Nic Samojluk, Editor www.sdaforum.com

Shayna,

No doubt that dating must be much more complicated today than what I did experience more than half a century ago. Fortunately, I am not in the dating business; nevertheless, the following statement you made forced me to wonder how to interpret certain biblical references in connection with homosexuality. You said:

"Make no mistake that I am neither gay bashing, nor suggesting that homosexuality is a worse sin than any other on the eternal gauge of naughty and nice."

I know for a fact that certain passages by Paul indicate that there would be no place for homosexuals in heaven. My question is: What about those who were born with a strong preference for the same sex? Do you think that it is a sin to be born with homosexual tendencies? The biblical references I am trying to understand are the following:

A. "For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it." (Matthew 19:10-12)

B. "No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the Lord." (Deuteronomy 23:1)

C. "And let not any eunuch complain, 'I am only a dry tree.' For this is what the Lord says: 'To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose what pleases me and hold fast to my covenant-- to them I will give within my temple and its walls a memorial and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that will not be cut off."

When you analyze all these enigmatic inspired passages, can you conclude that those who were born with homosexual tendencies will be excluded from God's kingdom?

 I dont buy this born gay nonsense.  Sex is a very powerful drive that all of us deal with especially through the teen years.  It is clearly difficult for all of us to deal with our sexuality.  I know of a few cases of gayness starting in  the dorms of our boarding academies and colleges.  I am most certainly not gay at all but I have several friends who I might best describe as bisexual - certainly not conducive to a good or permanent traditional marriage for any of them as I have observed. 

Nic,

you are talking nature or nurture, I tend to lean on the nurture side, except in cases at birth or developmentally, it is deifficult to determine whether one is a female or a male. And there are these cases, then cosmetic surgery decisions have to be made to allow for a normal existence, on one side of the gender fence or the other. 

But Homosexuality is a choice and getting easier to be a choice by the day. If it feels good do it. "My parents mistreated me." "Girls laughed at me."

Then along comes a "comforting, Kind" same gender individual with certain unrestrained desires, and that person is "off to the races" so to speak.

Recently Spectrum was encouraging the SDA church to accept Gay marriage and not sign petitions for a California constitutional ban on Gay Marriage. . WOW, and statements made by bloggers, "Why would anyone choose being Gay?" Because more and more, organizations like Spectrum are making it easier "to come out of the closet" but that is a choice not a born with a proclivity, IMO.

I am no physician or expert on Homosexuality, just an observer of life passing by. There is not a gene for all that ails us!!!!

Regards, Douglas

Shyna,

On this thread you tell of a friend hopping in bed naked with a male friend, ostensible to determine his gayness or not, if he made a move for sex

Then on the other thread you appear to be singing the blues about the expectations of male suitors and the difficulty in keeping one's virginity.

Which  game is being played out there so I can warn my two daughters.

I'm no prude, in fact I sort of agreed with a talk show host on the radio, who got answering questions about his relationship with his girlfriend. One of his cohosts was pushing him hoping to here him admit they had had sex. To my surprise he said, their other things one can do beside sex or penetration before marriage.

On another thread, yours on virginity, I suggested Jocelyn Elder's Outercourse that got her in trouble. I haven't got a reponse from you there yet, but are those suggestions on that site considered Christian pure, as long as penetration doesn't happen or preservation of virginity is accomplished? 

If the male friend just touched your friend's breasts would that have been enough for your friend's gay-dar, or was your friend hoping for full blown sex, if so, as a Christian what a horrible double standard or position to put a male in if you want respect, and preservation of your virginity. Am I missing something in your story or the point of your story?  

Regards, Douglas

 Hi Nic,

Thanks again for stopping by!  Let me clarify what I meant by the statement, "Make no mistake..."  From a medical perspective, is it unlikely that homosexuality is triggered solely by environmental factors.  Evidence from this stems from biological anomalies, such as babies who are genetically XX (female), but may develop male genitalia as a result of hormonal imbalances in utero (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=25059).  Moreover, the observation of homosexuality in animals suggests a biological basis (http://www.news-medical.net/?id=20718). Thus, your comments are absolutely correct--some people are definitely "born gay."  What I meant to imply in my statement is that the practice of homosexuality is no worse than other sexual sins, like adultery and extramarital sexual addiction.  I do not believe that those born with homosexual tendencies will be excluded from God's kingdom.  If anything, I meant to offer a defense for those who are often singled out and castigated unfairly.  None of us are without sin and ALL sins are detestable in God's eyes.  The beauty of grace is that regardless of this, we are all still given the opportunity for salvation.

