14 Talking Points in Defense of Homosexuality (1)
On May 1, 2006, Jerry Maneker, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at California State University, published a document containing 14 points in defense of homosexuality. The reader has probably already heard some of these expressed; certainly, he will hear them again, but all should have access to the truth concerning these matters. Many of these have been answered time and again, but like a bad memory, they just never seem to go away. Maneker was asked to write out his rationale in favor of the practice of homosexuality; thus, he was happy to put them into print.
He was also greatly pleased to imply that anyone who disagreed with him is a Nazi. In his second paragraph he cites Hitler's propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbles who said that no matter how big the lie is, if it's repeated often enough, people will come to believe it. So, who, in his mind, parallels the Nazis who implemented Goebbles' philosophy? Those who have condemned homosexuality over the centuries. Yes, those who have preached against the practice of homosexuality are guilty of "the big lie" because in his (Manaker's) mind, same-sex practices are approved by God. He denies that homosexuality is a sin.
Instead of referencing pertinent Scriptures at this point, he cites "the Reverend Troy Perry," who said, "Jesus came to take away our sins, not our sexuality." While this statement is technically true, it implies that one may continue in a sexual sin instead of repenting of it, which is false. Perry is the founder of the Metropolitan Community Church, which ministers to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community. Maneker also quotes himself as an authority: "Never let other people define your reality and put you into bondage to their ways of thinking!" The fact is, however, people do not have authority from God to create their own reality; they have a responsibility to recognize reality, period, as set forth by God in His Word. In other words, God's thinking is the only reality that matters.
Maneker charges that modern society must remove "the patriarchal and legalistic trappings of 'Christianity.'" What does that description mean? Basically, it's his way of calling names against longstanding views he disagrees with in order to emphasize grace, faith, love, peace, reconciliation, and inclusiveness. Are these six things Christian principles? Grace, faith, love, and peace are. So is reconciliation—so long as one understands that man is reconciled to God and not vice versa. That is to say, man is reconciled to God when he repents—when he gives up sin. God is not reconciled to man by approving or ignoring sin.
Is Christianity inclusive? Yes and no. Salvation is available to anyone (any gender, nationality, or race) who believes, repents, and is willing to be baptized to wash their sins away. But Christianity excludes those who refuse to repent of their sins.
Christians do embrace all of God's children, but such a description does not refer to every human being on the face of the earth; God's children only include those who have obeyed the gospel (Gal. 1:6-9; 1 John 3:1-3). Maneker adds that we should be as authentic as God created us to be. What Scripture is that? Saul of Tarsus was being "authentic" when he persecuted Christians (Phil. 3:1-7). He was a zealous Jew. Jesus called on him to change. God makes the same demand on those who practice homosexuality.
Again, Troy Perry is cited: "God didn't create someone whom He could sit around and hate!" No, that was not the purpose of the creation. But there are, nevertheless, sins God hates (Pro. 6:16-19). If God accepts everyone and everything, why did He send so many prophets to call people to repentance? And why did Jesus say, "…unless you repent, you will all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3; Acts 26:18)?
Isaiah 5:20 warns: "Woe to those who call good evil and evil good; who put darkness for light and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" Maneker provides an example of doing just that when he writes that it is "a grievous sin to reject the sexual orientation given you by God!" Wow! So, God is responsible for the perversion He condemns in the Scriptures. Scarcely anything is more twisted than that. No one has ever proved Scripturally or medically that homosexuals are "born that way." This article was written five years before "Born This Way," was released in 2011, or Maneker could also have cited the noted theologian, Lady Gaga.
The author also speaks of many LGBT Christians. No such thing exists. Some in Corinth had been homosexuals and sodomites, but they had repented of those sins before being washed, sanctified, and justified (1 Cor. 6:9-11). According to the Scriptures, therefore, there are only former LGBT sinners.
The author next cites a nameless source: "We are not here to prove ourselves to the world, but to be ourselves in the world!" Those living before the Flood might have said those words. They might have protested, "We can't help what's in our minds. We were just born to think evil thoughts" (Gen. 6:5). "We just want to be ourselves in the world." Had they made such an argument, the Flood would have still engulfed the world.
After five paragraphs, the author finally cites two Scriptures. Remember, they are supposed to prove that we need to be ourselves (what we were born to be). The first one is Isaiah 2:22: "Sever yourselves from such a man, whose breath is in his nostrils; for of what account is he?" Um, we seem to lack context here; nothing applies to the point being made. The reader is invited to try and find a connection.
