You believe the moral fabric of society is decaying, as if we were better off burning witches, enslaving blacks and keeping women subservient.

You cry “out of context” whenever someone mentions atrocities in the Bible, yet you are completely oblivious when taking quotes from scientists and historians out of context.

You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.

You think recognising Jesus is the Messiah is far more important than actually listening to anything he said.

You rely on vague “prophecies” as proof of the Bible’s validity, while disregarding the failed prophecies within and the fact that other religions have fulfilled prophecies as well.

What causes homosexuality? Can sexual orientation be changed? And are the brains of gay people different from those of straight people? Adrian Tippetts meets Dr Qazi Rahman, an assistant professor in Cognitive Biology from Queen Mary University London, to find out more.

While almost all scientists accept homosexuality has purely natural causes, the debate has been mired in confusion. There have been conflicting reports about the existence of ‘gay’ genes and their significance. Religious propagandists have tried to promote the myths that sexuality is changeable. And the mainstream media, more interested in causing controversy than holding rational debate, has done little to raise public understanding about the issue. For Dr Rahman, who heads QMUL’s Biological and Experimental Psychology Group, it is quite clear: you’re born gay, and that’s that.

I begin by asking him what aspects of biology are responsible for sexual orientation.

“The whole nature-nurture debate is entirely pointless,” he says. “Sexual orientation is not a choice because humans come in two types: one with a vagina, the other with a penis, so sexual orientation is entirely biological.

“We all end up at the same point: heterosexuality or homosexuality. There is little variation in between but this is not to exclude bisexual behaviour. People do not end up sexually attracted to bananas or animals for example. This is not a flippant comment. What I am saying is that we see the same characteristic traits and behaviours, resulting from a relatively small number of factors.

“We think the causes for different sexual orientations cluster around two areas. We know that just under half the variation in sexual orientation is down to genes. Then the rest of the variation is down to ‘non-shared’ factors, and those, like hormones, are primarily biological.”

At this point a little background is needed.

Dr Rahman explained that the gene story originated in 1993, when geneticist Dean Hamer published a study that claimed homosexuality was genetically influenced, and pinpointed the stretch of the X chromosome (inherited from the mother). He studied 76 pairs of gay brothers and found they shared a stretch of DNA. However, since then no research has been able to repeat the test.

Despite the shortcomings of Hamer’s research, scientists agree the environmental factors do not cause homosexuality. It is increasingly clear that no single gene is responsible for sexual orientation. Furthermore, William Reiner at the University of Oklahoma surveyed the sexuality of a group who had been surgically reassigned from boys to girls at birth, due to genital deformities. Though they were brought up as women, and knew nothing about their surgery, they were all attracted to women later in life.

Michael Bailey of Northwestern University found that an identical twin of a gay man had a 50 per cent chance of also being gay. Among fraternal, yet non-identical twins, that probability was reduced to 20 per cent. This latter statistic does not in fact downplay the role of genetics, because not all the genes we inherit are active. We receive two alternative genes of every gene – one from each parent. Our bodies, therefore, contain two sets of building plans. A process called methylation turns off certain genes, and determines whether the gene we inherit from the mother or the father gets turned on. Although this process is inherited, it has none of DNA’s proof-reading mechanisms, and thus varies greatly from one generation to the next. The causes and effects of methylation are under investigation by Sven Bocklandt at UCLA.

But if homosexuality were inherited, wouldn’t the genes for it disappear because of natural selection?

Dr Rahman said: “That is a common misunderstanding, and that is said by people with no understanding of evolutionary biology. Sexuality is a complex human trait, just like IQ or personality. It is determined not by a single gene, but how several genes work together. A whole range of features with reproductive disadvantages can be maintained in the gene pool down the generations, if only a portion of the genes responsible are advantageous to heterosexual carriers.”

He continued: “One of the ideas is that heterosexual men that may carry some ‘gay’ alleles that result in more empathic and nurturing traits, which are thus more attractive to females, who might mate with them and then carry those genes on further. So long as passing on some versions of those genes is reproductively advantageous, the fact that at some point down the generations you end up with a completely homosexual male – with all gay genes activated – is inconsequential. Evolution will happily tolerate that as long as the general reproductive advantage for individuals is maintained.

“However,” he added, “there is much work to do. We don’t yet know how this works. A couple of papers published last year suggested females, rather than males, benefited. Genes responsible for homosexuality have to do something, but they do not literally write the word ‘gay’ in the brain.

“Maybe they are involved in producing certain types of proteins or hormones which confer attraction to males, useful for women, but maybe having some of these alleles make them more attractive to men, or maybe these genes make them look more beautiful, effeminising them in some way.

“Either way, these help females find a mate more easily and give them more offspring, while almost sterilising the male line. A male who is gay won’t compete with your own reproductive outcomes. At the genomic level, females should be more interested in producing ‘like’ i.e., more females.”

The second influence on sexuality is hormones.

Dr Rahman continued: “The level of exposure to sex hormones, such as testosterone, during life in the womb, seems to influence the direction of sexual preference. Everyone would be born female if it were not for testosterone. At stages during pregnancy, the hormone is introduced into the womb. The level of testosterone to which the foetus is exposed determines the level of masculinity. Some bodily markers provide an insight into exposure. One example is the relative length of index finger to ring finger.

“There are a whole range of measures like startle responses, a particular sound emission that comes from the inner ear and cognitive profiles, which show how people perform on different problem solving tasks.”

