INTRODUCTION

Homosexuality is the sexual relations between people of the same sex. The biblical
emphasis upon the loving union of male and female, as an integral part of Gods
creation ordinance, establishes the context against which the censure of
homosexual practice is to be set.1 When discussing homosexuality, the biblical
emphasis is on behavior, and the verdict is always that it is sinful. 2 The homosexual
has now become a global topic and it has been debated almost every time. The
main question is the right for individuals to choose their own sexual orientations.
Are people naturally born to be homosexuals? Nowadays, the question of the origin
and nature of homosexual is considered as an important scientific issue that lays
the foundation for the understanding of homosexuality. It is based on the
assumption that homosexual develops because of a biological (most likely a
generic) characteristics that are present from birth and cannot be changed during
the life course. This paper will examine homosexuality in our contemporary world,
Pauls comments on homosexuality in relation to Romans Chapter 1 and critic from
the reformed perspective. The writer will also identify some roles the church can
play to curb the situation. Homosexuals in this paper will primarily mean same-sex
marriage.
HOMOSEXUALISM IN 21st CENTURY
Homosexuality is in the news a lot these days, what with homosexuals getting
married and homosexuals serving in the military and forming their own football
leagues. Recent times, societal attitudes towards homosexuality are changing. It is
no longer acceptable for young men who have been drinking alcohol after a hard
day at work to find a gay man to beat up. I can confidently say that this sort of
bullying is viewed now universally with disapproval, ranking somewhat below anti1 M. H. Manser. Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical Studies (London:
2009)

2
J. A. Johnson, Homosexuality. In C. Brand, C. Draper, A. England, S. Bond, E. R. Clendenen, & T. C. Butler (Eds.),
Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003) 777

Semitism and on a par, perhaps, with racial discrimination. Because of these

changing attitudes, those who hate or despise, or disapprove, or who are disgusted
by homosexuality, are somewhat at a loss.
Available evidence indicates that the position of gays and lesbians in societies and
the legal status of homosexuality have undergone notable changes in recent
decades. In some countries, attitudes have become much more supportive of gay
and lesbians rights and more accepting of homosexual behavior. For example, in
Great Britain, the percentage saying that sexual relations between two adults of the
same gender were always wrong fell from 64% in 1987 to 22% in 2012. 3 In the
United States, approval of gay marriage climbed from 11% to 48% in 2012. 4
Collective behaviors have also changed. For example, the first gay pride parade was
held in the united States in June 1970. These have expanded into mass, annual
events that attract over a million attendees in a number of countries. The legal
status and rights of gays and lesbians have been also expanded. For example, in
the year 2000, the Netherlands became the first country to recognize gay marriage
and by 2013, 15 countries had done so 5
Let us focus our attention to where homosexuality is rejected. A research done by
the Pew Research Center in May 2014 revealed that homosexualism is least
expected in Africa countries which are predominantly Muslim. In sub- Saharan
Africa, Nigeria 98%, Senegal 96%, Ghana 96%, Uganda 96% and Kenya 90% believe
homosexuality should not be accepted by society. Even in South Africa, unlike in
many other African countries, homosexual acts are legal and discrimination based
3
Park, Alison and Rebecca Rhead, Personal relationship: Changing Attitudes torwards Sex, Marriage and Parenthood.
In British Social Attitudes. Ed. Alison Park et al. (London NatCen Social Research, 2013)

4
Tom Smith and Son Jaseok., Trends in Attitudes towards Sexual Morality. (Chicago IL: NORC, 2013)

5
Itaborahy, Lucas Paoli and Jingshu Zhu. A World Survey of Laws: Criminalisation, Protection and Recognition of
Same-Sex Love. 8th ed (International Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals, Trans and Intersex Association, 2013), 1

on sexual orientation are unconstitutional, 61% says homosexuality should not be

accepted by society while just 32% say it should be accepted.