The other verse cited is Galatians 1:10: "For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ." The context here is preaching the one gospel, which is not that of the Judaizing teachers. Neither morality in general nor homosexuality specifically can be found in this text. Maneker is obviously reading into the text something he wants it to say.
As the author expresses the hope that the 14 points will come in handy, he can't resist commenting that anyone who does not agree with them is prejudiced. Nothing like stacking the deck in one's own favor, is there? Again, he states his goal that people accept homosexuals as God's children. Sorry, but nothing has changed during the last three paragraphs. Only those who have given up their sin can be regarded as brothers and sisters in the kingdom.
He concludes by saying: "God is not stupid and God doesn't make mistakes!" Again, he is assuming that God created people to be homosexuals, but he never offers any proof. While it is true that God does not make mistakes, the human beings He created do—especially when they attempt to justify their sins. So, let's consider the 14 points.
All of the commandments are fulfilled by loving God and loving others. We are never to judge others. (Matthew 7:1; Romans 2:1) Read Romans 1 in detail and then Romans 2:1.
Since two Scriptures are cited, let us first deal with each one individually. Matthew 7:1 does not teach that we are never to judge others. In fact, in John 7:24 Jesus taught: "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment." Furthermore, In Matthew 7, Jesus is cautioning against hypocritical judgment (read verses 2-5). Romans 2:1 says the same thing. A person is hypocritical who judges someone as guilty when he stands guilty of the same sin. The Jews condemned the Gentiles for various sins of which they themselves had committed.
However, while we are on this subject, we are not judgmental to quote or apply what the Scriptures say concerning a moral matter. If someone condemns adultery or fornication, he has made no judgment; rather, God has (Heb. 13:4). Paul wrote: "Let him who stole steal no longer…" (Eph. 4:28). Was he being judgmental or simply teaching the Word of God?
If we love God (the greatest commandment, according to Matthew 22:37-39), then we will walk in the commandments (2 John 6), which includes prohibitions against homosexuality (Jude 7). If we love others, we will not try to make them participants in our sins.
The "clobber passages" in Leviticus and Deuteronomy concern the "Holiness Codes" that have been fulfilled in Jesus, "Toevah" means "abomination" or "detestable" as related to idolatry and cult prostitution that were engaged in by the Canaanites.
Notice that Maneker did not even cite the Scriptures; he only named the books. So that the reader can consider the context, the full references are provided below.
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination" (Lev. 18:22).
"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them" (Lev. 20:13).
We cannot find a similar verse in Deuteronomy; Maneker should have specified what he was thinking of. But if the reader will examine the two passages cited, he will find nothing about Holiness Codes or a prophecy of Jesus fulfilling them, nor will he find anything in the text describing cult prostitution. In other words, Maneker made a number of assertions without any proof.
Leviticus 18:21 condemns allowing one's descendants to "pass through the fire to Molech." Verse 23 goes on to prohibit bestiality. Leviticus 20:12 calls for putting to death a man lying with his daughter-in-law, and verse 14 calls for burning with fire a man who marries a woman and her mother. Again, nothing is mentioned here about cult prostitutes. These verses simply condemn homosexuality, period.
To what word did Maneker refer when he wrote of "Toevah"? If he intends the Hebrew word translated "abomination," Strong records #8581 as toeba. Primarily, it means "a disgusting thing, abomination." It is not always associated with idolatry, nor is cult prostitution part of the definition of the word. It seems that nothing in Maneker's second point is accurate.
The Bible also contains prohibitions against eating shellfish; there are also the cultural practices of stoning to death those who commit adultery, stoning to death those who work on the Sabbath, stoning to death recalcitrant children, women not being allowed to talk in the Church, women not being allowed to teach men, women keeping their heads covered in church, not wearing mixed fibers in one's clothes, etc. Why not picket Safeway for selling shellfish and picket K-Mart for selling shirts made of cotton and polyester?
What the reader observes in the above paragraph is what happens when people who do not know the Bible attempt to use it to prove their position instead of reading it for the truth it teaches. Notice how this begins: "The Bible also contains prohibitions against…." This is actually an admission that the Bible teaches against homosexuality. Maneker's point is this: the Scriptures teach against other things that we ignore; therefore, we ought to ignore its teaching against homosexuality. If we did, it would permit us to practice any sin we desire.