Research shows homosexuality 100% wrong, 100% of the time

Thanks to Scripture Refiners Fire, GCM Watch was made aware of an incredible body of biblical research on homosexuality by David Root, Jr. of Layhands.com.

Its amazing what an honest study of the scriptures will produce when you allow them to speak and the Holy Spirit to illuminate the logos. David has done an outstanding job writing this and more than ever it is clear that there is no justification whatsoever found in any of the 66 books of the Bible for homosexual conduct. Not even for those who self identify as so-called “gay and celibate”.

Its sheer madness for the gay christian movement to stubbornly continue to uphold such an egregious lie just to please their flesh. Every possible mention (whether implied or explict) of homosexuality in the Bible speaks against the sin with the harshest, most condemning language possible. One wonders why people continue to soften the language and change the dire consequences of the sin to “save” homosexuals. If we change the language of the scripture no matter how harsh it is, will it actually save someone? I think not. Jesus said that only [his] truth can make us free.

Sin is deadly, vile and degenerative in all its forms. It is so pervasive and destructive in the human race that it took the blood of an innocent man to pay the price for freedom from it. And there was no one worthy enough to die except Jesus.  Dumbing down sin and its consequences can be nothing less than a rejection of the precious sacrifice of our Redeemer’s blood. Yet, those who argue homosexuality isnt a sin do just that. 

David shows how the flimsy argument that the Bible was only condemning temple idolatry and not “consensual, loving same gender relationships” is completely untrue.

Some homosexuals argue that Leviticus 18:22 (above) refers to cultic idolatry in the form of male temple prostitution, or that it refers to some other specific form of homosexuality rather than describing homosexual activity in general (our italics). Notice that the preceding verse (Leviticus 18:21, above) does refer to a form of idolatry, but it has nothing to do with male temple prostitution. It’s a huge stretch to use Leviticus 18:21 for making the argument that Leviticus 18:22 is referring to male temple prostitution. In fact, the very next verse (Leviticus 18:23, above) talks about having sex with animals, which has nothing to do with male temple prostitution. So the context of Leviticus 18:22 does not in any way indicate that cultic prostitution is the sin being described rather than general homosexual activity. In fact, we can prove this even further by looking at Leviticus 20:10-21 (above). In verse 13 we see the exact same reference to homosexuality, and the entire context of that verse relates to a variety of sexual sins. There is no idolatry in view here.”

What makes this so fresh is that David Root didn’t start out to prove some sort of predetermined thesis. He was simply responding to a question asked to him. Someone said their church was struggling over whether to ordain gay ministers and wanted to know “what does the bible say about homosexuality?”

David decided to intently study —without malice towards gays— and the result was his detailed exegesis of what the Bible says.

This is the type of honest exegesis that strikes fear in the hearts of the rebellious leaders of the gay christian movement. Knowing they cannot possibly refute the clear teaching of the scriptures, some are now informing their followers not to “argue the Bible”.  In doing so, like the church leaders of the dark ages they prevent people from finding out the truth for themselves.

We’ll place a permanent link to in under our resources column. Please feel free to reference it when you are confronted with the many lies, distortions and mischaracterizations of scripture originating out of the gay christian movement.

Related:
More than you know

John Boswell’s brilliant lie

Is gay sex sin according to the Bible?

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “Research shows homosexuality 100% wrong, 100% of the time

  1. Nice article. I have a question. When you say gay and celibate, are you condemning people who have a homosexual inclination but do not act on those desires? I follow the Catholic teaching on homosexuality which distinguishes between temptation and acts. To be tempted to a physicial homosexual act is not a sin but to physicially carry it out is a sin along with lust. Again, nice artice.

  2. No jysuper, Im condemning no one beyond what the scriptures say. Its important to note that the scriptures do not condemn people, but their sinful actions. Additionally, the scripture give strong warning not to ignore or take sinful “inclinations” lightly.

    My reference to the “gay and celibate” is for those who label themselves as homosexual but say they are not having sex.

    1. they need to define that fully in order for us to evaluate whether or not it is biblical. As it is, it is not biblical no more than saying you are a thief who does not steal or a murderer who does not kill.

    2. The “gay and celibate” as it is presented is a lukewarm position. Jesus said that he wants us to be “hot or cold” (Rev 3:15,16), there are no in between identifers accepted. If a person is gay meaning their romantic attractions are to the same sex, then celibacy does not resolve that. It may give the the designator some sort of nuetral sounding stance, but then it runs counter to scripture.