So, gay brains are wired differently?

“In males the big brother effect is also important. Gay men tend to be born younger in relation to their brothers. The maternal immune system recognises successive male foetuses and may form an immune response to particular types of protein that form on the surface of the brain in the developing foetus. This might affect sexual differentiation or it might produce some hormonal mechanism that produces that variation, too. The big brother effect only appears to be important when gay men are right handed. Left handed gay men owe their sexual orientation to other causes we are unaware of.

“Relatively recently, there has been lots of research into neurobiology – what goes on in the brain. Our lab has been working a lot on mental problem solving skills like spatial ability, finding your way around, finding important objects in a spatial environment, emotional skills and verbal recognition.

“And we know these are different between the sexes, but we find gay men tend to have a female type of spatial ability. Spatial ability is controlled partly by two regions of the brain. So if we know that gay men perform differently in these kinds of tests, that suggests that part of the brain either is structurally different or functions in a different way. That gives us an insight into brain development.

“Thanks to MRI scans, we also have the technology to look at the brain directly rather than just carry out problem solving tests on people. The studies in the last two years strongly suggest that in the adult gay brain, and lesbian brain, it is wired very differently to the straight brain.

“In 2008, Swedish scientists at the Karolinska Institute compared the brain hemispheres of healthy gays and lesbians with heterosexual male and female adults.

“The results showed that heterosexual men and lesbians show a rightward asymmetry in their brain – it appears to be larger in volume than the left. However, the brain hemispheres of gay men and heterosexual women were more symmetrical.

“It might explain why heterosexual men tend to be better at spatial skills; there is some evidence that lesbians are better at some visual motor skills as well. Tests show gay men and hetero women tend to be better at language, verbal fluency, skills and emotion processing.

“The Swedish group also found differences in the amygdala, the part of the brain responsible for orientating the rest of the brain in response to an emotional stimulus, such as a startle (fight or flight) response, or the presence of a potential mate.

“Heterosexual men and gay women have more nerve connections in the right side of the amygdala, while gay men and heterosexual women have more on the left.

“So, the brain network which determines what sexual orientation actually ‘orients’ towards is similar between gay men and straight women, and between gay women and straight men.”

Now some may ask ‘but how can you be sure that having gay sexual experiences or straight sexual experiences is not responsible for these differences and surely experience can change brain structure?’

Dr Rahman says this is a good question: “We don’t know the answer but studies with animals suggest these differences appear before any sexual experiences calibrate the biology. But only work in humans can truly answer this, and this remains to be done.”

So does the data justify stereotypes? Does it suggest footballers and athletes are less likely to be gay? And could research uncover why some people are homophobic?

In part one, published yesterday, Dr Qazi Rahman of Queen Mary University London discussed the impact of genes and hormones on homosexuality. Here, he addresses the isse of gay stereotypes and refutes psychoanalytic theories of why some people are gay. He also suggests that research into gay brains may help combat homophobia. Adrian Tippetts reports.

On the subject of gay stereotypes, Dr Rahman said: “[These] might originate from the observation that as children, gay men tend to be gender non-conforming; they are more feminine on average, and that is seen across cultures. These preferences may have their basis in neurobiology during early development (gender roles are partly organised by prenatal sex hormones and develop even before children can label the sexes and ascribe gender roles to them).”

He added: “But don’t get too carried away with unrealistic stereotypes, as there is a great deal of variation within that range of gay men. Plenty of gay men are interested in competitive sport and other spheres traditionally thought of as ‘male’ domains. And scientists need to explain that variation too. This is an area where we need more research.”

How does this explain bisexuality, and reports of people changing sexuality?

“We know very little about bisexuality but early work suggests that while bisexual behaviour exists, a bisexual orientation (sexual responsivity to both sexes) is rare in males. In females, there appears to be clearer evidence of bisexual responsivity. This suggests that researchers need to measure sexuality differently in women than in men.”

So, your studies can be useful beyond saying how someone turns out gay?

“We know there are big sex differences in certain mental health problems. Women have three times higher anxiety rates than men, while males suffer more from autism, reading problems, an earlier onset of schizophrenia. Early evidence suggests gay men show similar levels of anxiety and eating disorders as women do, incidences of drug addiction and personality problems in lesbians are similar to those reported in men.

“If there is any truth in these brain differences, we can attempt to understand why certain conditions arise, and then offer tailored, instead of generic treatment. This would be major progress in mental health, because people respond very differently according to their biological make-up. This does not exclude the important role of social factors (like stigma) in the development of mental health problems in sexual minorities (just like it impacts other minorities).

“Also, if we learn how people detect sexual orientation in others, we can explore whether someone detects it from a person’s speech or movement. We know from previous experiments, that people can detect sexual orientation within a couple of seconds. We can investigate whether homophobic people have a heightened sensitivity to others on the basis of their sexuality. If we know that we can go someway to develop psychosocial interventions to deal with sexuality-related prejudice.”

He added: “We welcome input from the gay and lesbian community, to find out what the important priorities are. ”

Some say that such research could lead to attempts to remove homosexuals from the gene pool. Isn’t there a danger of this?

Dr Rahman said: “Gays and lesbians can find this fascinating or scary and some can be downright against it. But humans have a fascination about their underlying human natures. Sexuality is a core part of who we are as human beings, and for this reason it should be cherished.

“This research has many benefits. It may provide us with clues about tackling homophobia effectively. It may help us understand mental illness better, or teach us more about the biological and psychological development of older gay and lesbian adults. On this latter topic, we currently know very little.

