THE QUESTION: What could
possibly be wrong with two
people who love each other,
regardless of their sexual
orientation, getting married? And
in general what’s the problem
with being gay anyway?
Gay 'Marriage' Uproar Erupts in Greece
Wed, Jun. 04 2008 07:18 PM EDT
Heated controversy erupted in Greece Tuesday after the mayor of Tilos, a small island
in the Aegean sea, stood over the nation’s first gay “marriage” ceremony. ..
Gay 'Marriage' Bill Approval Adds to Calif. Woes
Mon, Sep. 10 2007 09:19 AM EDT
Pro-family groups are denouncing a new California bill passed by the state senate
Friday that grants marriage licenses to homosexual couples…
Opponents Forsee Massachusetts as 'Las Vegas of Gay Marriage'
Fri, Aug. 01 2008 09:08 AM EDT
BOSTON - Gov. Deval Patrick signed a bill Thursday that repealed a 1913 law that
had blocked gay couples from outside Massachusetts from marrying here…
Opposition Forms Against Gay 'Marriage' Rights in N.Y.
Fri, May. 30 2008 08:12 AM EDT
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - Religious and social conservatives vowed Thursday to fight Gov.
David Paterson's directive requiring state agencies to recognize gay marriages
performed legally elsewhere, saying it flouts traditional values and is a big step toward
legalizing same-sex unions in New York…
Calif. Bishop Drives Gay 'Marriage' Momentum to Church
Thu, Jun. 12, 2008 Posted: 04:27 PM EDT
In a push to strengthen support for gay and lesbian persons, the bishop of the
Episcopal Diocese of California has initiated a process to move toward equality of
marriage rites for same-sex couples.
Is There Anything
Wrong With Anything?
Without an unchanging moral standard,
everything reverts to opinion and
becomes emotive (i.e. “I don’t like that…”)
Options for an unchanging moral standard:
• From the natural universe
• From culture
• From each individual
• From an arbitrary deity that has revealed itself
• From an unchanging Deity who has revealed Himself
Morality from the natural universe…
A man said to the Universe,
Sir, I exist!
Nevertheless, replied the Universe,
That fact has not created in me
The slightest feeling of obligation.
- Stephen Crane
The atheist must explain how an amoral universe accidentally created moral
beings. The very laws of causation are ignored. Further, you cannot even
arrive at the concept of “every person is [created] equal” with naturalism
alone – evolution and the survival of the fittest affords no such luxury.
“With me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s
mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are
of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of
a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?”
– Charles Darwin
Morality from culture…
• Is/was “Widow burning” in India morally OK?
• In some cultures they love their neighbors and in others they eat
them; which do you prefer?
• Does a land exist where murder is a virtue and thanksgiving a vice?
• Were the Nazi’s justified in their actions given the culture/power in
Germany; did culture OK their actions?
• If the majority rule that rape is OK, does that make it right?
• Is it OK for a culture to gratuitously torture innocent babies?
• If none of the above is true, then what/who is mankind morally
obligated to? Real moral obligation exists, but to whom?
• Perhaps the relativist’s view has been influenced by their culture…?
• Lastly, it precludes someone from the outside’s positive influence
There is a difference in what a culture is doing and what it ought to do; a
difference in descriptive and prescriptive.
Morality from each individual…
• Is it ever OK to for a person to torture babies, abuse children, or rape
someone?
• Just because we have a ‘twilight’ doesn’t mean we can’t recognize day
and night. What if we did the same thing with mathematics we do with
morals?
• How does one gauge if the world is getting better or worse without
global absolutes?
• How does one settle moral disagreements without absolutes?
• How many spouses desire their spouse be relatively faithful to them,
rather than absolutely faithful to them?
• The question is not “Must an individual believe in God in order to live
moral lives?”, but “Do objective moral values exist without God?”
