‘n Uitstekende samestelling en skrywe oor hierdie netelige kwessie deur ds. Slabbert Le Cornu (Predikant van die Gereformeerdegemeente, Carletonville)
IS HOMOSEKSUALISME ‘NATUURLIK EN ONVERANDERBAAR’ EN DUS NET DIE ‘DAAD’ SONDE, MAAR NIE DIE ‘ORIëNTASIE’ NIE ?
“There is a sense, therefore, in which recent requests for the church to review its attitude toward homosexuality are really a challenge to the church’s very identity, purpose, and direction and a challenge to its view of the Word of God.” – dr. Greg L. Bahnsen
Ek het in een van my vorige skrywes (Die Gereformeerde Kerke in SA se amptelike standpunt oor homoseksualisme), dit gestel dat ek iets meer wil skryf oor dr. Nico Vorster se stelling, “Volgens die gedragswetenskappe is die homoseksuele oriëntering van kern- of egte homoseksueles nie veranderbaar nie” (Belangrike nota: dit blyk dat die skrywe van dr.N. Vorster nie die amptelike standpunt van die GKSA is nie, maar dat die amptelike standpunt verwoord is in die sinodebesluit van 2003 (bl.751), sien die ‘regstelling’ hier by my vorige skrywe).
Die antwoord uit die Heilige Skrif, is eenvoudig en duidelik:
1) Homoseksualisme is nie ‘natuurlik’ nie, maar on- of teen-natuurlik, teen God se skeppingsorde en wil vir mense, nl. die huwelik tussen een man en een vrou (Gen.1,2; Matt.19:1-12), waarbinne alleen ‘n intieme verhouding en die seksuele uitgeleef kan word, as jy daartoe geroep is:
26Daarom het God hulle oorgegee aan skandelike hartstogte, want hulle vroue het die natuurlike verkeer verander in dié wat teen die natuur is;
27en net so het ook die manne die natuurlike verkeer met die vrou laat vaar en in hulle wellus teenoor mekaar ontbrand: manne het met manne skandelikheid bedrywe en in hulleself die noodwendige vergelding van hulle dwaling ontvang.
28 En omdat hulle dit nie die moeite werd geag het om God in erkentenis te hou nie, het God hulle oorgegee aan ‘n slegte gesindheid, om te doen wat nie betaam nie – Romeine 1
2) Homoseksualisme, soos alle ander sonde is veranderbaar deur die krag van die Evangelie, deur Christus se bloed en Gees,
16 Want ek skaam my nie oor die evangelie van Christus nie, want dit is ‘n krag van God tot redding vir elkeen wat glo …. (Romeine 1)
9 Of weet julle nie dat die onregverdiges die koninkryk van God nie sal beërwe nie?
10 Moenie dwaal nie! Geen hoereerders of afgodedienaars of egbrekers of wellustelinge of sodomiete of diewe of gierigaards of dronkaards of kwaadsprekers of rowers sal die koninkryk van God beërwe nie.
11 En dit was sommige van julle; maar julle het jul laat afwas, maar julle is geheilig, maar julle is geregverdig in die Naam van die Here Jesus en deur die Gees van onse God. – 1 Korinthiërs 6
(Hier is my preek oor Romeine 1:16-32)
Hier is ‘n paar bronne waarna ek u wil verwys, wat hierdie saak duidelik en eenvoudig uiteensit:
- Dr Attie Bogaards
- Nuwe boek oor die onderwerp
- Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen
- Eie skrywe
- Ander bronne
As die fondamente omgegooi word: Skrifbeskouing en Skrifgesag
Dr. Bahnsen in sy boek (sien hier onder) wys op die wesentlike onderliggende saak in die gay agenda en debat (en myns insiens die VIDA agenda), naamlik Skrifbeskouing en Skrifgesag, “Het God werklik gesê (Gen.3:1-5; Matt.4:1-11), as hy skryf (bl.9,14-19; lees asb aandagtig, beklemtonings bygevoeg):
“The choice before us thus seems to be this: either we will discriminate against homosexuals, or we will discriminate against the Word of God. We will either aim to convert the homosexual and have him transformed into the image of Christ, or we will aim to convert the church’s thinking about God’s Word and transform the Christian ethic into the image of homosexual values. The discussion has brought us to the question of ultimate priorities and standards, and here the choice for the Christian ought not be difficult.17
In conclusion, opposition to homosexuality is not a sure sign of a bigoted, improperly judgmental, or legalistic attitude. It is rhetorical terrorism to charge otherwise. Such fallacious tactics may persuade the unwary, but they cannot annul or disprove convictions rooted in the revealed Word of God. Our responsibility, of course, is to be sure that our attitudes do accord with Scripture and are not simply reflecting past tradition or mimicking present prejudice. ….