    3. Temptation alone is not a sin. I agree with you 100% on that. If it were, then the Savior certainly sinned. But according to Heb 4:15, he was tempted but did not sin.
    But is this what those who are claiming to be “gay and celibate” are saying? We dont know. Keep in mind that sin is not just actions according to Jesus.Matt 5:28

    Finally make sure you check Catholic teaching against what the scriptures teach. All doctrine must agree with scripture, not the other way around.

    Thanks and be blessed!

  3. Wow! That was exciting to read because it answered so many questions I’ve been asked myself and couldn’t quite find the words to explain it as clearly. Thanks to the brother who did all of the research and to you for posting it. I can’t wait to spread this message using these passages and explanations. I’m sure this will certainly bless someone and bring them out of bondage!

    Gob Bless
    GIG

  4. Thank you for the response Pastor Foster. I personally want to thank you for your site. You know when I lived in the active “gay” life, I would despise people who were against the life because I thought at the time that they didn’t understand us and just wanted to condemn. After 9 years in the active “gay”life, I decided in July 2008 that enough was enough. Since I have left the active “gay”life, I feel the inner peace and love that Charlene Cothran was talking about in your article “10 was to leave the active “gay”life. With Courage Ministry, Charlene, and yourself, I have come to see who I really am in God, that he loved me before but wanted me to come to him fully and inherit eternal life.

    Take care and keep on exposing the lie that the active “gay”life is pleasing to God.

    jysuper

  5. “I would despise people who were against the life because I thought at the time that they didn’t understand us and just wanted to condemn.”

    Me too brother. In my blindness to protect my sin, I thought everyone hated me because of “who I was”. In truth it was my own rebellious life that caused me to lash out in blindness.

    Its good to be free.

  6. Hey, stumbled upon your page and I’ve had a quick look around – its all very interesting.

    In light of the above post, and I guess to some of the stuff you are doing I have a few questions…I apologise for my ignorance on the subject, but at the same time I raise these question because out of all the comments I’ve read, no one else seems to be challenging you…

    GCMW: Thanks for your questions. There are plenty of challenges in the over 3,000 comments on this blog. If you’d like, take time to read them. Our responses in italics.

    My real question is where does acknowledging homosexually as a sin leave us?
    GCMW: In agreement with God. Amos 3:3.

    Does it mean we don’t let people who struggle with sexuality into our churches?
    GCMW: No, that’s not our position. Everyone is welcome in the church. But everyone cannot have a leadership position in the church and everyone cannot be given influence in the church.

    Does it mean we don’t ordain these people?
    GCMW: It depends on the situation of the “these people” are. Ordination and consecration are not automatic rights in the church. 1 Tim 5:22

    Does it mean we say they cannot accept Jesus’ message until they rid themselves of their sin?
    GCMW: No, that’s not scriptural Matt 11:28-30, Romans 5:8

    But then aren’t we all sinners?
    GCMW: You would have to explain who the “we” is.

    I may not be homosexual but I got plenty of other problems stopping me coming to God.
    And in terms of ‘false prophets’ – aren’t we all false prophets, we all get it wrong on some levels (often we don’t know it) and right on others…

    GCMW: (1) I would suggest that you not let your “problems” keep you from coming to God. Having a problem does not disqualify you. (2)No, the Bible doesn’t define a false prophet as someone who occassionally makes a mistake because they are uninformed. Matt 7:15, 2 Peter 2:1

    Its seems so easy to point the finger at gay communities and forget a lot of issues that come with it.
    GCMW: No, its not easy.

    Those who think it’s sinful but still struggle with these issues. Those who aren’t gay but are attracted to ‘gay culture’ so get labelled. And what about the problems in our own churches? Why don’t we ‘monitor’ the lies, the thieves, the gossipers…
    GCMW: Take some time to read and research. This is a common misconception that only homosexuals are “monitored” or singled out by the church. The Bible doesn’t excuse any sinful behavior.

    Are we called to grow good fruit or rip out the weeds – and we all know that we got to be careful ripping out the weeds cos we might ripe out the good fruit too…
    GCMW: We are called to be holy. Holiness produces good fruit, obedience and desire to protect the church against internal and external attacks 1 Thess 4:7

    Did Jesus come to rebuke, condemn, segregate, watch and monitor or did he come to engage, embrace, include, nurture and love?
    GCMW: He did all of that while he was here. So did the apostles and we are to do so in a biblical context. 2 Tim 3 :16,17

    And although the latter is probably a lot harder, and slower moving, I think ultimately it extends his kingdom further…

  7. possibly some additional reading on this subject would reveal you have come to the wrong conclusion.

