About homosexuality

We all know the depravity of the society in which we live in. I want to focus for a while on the subject of homosexuality.

Many people claim that being homosexual is heavily determined by the genes. So, that provides them a “protection” against any criticism. They say that it’s a “nature thing”, etc, etc.

I am not a doctor and I cannot exclude the possibility that this may be true to an extent. Furthermore, I do not have anything against homosexuals. My belief, which is founded upon the Bible, is that what they do is wrong and condemned by God. I myself though, would never harm, offend, or generally treat a homosexual in a bad way. At least deliberately. On the other hand, I sympathize for them and the fact that they have strayed away so much from what God wants and from what nature itself dictates, even though they can’t understand it, feel proud about it or even present it as something completely normal.

Having said that, I found an extremely interesting fact written in Dr Francis Collins’ book The Language of God. On page 260 Dr Collins writes:

“An area of particularly strong public interest is the genetic basis of homosexuality. Evidence from twin studies does in fact support the conclusion that heritable factors play a role in male homosexuality. However, the likelihood that the identical twin of a homosexual male will also be gay is about 20 percent (compared with 2-4 percent of males in the general population), indicating that sexual orientation is genetically influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations”.

To my understanding, this fact greatly undermines the notion that homosexuality is a “nature thing”. I repeat that I am not a doctor and I cannot exclude the possibility that this may be true to an extent (nor does Dr Collins). In such a case where there really is a natural factor involved, I cannot but sympathize. But… is there any possibility that we use this as an excuse just to hide and cover our own depraved desires and twisted nature? Is there any possibility that we will frankly look into ourselves and speak the truth instead of making excuses for our choices? In my opinion, a homosexual that admits that this is his/her choice instead of trying to find lame excuses, is far more respectable.

I felt that I wanted to share these thoughts. Thank you for reading them. I close this post saying that I condemn the action but not the person.

Advertisements

Did they or did they not hear the voice? (Acts 9:7 vs 22:9)

This post came up after the respective question by a friend of mine.

The account at Acts 9:7 says that the men with Saul heard “a voice” (KJ) or “the sound of a voice.” (NW) Yet, as recorded at Acts 22:9, Paul (Saul) says that the men with him did not hear the voice. When what was said in the two verses is properly understood, there is no contradiction. The Greek word for “voice” (φωνή) at Acts 9:7 is in the genitive case (φωνῆς) and gives, in this verse, the sense of hearing of a voice—hearing the sound but not understanding. At Acts 22:9 φωνή is in the accusative case (φωνήν): the men “did not hear the voice”. They heard the sound of a voice but did not get the words, the meaning; they did not understand what Jesus was saying to Saul, as Saul did.

That is why the ESV Bible has the following comment on verse 9:7: “Saul’s companions heard the voice but saw no one. In his later testimony to the Jews, Paul spoke of them seeing the light but not understanding the voice (22:9). They had no vision of Jesus nor did they hear the message to Paul, but they could testify to a brilliant light and a sound, which pointed to an objective event that was not a matter of Saul’s imagination”, and renders 22:9 as: “Now those who were with me saw the light but did not understand (or hear with understanding) the voice of the one who was speaking to me”.

This knowledge of the Bible’s use of the idea of ‘hearing’ in both senses helps to clear up what would otherwise seem to be discrepancies.