The Truth is Not Homophobic

truth1In an article dated January 30th, 2013, Gregg Rosenthal with, published the story of San Francisco 49er cornerback Chris Culliver’s statement that he would not be accepting of an openly homosexual athlete.  In the article that can be read here,

Rosenthal, as most reporters these days do, delivered a condescending bandwagon reprimand of Culliver, as though no “right thinking” person could justly think or feel the way that he did.  In his article he states, “Culliver will take deserved criticism for his remarks, but the honest comments hardly should come as a surprise. Homophobia runs rampant in professional sports; Culliver is just less guarded about his actual feelings than some players. I suspect those feelings won’t change until years after a gay player has the courage to come out with his sexuality in public. More than 65 years after Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier, unfortunately it’s difficult to imagine a player coming out of the closet.”

In his follow-up article chronicling Culliver’s expected apology that can be found here,

Rosenthal goes on to write, “Culliver’s comments towards homosexuals were regrettable to say the least.” 

In both articles, Rosenthal expresses nothing less than what is (ab)normal in the mind of mainstream society today.  What they cannot argue with, they will ridicule.  When they do not stand on the wrong side of truth, they demonize those who do.

Regardless of how many times they say it, it just isn’t true.  The “right minded” rejection of homosexulity is not a phobia, it is a faithfulness.  Moral truth is not a matter of emotions, or feelings, but a matter of settled fact.  It is no more homophobic to say that homosexuality is wrong, than it is “adulteriaphobic” to say that adultery is wrong.  I have no intrinsic fear of the man who is unfaithful to his wife, or vice versa.  I will readily say to either one of them that their unfaithfulness is flat, dead wrong.  In the same vein, I have no fear of the homosexual, and with feet planted firm and no hesitation in my voice say that it too is flat, dead wrong. 

The truth is that people like Mr. Rosenthal, at best are reading the wrong dictionary, and at worst trying to write their own and make the rest of us live by it.  They cannot understand that “fixed moral truth” includes the issues of sexuality and marriage.  Furthermore they have no concept of the Unchanging God that has revealed His permanent standards for every man, in every age.  That’s why it is imperative for us to pray earnestly that they will come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.

Too many people have the wrong idea about homosexuality and how it relates to the Bible and the Lord.  I do not concede this fact, but I will pretend for a minute that they are correct when they say, “I am born this way.”  The fundamental argument that they often make is that they are born bent in this direction, and therefore it is their right to practice it, and who are we to say otherwise.

Pretending for a minute that’s true, that changes nothing.  The problem with every man is how he is born.  I was born with a natural attraction to women, yet I still have to place that attraction underneath the revelation of God’s Word.  How I am born, has nothing to do with permissions I have.  Many drunks are born with the propensity for drunkenness; they are still told to repent.  Many people may have a “thief gene” they still are forbidden from stealing.  As I said, I was born attracted to women, but I am supposed to exercise that atraction within the bounds of God’s permission.  How you are born does not grant permission on how to live.  Men are natural born sinners.  The hard thing about Christianity that the world does not understand, is that we are called to “not be” what we are “born as” because it is what we are “born as” that condemns us. 

Erin Burnett recently said it was “crazy” to expect someone to change their sexuality.  The Bible word for change is repent, and that is exactly what God has called men to do.  Repent of their sin, ask him for forgiveness, and then let the grace of Christ work in their lives.  Even if we grant that a man is born as a homosexual, God calls him to repent, not out of hate, but out of love.  What we are naturally is our problem, and the only hope we have is for Christ to change us.  He alone has the power to change us into something that were not born as.  He alone gives us a new birth, with a new nature, and a new spirit, that is right in the sight of God.  That’s why we say, Jesus is the only change worth making.  It is not a phobia to say so, it is faithfulness to the truth.

2 comments on “The Truth is Not Homophobic

  1. There is no doubt that homosexual behaviour is sinful to God. The Bible has many passages that condemn it, and no passages to support it.

    Yet I find it hard to understand Chris Culliver’s position. Why would he be against a homosexual athlete joining his team?

    There may not be any homosexuals in Culliver’s team, but there may be adulterers, cheats, liars and even men who are habitually violent. Will he refuse to be in a team with these people as well?

    If a person is a sinner, how badly should we treat them? If we can refuse to work with a homosexual athlete, why should we sit at a desk next to an adulterer? Why should we have our hair cut by a liar?

  2. OSO

    Thanks for stopping by.

    Your points are well thought and worthy of discussion.

    However, the main point that I am trying to make, is that what Mr. Rosenthal, and those who think the same way that he does, rarely, if ever, make the clear distinction between what is “homophobia” and what is purely a moral stand.

    There are those who insist on attempting to label people like me, and from what I can ascertain like you, as being “homophobic” when the truth is that we are not. It is not a “homophobia” to outright reject homosexuality as normal acceptable behavior.

    To your point, most of the things that you listed, are at the very least not acceptable public behavior. Each of those “sins” bring a sort of “public scorn” on their own, while homosexuality is demanding to be considered normal and acceptable. Could Culliver been a little more tactful and articulate to explain a moral stand, absolutely. Is Culliver “afraid of homosexuals”, that I do not know. However to categorically label the rejection of homosexuality as being “homophobic” is not true, honest, or even a credible argument.

    Thanks again for stopping by.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s