Differing attitudes toward homosexuality within the professing Christian church can often be traced to conflicting views of Scripture. Many disputes over the morality of homosexuality turn on another question:
Will Scripture be the Christian’s normative guide or must it yield that position of authority over ethics to modern scholarship, personal experience, natural reason, new mystical insights, public opinion, or some other standard?
The twentieth century has proved to be an age of increasing doctrinal permissiveness among professing Christian teachers; this trend emerged from the modernist abandonment of the absolute authority of God’s revealed Word in the Old and New Testaments. Contrary to Scripture’s own self-witness as God’s inspired and infallible Word, many churchmen have attempted to synthesize Christian commitment with humanistic or secular perspectives in philosophy and the sciences. Throughout the theological spectrum the effect has been distortions of the Christian message that are evident to any thoughtful student.
Moreover, the alarming aftermath of replacing the God-centered theology of the Bible with the man-centered outlook of worldly wisdom is the amazing capacity of many churchmen to tolerate any and every deviation from the clearcut biblical standards of morality. By suppressing the truth in unrighteousness they can make concessions to homosexuality, granting it either sympathy or hearty approval. In Romans 1:18-32 Paul depicts this progression — from exchanging God’s truth for a lie to approving unnatural sexual inversion — as the object of divine displeasure.
Paul’s teaching has received startling confirmation in the enlightened atmosphere of modern theological study, where perversion of the truth about God has produced a corresponding perversion regarding man, God’s image. In an idolatrous fashion man has become the focus and authority of unorthodox theology, with the result that he has been debased through homosexual self-love at the very point of the essential distinction between male and female. Departure from the Word of God to other “lords” over life is theological inversion, a denial of the distinction between the Creator and His creation. Theological inversion today advertises its disgraceful, ungodly character by fostering sexual inversion in man as God’s image, denying the male-female distinction in creation.
The justification of this disordered sexual orientation in contemporary theological literature, grounded in a refusal to be directed by God’s Word, demonstrates dramatically that the self-professed wisdom of many theologians’ secular mindset is, in fact, foolishness with God. It is time to recognize the depths of sin to which the liberal and humanistic attitude toward Scripture is prone. When revealed theology is reduced to an autonomous study of man, when biblical authority is replaced by an unstable human wisdom, when behavior is directed by the descriptions of social science instead of the prescriptions of God’s Word, then we have returned to the situation prevailing at the time of the Book of Judges: every man will do what is right in his own eyes.
As the church takes a fresh look at the moral question of homosexuality, therefore, it must recognize that without God’s clear, infallible Word and its pronouncements Christianity has nothing to contribute to the issue. Without an authoritative word from the Lord regarding homosexuality there is no distinctive Christian discipleship in reference to it, nor is there a Christian word of hope for the individual or society.
If theologians are not heralds of the King’s Word, proclaimers of divine revelation, then their pronouncements are just more opinions among many others, and they deserve no special hearing. Christian standards are defined by the revealed Word of God in Scripture. Men can accept God’s prescriptive will for behavior or they can reject it, but they cannot tamper with it. If the biblical witness offends them, then it is God whom they must blame and reproach.
The church cannot condone what God condemns in Scripture without losing its own integrity and coming under His judgment. For the true disciple of Christ, moral boundaries are never drawn by man but only and always by God. Therefore, it should be noticed at the outset of this study that many cases arguing for tolerance of homosexuality are based on doctrinal premises that deviate from biblical teaching. Those who put forth such arguments cannot be seen as attempting to worship the living the true God as He directs and desires. Their antipathy to biblical revelation means that they will follow something less than the God of the Bible, who is the only Lord recognized by the believer.