In this same research by Pew Research Center, overwhelming majorities in the

predominantly Muslim countries surveyed says homosexuality should be rejected.
Elsewhere, the majority of South Korean 59% and China 57% also say
homosexuality should not be accepted by society; 39% and 21%, respectively say, it
should be accepted. There is a strong relationship between a countrys religiosity
and opinions about homosexuality. There is a far less acceptance of homosexuality
in countries where religion is central to peoples lives; measured by whether they
consider religion to be very important or whether they believe it is necessary to
believe in God in order to be moral and even whether they pray at least once a day.
Homosexuality and The Church
One of the volatile and important issues facing the church today is the question of
homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle. The church finds it very difficult to avoid
this question. The apostle Paul tells us not to become so well adjusted to our culture
( the way group of people lives) that you fit into without even thinking (Romans
12:2). One way that, modern Christians have not followed this teaching is in the
language and the categories we use to discuss and debate homosexuality. We have
allowed our culture to choose the terms of the debate and has brought casualties.
Both liberals and conservatives focus very much energy and resources on the cause
of homosexuality. Both sides presume that, if they win the battle, it will settle the
moral debate. Liberal voices often argue for a biological, that is, nature basis of
homosexuality, claiming that, if biology is the cause, then we cannot hold those who
have a homosexual orientation to the traditional Christian sexual ethic.
Conservatives, on the other hand, often argue for environmental that is natural
causes, which emphasize personal responsibility and the claim that people can
change their orientation. I disagree with all these views because it seems both

6
Pew Research Center. The Global Divid On Homosexuality. 2014. www.pewglodal.org. p.3

liberals and conservatives make their arguments as if the gospel hinged on their
claims.7
One homosexual group called Evangelicals Concerned is a group of people who are
to all appearances born-again, Bible-believing Christians, but also practicing
homosexuals. They claim that the Bible doesnt forbid homosexual activity or that
its commands are not valid for today, but were just a reflection of the culture in
which it was written. These people can be orthodox about Jesus and every other
area of teaching, but they just think its all right to be a practicing homosexual.
The conflict between homosexuality and conservative Christianity has become a
pending issue in Asian cultures, where the church incorporates melodramatic
rhetoric to label homosexuality as the ultimate evil. Literature have noted that
because of the missionary legacy and the strong evangelical background of most
Asian churches, homosexuality was generally condemned as abominable
and against Christian teachings.8 In Asia, Korean churches are especially notorious
for being hostile towards homosexuality. Although it seems that, Korea conservative
churches are becoming less influential in enforcing their beliefs toward the general
Korean audience and its congregation, it is questionable whether such findings
accurately reflect the opinions of all Koreans towards homosexuality.
Today, many people think of right and wrong, not as matters of fact, but as matters
of taste. For example, there is not any objective fact that gimchi a Korean
traditional side dish tastes good. It tastes good to some people but bad for others.
In other words, it may taste bad to you, but it will taste good to me. Many Christians
and homosexual Christians think it is the same with moral values. Something may
seem wrong to you, but right to me. There isnt any real right or wrong, but it is just
a matter of opinion. Now if there is no God, then I can agree with these people who
7
Mark Yarhouse. Homosxuality And The Christian. Bethany House Publishers:Grand Rapid, Michigan p 38

8
Jeffrey Siker, Asia and Asian American Churches: Homosexuality and Religion: AnEncyclopedia.(Westport, CT:
Greenwood, 2007). 59-61

think that way. In the absence of God, everything becomes relative. Right and
wrong becomes relative to different cultures and societies. My questions will be;
without God, who is to say that one cultures values are better than anothers. Who
is to say who is right and who is wrong? Where do right and wrong come from?
Richard Taylor, a prominent American philosopher, but not a Christian, by the way,
makes this point very forcefully. He said,
The idea of . . . moral obligation is clear enough, provided that reference to
some lawmaker higher . . . than those of the state is understood. In other
words, our moral obligations can . . . be understood as those that are
imposed by God. . . . But what if this higher-than-human lawgiver is no longer
taken into account? Does the concept of a moral obligation . . . still make
sense?9
He says the answer is No. I quote: The concept of moral obligation is
unintelligible apart from the idea of God. The words remain, but their meaning is
gone. He later says,
The modern age, more or less repudiating the idea of a divine
lawgiver, has nevertheless tried to retain the ideas of moral right and
wrong, without noticing that in casting God aside they have also
abolished the meaningfulness of right and wrong as well. Thus, even
educated persons sometimes declare that such things as war, or
abortion, or the violation of certain human rights are morally wrong,
and they imagine that they have said something true and meaningful.
Educated people do not need to be told, however, that questions such
as these have never been answered outside of religion. 10

