatantly gay things around me, and (b) feeling bad when I am repulsed by it.


I'm not homophobic, but it grosses me out and I think it should! It is an abomination before the Lord, a perversion of the created order, and blatant, proud, boastful, haugty, flagrant sexual immorality in the heart of men and women who care nothing for God or the wonder and splendour of his righteousness and who presume on his patience and forebearance.

To speak of this sin as what it actually is is not homophobia and I will not be ashamed to declare that homosexuality is wrong. I don't hate anyone for their sin, but I will no longer shrink back from calling a spade what it rightly is... no matter what.


TwinsK&D said...

right on is Sodomy...sin is sin and if we 'gloss over' it, it becomes non offensive and we get used to it (which in itself is a sin). It should gross us out just because it is sin...all sin sould be offensive because it offends an infanitly holy God!

Keep preaching it brother :-)

DErifter said...

What he said. (And in such simple terms today!)

Christian said...

Exactly right. I hadn't ever put it in terms like you did, but homoesexuality does destroy the image of Christ and the Church. Glad to know there's someone out there who isn't afraid to speak the truth.

canuckfish said...

My apologies. This post is in answer to the 'proof that God exists' post but I was unable to post it there. Please add me to your member list if you would like future comments, and please add this post to that blog.

I suppose you could have just asked me :-)

It is obvious that Rielly did not understand the website or read it thoroughly.

I am completely baffled at how anyone could have gotten 'faith in human reason,' from that site. If you are going to critique a Christian site, please take enough time to try to understand it.

The emphasis throughout the site is that men are saved soley through God's saving grace. The very welcome page states that It is my hope and prayer that God will renew your heart and use this site as a tool...

I will comment briefly on the Rielly's 2 points, but I sure hope he revisits the site and ammends his comments.

1. The entire gist of the website is in fact decrying the faith in human reason. Just read the "By what authority do Christians claim the Bible as their ultimate authority?" in the Q&A. For that matter, go back and read the entire site. Pay close attention to the 'about this site' tab.
When Peter in 1 Peter 3 says: But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.
I highly doubt that this implored us to give a subjective reason. I think it is unbiblical to tell people that 'God probably exists.'

2. Acts 9:22 states:
"Yet Saul grew more and more powerful and baffled the Jews living in Damascus by proving that Jesus is the Christ."

What do you suppose Paul was doing here. Doing something that you just tried to show was impossible and unbiblical, yet you gave no Bible reference for your claim.

How is it a fallacy for a finite being to prove that there is an infinite being? The very proof that God exists is that it is impossible that He does not exist.

Jesus Christ is an infinite being, Paul was finite. Was he engaing in a fallacy in Acts 9?

I understand that the concept of 'proof that God exists' is very new to many Christians. It is fallacious however to think that proof = persuasion, or is even meant to equal persuasion.

I hope Rielly will go back to the site and then take back his charge of 'foolishness,' and 'arrogance.'
If he as a Christian would rather have me direct those who do not believe that absolute truth exists, to his website or email address, I will certainly be happy to discuss this with him.

I will be happy to comment on any future post.



Son of Man said...

Thanks brother. I love you man.

JLF said...


Thanks for your comments. I cut and pasted them over into the other blog so the others could read them because I thought they were well thought out. Unfortunately, we cannot add you to that blog... it's members only by design, but I do thank you again for your thoughts.

And thank you for your site as well. I have no doubt in my mind that our Lord can use sites such as that to do absolutely miraculous things in his people and for his kingdom. Please keep up the good work!

Your brother in Christ,

canuckfish said...

Hello Julian,

Thanks for your kind words about the site. No problem with not adding me to your blog, I just hope you don't mind my responding here. You can always mail your email address to so I can mail any future responses to you directly.

I don't know how familliar you or your friends are with the Transcendental Argument for the existence of God, but it is extremely powerful and, dare I say, Biblical.
I was an 'evidentialist' in my apologetics up until about a year ago when I learned about 'presuppositionalism,' and I am so thankful for the new outlook. For a really good idea of the 'presuppositional' argument, download the debate between Greg Bahnsen and Gordon Stein. If you can't find it online, I'll send you a link.

I wonder if you caught the incredible irony in Rielly's critique. He 'criticized' the site for relying on 'human reason,' but how did he criticize it, not with the Bible but guessed it - human reason :-)

No doubt, I will run into more Christians who do not understand presuppositionlism, but I hope and pray that your group at least will look into it. Rielly seems like a bright chap, and if he has a fire for apologetics, like it appears that he does, he will love it.

Atheists hate the site, so it's nice to find Christians who encourage it.

Blessings to you and your group,


P.S. I am doing an interview on Tuesday evening (June 20th) just in case you are interested in tuning in.