There is a sense, therefore, in which recent requests for the church to review its attitude toward homosexuality are really a challenge to the church’s very identity, purpose, and direction and a challenge to its view of the Word of God. Such calls for reappraisal require a defense of the authority of the Bible — a defense that is, and has been, readily available elsewhere. It is assumed here that the authority of the Bible, for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, depends not on popular endorsement and human wisdom but completely upon its divine Author and His self-attesting identification of Scripture as the Word of God. While the philosophical argument and external evidences for the Bible’s truth are objective and inescapable, our full persuasion of the divine authority of Scripture comes as the Holy Spirit bears witness by and with the self-attesting Word in our hearts. Proponents of homosexuality who are indifferent to the authority of God’s Word and its teaching about this practice will obviously require such a basic defense of biblical authority.
Yet the defense of the faith at the foundational level of Scripture’s authority is only preliminary, for much of the modern challenge to the church’s condemnation of homosexuality is not grounded openly in a repudiation of the Bible’s teaching. Professing Christian advocates of moral tolerance toward homosexuality have recently alleged that a correct reading of the biblical record will undermine the belief that it condemns all homosexual activity, independent of circumstances. They claim that there is no clear revelation of God’s will that prohibits homosexuality as we understand that condition today. Moreover, they believe that scriptural ethics focus on personal considerations and situational factors, while condemning preoccupation with rigid legal stipulations.
Finally, even if it could be shown that God’s law should form the Christian ethic and that homosexuality as such is to be condemned, it is still maintained that this is a private matter of personal morality — not something that the state should recognize and prohibit in society at large. That is, even if homosexuality is a sin, it should not be deemed a crime by the state, according to some Christian writers; for them sexual preference is a civil right, a matter indifferent to public morality in a pluralistic society. Consequently, the basic defense of biblical authority must be supplemented today with answers for recent challenges to the traditional interpretation and application of Scripture regarding sexual inversion. The remainder of this study is given over to this task.”
Dr. Attie Bogaards: Homoseksuele – ware liefde, heerlike hoop en sekere verlossing in die Evangelie alleen
“‘n Ander standpunt stel weer: Volgens die gedragswetenskappe is die homoseksuele oriëntering van kern- of egte homoseksueles nie veranderbaar nie. Hierdie oriëntasie is geleë in ‘n bepaalde verlies in die ontwikkelingsfases gedurende die kinderjare. Die kerk behoort met Christelike liefde en pastorale deernis die persoon met ‘n homoseksuele oriëntasie te begelei om hierdie verlies te verstaan en te verwerk. Die homoseksuele persoon het nie gekies om so ‘n oriëntasie te hê nie, maar kan kies wat om daarmee te maak.
Die homoseksuele oriëntering van kern- of egte homoseksueles nie veranderbaar nie? Die Bybel leer iets anders as die gedragswetenskappe: Hulle wás homoseksuele, hulle wás onregverdiges, maar dit is hulle nie meer nie. Die evangelie verlos ons van ons neigings (oriëntasie) om God en ons naaste te haat nie (vergelyk wat die Heidelbergse Kategismus in vraag en antwoord 5 sê).
Romeine 1:16 leer immers dat die evangelie’n krag van God is tot redding vir elkeen wat glo.
Geen duiwel of sonde is te sterk vir Hom nie, geen skuld te groot nie.” …
Lees hier verder.
Splinternuwe boek oor hierdie spesifieke onderwerp:
Foreword by R. Albert Mohler Jr.
Preface: Why Do We Need This Book?
Part One: The Ethics of Desire
1. What Is Same-Sex Attraction?
2. Is Same-Sex Attraction Sinful?
Part Two: The Path of Transformation
3. Myths about Change
4. A Biblical Path to Change
5. How Evangelicals Can Change
Uit die voorwoord:
“The modern secular consensus is that an individual’s pattern of sexual attraction, whether heterosexual or homosexual, should be accepted as a given and considered normal. More than that, the secular view demands that this pattern of sexual orientation be accepted as integral to an individual’s identity. According to the secular consensus, any effort to change an individual’s sexual orientation is essentially wrong and harmful. The contemporary therapeutic worldview is virtually unanimous in this verdict, but nothing could be more directly at odds with the gospel of Jesus Christ….
