Is Homosexuality Biological?

I don't know. The thing is we've made so many advances in genetics in other areas but to my knowledge not for homosexuality.

My only real knowledge in this area came through a fellow high school student who came to my family's home to tell me that he was homosexual and desperately wanted to change but couldn't. He came to me because in Public Speaking class I gave a speech about proofs of the existence of God.

I felt completely inaudaquate and referred him to a psychologist or minister.

 

My Take:

No. Homosexuality is not genetical or biological in any way.

It is a sinful choice man makes.

There ARE environmental factors involved - psychological, sociological and otherwise - there have to be, by definition. It is impossible to willfully choose homosexuality (or anything else, good or bad) in the absence of environmental influences.

These "negative" influences ARE the result of the fall as someone pointed out. They cannot be otherwise, as they are neither holy nor innocent. On top of that the mind itself is fallen. Moreover, though it's more complex than this, it's safe to say these factors are often influenced, both directly and indirectly, by the "principalities and powers" in Eph.6:12 as someone else indicated. I should point out that these "negative" influences affect all men, though differently. We are all fallen. And we all experience the attention of demonic spirit beings to the extent that God our Almighty Father allows it.

Jesus Christ can and will change the homosexual just as He will change any other sinner. His Word is more than adequate to deal with homosexuality just as it is more than adequate to deal with all sin.

 

You assumed wrongly. I missed your last post. Just looked it up. Here is my response:

1. No, I am not saying that. I am saying that homosexuality is not a birth defect, it is a spiritual defect. It is not genetic. I am further saying that I don't know if birth defects might have occurred before the fall and neither do you. If you think the Bible deals with the issue of birth defects before the fall, please show me from scripture where you see that. I know that the Bible deals with the issues of man's spiritual state before the fall, their interpersonal relationships with other men before the fall, and the fact that their sin cuased death. I see nothing about birth defects.

You have accused me, falsely, of heresy. A charge that carries serious weight. [/QUOTE]

The heresy is two fold:

1. That sin is a genetic birth defect caused by sin in general. If that were true, we would all have that genetic failing. We all don't. As a matter of fact, none of us do.

2. That homosexuality is a genetic defect and not purely a choice of the natural sinful nature. It is a spiritual, not a biological issue. The totally depraved, sinful man is doing what is natural to him...whatever makes him feel good. For some it is pride. For some it is adultery. There are a myriad of sins that are committed by sinful man. None of them are the results of genetic wiring.

You focus on John 9:1ff. However there are several points you are ignoring (in reference to this discussion).

1. Jesus was talking about "this" blind man (vs1,3). That man, nor his parents, did anything to cause his condition. Personal sin was not the issue (in that case). Certainly some people sin and suffer disease as a result (see next paragraph). But that was not the case with this man. This man was not blind because of his personal sin nor his parents. However apart from the fall (sin) this man would not have been born blind. [/QUOTE]

And the point that you ignore is that his blindness had a purpose, which was the glorification of God. You refuse to see that the blindness in and of itself was not evil....and indeed, could have been the will of God. God made the man blind from birth in order to glorify God. God did not make any man homosexual from birth for his glorification. There is no condemnation of being blind in the Bible (except for those who were caught up in the ancient days version of the Word of Faith heresy). Homosexuality is very clearly condemned in the Bible. To compare the two is to do damage to logic and the Word of God.

Concerning your heresy charge I find it interesting that the Lord Jesus does not call his disciples "heretics" because of their statement in verse 2. In fact their statement was a common belief of the time. They believed that if a person was born with a birth defect either their parents sinned, or they sinned before birth. Jesus pointed out that in this particular case (Jn 9:1ff) the belief was not true (vs3). However some people's sin does lead to their own physical suffering according to Jesus Himself and other clear Scripture (see Jn 5:14, Jms 5:15, 1Cor 11:30, Rom 1:27, Pr 5:11, etc).[/QUOTE]

1. While it is true that some people's sin did, indeed, lead to physical suffering and it is clearly verifiable in Scripture, the idea that all birth defects are the result of sin is not true or clearly verifiable in Scripture.

2. Homosexuality is not a genetic birth defect. It is a spiritual defect.

3. Birth defects are not condemned as sin. Homosexuality is. The comparison of the two is ludicrous.

Now since I was NOT saying what the disciples said, and since Jesus did not call them heretics, you had no ground of charging me with heresy. Also my position that human suffering (etc) is a result of the fall (sin) is perfectly Biblical and orthodox (see below). Any position that tries to divorce suffering and sin (the fall) is unBiblical. [/QUOTE]

See above.

2. Jesus never said that suffering was not the result of sin (in general). In fact Paul indicates that it is (see Rom 8:18-22). In a very real sense all suffering is a result of sin. For if there were no sin there would be on suffering.[/QUOTE]

You show very little understanding by using this passage to argue that physical suffering is always due to sin. It is clearly dealing with spiritual siffering with the groanings of birthpains. You will also note who caused the frustration and by whose will it occurred. There is nothing genetic in this passage.

3. It would be error to claim that there was disease, birth defects, and human suffering before the fall (before sin). It would also be an error to claim that if there was no fall that people would still suffer from birth defects and disease.[/QUOTE]

Scripture please.

Now back to the point of the original post (which seems to have been lost). I don't see how anyone can claim that there are no influences on behavior (social, mental, or even biological). Clearly there are. We can see this in our daily life and in Scripture. People who fall into the sin of homosexuality have been influenced. Clearly their actions are the result of a choice they have made. However there had to have been some influences. These could include family, friends, teachers (ie...social), or mental issues of some sort (maybe a result of the social).