9
Richard Taylor, Ethics, Faith, and Reason (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985), pp. 83-84

10
Richard Taylor, Ethics, Faith, and Reason (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985), pp. 2-3

My argument is that, then if God does not exist, right and wrong do not exist either.
It is amazingly true that one of the best ways to defend the legitimacy of the
homosexual lifestyle is to become an atheist. The biggest problem is that, many
defenders of homosexuals do not want to become an atheist, but they want to
affirm that right and wrong exist.
Are people born homosexual?
People like to cite the overwhelming scientific evidence that sexual orientation is
biological in nature. The question is, are people naturally born to be homosexuals?
With the politicization of the homosexual agenda, there is the repeated assertion
that there is a genetic link to homosexuality. The thought is that, if people believe
that homosexuality is genetically determined, then they will be more favorable to
changing not only laws but even religious teaching concerning homosexuality. What
is most concerning about that tactic is that some Christians have softened their
teaching on the sinfulness of homosexuality. If homosexuality is a genetic tendency,
then it leads to two conclusions: 1) God made people homosexuals and 2)
homosexual desires cannot be changed. However, God has stated that
homosexuality is against nature. It is not how He designed men and women to
behave. God also has declared it to be a sin. If one insists on stating that
homosexual desire is built within a person, then the logical conclusion is that God
has caused a person to commit a sin that He has condemned.
Scholarly Views and Interpretation of Romans 1:26-27
Romans 1:2627 is clearly the most important passage on homosexual intercourse
in the New Testament. The broad context is summarized succinctly by Robin
Scroggs: Since the entire world, both Jew and Gentile, is guilty of sin, grace
(salvation) is entirely Gods gift and extends equally to Jew and Gentile. 11 The most
important text regarding homosexuality in the New Testament is Romans 1:26-27.
Thomas Schreiner in his commentary structured the later part of Romans 1 in two
11
Robin Scroggs,The New Testament and Homosexuality( Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), 110

main parts: (1) verses 24-27 and (2) verses 28-32. Schreiner argued that which
means therefore commencing verses 24 signals a break between verses 23 and
24. He stated that the content of verses 24-32, however, indicates that the
emphasis of the text has shifted since Paul was now detailing the consequences of
failing to worship and honor God. Verse 26 draws an inference from verses 25, as
the introductory phrase which means for this reason demonstrates. 12
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual
impurity.......Verse 24
They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served
created things rather than the Creator.. Verse 25
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women
exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the
men also abandoned natural relations with women Verses 26-27
Schreiner explained that the Greek word which means handed over
appeared many times such as in verses 24, 26 and 28. This has influenced other
scholars to divide the text into three sections, but it must be carefully noted that,
the content in verses 24 and 26-27 establishes that the refers to the
same reality and both refers to sexual immorality but different. The difference is
that verses 26-27 are more specific relating to homosexuality where humans
exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. Verse 25 which plays a
middle term between 24 and 26-27 and which echoes the same content in verses
21-23 explains that, sexual sin is a consequence of the rejection of God and a failure
to honor God.
The fundamental and the root of sin, therefore, is not homosexuality or any other
unnatural behavior. The sin that raises Gods anger and wrath and leads to all other
sin is the worship of the creatures and not the Creator as in Romans 1:25. Schreiner
emphasized that, homosexual sin is not singled out because homosexuals are the