The believer in the Lord Jesus Christ receives the forgiveness of sins, the gift of eternal life, and the righteousness of Christ imputed by faith. But the redeemed Christian is also united with Christ, indwelt by the Holy Spirit….
This means that Christians cannot accept any argument suggesting the impossibility of fundamentally reorienting a believer’s desires….
Christians know that believers among us struggle to submit their sexual desires to Christ. This is not something true only of those whose desires are homosexual. It is true of all Christians. Yet we know that those believers who are struggling to overcome homosexual desires have a special struggle—one that requires the full conviction and support of the body of Christ. We will see the glory of God in the growing obedience of Christ’s redeemed people. And, along with the apostle Paul and all the redeemed, we will await the glory that is yet to be revealed to us.”
Een van die skrywers, prof. Denny Burk, se artikel oor die onderwerp is ook hier aanlyn beskikbaar:
Sy belangrike konklusie is:
“So how do we answer the question, “Is same-sex orientation sinful?”
Insofar as same-sex orientation designates the experience of sexual desire for a person of the same-sex, yes, it is sinful.
Insofar as same-sex orientation indicates emotional/romantic attractions that brim with erotic possibility, yes, those attractions too are sinful. Insofar as sexual orientation designates an identity, yes, that identity too is a sinful fiction that contradicts God’s purposes for his creation.
If these observations about sexual orientation are true, there are numerous pastoral implications. I will mention just three:
(1) To call same-sex orientation sinful does not make gay people less like the rest of us. On the contrary, it makes them more like the rest of us. We are not singling out gay people as if their experience is somehow more repugnant than everyone else’s experience of living with a sinful nature. All of us bear the marks of our connection to Adam. All of us are crooked deep down. All of us have thoughts, inclinations, attitudes, and the like that are deeply antithetical to God’s intention for us. All of us need a renewal from the inside out that can come only from the grace of Christ. We are in this predicament together. We do not stand apart.
(2) These truths ought to inform how brothers and sisters in Christ wage war against same-sex attraction. Sin is not merely what we do. It is also who we are. As so many of our confessions have it, we are sinners by nature and by choice.54 All of us are born with an orientation toward sin in all its varieties. The ongoing experience of same-sex sexual attraction is but one manifestation of our common experience of indwelling sin—indeed, of the mind set on the flesh (Rom 7:23; 8:7). For that reason, the Bible teaches us to war against both the root and the fruit of sin. In this case, same-sex attraction is the root, and same-sex sexual behavior is the fruit. The Spirit of God aims to transform both (Rom 8:13). If same-sex attraction were morally benign, there would be no reason to repent of it. But the Bible never treats sexual attraction to the same sex as a morally neutral state. Jesus says all sexual immorality is fundamentally a matter of the heart.
Thus it will not do simply to avoid same sex behavior. The ordinary means of grace must be aimed at the heart as well. Prayer, the preaching of the word, and the fellowship of the saints must all be aimed at the Holy Spirit’s renewal of the inner man (2 Cor 4:16). It is to be a spiritual transformation that puts to death the deeds of the body by a daily renewal of the mind (Rom 8:13; 12:2). The aim of this transformation is not heterosexuality but holiness.55
This is not to say that Christians who experience same-sex attraction will necessarily be freed from those desires completely in this life. Many such Christians report partial or complete changes in their attractions after conversion—sometimes all at once, but more often over a period of months and years. But those cases are not the norm. There are a great many who also report ongoing struggles with samesex attraction.56 But that does not lessen the responsibility for them to fight those desires as long as they persist, no matter how natural those desires may feel. The Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit can bring about this kind of transformation in anyone—even if such progress is not experienced by everyone in precisely the same measure. As the apostle Paul writes, “Thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed” (Rom 6:17).
