-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The evidence of the New Testament affirms the creation intentions for humankind as set forth in the Old Testament. Man and woman, as image bearers of God, are created for sexual union in the context of marriage, which is the lifelong, exclusive union between a male and a female. This is the teaching of Jesus.

While recognising that marriage is the norm, Jesus clearly indicates that not everyone will enjoy the benefit of being married. Some will remain single, either by choice or circumstances. However, for those who choose not to marry, the only viable state is that of celibacy. Jesus did not contemplate that homosexual activity was an option for those who belonged to the kingdom of God.

The apostle Paul expresses the same view in his writings in the New Testament. He considers that homosexual activity per se is against nature, in the sense of a violation of nature. It is against nature for two women to be involved in sexual intercourse as it is for two men (Romans 1:26-27). The attempts by some commentators to confine Paul's condemnation to "promiscuous homosexuality" or to "homosexuality between those of heterosexual disposition" are ill founded, if not fanciful. Paul's basis for condemning homosexual behaviour stems from his understanding of the Old Testament, which clearly forbids the practice of a man lying with a man (Leviticus 18:22).

The ancient world knew nothing of the contemporary distinctions between orientation and behaviour. Indeed, distinctions were more common between penetrator (the active partner) and penetrated (the passive partner), than between homosexual and heterosexual. The latter distinction, with its abhorrence of homosexual activity, is founded upon the teachings of the Old Testament, and Paul clearly reiterates this teaching as being equally applicable to Christians under the new covenant.

The concept of homosexual activity as an ideal expression of love, expounded by Plato in his Symposium, finds no support in the New Testament. Paul was well aware of the culture of his day and society's acceptance of certain forms of homosexual behaviour. It was in the face of these practices that Paul sets forth the Christian standards and bounds of sexual expression.

The claims of love between two persons cannot override the teaching of the Bible. When Paul condemns the Corinthians for allowing a man to sleep with his father's wife (a relationship forbidden by Leviticus 18:7-8), there is no case for a counter plea that the two persons love each other. The sexual union of the two persons is wrong in itself. Indeed, Paul exclaims that such behaviour is not even found among the pagans (1 Corinthians 5:1)! One might well reflect upon the current societal attitudes towards incest. Both the Australian culture and our State laws forbid such a sexual union. There is no ground for allowing such a
union merely because the brother and sister love each other or are "orientated" to each other. The activity per se is wrong and unacceptable. With such logic the apostle Paul condemns all
homosexual activity.

This is not to suggest that a genuine love between two people, whether of the same sex or of opposite sex, cannot exist. The New Testament, like the Old, describes such relationships of genuine love (e.g. David and Jonathan, Jesus and the disciple "whom Jesus loved"). However, such love requires no expression of sexual activity to be considered genuine and real.

The Bible does not frown upon relationships of love between two people, but only relationships that involve sexual intercourse between two people who are not married to each other.

Notwithstanding the above prohibitions, the New Testament does not single out homosexual behaviour as somehow more heinous than other sins. All unrepented sin excludes one from God's kingdom. In this regard, homosexual activity is just one of a number of sins which are inconsistent and incompatible with the Christian life.

In a similar vein, the New Testament does not countenance the persecution of homosexuals that arises from homophobia. Such unwarranted persecution fails to recognise the validity and integrity of homosexuals as men and women made in the image of God.

Nonetheless, it ought also to be noted that Paul does not consider that homosexual activity is so ingrained in a person's behaviour that there is no escape. The triune God is able to wash, sanctify and justify in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of God. "That is what some of you were", Paul reminds the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 6:11). A history of homosexual behaviour, therefore, does not prevent a person from coming to Christ.

Yet it is also true that homosexual behaviour should not continue for the person converted to Christ. This is not to suggest that such persons will be free from all temptations and inclinations to revert to homosexual conduct. However, as in all cases of temptation to sin, there is a way of escape for the disciple of Christ (1 Corinthians 10:13). There is hope for those who want to live God's way. Fidelity to the teaching of the New Testament will always extend hope and mercy to all those who love God and seek to keep his commandments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bishop Glenn Davies is married to Di and is presently Anglican Bishop of North Sydney. Previously a parish minister, author and theological lecturer, Glenn has recently contributed a fuller version of the above under the title "Homosexuality in the New Testament" in the book Faithfulness and Fellowship.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Send us your feedback - Go on, be honest.

Impress a friend - tell them about this article.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------