    How do we know that the male-male sex indicated in verse 22 is with male temple cult prostitutes? Through the important link that exists between 1 Kings 14:24 and Leviticus 18:24. Leviticus 18:24 reads, “Do not defile yourselves with any of these things, which I am going to cast out before you.” Because this “casting” is future tense, that phrase could be translated, “which I will cast out before you,” referring to the same nations in 1 Kings 12:24, “which the LORD had cast out before the children of Israel” (partly because of the worship practices of the qadeshim, which He specifically refers to in 1 Kings 12:24).

    Again, what important link exists between 1 Kings 14:24 and Leviticus 18:24? In 1 Kings 14:24, the Lord explains what specifically was included as defiling the nations for which cause in Leviticus 18:24 He promised He was going to cast them (the nations) out.

    Then, considering the link that exists between 1 Kings 14:24 and Leviticus 18:24, as well as the lead-in of Leviticus 18:21, what is the context of Leviticus 18:22?

    That “they [the male temple cult prostitutes] did according to all of the
    abominations of the nations which the LORD had cast out before the children of Israel” (1 Kings 14:24, NKJV) has great significance, because it gives us insight into what type of male-male sex is signaled in Leviticus 18:22 through its cross-reference to Leviticus 18:24 (“ . . . for by all these [practices] the nations are defiled which I am going to cast out before you”).

    Had homosexuality been the reason that the Lord had cast out the nations before the children of Israel, He would not have referred specifically to male temple cult prostitution in 1 Kings 14:24. Thus are we provided in 1 Kings 14:24 with the important link to Leviticus 18:22 that God is referring to malemale sex in the context of temple cult prostitution.

    Further, in Leviticus 18:21-24, all four verses must be taken together. The “ . . . for by all these things . . .” in Leviticus 18:24 [plural emphasis mine] includes the idolatrous worship to Molech explicitly stated in verse 21 and the pagan practices incorporated into such worship, which practices included the murderous sacrifices of children (verse 21) as well as sexual relations between male idol worshippers and male temple cult prostitutes (verse 22) as well as between both male and female idol worshippers and animals (verse 23).

    So, in reading Leviticus 18:21-24, we have gone back to an earlier time
    (relative to 1 Kings 14:24), and the Lord is saying “these idolatrous people are doing abominable things (i.e., involving themselves in idolatrous practices); and, for the things that they are doing, I am going to cast them out before you as you enter and take their land.” Thus, the literary and historical contexts provide this most important biblical link to help us understand God’s seeming hard-line stance against same-sex activities in Leviticus. What’s the context for the male-male sex that’s mentioned in verse 22? An idolatrous one! Verse 21 is an introductory sentence (though those verses do not form what we think of as a paragraph in modern-day terms).

    Although the Bible was not written in paragraph form, verse 21 is an
    introduction to this whole subsection, and it mentions the fertility god Molech.

    How was Molech worshipped? Molech was worshipped in all sorts of
    unseemly ways: For example, sometimes worshippers went so far as to actually sacrifice their children to Molech by “passing them through the fire” (i.e., burning them to death). This is the context in which verses 22 through 24 have been written in Leviticus, Chapter 18. To be sure, bestiality and male cult prostitution were common within houses of worship dedicated to Molech as well as in the houses of worship dedicated to other pagan fertility gods and goddesses as well.

  8. Mr Venn-Brown, the difference between what you wrote and David Root wrote is this:

    He cited a comprehensive volume of scripture which though written by different authors at different time yet bear witness to each other. This shows the hand of God in HIS work to authenticate his word.

    You have (again) argued a faulty silence position. You believe that when there exists no specific “thou shalt not be in a consensual homosexual sexual relationship” statement it must mean God approves. You isolated these passages to prove that consensual sex is sanctioned in scripture. There exists no implied or explicit approval of any sexual activity simply because it is consensual and deemed “loving” by those who participate in it. That includes homosexuality.

    In short, all homosexual activity no matter what the context, is condemned by the scriptures clearly.

    If I were you I would agree with God and not my sin. In the end, though it seems right to you, the end thereof is death.

  9. My morality is a choice, my sexual orientation however isn’t.

    As I don’t have casual or consensual sex then as a gay man the doors of heaven must be open to me and I’m saved by my faith in Christ as you are.