(3) This truth ought to strengthen our love and compassion for brothers and sisters who experience same-sex attraction. For many of them, same-sex attraction is something they have experienced for as long as they can remember. There is no obvious pathology for their attractions. The attractions are what they are even though they may be quite unwelcome. It is naïve to think that these people are all outside of the church. No, they are among us. They are us. They have been baptized, have been attending the Lord’s Table with us, and have been fighting the good fight in what is sometimes a very lonely struggle. They believe what the Bible says about their sexuality, but their struggle is nevertheless difficult. Is your church the kind of place that would be safe for these dear brothers and sisters to come forward to find friendship and community? Is your home the kind of place that would be safe for these dear brothers and sisters to come forward to find friendship and community? Do your church and your home have arms wide open to them to come alongside them, to receive them, and to strengthen them?
Jesus said that the world would know us by our love for one another (John 13:35). One of the ways that we show love for one another is by bearing one another’s burdens (Gal 6:2). Can you bear this burden with your brothers and sisters who are in this fight? Are you ready to offer help and encouragement to these saints for whom Christ died? If not, then something is deeply amiss. For Jesus has loved us to the uttermost, and he calls us to do the same (John 13:34).”
Sien hier ‘n boekresensie.
Homosexuality: a Biblical View, dr. Greg L. Bahnsen
Gedeeltes van die boek kan hier gelees word: Bahnsen
Sien in die besonder die volgende hoofstuk (die voetnotas verwys na Skrifgedeeltes):
“To maintain that a person is not sinful for having homosexual attractions, feelings, or erotic orientation overlooks the clear biblical teaching that it is not only evil to do immoral acts, it is also evil to desire to do immoral acts: e.g., devising wicked plans or evil against your neighbor,15 anger leading to violence,16 malice,17 envying dishonesty,18 planning deceit,19 loving false oaths,20 coveting.21 God’s Word forbids sinful activities, but it equally forbids fleshly lusts or evil desires.22
The classic passage in this regard is Matthew 5:27-29, where Jesus declares that everyone who looks on a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery in his heart. However, homosexual lust is in a sense even worse; while heterosexual drives are God-given, promote the cultural mandate, and are fulfilled within marriage,23 homosexuality is always immoral in any context. Heterosexual desire is evil as lust (outside the marriage commitment), whereas homosexual desire is evil in itself (a perversion). In Romans 1 Paul does not restrict his censure to overt homosexual practices or “unseemly deeds.” His condemnation extends specifically to the homosexuals being “inflamed with desire” for each other.24 They are censured for having “impure lusts”25 and “shameful passions.”26
… Therefore, it is plainly incorrect to hold that Scripture speaks only of homosexual acts and not of the homosexual desire and inclination. In forthright language Paul holds men and women morally responsible and under God’s wrath for burning with homosexual desires, which he ethically describes as vile affections. The act / orientation distinction, then, does nothing to mitigate the Bible’s censure of homosexuality. We cannot agree with those who claim that Scripture knows nothing of sexual inversion, nor with their baseless judgment that a homosexual disposition is morally neutral. ….
“Let us now recapitulate the main points of our reply to the allegation that there is no distinction drawn in Scripture between outward homosexual acts and inward homosexual orientation (which was unknown at the time), and that therefore its condemnation must be restricted to homosexual practices (rather than propensities).
First, even if the premise were accurate, the inference drawn would not be legitimate; we should rather conclude that the Bible addresses both act and orientation since it did not qualify its pronouncements, exonerating and setting some aspect of homosexuality apart from its condemnation. Second, the premise itself is taken in a way that conflicts with other theological truths, such as the omniscience of the primary Author of the Bible and sufficiency of Scripture for every judgment pertaining to the standards of righteousness.
Third, the premise is straightforwardly mistaken: the ordinary metaphors and common-sense notions were available by which Scripture could have made reference to a homosexual disposition (understood as characteristic inner lust), and in actual fact we find that God’s Word explicitly censures homosexual desires and habits.
Finally, the attempt to isolate the homosexual disposition as a different, third type of entity (apart from homosexual desires and acts) — in both its theological and secular versions — fails to demonstrate its distinct existence or its moral relevance.”
