When religion loses its credibility A response This post is a response to an article that appeared on YahooNews by Oliver "Buzz" Thomas called "When Religion Loses Its Credibility". The article can be found here. Be warned the article is insulting and filled with misinformation and blasphemy. The author starts the article by asking, "What if Christian leaders are wrong about homosexuality? I suppose, much as a newspaper maintains its credibility by setting the record straight, church leaders would need to do the same" and answers it by saying "Despite what you might have read, heard or been taught throughout your churchgoing life, homosexuality is, in fact, determined at birth and is not to be condemned by God's followers". That statement is shocking for several reasons. First science does not determine what God does, and does not, condemn. Morality is not determined by biology (otherwise fornication and adultery would not be wrong) and therefore any so-called biological cause of homosexuality does lead us to the conclusion that homosexuality is moral. Second, as far as I know, there is no conclusive evidence that homosexuality is determined at birth. One of my professors is a activist lesbian. Even she admitted that this issue is unsettled. The fact is scientists do not know "why" some people seem to lean towards homosexuality. Is it biological, psychological, sociological, or some combination of any of those? At this time science cannot answer that question. However theology can, Biblical studies can. Homosexuality is not part of God's original creation (Gen 2:18-25) and God does not approve of it today (Rom 1:26-27). Any so-called biological "cause" is a result of the fall (Rom 5:6-10, 6:16, 8:5,7-8, Rev 21:8, 21:27, etc). As I stated above, morality is not determined by biology. God holds humans morally accountable. Simply because we are tempted to do something, whatever that something maybe, does not mean it is "of God" (Jms 1:14-16) nor does it mean God will excuse that person and not hold him/her morally accountable (1Cor 10:13, Rom 8:5-8, Eph 2:1-5). God expects humans to rise above biology. The author continues: "It's happened to Christianity before, most famously when we dug in our heels over Galileo's challenge to the biblical view that the Earth, rather than the sun, was at the center of our solar system. You know the story. Galileo was persecuted for what turned out to be incontrovertibly true. For many, especially in the scientific community, Christianity never recovered." ==This is a very poor analogy but probably the best the author could do. The Bible never states, as scientific fact, that the earth is flat or that the sun moves around the earth (let's take into genre). That was man's theory. On the issue of homosexuality the Bible is very clear. It is an abomination... Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 states that homosexual acts are an abomination that, under Israel's law, resulted in capital punishment. Romans 1:26-27 states that homosexual behavior, and lust, is degrading, unnatural, indecent, and that it leads to physical illness (a fact supported by medical science). Later, in verse 32, it stated that these type sins lead to death. 1Corinthians 6:9-10 says that the practice of homosexuality, and other sins, proves that a person is not saved. Revelation 21:8 says that immoral people, and those who are guilty of abominations, will end up burning in the lake of fire. The Bible is very clear in its condemnation of homosexuality. The analogy between this, the civil rights movement for blacks and women, and the theories of early science and Christian teaching, is poor. The Bible never states that blacks should not be given equal rights and it never states that the earth if flat (etc). However it does clearly state that homosexuality is sinful. The author continues… “Christianity is in danger of squandering its moral authority by continuing its pattern of discrimination against gays and lesbians in the face of mounting scientific evidence that sexual orientation has little or nothing to do with choice. To the contrary, whether sexual orientation arises as a result of the mother's hormones or the child's brain structure or DNA, it is almost certainly an accident of birth. The point is this: Without choice, there can be no moral culpability.” ==There are several problems with this statement. First discrimination is not always a bad thing. We discriminate against people, based on behavior every day of our lives (and that is a good thing). We don’t let our children play with children who are bad influences, we don’t hang around drug dealers and drunks, and many of us don’t like to be around gossips. Secondly the idea that “without choice, there can be no moral culpability” is wrong. As I stated above, biology does not determine morality. If that were the case then fornication and adultery, lying, gossiping, and stealing would all be morally ok. Why? Because each of those sinful behaviors is based in biology (sex drive, survival, etc). However God expects humans to rise above biology and do what is right (and the only way to do this is via the new birth). Notice what Scripture says about lost people… “Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath” –Eph 2:3 Biological behavior, animal instinct, is sinful. This is because of the fact that our natures, our minds, our behaviors have all been infected by sin. Humans always have a choice, not matter how heavy the temptation. A person has to choose to engage in homosexual behavior. While they may not choose the temptation they do choose to give into the temptation. Therefore there is “choice” and there certainly is “moral culpability” End Part I.