“In the UK, mine is the only group doing research in this area, but in the states, they have healthier funding, there are more groups. They have more money, but even in the USA there have been problems getting funds.”

There is a fringe group of psychoanalysts, such as NARTH, who claim that homosexuality is caused by dominant mothers. Dr Raham emphasises that there is no evidence for these claims.

He said: “Homosexuality is not due an overbearing mother and a distant father as some psychoanalytic nonsense has suggested. The crux of the theory predicts that gay men should come from homes where the father is absent – no demographic evidence supports this claim. Secondly, the notion that homosexuality is due to unresolved Oedipal complex (a core tenet of psychoanalytic theory) makes the prediction in the wrong way – it should explain heterosexuality and not homosexuality. If gay men are so fixated on their mothers as the theory claims then why do they end up fancying men? Psychoanalytic theory is best left in the land of warlock magic and elfin trickery. ”

Can exposure to information about homosexuality (for example through sex education classes) or childhood sexual experimentation make people more likely to turn out gay?

“All the biological and developmental evidence shows that homosexuality cannot be learned so teaching about same-sex relationships in schools cannot result in increases in homosexuality. You cannot learn homosexuality like you can learn maths! A certain amount of same-sex horseplay is common in adolescence but there is no evidence that is disproportionately results in adult homosexuality.”

Although there are frequent reports of kids who are abused, growing up to become gay, Dr Rahman dismisses this as anecdotal.

I ask about the religious right, who seem to be very good at their PR, with reparative therapists getting major news coverage when they visit the UK. Does the media seem to give their crackpot ideas far more attention than they deserve?

Dr Rahman replied: “Yes, and the media are to blame, for creating controversies where none exist. It’s vital to have heavyweights armed with the facts to demolish arguments of people who can claim, for example, to ‘cure’ homosexuals. But having the experts on doesn’t make ‘sexy’ enough TV for the media. Instead, they think, ‘let’s get a gay clergy member’ , which may be controversial but it doesn’t do justice to truth, or deal with the arguments sufficiently.”

He also commented on media representations of homosexual activity in the natural world: “There is a strong absence of any evidence of animals having homosexual behaviour in their programmes in the natural history documentaries. I don’t believe for an instant that they don’t see the behaviour. It seems just fine to put heterosexual activity in our faces left right and centre, but when it comes to homosexuality, it seems it’s a subject they are just not happy to touch. That is ironic because Britain is leaps and bounds ahead of most countries in terms of representation of gays and lesbians in the media now, before the watershed, but animal sexuality is somewhat inhibited. Maybe it is too animalistic I don’t know.”

As Dr Rahman shows, there remains much to learn about how sexual orientation is determined. But after nearly two decades of research, the evidence that nature has determined our sexuality is growing ever stronger.

To some, it may sound like we gays and lesbians are a genetic ‘mistake’. Not at all. Human civilisation owes its greatness to the ability to pass on ideas and override the genes. We should be thankful we have broken the savage rules of natural selection. Take inspiration from Richard Dawkins, who reminds us of our astronomically good fortune to be here at all, in ‘Unweaving the Rainbow’:

“We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they are never going to be born. The potential people who could have been here in my place but who will in fact never see the light of day outnumber the sand grains of Sahara. Certainly those unborn ghosts include greater poets than Keats, scientists greater than Newton. We know this because the set of possible people allowed by our DNA so massively outnumbers the set of actual people. In the teeth of these stupefying odds it is you and I, in our ordinariness, that are here.”

And if that doesn’t send a shiver down your spine, nothing will.

Further reading

Evolution explains how we got here, and tells a lot about why we are who we are. To learn more about the topic, try some of these:

Mark Pallen ‘Rough Guide to Evolution’

Jerry Coyne ‘Why Evolution is True’

Richard Dawkins ‘The Greatest Show on Earth’; ‘The Selfish Gene’.

Steve Jones ‘Darwin’s Island’

Matt Ridley ‘the Red Queen’ and ‘Origins of Virtue’

Dr Raham has also co-authored a book. ‘Born Gay: The Psychobiology of Sex Orientation’, by Glenn Wilson and Qazi Rahman (published by Peter Owen)

Why is the killing of an animal and the scattering of its blood around the alter not a common part of your average church service today?

Why do we food with fat or blood in it?

Why isnt the killing of a ram as a sacrifice to God for forgiveness issued as a penalty for theft?

Why are vets not condemned for touching sick (unclean) animals?

Why do we eat lamb, oxtail soup, goats milk & cheese, pork and shellfish?

Why do we drink wine?

Why do we allow people to keep dogs, cats, mice, ferrets & tortoises as pets?

Why are women not seperated from the rest of the population for seven days during their menstrual cycle?

Why are women who have had children not made to bring a lamb, a young pigeon or a turtle dove to a church to be burned as a sacrificial sin offering?

Why dont we use the blood of sacrificed animals to cure leprosy?

Why do we allow the crossbreeding of cattle?

Why is it not illegal for a person to have a tattoo?

Why dont we kill children who swear at their parents?

Why dont we kill Iris Robinson for adultery?

Why dont we stone people to death who are clairvoyants, mediums, fortune tellers, psychics and spiritualists?

Why arent body piercing and skinhead haircuts illegal?

Why do we allow people who are registered blind or have other visual impairments to come into a church?

Why dont we have a national holiday for seven days starting on the 15th of July?