“Why sir, if he really believes there is no distinction between virtue and vice,
let us count our spoons before he leaves.” – Dr. Samuel Johnson
Morality from an arbitrary deity…
•Still left in the dark as the deity could proclaim rape OK
tomorrow although it is wrong today
•This is the god of Islam who, through abrogation, can declare a
word or revelation from him yesterday as overridden by a
command issued by him today
•How can one trust the goodness or feel secure and at peace
with such a deity?
•Different than the progressive revelation found in Christianity,
where God slowly reveals His full purpose and, while the moral
pronouncements do not change, the punishment may
Morality from an unchanging Deity…
• Before you can call something bad, you must know what good is
• Before you can call something good, you must have a moral
framework to determine what’s good
• Before you can have a moral framework, you must have a set of
absolute moral laws to build the framework; they must be absolute so
you have certainty
• Before you can have absolute moral laws, you must have an absolute,
unchanging moral law giver
• This absolute moral law giver is God
Moral laws imply a Moral Law Giver
There is an objective Moral Law
Therefore, there is a Moral Law Giver
Only morality from an unchanging Deity solves the issue
“What do I care what some Bronze Age text says about homosexuality?” –
Christopher Hitchens, “God Bless Me, It's a Best-Seller!”, Vanity Fair,
September 2007
• Logical fallacy: ad annis – “argument because of age”
• Only an unchanging and all-good God who has revealed Himself gives
the foundation needed to answer any and all moral issues
• ‘Imposing morals on others’ isn’t the issue – someone’s morals will be
imposed, we’re just arguing over whose morals it will be
• “For all denunciation applies a moral doctrine of some kind…” – G. K.
Chesterton
“A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight
line.” – C. S. Lewis
Traditional Homosexual Stance
Born homosexual
It is an identity
It is “who I am”
It is normal and natural
It is an alternative lifestyle
It is a civil rights issue
Traditional Christian Stance
May or may not be born homosexual
It is a choice
It is “what I do”
It is abnormal and unnatural
It is a destructive lifestyle
It is a moral issue
Again, it goes back to an absolute moral standard. In the absence of such
a standard, it all boils down to a matter of taste (“I like broccoli, but you
don’t…”) And if there is no God, they may be right! But if this is the case,
why make such absolute statements such as “It’s wrong to discriminate
against homosexual behavior!”
“Who are you to say homosexual behavior is morally wrong?!” can easily
be returned, “Who are you to say homosexual behavior is morally right?!”
When sexologist Alfred Kensey in the 1940’s asked homosexuals why
they practiced homosexuality, only nine percent claimed they were born
that way. A decade or so later found that 35 percent claimed to be born
that way, and today, virtually all make this declaration.
“First, there is a difference between inherited physical
characteristics (like brown eyes), over which I have no control,
and inherited spiritual tendencies (like lust), over which I ought
to have control. We cannot avoid the basic size, color, talents,
or ethnic group from which we have come. But we do have a
choice as to whether to follow spiritual impulses we may have
inherited, like impatience, anger, pride, or sexual impurity . . . .
Morally speaking, “irresistible urges” are urges that have not
been resisted. People have died for lack of water and food,
but no one has ever been known to die for lack of sex,
alcohol, or other drugs to fulfill his cravings! We have a free
choice in all these areas.” – Norman Geisler
How many men are born monogamous? What about naturally bad
tempers? Flipping the issue onto the other side: How many people are
naturally born with patience, forgiveness, and discipline? Aren’t these
good traits to have?
“Yes, God created homosexuals and homosexuality.”, Troy Perry, founder
of Metropolitan Community Church.
“Homosexuality doesn’t just vanish when a person decides he no longer
wants it. None of my counselees have been unclear on that point. As
Bible-believing Christians, they no more wanted to be gay than they
wanted a third eyeball.” – Joe Dallas
“All Christians, of course, don’t wrestle with homosexuality, but they
wrestle with something. That’s part of our common human experience.” –
Joe Dallas
“For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I
would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate.” – Paul, Romans
7:18
“But I don’t feel guilty…” Regardless of how
you feel, sin brings guilt before God
How many parents taught their children to lie, be selfish, or get angry?
