“But I prayed for God do take the desire away and He didn’t, therefore it isn’t a sin”

The title is a synopsis of the sad and illogical argument used by many in the “Christian” LGBTQ community to rationalize their sins.  And the theological Left supports them in this charade because they love the world and themselves more than they love God and their neighbors.

Here’s an example from a recent comment on the Heterosexual questionnaire, aka Best. Homework assignment. Ever. post.

I’ve dealt specifically with scriptures in regards to homosexuality for many years. I struggled with accepting myself and had prayed every night for many months for God to “change” me, which according to my sister was not long enough. However, I was changed: I finally accepted that I was attracted to men and not women. I moved on. And I became much happier and closer to God. And I found the love of my life who I will marry as soon as my state clears the legal path for me to do so.

So he prayed to God to change his sexual desires and God didn’t answer that request.  Instead, God allegedly changed him to accept those desires, even though that goes against the clear teachings of the Bible and 2,000 years of church history.

Those making that claim have the burden to show Bible verses that teach this:

– If you pray for God to remove a temptation, he will do it 100% of the time.
– Therefore, if he doesn’t remove the temptation, it isn’t a sin.

That is transparently false. I could pray that God would eliminate every possible sin from my life. He could solve that by striking me dead, of course, but if He didn’t take away the desires then it wouldn’t be an excuse for me to sin.

If you have given yourself over to homosexual behavior then it isn’t God you’ve moved closer to.

Romans 1:26-28 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

We are all sinners in need of a Savior.  The solution isn’t to pretend that our sins aren’t sins.  The solution is Jesus, who can forgive our sins and give us the Holy Spirit to transform us and to give us power over sin.  Yes, we will still sin, as Romans 7 and other passages teach, but our lives will be transformed now and forever.

If you love your neighbors you won’t encourage them to sear their consciences by pretending that sins aren’t sins — whether the sins are homosexual desires, inappropriate heterosexual desires, lust, anger, greed, jealousy, etc.

Really, people, just say something like, “Yes, homosexual behavior is a sin.  The word of God is clear.  But I’m not going to grandstand on that sin just because it isn’t a temptation for me and I’m not going to try and stop you from sinning before I share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with you.  Even if homosexual behavior wasn’t sinful you’d still be a sinner in need of a Savior because of countless other sins.”

Yes, you are likely to be unpopular with the world if you say that.  But if that is your aim then Christianity may not be for you.

——–

Here is the full comment and my response from that post:

Hi Matt,

Thanks for visiting and commenting. I have a couple thoughts to share aside from the survey topic.

You are entitled to your opinion like anyone else. I would just strongly encourage anyone, liberal or conservative, gay or straight, to drop this strong ‘us vs them’ mentality. I would like Christians to adhere to their beliefs and continue to be strong devotees to Christ while simultaneously acknowledging that homosexuality is not an immoral behavior/lifestyle/affliction in and of itself (although who cares what I would like).

While I don’t think the “us vs. them” has to be hostile — even though the LGBTQ lobby certainly is hostile and not interested in any sort of compromise, such as leaving religious liberties intact — what you proposed is completely illogical. What you have said is basically, “Be devoted to Christ but disagree with him on what He says about sexuality.” That is impossible. He is King and Lord of all, so to be devoted to him is to agree with him. And He was very clear. Bible-believing Christians and even two out of the three types of pro-gay people* (religious or not) can see these truths:

100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior describe it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.

100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.

100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).

0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions of any kind.

* The three general types of pro-gay theology people: 1. “The Bible says homosexuality is wrong but it isn’t the word of God” (obviously non-Christians) 2. “The Bible says it is wrong but God changed his mind and is only telling theological Liberals” (only about 10 things wrong with that) 3. “The Bible is the word of God but you are just misunderstanding it” (Uh, no, not really.)

Any sex outside of marriage is prohibited, for good reason: that’s a given. But, if you are going to take the INTERPRETATION that certain Greek and Hebrew words were referring to LGBT people and strongly admonish people for identifying as such, then please be consistent. I would assume you also wear clothes of only one material (Deuteronomy 22:11). Indeed, I would expect all Christians who speak out about the destructive nature of homosexuality and back it up with biblical reasoning, to follow most of the hundreds of prohibitions and commandments found throughout the Bible. I should not assume that you do not.

That is a sadly common argument, but one that is false. The literalists who assume that to be consistent with Christ’s teachings on homosexuality (and adultery, etc.) means we must follow every civil and ceremonial law given to the Israelites make two errors. One is that they ignore the distinctions of what God commanded a specific group of people at a point in time relative to his broader commandments to all people. The second is that even if their argument was true it would prove too much, as it implies that unless you wear clothes of the same material then you are inconsistent to argue against any sin, including bestiality, child sacrifice, adultery, gay-bashing, etc. That is ridiculous, of course.

