NOTICE: Store prices and specials on the Banner of Truth UK site are not available for orders shipped to North America. Please use the Banner of Truth USA site .

Section navigation

Same Sex Marriages Legalised in Canada

Category Articles
Date October 19, 2003


Pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church in Pickering, Ontario, Canada

I am certain that every evangelical Christian was stunned to wake up in Ontarioand learn that the Supreme Court of Ontario ruled in favour of same sexmarriages – immediately. This was a seismic tremor of ten on the Richter scalethat has shaken our nation to the core of its existence, and brought everyvalue we ever held in trust into question. The ruling spells the death knell fora Christian society founded on the rule of God through Biblical values, and thetriumph of a secular society ruled by an elite cadre of humanist and atheisticjudges whose sole delight is to tear down years of proven safeguards thatbuttress individuals and family from the elite and powerful.

The decision is so shocking because it tears away any hope we may have had instemming the tide of the secular juggernaught. We who believe that,’Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people’ (Prov. 15:34),find ourselves on the defensive if not in full retreat. The Church has notonly failed to stem the tide, but our democracy lies in the dust, bleeding red.Upon hearing that the Supreme Court ordered our parliament (the elected voiceof Canadians) to bring the laws governing marriage into line with the ruling,our supine Prime Minister immediately stated that the government of the daywould fit a bill in accordance with the dictatorial demands of the Court – ademand that makes Canada’s ruling unique in the world as even Holland andBelgium have restrictions concerning same sex marriages.

As a result, three people and two percent of the population hold the majorityof Canadians ransom, so that, even to speak out or oppose this legislationcould bring one into Court and under judicial prosecution – or is itpersecution? A Supreme Court Justice, Justice McLaughlin, rushed to defend thelower court’s ruling by stating, ‘the majority must not be allowed to suppressthe minority.’ An interesting statement in and of itself when one thinks thatthe majority does suppress the minority all the time. We suppress thieves, asan example, for the well being of society as a whole. Further, what happenswhen a minority suppresses the majority? In fact, human history is full of suchexamples of minority oppression as is the case of Saddam Hussein and numerouscommunist regimes.

The real question is, ‘What will happen when a few unelected people become thearbitrators of what values Canadian will uphold and what values they willsuppress?’ The real problem is, ‘that Law, having cut the umbilical cord withthe transcendent, has no basis for its decisions except brute force and thedictatorial power of judicial activism.’ Carl F. Henry writes in, ‘Twilightof a Great Civilization’, these words of warning: ‘Our generation is lostto the truth of God, to the reality of divine revelation, to the concept ofGod’s will, to the power of his redemption, and to the authority of his Word.For this loss it is paying dearly in a swift relapse to paganism. The savagesare stirring again, you can hear them rumbling and rustling in the tempo of thetimes.’ (p.15)


What is the struggle all about? Is it really a tempest in a teapot and, as weare told, ‘when we realize the sky is not falling, life will go on as normal?’I am reminded of Malcolm Muggeridge’s two volume work of his life entitled GreenTree (when he was young) and Dry Tree (when he was old). As anewspaper man, he had seen numerous changes in his life, and he poked some funat the small ‘1’ liberals of his day. He likened these social reformers topeople on a train with a destination in mind. Once they reached theirdestination, they wanted the train to stop, but it never did, and no matter howmuch they shouted, the train kept rolling along. The homosexual train will alsokeep rolling along because it is a deviancy, and, as a deviancy, it corruptsand corrupts absolutely. Today homosexual marriages, then adoption, followed byeducation of the young contrary to parents’ protestations, officials elected onthe basis of their approval of homosexual agenda, affirmative action forhomosexuals in teaching positions, the firing of those who refuse to supportthis deviancy and jail for those who oppose or protest. As Paul writes inRomans 1:32, ‘Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do suchthings deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but alsoapprove of those who practice them.’