You also imply that all gay relationships are abusive and violent and that is simply not true. Yes there is domestic violence and dysfunction in many relationships, both in same and opposite sex relationships. But to say that that is a characteristic of all same gender unions is an outright lie. I have been in a loving, supportive relationship with my partner for 13 years and there has never been ANY occurance of what you say characterises same sex relationships.

You dont seem to say much about lesbian relationships sapphire, Why is that? I already know the answer but do you?

I think we need to clearly clarify the meaning of the word ‘sodomy’ and the word ‘homosexual’ and discuss and analyse the implications of these terms. Consider the following material:

http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/sodom.htm

The word sodomy is primarily used to describe the act of anal intercourse which is the insertion of the penis into the anus. It implys a physical sexual act which does not necessarily bear any relation to a persons sexual orientation which is defined by such terms as heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual.

The word homosexual is derived from greek and can be split into two parts to explain its meaning. The first part ‘homo’ can be transliterated as ‘same’ and the second part ‘sexual’ refers to gender (male/female). So the term homosexual simply implies a ‘same gender’ attraction or orientation and does not relate or refer to the physical act of anal sex – sodomy.

You’ve cited a number of the so called ‘clobber texts’ and in the interests of balance I’d like to present material, compiled from literature produced by the Lesbian & Gay Christian Movement & The Metropolitan Community which analyses and critiques them. Consider the following:

Deuteronomy 23:17-18 ( Related – Kings 14:23 – 24, 15: 22, 22:46; II Kings 23:7)

These verses have been applied to homosexuality because of a mistranslation of two Hebrew words. The Authorised (King James) Version translates them ‘whore’ and ‘sodomite’. They are actually the masculine and feminine forms of the same noun. The word is literally translated ‘male (or female) holy one’ and is understood as ‘temple (or cult) prostitute. This person was a kind of priestess in fertility cult worship. In these cults, sexual activity was believed to lead the deity to bestow fertility. The verse have nothing to do with homosexuality as we understand it today.

Genesis 19: 3-11 (Related – Judges 19:22)

Ezekiel 16: 49-50 states clearly that Sodom was destroyed for a general, deep sinfulness. Neither homosexuality nor any specific sin is cited. Even if the men of the city meant to rape God’s messengars, which is in dispute, the issue is not that such an assault would have been homosexual, but that it would have been an abuse of guests, a profound crime in the ancient world. This account is only one example of the ungodly behaviour toward others toward others which actually brought Sodom’s condemnation.

Genesis 19: 1-25

What was the sin of Sodom? Some ‘televangelists’ carelessly proclaim that the God destroyed the ancient cities of Sodom & Gomorrah because of ‘homosexuality’. Although some theologians have equated the sin of Sodom with homosexuality, a careful look at Scripture corrects such ignorance.

Announcing judgement on these cities in Genesis 18, God sends two angels to Sodom, where Abrahams nephew, Lot, persuades them to stay in his home. Genesis 19 records that ‘all people from every quarter’ surround Lots house demanding the release of his visitors that ‘we might know them’. The Hebrew word for ‘know’ in this case, ‘yadha’, usually means ‘have thorough knowledge of’. It could also express intent to examine the visitors credentials, or on rare occasions the term implies sexual intercourse. If the latter were the authors intending meaning, it would have been a clear case of attempted gang rape. Horrified at this gross violation of ancient hospitality rules, Lot attempts to protect the visitors by offering his two daughters to the angry crowd, a morally outrageous act by today’s standards. The people of Sodom refuse, so the angels render them blind. Lot and his family are then rescued by the angels as the cities are destroyed.

Several observations are important. First, the judgement on these cities for their wickedness had been announced prior to the alleged homosexual incident. Second, all of Sodoms people participated in the assault on Lots house; in no culture has more than a small minority of the population been homosexual. Third, Lots offer to release his daughters suggests he knew his neighbours to have heterosexual interests. Fourth, if the issue was sexual, why did God spare Lot, who immediately commits incest with his daughters? Most importantly, why do all the other passages of Scripture referring to this account fail to raise the issue of homosexuality?

What was the sin of Sodom?

Ezekiel 16:48-50 states it clearly: people of Sodom, like many people today, had abundance of material goods but failed to meet the needs of the poor, and they worshipped idols.
The sind of idolatry plague every generation. We stand under the same judgement if we create false gods or treat others with injustice.

Leviticus 18:22; 20:13-14

These verses are found in the section of Leviticus known as the ‘Holiness Code’ of law. Observance of these laws reminded the Hebrew people that they were set apart to God. (Remember that the New Testament teaches that we are no longer subject to this former law). The verses involve the belief that anal intercourse (the only practice mentioned here) was humiliating and subjugating. It was used for that purpose by some cultures against conquered enemies. In such cases the view that captive men were being ‘used’ like women, who were chattel property in those societies. The Hebrew people believed that to do this to a male was to violate the dignity of the male sex. Their sexist culture held that each male was the image of God. To ‘lie with a man as with a woman’ was, in their eyes, to violate his dignity. This was considered ‘abomination’, the translation of a Hebrew word which meant a practice was idolatrous. The universal issue here is not homosexuality but the use of other beings as objects, thus violating their humanness and the image of God in which they are created.