As has already been discussed, the issue of equating a “natural” feeling
with moral and righteous behavior simply cannot be done as the depravity
of man doctrine makes clear that the two are not the same. It is natural
for most men to want to have intimate relations with as many as they can,
but God asks that such actions be confined to the bond of heterosexual
marriage.
“For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their
women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and
in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the
woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men
committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due
penalty of their error” (Romans 1:26-27).
Paul specifically states that they “exchanged” and “abandoned” the
natural function God gives everyone and instead began practicing
something that was different than what God originally intended. This is
important because it speaks against the claim of the pro-gay movement
that says homosexuals simply do not possess the capability for opposite
sex attraction.
Immoral behavior is never a civil right.
When Paul and John wrote against homosexuality, they were
writing in a day when it was in full bloom and practiced by the very
leaders they were living under. As educated as Paul was, he would
have been quite familiar with the homoerotic love that was
celebrated during this time and would certainly be familiar with the
“marriage” of the emperor Nero and Sporus, who was a man that
was altered via first century surgery to become Nero’s “wife”.
Paul’s message against homosexuality was as counter-culture
then as it is today.
The homosexual agenda pushes hard for social acceptance to
lessen the sting of conscience. As Christian philosopher J.
Budziszewski writes in his book The Revenge of Conscience,
“those who rationalize their sins find it to be so much work
that they require other people to support them in it.”
Assertion: What two consenting adults do is their right.
Response: Not true. Can two adults consent to rob a bank, kidnap a child,
participate in prostitution, or commit suicide?
Assertion: My right to privacy is an ultimate right.
Response: Not true. Can a person privately commit a moral crime such as rape or
murder?
Assertion: Morals evolve and what once was wrong is now OK.
Response: Not true. Will the same be said of other moral acts such as murder,
etc.?
Assertion: There is homosexuality in the animal world.
Response: And…? Should we behave as animals? Secondly, such observed
behavior is temporary and casual, not habitual and lifelong
Assertion: A person should be able to marry who they want.
Response: And where is the line drawn and how much will it be redrawn?
Polygamy, marrying children, animals, etc? When posed with the question “Why
draw the line at two people?,” same-sex marriage advocate Cheryl Jacques of the
Human Rights Campaign said, ”Because I don't approve of that.” How come her
“because I don’t approve of that” objection to polygamy is more reasonable than “I
don’t approve of that” objection to same-sex “marriage”?
• Is there an absolute moral God that exists? (already answered)
• Is God’s will expressed in the Bible?
• Does the Bible state that homosexual behavior is a sin?
It isn’t the purpose of this message to validate that the will of God has
been expressed in the Bible, but one point to make: Jesus Christ, the Son
of God, the only one to rise from the dead and remain alive says this
about the Scripture:
1. Divinely Authoritative – Jesus said “It is written…” in Matthew 4 to
rebuke the devil
2. Imperishable – Jesus said not the smallest stroke in Scripture would
pass away (Matthew 5:18)) 24:35)
3. Unbreakable – Jesus said the Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35)
4. Ultimate Supremacy – Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for putting their
tradition over Scripture (Matthew 15:3-4)
5. Inerrant – Jesus said the Bible is inerrant (without error) – John 17:17
6. Historically Accurate – Jesus cited Adam/Eve, Jonah and others as
historical figures
• This is the weakest form of argument one can have – an argument from
silence
• Neither did Christ speak against bestiality, child pornography, torture,
etc., but it is doubtful anyone in the pro-gay movement would say Jesus
approves of those things
• Christ did say heterosexuality is the standard: In Mark 10:6-9, Jesus
says, “But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and
female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother, and the
two shall become one flesh; so they are no longer two, but one
flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
"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.” But
Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and
said, “Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly. “Now behold, I have two
daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them
out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these
men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof.” But they
said, “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.” So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door.