12
Thomas Schriener, Romans: Baker Exegetical Commentry on the New Testament (Grands Rapids, Michigan:Baker
Academic, 1998), 90

most sinners; not at all. Sin is an equal opportunity and democratic employer. Paul
probably focuses on homosexuality at this point because it mirrors idolatry. 13
Schreiner argued that Paul was referring to homosexuality. First, Paul selected the
unusual words and which means female and male respectively. In this
sense, he drew our attention to creation design in Genesis 1:27. These words
emphasize the sexual distinctiveness of male and female. Moo suggest that, sexual
relations with the same sex violate the distinctions that God intended in the
creation of man and woman. Secondly, the phrase contrary to nature is rooted in
the Stoic and Hellenistic Jewish traditions that saw homosexual relations as
violations of the creation design by God. Verse 27 gives no indication that only
specific kinds of homosexual activities are prohibited. The wording of Romans 1:2627 is not restricted to a specific kind of homosexuality, but a general proscription of
the activity. It is clear that no indication is made of homosexual relations between
men and boys or women and girls that result in pederasty. The last clause in verse
27 ., men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves
the due penalty for their error suggest that, the penalty is not something in
addition to homosexuality but the real penalty is rather being handed over to the
sin of homosexuality itself. Schreiner main theme of this topic of homosexual in
Romans 1 is that, the foundational sin of refocusing to thank and glorify God leads
to other sins such as homosexuality.
Some scholars have suggested that a few passages in the scripture constitute an
important exception to the idea that heterosexual relations alone are appropriate in
the Bible Tom Horner in his book entitled Jonathan loved David maintains that
David and Jonathan and Naomi and Ruth respectively had possible homosexual
relations and he even goes far to suggest that, Jesus and Paul had homosexual
traits.14 V. P Furnish argues that, even if there were substance to the clamis of
Horner, the alleged biblical allusion to homosexual traits and or same-sex would
13
Adolf Schlatter, Romans: The Righteousness of God. Trans. S. S. Schatzmann (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995), 43

14
Tom Horner, Jonathan Loved David: Homosexuality in Bible Times (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978)

have to be prescribed or set forth in a positive exemplary light for it to be significant

for Christian ethical reflection today. 15 However, the infrequency with which the
Bible mentions homosexual relationships, and the possible silence of Jesus on the
issues do not in any way suggest that, these relationships were relatively
unimportant to the biblical writers such as Paul or to Jesus, as is sometimes
maintained. It could possibly be that, homosexual relations were not a major issue
in the early church, most likely because it shared the perspective of Hellenistic
Judaism that sexual relations of this kind were sinful. In other words, it is vital in
reading the New Testament to recall that Jesus and all the writers of the New
Testament are heirs of the Jewish tradition, and the Jewish interpretive tradition
regularly, and without exception, indicted homosexuality. Hence, the real question is
whether the New Testament writers departed from the tradition they inherited. 16
To conclude on this matter, one should not search the Bible in vain to suggest that
homosexual relations were a viable option for the faithful. There is no evidence to
state Horners view are biblical. If he is suggesting that there were series of
hommsexual relations between Jonathan and David and the others, there will be an
act or scence in the Bible to prove that. The Bible decribed the intimate friendship
between Johnathan and David in 1 Samuel 18 in verse 1, after David had finished
talking with Saul, Jonathan became one in spirit with David and he loved him as
himself. Become one in spirit with another person does not mean any physical
significance to the body. Again to love someone in this contest does not mean
sexual relation.
The Christian Community Role
The most effective route to real, lasting change for those caught in homosexuality
attraction is a redemptive approach. This means discipleship, being taught and
encouraged and held accountable to develop intimacy with Christ. Personally, I
15
Victor Furnish, The Moral Teaching of Paul: Selected Issues (Nashville: Abingdon, 1986), 81