Christians today do not follow the rules and regulations described in Leviticus. But some ignore its definitions of their own ‘uncleanness’ while quoting Leviticus to condemn ‘homosexuals’. Such abuse of Scripture distorts the Old Testament meaning and denies a New Testament Message.
‘You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination’. These words are found solely in the Holiness Code of Leviticus, a ritual manual for Israel’s priests. Their meaning can only be fully appreciated in the context of the Hebrew people. Israel, in a unique place as the chosen people of one God, was to avoid the practices of other peoples and gods.

Hebrew religion, characterised by the revelation of one God, stood in continuous tension with the religion of the surrounding Canaanites who worshipped the multiple gods of fertility cults. Canaanite idol worship, which featured male and female cult prostitution as noted in Deuteronomy 23:17, repeatedly compromised Israel’s loyalty to God. The Hebrew word for a male cult prostitute, ‘quadesh’, is mistranslated ‘sodomite’ in some versions of the Bible.

What is an Abomination?

An abomination is that which God found detestable because it was unclean, disloyal, or unjust. Several Hebrew words were so translated, and the one found in Leviticus, ‘toevah’, is usually associated with idolatry, as in Ezekiel, where it occurs numerous times. Given the strong association of ‘toevah’ with idolatry and the Canaanite religious practice of cult prostitution, the use of ‘toevah’ regarding male same-sex act in Leviticus calls into question any conclusion that such condemnation also applies to loving, responsible homosexual relationships.

I Corinthians 6: 9; I Timothy 1:10

At issue here are two Greek words: ‘malakee’ (some scholars have transliterated this word ‘malakoi’), which occurs in the list in I Corinthians, and ‘arsenokeeteh’ (some scholars have transliterated the word ‘arsenokoitai), which occurs in both lists. The meaning of the words have been assumed traditionally to refer to homosexual people. Their exact translations, like those of some surrounding words, are not known precisely. Recent scholarship has shed some light on them and they certainly do not refer to homosexual people or homosexuality in general, though there were greek words for particular homosexual behaviours.

Scolarship indicates that the words may refer to participants of pederasty which was widely condemned for its manipulative and abusive character. Another theory is that they refer to particular participants in fertility cult worship, and are about temple or cult prostitutes similar to those being condemned in Deutoronomy 23. While these words may perhaps refer to specific homosexual activities, they certainly cannot be constructed as references to homosexal orientation or homosexual people in general.

Romans 1:24-27

This is the only passage in Scripture which, apparently, refers to homosexual behaviour among women, as well as among men. The unjustified, traditional interpretation that this passage condemns homosexuality in general arises in part from failure to relate the passage to the whole chapter. Paul is writing about idolatrous people who put things or concerns ahead of their devotion to God. As an example here, he cites a specific group of people, probably in a Roman fertility cult, who are engaging in homosexual activity. These particular people are so consumed with a self centred, destructive craving for sex that they ignore God and the image of God in the other person. Paul writes that God, having given them free will, allows them to plunge to self destruction. He warns of the danger of behaviour and attitudes which turn from caring for God and for others. This certainly is a dangerous path for both lesbian/gay and non gay people. Traditionalists infer that Paul means that homosexual behaviour can never be loving. In reality, the Christian lesbian or gay man is freed by and subject to the same law of love which Christ commanded for all of us. Behaving lovingly toward one another and acknowledging God’s image in others is basic to all of Christian life, including sexuality, whether the Christian is lesbian, gay or non gay.

What is ‘Natural’?

Significant to Paul’s discussion is the fact that these ‘unclean’ Gentiles exchange that which was ‘natural’ for them ‘physin’, in the Greek text, for something ‘unnatural’, ‘para-physin’. In Romans 11:24, God acts in an ‘unnatural’ way, ‘para-physin’, to accept the Gentiles. ‘Unnatural’ in these passages does not refer to violation of so called laws of nature, but rather implies action contradicting one’s own nature. In view of this, we should observe that it is ‘unnatural’, ‘para-physin’, for a person today with a lesbian or gay sexual orientation to attempt living a heterosexual lifestyle.

‘Against Nature’ (Contra Natural)

Traditional theology has argued that God created male and female genders, as recorded in Genesis, only as a means of procreation. Homosexuality is condemned on the basis that it is not procreative. The argument is that, since a gender difference exists, heterosexuality in the only way in which God meant sexuality to be expressed. In the Genesis accounts, however, procreation was only one of God’s purposes. The other, equally important, was human companionship – relationship. God did not wish us to be alone.

It is also dangerous to argue merely from biology when discussing God’s intents and ourselves in the ‘image of God’. Jesus told us that ‘God is Spirit’. We are created in this image of God as spiritual beings. Human beings are distinguished from other animals by that spiritual nature which is the context of human sexuality. Our ‘natural’ capacity for sexual expression, heterosexual or homosexual, is given its deepest meaning by our capacity for loving relationship.

About the Bible.

The Bible is a collection of writings which span more than a thousand years recounting the history of God’s relationship with the Hebrew and Christian people. It was written in several languages, embraces many literary forms, and reflects cultures very different from our own. These are important considerations for properly understanding the Bible in its context.

There are vast differences in doctrines between various Christian denominations, all of which use the same Bible. Such differences have led Christians to claim that other Christians are not really Christians at all! Biblical interpretation and theology differ from church to church.

Biblical interpretation and theology also change from time to time. Approximately 150 years ago in the United States, some Christian teaching held that there was a two fold moral order: Black and White. Whites were thought to be superior to blacks, therefore blacks were to be subservient and slavery was an institution ordained by God. Clergy who supported such an abhorrent idea claimed the authority of the Bible. The conflict over slavery led to divisions which gave birth to some major Christian denominations. These same denominations, of course, do not support slavery today. Did the Bible change? No, their interpretation of the Bible did.

