Homosexuality in Nature

Post Reply
User avatar
SGStrong
New Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 10:44 pm
Location: Scottsbluff NE
Contact:

Homosexuality in Nature

Post by SGStrong » Fri Apr 28, 2006 12:54 am

Hi Dr. Nay, this is Shawn Strong and my question doesn't exactly deal with creation science but I think it may be relevant.
I was wondering what rebuttal could be used if someone would argue for homosexuality by pointing to nature and saying that it occurs with animals making it "natural."

User avatar
Dr. John Nay
Professor
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2003 7:34 am
Location: Prescott Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Homosexuality

Post by Dr. John Nay » Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:37 pm

:D It's great to hear from you Shawn, I pray all is well with you.

As you know, there are many diverse opinions relative to the issue of homosexuality. In my opinion, the only opinion that really counts is God's. He gives us His opinion in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV):

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders no thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will in herit the kingdom of God." (cf. Romans 1:18-28)

It's interesting that Paul continues in 1 Corinthians 6:11, "And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

In-other-words, some of those in the church in Corinth had been "homosexual offenders".

God's Word teaches that homosexuality is a sin. Not unforgiveable (PTL), but a sin with possibly greater consequences that some sins, but no more a sin than the one that has "pride" that he or she is not homosexual.

I have a Time Magazine from August 15, 1994, with the following title on the front cover: "Infidelity, It may be in our genes." In the article the author argues that a man or woman cannot realistically expect to be faithful to their mate, because they are genetically predisposed to infidelity. The author uses several birds to illustrate his point.

The problem is that man is NOT an animal. Man possesses intellect, a part of which is the ability to exercise choice counter to his "feelings", biologically, or otherwise. I.e., a man might be attracted to another woman, but he has a choice as to whether he acts on that attraction or not. When the article says, "Infidelity, It may be in our genes.", the problem is that the author mispelled "genes".

John : )

User avatar
SGStrong
New Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 10:44 pm
Location: Scottsbluff NE
Contact:

Post by SGStrong » Sat Jun 10, 2006 10:50 pm

All is well Dr. Nay. Thank you for your prayers and for your response to my question. I often forget sometimes that Gods opinion is the only one that matters. I also seldom think of the reply that we are not animals. But it is a fact that puts a smile on my face. :D

Post Reply