As one who belongs to the majority I want to make it clear that I do not havethe right to bully, harass or oppress in any way those who have chosen ahomosexual lifestyle. My Lord and Saviour has taught me to love all men eventhose who hate me and spitefully use me. Homosexuals are to be treated withrespect and courtesy and, as God’s fallen image bearers (as we all are), to betreated as human beings. Further, the criminal code of Canada gives tohomosexuals the same protection as any other citizen of Canada. In that sense,they are equal to those whose sexuality conforms to God’s Word. The point isthat while homosexuals are entitled to the same legal protection as anyother citizen so long as they keep their proclivities to themselves, theyshould never have the same privileges. The war that is now being wagedin the bosom of our nation is not about basic human rights and legalprotection, but a homosexual lobby that insists upon full acceptance and theblessing of all citizens upon their deviant lifestyle. Further, they areclearly determined to have it even if it means that those who oppose thislifestyle and view it as detrimental to the well being of individuals andsociety, must be punished and even incarcerated.

Clearly, we cannot accept the Supreme Court ruling, and we will not bow the kneeto Caesar in this regard. How can we, and still be loyal to Christ our King? Weare told by those who promote the gay agenda that Christ never condemnedhomosexual behaviour. But this is specious reasoning and deliberate twisting ofthe facts concerning Christ’s teaching on the subject of human sexuality. Thewhole Bible is Christ’s mind and will for His church, and not just the lettersin red. Christ never condemned incest, or bestiality, or polygamy in so manywords, but his teaching on marriage and his appeal to Genesis 2 as the templatefor what God intended marriage to be, makes it clear that Jesus saw marriage asa heterosexual union, one man and one woman, for life. Any sexual activityapart from this heterosexual pattern, whether before or outside of the marriagebed, is defiled and condemned by our Lord (Heb.13:4). David Feddes, thedesignated preacher on ‘The Back to God Hour’ gives the direction thechurch must take in these difficult issues. ‘The church’ he teaches, ‘must havethe courage and clarity to say no on at least three levels: no to homosexualacts, no to homosexual marriage and rituals that bless same-sex unions, and noto church leadership for people who practice or promote homosexual conduct'(June, 2003).


The amazing thing about the court’s decision is you do not even have to be aresident of Ontario to receive a marriage license issued at Toronto City Hall.So we have become the Las Vegas of the North and homosexuals are flocking toToronto to get the Court’s approval of their sinful lifestyle. As of thiswriting, over one hundred and fifty marriage licenses have been issued and manymore are likely by the time ‘Gay Pride’ week hits the streets of Sodom andGomorrah. Homosexuals have come in such numbers because, as they put it, ‘ifscores of us get married, how do they put the horse back in the barn?’ Canadahas become a painted hussy offering her wares to any passer by. The words ofthe prophet Ezekiel 16:32-34 have become applicable to our nation

‘You adulterous wife! You prefer strangers to your own husband. Everyprostitute receives a fee, but you give gifts to all your lovers, bribing themto come to you from everywhere for your illicit favours. So in yourprostitution you are opposite of others; for you give payment and none is givento you.’ And in the words of the prophet Hosea, ‘A spirit of prostitution is intheir heart; they do not acknowledge the Lord’ (Hos.5:4).

Who indeed can close the barn door? The tragedy is the barn holds more thanone denizen of the deep. If marriage has no more meaning than a wax nose, to betwisted to one’s liking, who can protest bestial marriages, incestuousmarriages, polygamous or polyandrous marriages, and even men loving boysmarriages? One may accuse me of scare mongering, but the decisions of ourcourts make it clear that what was once unthinkable has first become thinkableand now is ‘do-able.’ Once the train gets rolling, who can stop it? Who, butGod, can prevent our nation’s Gaderene slide into the abyss? Recently, SARS(Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) invaded our shores and claimed manyvictims. In order to protect ‘normal’ society, we forced those so infected tobe quarantined. Was this fair? Yes, in the interests of the nation as a whole,even though some would suffer confinement for the safety of the majority. Inlike manner, as William Gairdner points out in his book The War Against theFamily, the question is not what is fair and unfair, but what of all theunfair systems is best since no society can be fair to all. He concludes, ‘itis better to be unfair to homosexuals in the name of its own social health,than to be unfair to the entire society in the name of fairness to homosexuals[or any other pressure group]’ (p.364).

