I would like to offer a short response to Lynn’s comment. I cannot respond to everything, but I would like to address what I see as the major points to engage in.

1)Lynn, I find it a bit curious that you responded to what was in fact an addendum to my primary point while ignoring the main thrust of what I wrote. I would find the argument you advance more cogent or weighty if you were willing to interact with the text of Romans 1 to demonstrate why the exegesis I provided is faulty and why another is to be preferred. Your response—an attempt to persuade that some homosexual relationships can be honoring to God—completely bypasses engaging with a New Testament passage that is vitally important to this discussion, regardless of whether one is speaking of same-sex marriage or the gay lifestyle in general.

2) As a molecular biologist I do not find the evidence for a person born with an innate homosexual orientation either compelling or persuasive (in fact, I find the evidence pointing in quite the opposite direction). But for the sake of argument, let us suppose that this is the case. Does that necessarily mean that homosexual behavior is moral and that society ought to endorse it? It is a logical fallacy to suggest that because something is natural, it is moral or should be accepted. Claiming that homosexuality is natural is insufficient to make the claim that it is moral or approved by God.

3) By referring briefly of my friends in the gay community, it was not my intent to imply that the gay lifestyle of many represents the lifestyle of all. Nor did I intend to define one expression of homosexuality with another. Perhaps I should have been clearer in regards to this, and your pointing this out is a fair one for which I’m appreciative of. I do think that the claims that I am spreading falsehoods and falsely representing the issue goes well beyond the evidence present in what I wrote, though.

However, this does not diminish my main point (or, more importantly, Dr. Bock’s point) which was whether Scripture provides any allowance for one to define any expression of a same-sex sexual relationship as honoring to God. The test for whether one truly loves and honors God is found in 2 John 6: “Now this is love: that we walk according to his commandments.” Biblical history is replete with examples of how people can create in their minds a false image of a deity, one who gives them license to pursue a lifestyle explicitly condemned by the Scriptures. True love for God recognizes and honors the commandments and prohibitions God has established. Therefore, living according to God’s instructions is the true test for whether an individual truly loves God or not.

4) Lynn, you state that “Our God is a God of love and truth, but these truths have no bearing to Chuck, and to the many people who applaud and agree with his treatment of this issue” and refers to my approach as “bigotry”. I am not sure how an ad hominem attack on myself and others can contribute to the furthering of this conversation. Dismissing a person as one who cares little for either love or truth and categorizing them as intolerant of any opinion that differs from their own, rather than dealing with what they wrote in a subtantive fashion, tends to suggest an inherent weakness in one’s argument.

To conclude, I would invite you to consider how you would answer the following question:

“If it could be demonstrated from the Scriptures, clearly and beyond a reasonable doubt, that God condemns all sexual activity, other than within the context of the marriage covenant between a man and a woman, as sinful and outside His will—would you abide by and yield to that teaching? Would you faithfully communicate this, even to those many gay people that you perceive as loving God and desire only a committed life-partnership?”

The answer to this question will help to provide a jumping point for further conversations on this issue.

Best,
Chuck