Theology Blog

I have decided to do some theological writing and reflecting on the same-sex marriage debate. While I cannot decide if this is a brave, stupid, unnecessary or necessary decision, there is no question that in the Christian church in the United States today, this is the most divisive and painful issue we face. I have seen families, churches, denominations, friendships and more torn apart as a result of this debate.

As I reflect on this issue from a Biblical and theological perspective, I have come to discover that while there are multiple perspectives on this issue, and that sexuality itself is probably more of a spectrum than a series of definitive categories, I have found that three views are most prevalent amongst Christians.

First View: Both the nature and the action are sinful.

To be gay (homosexual), to have that nature, tendency or attraction itself is sinful. Simply put, the feeling or desire itself is sinful. Additionally, the action is sinful, that is to participate in a homosexual action or activity itself ins also sinful, much in the way adultery is sinful (though we seem to be less concerned with adultery than we are homosexuality). The passages of Scripture and Christian tradition itself condemn both the nature and action in this view. For this particular camp, the Scripture does not make a distinction between nature and action.

Second View: Neither the nature or the action is sinful.

In this view, Christian tradition and the Scripture do not make a specific, clear case that homosexual orientation (attraction/desire) or action (engaging in homosexual activity) are sinful. For this particular camp, the passages in the Scripture and Christian tradition can explained away and are entirely cultural.

Third View: The nature is not sinful, but the action is sinful.

In this view, Christian tradition and Scripture draw a clear distinction between sinful nature and action. This view assumes that homosexual activity (or action) in of itself is sinful, but to have the desire, nature or attraction is not. This view takes into account a high value of Scripture as well as context.

Oftentimes, homosexuality is compared to alcoholism. This comparison is completely inaccurate, as we know alcoholism can be a disease, where sexual identity/nature is not a disease. The first and the second require more work to defend in terms of how most scholars and the church historically treat and view the Scripture both specifically and as a whole. The truth is that Jesus did not speak specifically on homosexuality and this in of itself speaks volumes as its clear that it existed during that time historically. For many, this truth complicates this issue as many faithful Christians seek to discern the Biblical and theological truth on this issue. Regardless of what one believes as it relates to this issue, we are called to be gracious, understanding and loving in the midst of our differences.