  10. This is a strange statement coming from a self declared Christian.

    1. How is it that God has given you a special exemption to be “moral” on your own terms, when the rest of us have to live by God’s stipulations of morality?
    Who told you your sexual orientation wasnt a choice? The APA? God? Again, it seems youve crafted quite an exemption for yourself.

    2. If you are not having “casual or consensual sex” why would you vigorously defend someone else doing it since outside of the male-female marriage covenant it is clearly sin? That’s like saying “I dont steal, but its okay for others.”

    3. Nothing in heaven will swing open simply because you are a gay man. You should read the scriptures so that you dont miss out thinking that your gayness will grant you special entrance priveleges.

  11. Sigh…..

    It is so sad that all the scripture comparisons and research and clarification and special insights cannot change one fact. Jesus said: Marriage is between a man and a woman. It was this way from the begining. He said it was the father’s design. He never affirmed any other sexual realtionship for humanity. He called sexual uncleaness (pornea, greek) as sinful and reasons to break the bond of marriage. (Matt. 19) Those who would argue against these biblical facts often say Jesus said nothing about homosexuality. He did. He affirmed heterosexuality as the norm and the accepted form of human sexuality for followers of Christ.

    May people have to give up some hard tings for the Kingdom of GOD. Some riches (and the source thereof) some houses, land, mother, father, wives, position in society and some others their lives. Some will have to give up their desired expression of sexuality, for the Kingdom’s sake. With GOD all things are possible.

    My hearts breaks for and understands the person who has tried to change their same sex desires without fail. Perhaps the issue is not truly desire that is gay or straight but instead an obedience issue. “Peter, loveth thou me more than these?” Then feed my sheep. It is NOT easy to be a real follower of Christ. Jesus never said it would be either.

  12. For those of you who say that gays aren’t living by God’s word, I would suggest reading this article:

    Why, if religion condemns homosexuality, would God create humans in this way?

    GCMW: Edited. Nigel, I suggest you quote from the article. After seeing it, I dont want to offend our readers.

  13. I totally do not understand your position on gay and celibate. If I choose not to act out on my sexual or emotional desires towards another man. If I strive to, with God’s help, have non-sexual healthy relationships with others, to control the thoughts that can lead to lust and the possibility of sinful actions. If I in all ways try to grow in intimacy with the Lord and glorify Him with my life, then where is the sin? All these things are not going to make me heterosexual, and at 50 I’m not likely to “go forth and multiply” and I KNOW that it is God’s will that I remain single (do you call that sin also?). So where is the homosexual conduct? Where is the rebellion against God? I do this because yes, I love Jesus more than these thing.

  14. What you described is not celibacy, but holiness. If you are living holy, why the need to identify with homosexuality aka “gay”? I do not believe that heterosexuality is the goal, but holiness.

    That being said lifelong celibacy is a choice one makes, it is not the call or command of God. You said that yourself. God commanded the man and the woman to be fruitful and multiply. To choose to do something different than that because you have convinced yourself that you cant do anything else, is not a major point of victory.

    Am I saying you have to go our and prove your heterosexuality through sex. Not at all. That’s fornication. The main problem is that man has created ways of not following God’s commands, but the commands still remains. God did not remove it nor rescind it. You say you know it is God’s will but how can God’s will be contradictory?

    I will say again celibacy within itself is not holiness nor is it freedom from sin. An atheist can be celibate, so can a muslim. Does that mean they have accepted Jesus Christ?

  15. Matthew 19 :11Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage[a]because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

    So is this contradictory to “go forth and multiply?

    GCMW: (1)Dave, are you a eunuch? If you are, could you give the definition of a eunuch?
    (2) The “this word” of that passage is a revelation of the husband and wife question asked by the disciples. Read the scripture from the chapter beginning. To attribute “this words” acceptance of homosexuality or so-called gay celibacy is a gross miscalculation of Jesus’s words and meaning.

    Or this:

    1 Corinthians 7

    6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment 7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. 8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.

    I totally agree that the goal is holiness. And certainly the Bible has examples of those who have had children much later in life than I am now. But until I hear otherwise I remain abstinent and celibate. I disagree with you when you say it’s not a major victory but there’s little point in arguing. I will continue to explore this site there is a lot to read and digest here!

    GCMW: Paul says this is not a commandment. The reason it could not be a commandment [from God] is because it would contradict God’s command to be fruitful and multiply. Thus, celibacy is a choice of the individual, not to be misconstrued as God’s will. Thank you for reading. I’m not discouraging you from being celibate, only trying to put it in biblical context.

Comments are closed.