 Blessings,

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today 

Dear Douglas,

I do believe that you have grossly misinterpreted the point of both blogs.  The intended message of each blog is contained in the final paragraphs of each. 

For clarification, the purpose of this blog was to suggest that young adults should rely more on "waiting, trusting, and praying" to make character determinations about their significant other than "testing the hypothesis" or other methods.  The choice of homosexuality as a case example highlighted the misadventures exercised by many young people (not just my friend).  I suggest you reread the last three paragraphs of the blog. 

Also, contrary to your unfair implication on the previous blog that I am some sort of Adventist prude (similar to your date at Andrews), I have never professed to be a conservative, puritanical Adventist.  And, since this seems to be of consequence somehow, I have never attended an Adventist school where I have been surrounded by a staunch SDA friend base cheering me on.  The friend I spoke of in this blog is not a Christian.  As you will notice, I did not indicate that she was.   I expressly called her behavior a "double standard" and maintained the same viewpoint as in the previous blog--that purity and trust in God should come before biological urges and self tests.  It is unfortunate that you seemed to have missed this point.  My only advice would be to reread the last three paragraphs of that blog as well.   

Please understand that my exclusive purpose in writing here and elsewhere as a Christian relationship advisor is to offer pointed advice about appropriate dating behaviors.  That advice will always be rooted in the Bible and nothing else. 

Best regards,

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today 

Shyna, how can you limit your answers so easily to Biblical texts that talk of adultery when we are talking of two single individuals. Granted you used another text that spoke of sexual immorality, Yet, even that in that day meant one thing and today, another?

HMS Richards, Jr, preached a sermon at Pioneer at Andrews, probably the only sermon topic I remember, but he spoke of the difference between rules and principles. Say, the principle of modesty, where the rule use to be,  how many inches above the knee a dress was,  to be modest, compared to Paul's day, WOW.

To see your engaged girl's breast as sinful, because you saw a woman's nudity, is that really what you recommend  in your advice columns, or the topic of mutual masturbation, that can be done in the dark without seeing  any nudity? No texts to help here, are there. 

 Regards, Douglas

Douglas,

If the Bible is truly the inspired Word of God, we should find relevance in Its instructions regardless of the time period. Please also note that texts I frequently reference speak of purity, not just adultery. I find it difficult to believe that God would expect us to espouse respect for our bodies and each other only after we are married. 1 Corinthians 7 supports this point, saying that "If they [the unmarried] cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion" (verse 9). If we were not expected to remain virgins before marriage, why would such instructions exist?

I'm not sure what you are asking me in your last paragraph, but I surmise you are requesting that I provide more specific opinions in response to your questions--a list of dos and don'ts, if you will. As I have noted before and in my column (which seemingly, you do not read), decisions must be made individually based on a person's relationship with Christ. I am by no means able to address the individual needs of all of my readers en mass. After all, for some couples, holding hands may only be the beginning of the affection they show...for others, it may be far too much. My only aim is to address topics of young adult relevance with sound Biblical principles. As a Christian relationship advisor, I am interested to know what source you would consider to be a superior reference.

 

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today

All I'm saying, from my experience the Bible does not cover every situation of personal behavior.

I did an Administrative Residency at LLUMC, and the secretary assigned to our area, was married, had a husband living in Phoenix with her best friend, using his income on her friend and her kid, and when I asked the secretary what she was going to do, she stated "I'm waiting for the Lord to lead me." as if the thunderbolt hadn't rung out yet. My response, "I think  He has already spoken to you and you don't realize it." Now maybe I was a little brash, I did not ask if he was having sex with her friend, which would be the basis for adultery, I just couldn't believe God would want her to hold out for a creep like that, even in a marriage.

 Do you see my point, even human logic can help the Bible a little, eh?  [ Yeah, I'm a Canadian, and it even shows through my emails and blogs.]

 BTW, Divorce only on adultery grounds I believe is the Biblical standard, what do you advise your young married couples in a similar situation?