16
Thomas Schreiner, A New Testament Perspective on Homosexuality ( Themelios, 31(3), 2006), 65

think the church has a very big role to play. The church must have their arms open
to accept these people in the midst of their congregation. It must not be
misunderstood that homosexuality is a capital sin. The Bible in Romans 3:23 states,
for all have sinned. This means we cannot judge them to condemnation
because Jesus died for sins and we have to opportunity again to reconcile with God
the father.
First of all, the church must encourage them to put an end to the act by taking them
through biblical teaching and pointing out out its sinful nature. It is best to ask for
Gods help. This is no different from the requirement for any drug or alcohol abuse
treatment. You cant work on a problem when youre still totally controlled by it. The
second step is for the church to help the learn the what the Bible says about who
we are in Christ in passages such as 2 Corinthians 5:17, 2 Peter 1:4 and the book of
Romans 6:4, we were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in
order that, just as Christ was raised from the death through the glory of his father,
we too may live in a good life. Just as people learning to identify counterfeit money
examine real currency so they can spot the fakes, the struggler needs to fill their
mind with Gods Word so they can enter into their true identity as a beloved,
valuable child of God. The next stage is by helping them to develop a new thought
for their lives. A new though, I mean is for them to realize the truth in Christ. This
will help them to have a positive thought of the ability to change through Christ who
will give the strength. Having been successful at this stage, it is very important for
the church to help them discover their purpose in lives and to ask God their true
needs in life. This is where the powerful healing happens.
Conclusion
At this point I state that, homosexuality is sin. God hates sin. It is contrary to the
creation design prescribed by God in the creation of the world in Genesis 2:24. I
believe homosexuality was never in existence until men resulted in idolatry worship.
God the Father is a jealous God and does not share his glory and honour. The first
law in the ten commandments clearly state, I am the Lord your God, who brought
you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me
Exodus 20:2-3. It was placed first because it is very significant to God..
Homosexuality has in our generation gain much influence from the Western

countries and part of Asia and Europe simply because these countries have rejected
God and chose to worship earthly materials. Worship does not exist and that is why
John Piper said Mission exist because worship does not. 17 The church has a major
role to play by sending out missionaries to these nations so that homosexuals can
acknowledge God and honour him.

Bibliography
1. Alison, Park, and Rebecca Rhead, Personal Relationship: Changing Attitudes
Towards Sex, Marriage and Parenthood. In British Social Attitudes. Ed. Alison
Park et al. London NatCen Social Research, 2013
2. Furnish, Victor. The Moral Teaching of Paul: Selected Issues. Nashville:
Abingdon, 1986

17
John Piper, The Nations be Glad (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2010), 17

3. Horner, Tom. Jonathan Loved David: Homosexuality in Bible Times.

Philadelphia: Westminster,
4. Johnson, J. A. Homosexuality. In C. Brand, C. Draper, A. England, S. Bond, E. R.
Clendenen, & T. C. Butler (Eds.), Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary Nashville,
TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003
5. Manser, M. H. Dictionary of Bible Themes:The Accessible and Comprehensive
Tool for Topical Studies. London, 2009

6. Paoli, Itaborahy, and Jingshu Zhu. A World Survey of Laws: Criminalisation,

Protection and Recognition of Same-Sex Love. 8th Ed. International Lesbians,
Gays, Bisexuals, Trans and Intersex Association, 2013

7. Pew Research Center. The Global Divide On Homosexuality. 2014.

www.pewglodal.org.

8. Piper, John. The Nations Be Glad. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic,
2010
9. Schlatter, Adolf. Romans: The Righteousness of God. Trans. S. S. Schatzmann.
Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995Scroggs, Robin. The New Testament and
Homosexuality. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983
10.
Schreiner, Thomas. A New Testament Perspective on Homosexuality.
Themelios, 31(3), 2006
Schreiner, Thomas Romans: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New

11.

Testament.Grands Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 1998

Siker, Jeffrey. Asia and Asian American Churches: Homosexuality and

12.

Religion: An Encyclopedia. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 200

13.
Smith, Tom and Son Jaseok. Trends in Attitudes towards Sexual
Morality. Chicago IL: NORC, 2013
Taylor, Richard. Ethics, Faith, and Reason. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:

14.

Prentice-Hall, 198
Yarhouse, Mark. Homosexuality And The Christian. Bethany House

15.

Publishers:Grand Rapid, Michigan

Term Paper
HOMOSEXUALISM: CRITIC FROM THE
REFORMED THOUGHT
Course unit:
CONTEMPOARY THEOLOGY II
Semester 4
Name:
KWADWO OPOKU SARKODIE
201570024