Jude verse 7

……..and did detestable things before me..does it not strike anyone that the detestable things included their homosexuality????

Please look at this thread–

The Sin of Sodom
Serious Questions and Bible Answers about the Homosexual Movement

What is a Sodomite?

A sodomite is a person who practices sodomy–a homosexual. God’s word doesn’t use such terms as “homosexual,” “gay,” and “lesbian.” Some might argue that a sodomite is nothing more than an inhabitant of Sodom, but God uses the word “sodomite” in reference to homosexuals long after the ancient city of Sodom is destroyed (1 Kings 14:24; 15:12; 22:46; 2 Kings 23:7).

Isn’t it more proper to refer to sodomites as “homosexuals” and “gays?”

No, because God refers to them as “sodomites.” “Homosexual” is a neutral technical term, while “gay” is a nice term that the sodomites have invented for themselves. Due to the constant brainwashing tactics of Hollywood and the Media, “gay” has been adapted by most everyone as the proper title for these people. To be “gay” is to be “merry” and “joyful.” To be a “sodomite” is to be wicked and sinful (Gen. 13:13). So “gay” is certainly NOT the proper title. We are warned in Isaiah 5:20 that God is very displeased with people who apply good words to evil things: “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” Drunkards are not “chronic alcoholics,” fornication is not “pre-marital sex,” and sodomites are not “gay.”

How do we know for certain that sodomy is a sin?

Because God’s word declares it to be a sin, over and over again. The very first time “Sodom” occurs in the Bible God sends us a sound warning: “But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly.” (Gen. 13:13) In Genesis 18:20, we are told that the sin of Sodom is “very grievous.” Then in Genesis 19:4-7 we read of a case where the Sodomites seek sexual relations with a total stranger! Shortly after this incident, God destroys their entire city because He couldn’t find even ten righteous people dwelling there.

Later, in the book of Leviticus, some very sharp warnings are given about sodomy. Leviticus 18:22 says, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” Then Leviticus 20:13 says, “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Webster defines an “abomination” as “extreme hatred” and “detestation.” That’s how God feels about sodomites.

Hundreds of years later we read that sodomites are in the land and they are committing “abominations” (1 Kings 14:24). King Asa, a good king over Judah, did “that which was right in the eyes of the Lord” when he “took away the sodomites out of the land” (1 Kings 15:11-12). Several years later there were still some sodomites left in the land, so King Jehoshaphat, the son of King Asa, also did that which was RIGHT in the eyes of the Lord by taking the sodomites OUT of the land (1 Kings 22:43-46). We also read that King Josiah did the “right” thing when he “brake down the houses of the sodomites” (2 Kings 22:2; 23:7).

In Isaiah 3:9, God makes reference to the boldness of the people who commit this grievous sin: “The show of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves.” Is this not a perfect description of the modern day sodomites who parade up and down the streets demanding their rights? Ezekiel 16:49 says that PRIDE is a chief sin of the sodomites. Perhaps this is why we read about “Gay Pride” parades. Proverbs 16:18 says, “Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.”

Some say only the Old Testament speaks against sodomy but that the New Testament is silent about it. This is not true. The New Testament clearly condemns this sin. Romans 1:21-27 speaks about the sodomites. Paul says they are vain in their imaginations, they steal God’s glory, they are foolish, unclean, vile, and against nature. In II Peter 2:6, the word “ungodly” is used in connection with sodomy. Paul said in I Corinthians 6:9 that these people would not inherit the kingdom of God.

Friend, sodomy is wicked in the eyes of God!

Don’t most professionals agree that a person’s sexual orientation is of biological or genetic origin?

Yes, but they’re dead wrong. The majority of professional people once believed the earth to be flat. Were they right? The majority of astronomers once believed the stars could be numbered. Were they right? The majority of scientists today believe that men have evolved from monkeys. Are they right? In Genesis, the majority of the world thought Noah was crazy. Were they right? The majority thought Jesus Christ should be crucified. Were they right? Listen friend, if you’re running with “the majority,” then you are on a collision coarse with the Devil! IGNORE THE MAJORITY! Just trust God’s word. God says that sodomy is WRONG, so it’s wrong. Period.

Besides, there are many professional people in the medical field who believe that sodomy is an acquired behavior. The book, Shadow In The Land, by Congressman William Dannemeyer, cites several authors who disagree with the biological and genetic theories. The following are among them:

“Homosexuality, the choice of a partner of the same sex for orgastic satisfaction, is not innate. There is no connection between sexual instinct and choice of sexual object. Such an object choice is acquired behavior; there is no inevitable genetically inborn propensity toward the choice of a partner of either the same or opposite sex.” (Charles Socarides, Homosexuality: Basic Concepts and Psychodynamics, International Journal of Psychiatry 10, 1972: 118-25)

“Whatever may be the possible unlearned assistance from constitutional sources, the child’s psychosexual identity is not written, unlearned, in the genetic code, the hormonal system or the nervous system at birth.” (John Monday, Sexual Dimorphism and Homosexual Gender Identity, Perspectives in Human Sexuality, 1974, p. 67)

Doesn’t the American Psychiatric Association consider sodomy to be normal?