But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with
them, and shut the door. They 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." (Genesis 19:4-11)
"just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in
the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after
strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment
of eternal fire." (Jude 7)
"‘You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an
abomination." (Leviticus 18:22)
"‘If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a
woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall
surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them."
(Leviticus 20:13)
"For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for
their women exchanged the natural function for that which is
unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the
natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward
one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving
in their own persons the due penalty of their error." (Romans 1:2627)
"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the
kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor
idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor
thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)
"realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but
for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and
sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers
or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and
kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary
to sound teaching," (1 Timothy 1:9-10)
Bottom line: God’s word condemns homosexual behavior.
Important Point: a person with homosexual orientation is not
condemned, but the sin is.
The personal, infinite and Triune God is one God comprised of
three distinct Persons who are of the same essence, but different
from one Another, with all being involved in a loving relationship.
Father
God
Spirit
Is not
Son
Unity in Diversity
A marriage is the uniting of two individuals who are of the same
essence (human), but are distinct persons (separate from each
other), different from one another (man and woman), that come
together to become one in a loving relationship. It is a physical
symbolic relationship of a person choosing God forever.
“Attempting to promote monogamy among homosexual couples by
rearranging marriage ignores the fact that homosexual acts are
patently obvious distortions of the human biological design. We
are born biologically male or female and as such we are sexually
dissimilar but in complimentary ways. The male/female sexual
union works, in other words. This is true of every species on earth.
Every living organism has a particular way of reproducing and
rearing offspring; its anatomy is biologically designed to support
that way. If one believes we are products of an evolutionary
process, then homosexual acts are a deviation from the
procreative design and homosexuality is therefore a genetic
defect because it fails to propagate the species. If one holds
to the belief that we are created, then it defies the design and
intent of the Creator. Either way homosexuality violates the
given design.” – Michael Craven
“We are reluctant to say this today because our culture has been
inundated with gay-rights propaganda that carefully avoids the
sexual reality of homosexual behavior. Instead the emphasis is on
the so-called emotional and romantic aspects. As a result, we feel
sympathetic; we may feel like we should capitulate to their demand
for marriage in the name of equal treatment. However, equal
treatment of persons living the homosexual lifestyle is a completely
different issue than redefining marriage. No thinking Christian
opposes the equal treatment of homosexuals, because they are
fully human persons made in the image of God. Furthermore, gay
men and women are free to have sex, experience romantic
relationships, and live in whatever arrangement they choose. (Of
course, there are consequences to these choices.) What is not
their choice is to redefine an institution essential to the social
welfare and common good such that these benefits are
nullified. The demand for SSM is not about equal dignity and
treatment but rather social affirmation of a particular lifestyle.”
– Michael Craven
According to a thorough survey of history, any and every culture that embraces a
philosophy of sexual freedom for a period of at least three generations will
inevitably experience cultural decline (Unwin, Sexual Regulations and Cultural
Behavior, 1935). There is not one single example in all of human history where this
cultural pattern appears and there does not follow cultural demise consistent with
these conclusions.
History is replete with examples that testify to this fact. The Greek, Roman,
Babylonian, and Sumerian empires are just a few examples of cultures that began
with a strong marriage-centered monogamy and later degenerated into liberal
sexual practices (including homosexuality), which, according to the sociological and
anthropological evidence, was central to their downfall.
Pitirim A. Sorokin, the renowned Russian-born sociologist who founded the
sociology department at Harvard, conducted his own study of history and likewise
stressed that marriage is "the most decisive factor in the survival and well-being" of
society (Sorokin, p. 6). Based on his sociological study of historical civilizations, Dr.
Sorokin warned that "any change in marriage behavior, any increase in sexual
promiscuity, and illicit sexual relations is pregnant with momentous consequences,"
adding that a "sex revolution drastically affects the lives of millions, deeply disturbs
the community and decisively influences the future of society" (p.7).