What about biological influences? As I said in my original post, I don't know. Thanks to sin (the fall and its results) it is possible that some people have a birth defect that allows them to be tempted with homosexuality. This type of thing is not unheard of in the medical community. It is known, for example, that children of alcoholics tend to tempted by alcoholism themselves. There is something that has "gone wrong", or been altered, in their biology that causes that (ie..a birth defect). This of course does not mean that the behavior is ok. No. Morality is not determined by biology (in a fallen world). I don't know that there are biological influences when it comes to homosexuality but if there are it does not justify or excuse the behavior. It is still a sin. The person who is tempted by homosexuality, like every other person, must come to Christ and be born again. Christ can save them from sin and give them the strength to overcome the temptation (see 1Cor 10:13).

Martin. [/QUOTE]

There are influences. They are spiritual, not biological in nature. Now, I must go to bed because I have to get up and go to work tomorrow at 5 in the morning. Won't be back on till probably tomorrow night. Good Night.

Joseph Botwinick

 

#2. Homosexuality is a direct result of sin, and since it is "unnatural", man was not created with the desire initialy, nor was it coded into man's DNA.

 

I agree. I believe the "I was born gay" as a means of not being held accountable. Man's stamp of approval for sins committed.

I also have family who are "Christian" yet live this lifestyle believing it to be OK.

 

God's Word declares this lifestyle to be an abomination. And we are told that all things abominable will be cast in the lake of fire. This includes all who practice homosexuality.

 

Somewhere between answers 3 and 4.

 

Webdog,

I agree, with only one addition: Neither are they created with its code in their DNA today.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I'll vote for a "Maybe" type answer.

In a fallen world, I think it is possible that man could be born with these unnatural affections. That certainly doesn't make them right. There is a matter of choice for someone to willfully live out these affections.

For example, it is generally accepted that some people are predisposed to alcholism, but they can choose not to drink. It may not be the exact same thing, perhaps the drive or desire is far greater (I am a man, and I know how sex driven we can be).

Maybe it's just a little of both. Man certainly is free to choose, but some men maybe genetically predisposed to this particular sin, whereas others may be predisposed/have weaknesses to others.

 

Homosexuality results from a combination of things including biology, upbringing, spiritual status, and choice.

 

==Agree or disagree I don't see that as being properly labeled as heresy. Also I have not said that homosexuality "IS" biological in nature. I have said that there "maybe" biological "influences". That is far different from what you are claiming. Now, as I pointed out, there are clear medical examples of biological influences so I don't see how you can deny that possibility. As I have said even IF there is a biological influence that does not excuse the behavior. The behavior is still sin.
</font>[/QUOTE]There is no clear medical examples of genetics causing homosexuality. There is clear Biblical evidence that God calls this sin an abomination, and that he does not say the same thing about other biological ailments (such as being blind). Homosexuality is a spiritual defect. Blindness and other biological defects are genetic defects. They are not the same.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Martin, just what is your agenda here? Are you trying to justify a person's homosexuality?

Homosexual acts are not of God. There is nothing at all biological involved in it. No chemical imbalances, nothing.

Socialogical influences? Jesus accused the Pharisees of doing the work of their father, the devil. I would say it is not a social thing, but rather giving into temptation and the lies satan tells.

Psychological influences? again, listening to the father of lies.

 

There may be some biological basis for a tendency towards homosexuality. The brains of homosexual males show some significantly different conduction patterns than those of heterosexual males. That could also be an effect of a habitual homosexual lifestyle however and is not proof of a biological cause.

No homosexual will tell you he/she CHOSE that lifestyle. That doesn't mean they were BORN gay. But it certainly does suggest that it is not a simple yes/no choice. The adoption of a homosexual lifestyle likely occurs secondary to serious emotional and spiritual deficits which require fulfillment. A boy who loses his father early in life, has few friends, is not popular with the girls, has no spiritual support may end up feeling accepted in the gay community. If he has had some confusing feelings about other men (as boys often transiently do during sexual maturation) and did not have any real emotional support he may end up in a relationship with another man which becomes an emotional bond. This may lead to a sexual relationship.

Comments like, "It's a simple case of chosing sin!" are immature and spiritually insensitive. These people are broken and in dire need. Some here are just not Christlike enough to care about them.

Jesus has a heart for every gay man and woman out there. And He CAN fill their needs. But many here won't even consider their plight. They are more interested in following the "Fundie party line".

Sad.

 

Homosexual acts are not of God. There is nothing at all biological involved in it. No chemical imbalances, nothing.

Socialogical influences? Jesus accused the Pharisees of doing the work of their father, the devil. I would say it is not a social thing, but rather giving into temptation and the lies satan tells.

Psychological influences? again, listening to the father of lies.

Have you had a homosexual relationship before? You really don't have any idea what is going through the minds of these poor souls. And from your comments it doesn;t sound like you care to listen to them at all.

If you are a pastor shame on you.

 

I am finished arguing against this heresy. Sin is a spiritual defect, not a genetic issue. If you want to continue trying to justify sin, and then deny you did so, be my guest. But, you will do it without me. I don't have time for such foolishness.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I am finished arguing against this heresy. Sin is a spiritual defect, not a genetic issue.

And you don't seem very interested in providing any spiritual support, Joseph.

No one here has justified homosexual behavior. WE simply have pointed out that there is more to it than a willful choice to do something bad.

These people are broken spiritually, emotionally, and often socially as well. If they have a certain genetic predisposition or are placed in the right situation they may turn to this deviant practice.

You are telling these people, "Go away, be ye warmed and filled". What they need is understanding, compassion, patience - you know - the stuff Jesus showed US.

Looking down your nose at sinners and saying "Lord Lord" is the easy part.