Yes. In 1974, the APA removed homosexuality from their list of mental disorders. Naturally, the sodomites make a regular habit of informing us of this, but they fail to inform us of HOW the APA came to this decision. Beginning in 1970, the sodomites started invading the annual APA convention. Although not invited, they made it a regular habit to burst into the annual meetings like uncivilized barbarians. Once in the panel rooms they would resort to shouting and name calling, in hopes of intimidating as many people as possible. They also found it effective to appeal for pity by whining about their sad plight, which they compared to racial discrimination against blacks. By much sympathy pleading and very little factual evidence, the sodomites won the hearts of a few psychiatrists and also a panel of their own in 1973. Then after a very effective letter campaign, the sodomites had applied enough pressure to seal their victory. Finally, in a 58 to 40 vote, the APA decided to remove homosexuality from their list of mental disorders in 1974.

Why not just leave the sodomites alone and let them live their own lives?

Because God hates this sin and He doesn’t want it “left alone.” Sin is like a cancer: when ignored it spreads. As we’ve already seen from God’s word, God commends those who oppose sodomy, so we too need to speak out against this abominable sin before it overwhelms us and destroys our nation like it destroyed Sodom. No, we should not HATE the sodomites, but we should firmly oppose their sin as the word of God commands us.

Can a sodomite be cured?

Man says, “No, because it isn’t a disease,” but God tells us there IS a cure, because there is a cure for ALL SIN. God is willing to cleanse any person of this sin and forget it forever! Some people have the strange idea that God cannot forgive certain sins, but the Bible says otherwise!

1 John 1:7 says, “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.”

Revelation 1:5 says, “And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.”

Friend, Jesus Christ has the cure. You can ignore what the medical profession says about there being no cure for homosexuality. There IS a cure, and YOU can have it TODAY – if you’ll confess to God that you’re a sinner, repent of your sins (Luke 13:3), and receive His Son as your one and only Saviour. Sin is sin, whether it be sodomy, murder, stealing, lying, adultery, fornication, pride, rebellion, or anything else. All have sinned and come short of God’s glory (Rom. 3:23) because all have been born with a sin nature (Rom. 5:12; Psa. 51:5). Jesus Christ shed His sinless blood and died to pay for your sins and He rose again the third day for your justification. The Bible says He’ll save you if you’ll RECEIVE Him as your Savior:

“But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:” (John 1:12)

“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” (Rom. 10:9-10)

“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Rom. 10:13)

Friend, the decision is all your’s. You can believe man and pretend that God made you to be a sodomite, or you can believe God and ask Him to save your soul from Hell through the precious blood of Jesus Christ.

What’s your decision?

For more information about salvation, please send for your free copy of Understanding God’s Salvation Plan.

Copyright © 1996 James L. Melton

Jesus Christ condemns the sin of sodomy and calls all homosexuals to repentance

If you’re new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Last year I received a letter from a homosexual who wrote:

Jesus Christ didn’t say any word regarding sexual orienation! Only Saul from Tars and abearation from Leveticus and Deuteronomy are cited (aberations that can not be applied nowadays without being sent to prison, because now we cannot murder someone so easy, as it was in that time)

This statement is spread among immoral people that practice homosexuality and they call “aberation” every part of the Scripture that condemns their sin and they don’t admit that it was inspired by God as a part of the Holy Scriptures. If thieves, drunkers, etc. do the same, it is interesting what remains from the Holy Book. God doesn’t allow anyone to act in this way regarding His Truth let on the pages of the Holy Scriptures, and everyone who neglects the Bible will answer for this before God Himself. So, according to the opinion and the statement of the author of the letter and of all members of the homosexual and lesbians community, the Lord Jesus “didn’t say any word concerning the sexual orientation”.

I want to make an analysis of the texts from the Gospels, where the Lord Jesus talks concerning the sin of sodomy, named so, because of the city of Sodom, that is mentioned in the Bible and that was destroyed by God with fire and brimstone from heaven, because of their many sins. The one that crowns them all is the sin of homosexuality. I advise you to read the biblical passage found in the first book of the Bible, Genesis, chapter 19 to find out more about that event. But, in this article I want to refer to the New Testament only and especially to Gospels, that relate the life and the activity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Lord Jesus mentioned the people who lived in the city of Sodom for three times, especially those who were destroyed as punishment for their homosexuality. The Gospel of Matthew has one of this references and the other two are found in the Gospel of Luke. Let us make a short analysis of each of these passages.

Homosexuals from Sodom could have repented if they had heard the Gospel

When Jesus rebuked people from the localities where He had performed His greatest marvels, because they didn’t repent, He said:

And you, Capernaum, will not be exalted to heaven, will you? You will descend to Hades; for if the miracles had occurred in Sodom which occurred in you, it would have remained to this day. Nevertheless I say to you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for you. (The Gospel of Matthew 11:23–24)(NASB)

Men from Sodom were extremely violent homosexuals. The book of Genesis relates us that when Lot invited into his house those three men who came into the city, not knowing they were angels, “before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.” When Lot tried to confront them, peacefully and tactfullly, he said: “Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly.” They acted according to their wickedness and violence settled in the perversion of their heart, they shouted at Lot: “Stand aside!”, furthermore, they said, “This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them.” Angels struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they wearied themselves trying to find the doorway to take those men and abuse them sexually. This is the reality about homosexuals that are extremely violent.