In regards to homosexual couples, the concept of fidelity is a popular
myth. In the book The Male Couple, the author reports that in a study of
156 males in homosexual relationships lasting from one to thirty-seven
years, "Only seven couples have a totally exclusive sexual relationship,
and these men all have been together for less than five years. Stated
another way, all couples with a relationship lasting more than five years
have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their
relationships" (McWhirter, The Male Couple [Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall] 252, 253).
Furthermore, gay marriage has not strengthened the institution of
marriage by promoting fidelity and commitment among gays in
Scandinavia, as some suggest it will do here. In fact, take-up rates on gay
marriage are exceedingly small. Yale law professor William Eskridge (an
advocate for gay marriage) acknowledged this when “he reported in 2000
that only 2372 couples had registered after nine years of the Danish law
going into effect, 674 after four years in Norway, and only 749 couples
after four years in Sweden”
Stanley Kurtz, senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute, reported in
April of 2004 before the House Judiciary Committee that there is ample evidence
available in Scandinavia demonstrating the effect of devolving marriage to include
couples of the same sex. Dr. Kurtz holds a PhD in social anthropology from
Harvard University and is regarded as both an excellent scholar and expert in this
area. Commenting on the situation in Sweden and other European countries that
have embraced same-sex marriage, Kurtz writes:
The Swedes have simply drawn the final conclusion: If we’ve come so far without
marriage, why marry at all? Our love is what matters, not a piece of paper. Why
should children change that? (Stanley Kurtz, “The End of Marriage in Scandinavia:
The ‘conservative case’ for same-sex marriage collapses,” The Weekly Standard, 2
February 2004.)
Indeed, in Sweden the out-of-wedlock birthrate is 55 percent, Norway is 50 percent,
Iceland is approaching 70 percent, and in Denmark 60 percent of firstborn children
are born out of wedlock. According to Dr. Kurtz, studies in these countries
demonstrate that these unmarried families break up at a rate two to three times that
of married couples. Kurtz concludes by saying, “This suggests that gay marriage is
both an effect and a cause of the increasing separation between marriage and
parenthood. As rising out-of-wedlock birthrates disassociate heterosexual marriage
from parenting, gay marriage becomes conceivable”
Immanuel Kant, who was an agnostic but held to a belief in God along
with a stance in ethical unqualified absolutism, stated that if one wanted to
determine whether a particular activity or behavior was normal and moral,
they should take the behavior and apply it on a universal scale and
observe the end result. For example, in determining whether lying is a
moral, normal, and acceptable behavior for people, what would be the end
result if everyone lied? Two results occur (1) rational communication
breaks down (2) The practice is self-defeating because a lie only works if
the target is expecting the truth (and no one would be).
In this vein, what would be the final result if everyone on the planet only
practiced “loving and monogamous” homosexuality as the pro-gay
movement advocates? The final analysis is that mankind would likely
cease to exist within a generation. In effect, this is more than just a
consequential outcome view as the universal practice of homosexuality
truly does defeat itself.
Harvard professor of law Mary Ann Glendon acknowledged this real consequence
of legalizing same-sex marriage. She writes: “Religious freedom, too, is at stake..
Every person and every religion that disagrees will be labeled as bigoted and
openly discriminated against. The ax must fall most heavily on religious persons
and groups that don't go along. Religious institutions will be hit with lawsuits if they
refuse to compromise their principles.” (Mary Ann Glendon, "For Better or for
Worse? The federal marriage amendment would strike a blow for freedom," opinion
post to online editorial page, The Wall Street Journal, 25 February 2004).
In British Columbia, Dr. Chris Kempling, a school counselor, was suspended
without pay for three months in 2005 for writing a letter to the editor of the local
newspaper criticizing the Liberal government's same-sex marriage legislation. In
2006, Canadian professor David Mullan was fined $2,100 by Cape Breton
University, after he told a student homosexuality was "unnatural."