Those type of “inconsistency” allegations are full of holes but is appealing to many because so few bother to study the passages. I address six serious problems with it in flaws of the shellfish argument. http://tinyurl.com/shellfishflaws

But just as you would probably assume that I as a gay man have lots of anonymous sex and use drugs

I wouldn’t have assumed that, though now that you brought it up the statistics say that it is more likely. Whether you have one partner or 100 it is a sin. And you would be 40+ times more likely to get HIV/Syphilis and if you had HIV there is a 62% chance that you would have deliberate unprotected sex.

I’ve dealt specifically with scriptures in regards to homosexuality for many years. I struggled with accepting myself and had prayed every night for many months for God to “change” me, which according to my sister was not long enough. However, I was changed: I finally accepted that I was attracted to men and not women. I moved on. And I became much happier and closer to God. And I found the love of my life who I will marry as soon as my state clears the legal path for me to do so.

Please show me the Bible verses that teach this:
– If you pray for God to remove a temptation, he will do it 100% of the time.
– Therefore, if he doesn’t remove the temptation, it isn’t a sin.

That is false. I could pray that God would eliminate every possible sin from my life. He could solve that by striking me dead ;-), of course, but if He didn’t answer it then it wouldn’t be an excuse for me to sin.

If you have given yourself over to homosexual behavior then it isn’t God you’ve moved closer to. Romans 1:26-28 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

The Bible clearly states that certain men are “born eunuchs” (Matthew 19:12) as in they were not meant to marry women and procreate. In the historical context, eunuchs were simply the men entrusted to serve & protect aristocratic women. Some were already disinterested in bedding the women, which was a prerequisite, while others had to be castrated. If Jesus accepts us as such, then maybe you should, too.

You twisted Jesus’ words to imply that eunuchs = homosexuals, while you ignore the rest of Jesus’ words (i.e., the entire Bible, including his design and ideal for marriage: one man and one woman. Using your reasoning, castration would be a more logical solution than “marrying” someone of the same sex.

The most important thing to remember is that we are all in this society together. I don’t want to live in a crumbling empire spiraling into debauchery and decadence any more than any of you do. Constant partying, promiscuity, and drug use are all recipes for disaster. They are fun for a time I guess, but ultimately lead to misery and isolation. Anyone (gay, bi , straight, trans, etc) can fall into this trap. One of the main reasons there is a ‘gay partying subculture’ is because same-sex couples were excluded from the stabilizing affects of social expectation and pressure to settle down in a permanent monogamous relationship. Marriage fosters strong bonds and rock-solid family foundations which strengthens social cohesion. That’s why I support marriage as much as I do critical thought and compassioned reason.

I agree that less sin is better than more sin. But if I really care about you and your eternal soul then I can’t affirm your homosexual behavior as not being sinful. I hope you study the Bible more carefully and reconsider your views.

All the best to you!

Also see:

Problems with pro-gay theology http://tinyurl.com/5sgoqvv

Responding to Pro-Gay Theology http://www.exodusglobalalliance.org/respondingtoprogaytheologypartip344.php

Responding to same-sex marriage arguments http://wp.me/p1wGU-48E

Advertisements

6 thoughts on ““But I prayed for God do take the desire away and He didn’t, therefore it isn’t a sin””

  1. Wow, that whole “born eunuchs” thing was ripped out of context and built in another image. The point is “Who should marry?” (Matt 19:10). Jesus’s answer was “Not eunuchs, either by birth or modification.”

    But the whole argument breaks down when compared to … you know … the Bible. We read, for instance, of Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” (a “messenger from Satan”) which wasn’t removed (2 Cor 12:7-12). That didn’t make it “good” or “not a messenger from Satan”. And Paul assures us not that God will take away temptation, but “He will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it” (1 Cor 10:13), not take it away.

    And that “us vs them” thing has always been problematic. I’ve explained it this way. “Look, I’m a Christian. That means that I’m obligated to follow Christ. So when Christ says, for instance, that marriage is the union of a man and a woman (Matt 19:4-6), I have two choices. I can go along with Him on it and be a Christian, or I can not … and stop being a Christian. I do not have the option of discarding His instructions and calling myself His follower. So I’m kind of stuck here. You know, like He said (John 15:18-21).” I didn’t set up the “us vs them” problem here. Christ did.

    Like

    1. I have a thorn of my own. But I have come to understand myself well enough to know why God has not taken it away. If he did, before long I would likely become proud of overcoming my thorn and completely “forget” God had anything to do with it.
      Instead I have learned that if God’s grace was sufficient for Paul, it is certainly sufficient for me.
      I also believe that the times I have fallen into this temptation, though repentance is painful, have made me more humble, a better Christian, and a better teacher.

      Like

  2. I can’t say I haven’t heard this angle, but while certainly being a lame as most, the implications are more profound. Imagine if everyone felt the same for their own particularly temptations. Who doesn’t wish their own were taken away? But how many would say that their temptation to, say, steal means that it must be OK if God won’t remove that temptation? It seems to be a variation on the silly “living a lie” excuse.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s