 Regards, Douglas

Douglas,

By definition, faith is the ability to apply our relationship with God to every component of our life--whether or not instructions have been explicitly outlined for us in the Bible or elsewhere. Your friend's situation is sad and I respect your use of it as a case example. However, I cannot analyze every situation presented to me here in the comments. I simply do not know the circumstances of your friend's marriage or whether or not her decision was the correct one. Like you, I do not know whether her husband was committing adultery and even if he was, it would still your friend's choice to stay married to him if she wanted to. The precise reason that we should be dependent upon the Holy Spirit to lead us is because human logic is flawed. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have the need for the Bible or any other sort of divine guidance.

Best,

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today

Nic Samojluk, Editor www.sdaforum.com

Shayna,

Thanks for your comments, and I want to add that I am impressed with your committment to the principles outlined in the Bible. I have a question, though, and I am wondering whether you would agree with the way I see things. You stated the following:

*********

"What I meant to imply in my statement is that the practice of homosexuality is no worse than other sexual sins, like adultery and extramarital sexual addiction."

 *********

Would you consider the possibility that engaging in  homosexual acts might be, not worse, but rather a lesser offense than either adultery or fornication?

 My reason for thinking this way is as follows: Nobody ever got pregnant as a result of engaging in homosexual acts, while both adultery and fornication has resulted in millions of unwanted pregnancies.

Unwanted pregnancies, in turn, quite often leads to the killing of innocent human beings: the unborn. Is'nt this evidence that the consequences of homosexual acts result in less harm to society and the life of innocent human beings than both adultery and fornication? Just wondering!

Nic, rather than discussing gradations of sin between abortion and Homosexuality, we should be finding ways to minimize individuals turning to these "sins". Here is the reference to SDA Guidelines on Abortion and Position Statement on Homosexuality:

http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/guidelines/main_guide1.html

http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/statements/main_stat46.html

To try to place some gradation on which is worse, seems to me to be a foolish exercise.  

Regards, Douglas

Nic Samojluk, Editor www.sdaforum.com

Douglas,

By your anwer, you seem to imply that there is no gradations of sins. This puzzles me, since the Apostle John has the following statement in his epistle:

"If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. ... There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying he should pray about that. All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death." [11 John 5:16,17]

 If the Apostle John believed that all sins are not created iqual, then why is it wrong to centertain the undeniable fact that there is a difference between homosexual sins, which to not lead to pregnancy and abortion [death] and adultery and fornication, which do quite often lead to abortion [death]?

Even humans do make a difference between  manslaughter and a first-degree murder.

How would you class the AIDS epidemic that started within the Homosexual community? Contributing to death or not?  

Regards, Douglas

Nic,

I saw someone suggest that "sin that does not lead to death" is one a person repents of, a "sin that leads to death" as one the person is non-repentant of and persists in against God's will, urging the on looker to pray for life for the repentant sinner.

Regards, Douglas

Douglas,

 Biblical passages are not limited to a single interpretation. The important thing is not to eliminate any alternative umnderstanding of Scripture which does not violate the fundamental principles contained in Holy Writ.

Nic Samojluk, Editor www.sdaforum.com

Hi Nic,

I personally do not believe that there are gradations of sin, but I honestly do not know.  Romans 2:5-6 tells us that judgment is reserved for God because only He knows the severity of our struggles and our internal responses to them.  1 Corin. 10:13 accurately highlights that we will never be tempted beyond what we can bear and moreover, we are promised that we will always have a way out of temptation. Thus, a homosexual tempation may be much harder than other sins, but it is not necessarily impossible to avoid living an openly gay life. 

As far as homosexuality not really "hurting" anyone else, we can't always conceive of the ramifications of our actions.  This is precisely why God says in regard to His law, "My ways are higher than your ways and My thoughts are higher than your thoughts" (Isaiah 55:8-9).  Just from a cursory analysis, homosexuality has the potential to lead a homosexual partner to sin, to spread STDs with greater prevalence than during heterosexual sex (microabrasions that occur during dry/anal sex are conducive to exchange of seminal fluids), and to potentially lead another person to stumble (Romans 14:13) by our example. 

I do believe that homosexuality is one of the hardest struggles here on earth and for that reason, God will judge reasonably and fairly.  However, I don't think practicing homosexuality should be condoned as a lesser sin.

Blessings,

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today