A 1998 study revealed that of the homosexuals surveyed, 62% had been threatened with a weapon and 85% had experienced significant property or financial loss from an angry partner. In addition, 39% had been forced to have sex against their will by a homosexual partner. You can find more dates concerning this on Internet, for example here is a source. If homosexuals are so violent with their partners, then the society should realize how dangerous it is to tolerate this kind of sexual conduct, shouldn’t it? Most of them became homosexuals because they had been sexually abused by other homosexuals. But, let us look go back at the words of the Lord Jesus said in the the Gospel of Matthew. The Savior said that if homosexuals from Sodom had seen the miracles performed by Jesus Christ in Capernaum, they would have repented and their city would have existed until nowadays. If our Lord said that violent homosexuals would have repented, much more important it is to share the Gospel with homosexuals whom we know, so that they and the countries that are affected by their bad actions might live. The actions of homosexuals affect the society badly and this is an evil that spreads very quickly when it is tolerated by the society. All men from Sodom became homosexuals and so, they, their families and their city were destroyed. All paid the price of the sin: homosexuals for immorality and the whole society for indifference and tolerance of the evil that destroyed them.

Homosexuals and all sinners will be judged because they do not accept Jesus Christ

The first time Jesus metioned Sodom in the Gospel of Luke was when He “appointed seventy others, and sent them in pairs ahead of Him to every city and place where He Himself was going to come.” (The Gospel of Luke 1:1–16)(NASB). After He gave them instructions how to act with those who rejected them and the message of the Gospel, the Savior said:

“I say to you, it will be more tolerable in that day for (inhabitants of) Sodom than for (inhabitants of) that city.”

The conclusion is that if the disciples of Jesus, or Christians came and said to the inhabitants of that city about the salvation and forgiveness they could have in the Lord Jesus then violent homsexuals from Sodom would have repented. Why then homosexuals from nowadays are so bad that they do not want to accept Christians who come to bring them the message of the Gospel and forgiveness of their sin and the knowledge about the day of judgement, that Jesus Christ refers to? In the end of this message addressed to the disciples, the Savior said: “The one who listens to you (disciples) listens to Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me.”

An unexpected destruction came upon the indifferent homosexuals

The second passage from the Gospel of Luke, when Jesus Christ mentioned the homosexuals from Sodom for the second time is in chapter 17, where it is related about the day when the Son of Man is revealed. Here is the description of this day:

It was the same as happened in the days of Lot: they were eating, they were drinking, they were buying, they were selling, they were planting, they were building; but on the day that Lot went out from Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. It will be just the same on the day that the Son of Man is revealed. (The Gospel of Luke 17:38–30)(NASB)

People from Sodom were very concerned with their business, with their financial position and they didn’t care about the immorality that was spreading and growing. They were not aware about the consequences that were to follow. Today is the same situation. Here is what the author of the message cited in the beginning of this article wrote to me:

“The rest of us (homosexuals) have to pray that Basarabia may enter the European Union, as others have done, so that civilization may penetrate there too. It is the last hope for homosexuals from Moldova: to impose social tolerance from this place forgotten by God! Maybe this is a cause why Moldova is the poorest “country” from Europe, because the mentality you have is so beackward… and inversely?”

According to this statement, immoral poeple’s opinion is that civilization means financial position and toleration of immorality. If they don’t have these things, then the country is “forgotten by God”. But the Word of God proves the contrary. Immorality destroyed the country and the inhabitants of Sodom. The fire that came from heaven burnt their properties, and no one escaped of this great disaster they had brought upon themselves with their own way of immoral living.

All these three passages, where the Lord Jesus mentioned the homosexuals from Sodom confirm exactly the things written in the Old Testament concerning the sin of sodomy and its consequences. The Lord Jesus didn’t deny anything that God had spoken in the Old Testament. How can immoral people say the Word of God is an “aberation” and to say that “Jesus Christ didn’t say any word concerning sexual orientation”?

If you are homosexual or you practice any other kind of immorality, stop. Don’t disregard the Word of God and don’t believe those who tell you it is an “aberation”. Stop to perform those immoral things people from Sodom performed and do what the Lord Jesus said people from Sodom would have done if the Savior or His disciples had come to them. Repent! You have already heard the Gospel when you read this article. Repent from all you sins and stop to have dealings with people that practice these immoral things. Look for a church where people live in fear for God, and look for people who study and live according to the Word of God and make them your friends. In this way you will escape from the judgement that will come for all immorals and sinners. Reconcile with God.

If you are a believer, do what Jesus would have done to homosexuals if Sodom hadn’t been destroyed by the time He was on this earth. Do what the Lord Jesus said to His disciples to do when He sent then from city to city. Tell people about the salvation offered by Jesus Christ. Go to immoral people and tell them the message of salvation. Even if it seems to you their state is too low, and they do not have any chance to turn back to God. Don’t be so sure. The Lord Jesus has hope and he waits for homosexuals and immoral people to repent. Be a true disciple of God and a witness of the Gospel.

Job? Isn’t that the story where Evil was actually in the presence of … Gasp….GOD?

But RCC theology says that’s impossible…that Evil can never, never, never be in the presence of …gasp…GOD.

Job…Lot…Let’s call it an honest mistake.

xx

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?filter=pp#/pages/The-Christian-Institute/78436661801?ref=nf

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?filter=pp#/pages/The-Christian-Institute/78436661801?ref=nf

To shove Xianity down children’s throats is abuse.

He said:

“There is not one redeeming feature in our superstition of Christianity. It has made one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites.”

And Thomas Jefferson, also said:

“Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man.”

I look forward to glancing through his slimmed-down version of The Holy Book, i.e., the only decent bits that are in the “original”!