Biology or choice- Does it even matter?
I am now about to jump into a muddy pool of philosophy and thus throw myself into the bizarre mayhem that politicians, clergy, and philosophers alike are incapable of coming to a proper conclusion about. For those of you who simply cannot stand arguments over what should be trivial details in scripture, you might be wise to spare yourself the frustration of me extrapolating my personal views on the issue of whether or not homosexuality is a result of biology or of choice.
In one of his recent articles on his blog, Dr. Al Mohler posted an article which acknowledged biological evidence for homosexuality.
Research into the sexual orientation of sheep and other animals, as well as human studies, points to some level of biological causation for sexual orientation in at least some individuals.
Many conservative Christians have assailed this acknowledgement of this possibility largely out of the fear that if this is in fact a biologically provoked sin that it has found ground for justification and that it would no longer be a sin which the bible clearly says that it is. They’ve claimed that the only possible way for them to protect the credibility and justice of the bible would be to place the blame and thought of the action squarely on the so-inclined subject.
But the more research that is done it seems that the more evidence turns up in support of the side that claims that homosexuality is rooted in one’s genetic structure.
So how do we reconcile this? On the one hand we have the credibility of scripture to adhere to. On the other hand we cannot simply ignore the discoveries made daily about the genetic structures of sexual orientation. How can the scriptures justly condemn homosexuality if it is in the very fabric of how individuals are made?
So is it choice or biology?
That is the question that most critics, evangelical and secular alike, have been trying to answer. However, I believe that the question is avoiding a more obvious answer. So I must defer away from answering this question in favor of giving an answer which does not rest on the answering of this question.
The fact is that each of us is biologically oriented in such a way that God has predetermined for us. And each of us is biologically oriented to sin. Just because we are all made in God’s image does not mean we are made perfect. Remember, we are living after the fall.
But just because an action or behavior can be biologically motivated, does that then ethically justify it? Is everything that we do that is motivated or provoked by a natural biological function automatically good and right to do? Certainly not. If actions were justified on the basis of whether or not it was oriented in genetic traits then sins such as fornication would be completely justified which is not the case.
One may be biologically oriented towards homosexuality. But I personally don’t believe that it is a sin any more than it is to be sexually oriented at all. I certainly believe that the condition is a result of the fall and is the effect of sin. It is a temptation just as any orientation is. But by the grace of God human beings are able to overcome temptation.
Biological orientation of any kind, whether it be sexual orientation or orientation which dictates what you like to eat most, is nothing more than a temptation. We do not sin simply by having it. But we sin by lacking self-control and succumbing to the temptation.
Homosexuality will not cease to be a sin if incontravertible evidence of its genetic causes were brought up. It is not a sin because it is something that is predominately chosen. It is a sin because God declared it to be a sin in the bible.
It would not surprise me if rock-solid evidence stating that homosexuality is a result of genetic traits was brought up. The doctrine of absolute depravity states that all things in this world are tainted by sin including genetic structure.
I leave you with a few closing thoughts.
I believe that claiming that homosexuality is a predominately chosen trait is a dangerous position to take on this issue. We put the credibility of the church at stake when we make scientific claims that are unproven as of yet. (A similar mistake was made in the Middle-ages when the church insisted that the earth was the center of the universe and it cost them dearly.)
We must not place our credibility in the world on the line to defend a moot point. Homosexual behavior is a sin. We need no long discourse to discern that God clearly views it as such regardless of whether or not it is biologically oriented.
We must also not sin against homosexuals by refusing to understand that their temptation could very well be a result of their biological structure. We pass judgment on them by saying that their sinful behavior and desires are freely chosen. We must be gracious and grant the benefit of the doubt to their arguments. Our refusal to give ear to their arguments can severely detract from our ability to help them through their temptation.
In closing, I leave you with some of Al Mohler's words.
Christians must be very careful not to claim that science can never prove a biological basis for sexual orientation. We can and must insist that no scientific finding can change the basic sinfulness of all homosexual behavior. The general trend of the research points to at least some biological factors behind sexual attraction, gender identity, and sexual orientation. This does not alter God's moral verdict on homosexual sin (or heterosexual sin, for that matter), but it does hold some promise that a deeper knowledge of homosexuality and its cause will allow for more effective ministries to those who struggle with this particular pattern of temptation. If such knowledge should ever be discovered, we should embrace it and use it for the greater good of humanity and for the greater glory of God.
All quotes taken from the aforementioned article by Al Mohler available
here.
0 comment(s):
Post a comment
<< Home