Sien ook Bahnsen se artikel: “In the Shadow of Sodom: Does the Bible Really Say What We Thought About Homosexuality?”
“People are no more born constitutional homosexuals than they are born constitutional adulterers or thieves. Every homosexual has turned away from and thus perverted God’s creational design (“nature”) for sexuality, whether self-consciously or not.
The notions and metaphorical vocabulary were readily available to the Apostle Paul by which he could have referred to an inner propensity toward homosexuality, if it had been his intention to exclude such from the condemnation uttered in Romans 1; but his denunciation of homosexuality was, by contrast, categorical or without qualification.”
“On the John Stewart radio program, Dr. Bahnsen held a dialog with a man (Mr. Paul Johnson), who claimed to be a “Christian homosexual.” You will want to see how this man’s deceptions and faulty scholarship were exposed and refuted by Dr. Bahnsen. Includes a separate radio dialog with Jim Mitulski, pastor of the Metropolitan Community Church in San Francisco, the largest homosexual congregation in the city.”
My eie skrywe:
Sien tabel 2 (bl. 3,4) in hierdie beradingsprogram: Bybelstudie program
God openbaar hier (Rom.1:24-27) dat:
1. Homoseksualiteit (beide in denke “begeerlikhede” én dade: ‘om hulle liggame onder mekaar te onteer ‘) die gevolg is van:
a. dat God nie meer verheerlik word nie
b. die waarheid (wet ?) van God wat verruil is vir die leuen.
2. In verse 32 word ook geopenbaar dat die afwysing van homoseksualiteit/ isme in vers 32 gefundeer is in die ‘verordening van God’ en dan belangrik, word hulle wat dit of ook doen of goedkeur, ook veroordeel deur die Skrif hier in Romeine 1.
3. Dat ‘n homoseksuele samelewing, hetsy hulle wat ditself leer en doen en/of hulle wat dit goedpraat, ‘n getuienis is van God se oordeel oor hulle: “Daarom het God hulle oorgegee” (werkwoord: indikatief, aoristus, aktief).
Hierin (1 Kor.6:9-11) word dit duidelik geopenbaar,
dat homoseksueles, soos ook die ander sondaars hier genoem, nié die koninkryk sal beërwe nie. Dit behels persone wat in leer en lewe, gedagtes en dade openlik volhard in so ‘n lewenswyse. (sien in konteks met die gedeeltes wat volg)
Hierdie gedeelte (1 Tim.1:8-11) bevestig dat,
“homoseksualiteit (soos die ander gevalle hier genoem) in stryd is met God se wil soos geopenbaar in sy heilige wet. Dit is ook in stryd met die ‘gesonde leer’ van die NT, in stryd met die evangelie en dit wat Christus leer.”
Konklusie: Homoseksualiteit, soos enige ander sonde, is in stryd met God se wil soos geopenbaar in sy Woord, sy wet vir ons leer en lewe. Valse leraars wat dit probeer goedpraat is in stryd met God self. Die homoseksuele persoon moet opnuut besef dat sy homoseksuele gedagtes, neigings en dade in stryd is met ons heilige God, en dat as sy nie daarvan bekeer nie, sy nie die koninkryk van God sal ingaan nie. Beter gestel, daar is nie iets soos homoseksuele persone nie, maar wel mans en vrouens wat worstel met homoseksuele neigings/sonde
Nota: sien asb. die res van die program vir die antwoord op ons sondige worstelinge, van watter aard ookal – die evangelie (goeie nuus) van ons Here Jesus Christus !
– The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics, Rob Gagnon (die skrywer se webblad – http://www.robgagnon.net (hy is seker een van die bekendste en beste apologete teen die gay agenda, stem wel nie saam met sy inkonsekwente VIDA standpunt nie.). Sien ook: http://www.theologymatters.com/NovDec01.PDF
– What does the Bible really teach about Homosexuality?, Kevin deYoung
– The Secret Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert, Rosarie Butterfield
– Christian Action for Reformation and Revival (spesifiek vir die SA situasie oor verskillende sake)
– Enige werke van dr. Peter Jones om die seksuele rewolusie vanaf die 20ste eeu tot vandag te verstaan: https://truthxchange.com