I am not in favor of the homosexual lifestyle. I am not in favor of prostitution nor porn nor bestiality.
I am in favor of heterosexual relations in marriage alone.
But when it comes to homosexuals acting out their sexual desires in private,
I do not believe that the police should push open their doors and catch them
in the act, then haul them off to court and jail.
I don’t believe that police should push down heterosexual persons’ doors,
catching them in the act, and doing anything about what they are doing.
Some heterosexuals engage in various sexual acts which may be repulsive to
other heterosexuals. Couples decide on their own definitions of sexual pleasures
as God has ordained them to enjoy within marriage. Unless persons are harmed
in any way, couples should decide their own definitions.
Therefore, when it came to the two men in Texas being caught having sexual
relations, hauled off to court and then jailed and fined, I do not believe
that that was the prerogative of the police department nor the judicial courts.
Those two men were acting out acts that are prohibited by the Bible, the
same as prostitutes act out acts that are prohibited by the Bible. Persons
who engage in any sex acts outside marriage are engaging in sex acts that
are prohibited by the Bible.
However, I have found that persons continue to act out a lot of things in
their lives that are prohibited by the Bible until they come to understand
God and His Word.
When they come to accept God and His Word, then their lives change according
to God and His Word. When that occurs, then the life change equals the act
change; before that, persons live according to their own moral definitions,
some of which are against God’s Word.
Consequently, to put the cart before the horse regarding sexuality morality is to deal with the matter of sex acts incorrectly.
For instance, Jesus met a woman at Jacob’s well. The two fell into conversation.
Jesus knew that the woman had had various sex partners and was presently
living with a man not her husband.
But Jesus did not attack her sexual lifestyle. Instead, Jesus offered her
salvation. When the woman accepted Jesus’ forgiveness in salvation, then
her lifestyle changed.
For a Christian in a non-Christian culture to try to bend all culture in
the direction of the Christian lifestyle is perhaps to straighten out certain
cultural pockets but at the same time lose the chance of saving the souls.
The souls are eternal. That is what is most important, to salvage the eternal
component known as the "soul." When that soul is met with in divine grace,
then the whole life attitude changes toward the biblical way.
Christians therefore are at their gospel best when they go after the soul
for salvation. That puts the horse then in front of the cart. The ethical
matters that follow then coincide with the God who provided the saving grace.
Some Christians may say regarding this approach to sexuality that we are
thereby giving the wrong moral message. We are condoning homosexuality or
Not at all. If the Christian community really gets out its message, it will
start with saving grace and then move on to Christian ethics, including sexual
But sadly enough, much of the so-called Christian religion is theologically
liberal and does not get out the saving grace message at all for it really
does not believe in it. It is hung up on politically liberal social issues
and liberal theological agendas against biblical data.
When it comes to the biblical portion of the Christian religion, much of
it is lazy or preoccupied with materialism such as enlarging church properties,
raising moneys for personages to enjoy a larger materialistic lifestyle in
leadership, or simply playing religion instead of genuinely evangelizing
concerning saving grace.
Therefore, the church by and large is wanting in this area of gospel message.
And in that it hardly has the right to tell the culture how to act — what
not to do and what to do.
Once the church gets out the saving grace message, then it can follow up with its moral message according to God’s Word.
The church, while getting out the saving grace gospel, must also take its
moral stand publicly regarding sexuality — including sodomy and so forth
— but not to barge into persons’ private homes concerning these situations.
The church needs to get out the gospel message while at the same get out
the option to choose the right moral lifestyle. Once the church does that,
the church then can leave individuals to choose their own fates; that’s what
In regard to the two Texans who were accused of sodomy, it would have been
helpful if the saving grace gospel message had reached them.
Once it did, they could reject or receive it. If they rejected it, then they
are answerable to God for their continuing homosexual lifestyle. If they
accepted it, then they would reorder their ethics according to God’s Word.
Grant Swank, Jr., is the Pastor of New Hope Church in
Windham, ME. He is a a graduate of an accredited
college (BA) and seminary (M Div) with graduate work at
Harvard Divinity School. Pastor Swank has been married
for 41 years and he has 3 adult children. He is
the author of 5 books and over 2000 articles in various
Protestant and Catholic magazines, journals and newspapers.
He writes a weekly religion column for PORTLAND PRESS HERALD
newspaper, Portland ME. His columns have appeared on IntellectualConservative.com,
VIOdaily.com, AmericanDaily.com, MensNewsDaily.com, BushCountry.org, Chalcedon.com,
ConservativeTruth.com, FreeRepublic.com, WoundedShepherds.com, among others.
this Article to a Friend