In January of last year, Christian Vanneste, a member of France's ruling party, was
fined almost $4,000 under French hate speech law for comments opposing
homosexuality. What was so egregious? Vanneste dared to suggest that
homosexuality was "inferior" to heterosexuality and said the practice would be
"dangerous for humanity if it was pushed to the limit."
Last year, the Brazilian Association of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, Transvestites,
and Transsexuals (ABGLT) filed a criminal complaint against Christian activist Julio
Severo and the National Vision for Christian Awareness for inciting "hatred" against
homosexuals, and "homophobia." The complaint was made because Severo
regularly denounces homosexual behavior as immoral on his Web site, and
opposes the goals of the homosexual movement. Severo and his ministry were
successfully prosecuted simply for denouncing homosexual behavior as sinful
during a campaign to promote family values. As a result, the ministry was ordered
to cancel its campaign and all related events.
In America-the land of the free-a Christian photographer who declined to
photograph a same-sex "commitment ceremony" was hauled before the New
Mexico Human Rights Division (NMHRD) in January of this year. Elane
Photography turned down the job because their beliefs were in conflict with the
message communicated by the ceremony. The same-sex couple filed a complaint
with the NMHRD, which is now trying Elane Photography under state
antidiscrimination laws for sexual orientation discrimination.
Last year, June Sheldon, an adjunct professor teaching a human heredity course at
San Jose City College, was fired for answering a student's in-class question about
heredity and homosexual behavior. Apparently professor Sheldon did not offer the
student the "right" answer.
Marcia Walden, a licensed counselor at Computer Sciences Corporation in Atlanta,
was fired after she chose to refer a person seeking counsel in a same-sex
relationship to another colleague.
The New Jersey Division on Civil Rights threatened to prosecute the Ocean Grove
Camp Meeting Association of the United Methodist Church after it refused to allow
a same-sex civil union ceremony at one of its worship facilities.
Students in Boyd County, Kentucky, were threatened with "suspension" and the
"possibility of court referral" if they publicly voiced moral objections to the school's
diversity training, which normalized homosexual behavior.
A Christian high school student in Michigan was suspended for refusing to remove
an "I'm Straight" sticker from his t-shirt when other students were wearing duct tape
over their mouths to show support for the pro-homosexual National Day of Silence.
And in a most ludicrous act, Christian publishers Zondervan and Thomas Nelson
are facing a $60 million federal lawsuit for publishing "homophobic and prejudicial"
translations of the Bible, from a man who claims he and other homosexuals have
suffered based on what the suit claims is a misinterpretation of the Bible.
First, Those tempted to judge homosexuals more harshly than
others should remember Christ’s words about it being more
tolerable for Sodom in the day of judgment than for cities that had
come face-to-face with the truth of Christ and turned away
(Matthew 10:15).
It must also be remembered that homosexual orientation is not the
issue, but the practice of homosexual behavior, and even then,
understanding must be given to those who fall into sin but turn
back in repentance to Christ.
Jesus acted only with compassion and understanding with the
adulterous woman whose story is told in John 8. Do Christians
really believe the outcome would have been different if a
homosexual caught in the act was thrown before Christ instead of
a woman charged with having immoral heterosexual relations?
But those in the pro-gay movement must be careful not to pull out
their eraser and remove Christ’s final words in the John 8
passage, which are: “now go your way and leave your life of sin.”
The Bible clearly does not condone homosexual behavior. The
Church should make every effort to spiritually educate struggling
homosexuals on God’s truth and provide counseling and support
groups that supply help to those struggling with the temptation.
Most importantly, the Church should relay the fact that
homosexuality can be overcome just as every other temptation
that is common to man. After Paul speaks about those who
continue to practice sin (including homosexuality) being denied
entry into the kingdom of God in 1 Corinthians 6, he provides
much needed hope for those who believe that escape from
homosexual behavior is not possible: “Such were some of you; but
you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in
the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.”
(1 Corinthians 6:11, emphasis added).