One of the responses to our ongoing string of articles on the LCMS music director who is a gay and lesbian activist was a scientific defense of homosexuality. Both Pastor Eric Stefanski and I responded to this assertion that homosexuality is defensible with genetics. My response is pithy and rhetorical. Pastor Stefanski’s response is longer and carefully and subtely reasoned from the teachings of scripture.
Here is the scientific defense given by commenter Ed.
Scientists can now use brain-imaging technology to identify the specific brain and chemical systems that drive the complete process & sequence when determining gender whilst in the womb – this is known as the neurobiology of gender. The hypothalamus is involved. Is this not then God’s hand in creationism when he proclaims in Psalm 139:1ff that he knew us before we were born and whilst in the womb he breathed his breath into each of us and created our inner-most being knitting us together in our mother’s womb? In summary your created gay, straight or a derivative thereof.
Christians believe that humans were created in God’s image and that God expressed pleasure at His creation. Why then would God specifically create a minority group who are biological predisposed to a supposedly grievous sin that’s grounded in love? Further, why would an omnipotent but loving God select some and not others into this depraved minority? If homosexuality is unnatural, why do non-human mammals exhibit a similar incidence of it? Same-sex lovin’ is common in hundreds of species, scientists say. Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York’s Central Park Zoo, were a couple for about six years, during which they nurtured a fertilized egg together (given to them by a zookeeper) and raised the young chick that hatched. According to University of Oslo zoologist Petter BÃ¶ckman, about 1,500 animal species are known to practice same-sex coupling, including bears, gorillas, flamingos, owls, salmon and many others. Is this not God’s creation and handy work?
Why does a church (Lutheran or otherwise) that’s so adamant about homosexuality seemingly ignore other biologically oriented Biblical directives and prohibitions? The list of such challenges goes on.
If any theologian can provide a response that is not biologically ignorant and self-serving theologically prejudice, then I am listening.
Here is my pithy rhetorical response:
Human reason does not accept the six day creation taught by God in his word. Human reason does not accept the ressurection of the dead taught in scripture. Human reason does not accept that the blood of Jesus of Nazareth was shed to pay for your sins and mine. Do you trust man’s reason over the word of God?
Here is Pastor Stefanski’s reasoned approach based on the truth of scripture:
Not being a biologist, I will leave it to those who are to point out the inconclusiveness of the research.
Instead, I will point to the fact that what one finds in the process today is not what God designed it to be. For your point to be valid, we would have to conclude that God *intends* various physical disabilities that occur during gestation, etc. Since God commands against homosexuality, it is evident that the original mechanism did not allow for deviations to occur.
In short, while you wish to cast aspersions at others for theological prejudice, your reasoning trifles with Original Sin and its effects.
A second consideration: if one is physically pre-attached to a certain sin, that is no excuse for practicing it. If there is, indeed, a predisposition to alcoholism, it is nonetheless incumbent upon one so disposed to avoid it.
The Brothers of John the Steadfast will face these types of arguments from science regularly. I hope these two scriptural and confessional responses will help you be better prepared for this sort of genetic defense of sin.