Several years ago, under duress of the homosexual lobby, the AmericanPsychiatric Association (1973) voted to remove homosexuality from the list ofmental diseases (of course, it never was a mental disease; it is a heartdisease as is all sin). Recently, the same Society narrowly voted to keeppedophilia (adults having sex with minors) on the list of mental diseases. Thetrain keeps rolling on, travelling, passing station after station. Whilehomosexuals constantly portray themselves as victims of intolerance and socalled ‘gay bashing,’ they have no trouble trashing marriage as aninstitution, and heterosexuals marriages as a form of bondage and slavery. Inhomosexual newspapers, comments like this are a dime a dozen: ‘The heterosexualfamily unit – spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy andviolence – shall be abolished’ (Gairdner p.361). Their aim goes beyond trashingmarriage, for they openly admit they want all laws governing the age of sexualconsent abolished, thus enabling adults to have sex with consenting children ofany age or either sex. Of course, as we know, children are vulnerable and canoften be talked into things that they are not yet experienced enough to refuse.

The answer to marriage bashing by gays is an easy one. No one would deny thatmarriage has taken a beating, and that government and society as a whole nolonger see it as an ideal for the nation. Clearly, many marriages have beencrushing in their brutality and wickedness. But we live in a fallen, sinfulworld in which sin invades family units as it does all other aspects ofsociety. The point still remains that while the traditional understanding ofmarriage has its pitfalls (and we must continue to strive for improvement inthis regard), traditional marriages are, by far, above anything else the worldhas to offer. Every other permutation and combination has proved a colossalfailure, and the beginning of the end of any nation that harbours deviancy on awide scale. In a fallen world, heterosexual marriage is the institution thatmost protects women, children, and the individual from the rapacious outsiderand designs of the omni-present State.

Disturbingly, in heterosexual unions the sexual abuse of children does go on,but such abuse percentage wise is much less than amongst other forms of unionswhether communal or same sex unions. The homosexual lobby loves to point tostatistics claiming that heterosexual offenses against their own offspring iswidespread, but the truth is, while only one or two percent of the population,homosexuals offend more often and in greater percentages. As Gairdner reveals,’Although homosexuals represent only between 1 and 4 percent of the entirepopulation (up to 2 percent exclusively homosexual; and 2 percent casualbisexuals), studies based on ample U.S. data tell us that they perpetratebetween one-third and one-half of all child molestations (Los Angeles Timessurvey, August 26, 1985), and that homosexual teachers commit between 25 and 80per cent of all pupil molestations’ (388). In other words, a deviancy is notself-contained but seeps into society like a cancer corrupting the innocent andabusing the helpless.


But what about tolerance? Is not accepting others on their terms a good thing?Should we not be tolerant of those who have a different lifestyle than our own?Think back in time when people were intolerant towards blacks, or other races,or even women. They acted towards them in ways that were detrimental anddehumanizing. One only has to go back a few years to Nazi Germany and see theresults of people acting in an intolerant fashion and the horrors associatedwith it. Why should we not tolerate homosexual behaviour and simply regard itas a lifestyle that is different from the majority of citizens amongst whomthey live? Certainly, the homosexual lobby has used the ‘tolerance card’skillfully, for, as we know, the only sin left in the Western world isintolerance.

But since when has tolerance become a supreme virtue? For example, my body willnot tolerate poison and seeks to expel it. The body politic cannot toleratecertain types of behaviour and survive. The truth is, tolerance has beenreduced to acceptance, and anyone who is unaccepting is accused of beingintolerant. But such ‘doublespeak’ is deceiving and mischievous. Here is why:tolerance is necessary in a pluralistic society: we agree on that. I want myJewish neighbour to tolerate me just as I should tolerate him. That way we canlive side by side in peace and harmony. But tolerance does not demand that Iaccept his view of God and the world as the correct one. Nor does it mean thatI should not try and convert him to my Lord and my Christ. In fact, in a trulytolerant society, the heart of freedom is the exchange of ideas and the rightto convert others to one’s cause or one’s religion. Many people ‘froth at themouth’ when they hear about attempts to convert others from one faith toanother. They fail to recognize, that in a secular society humanistic valuesare foisted on the unsuspecting every day, and attempts to convert the populaceto these values are constant and pervasive. Yes, we need to be tolerant ofothers, and as believers in our Lord Jesus we have been in the forefront ofmaintaining freedom of conscience where we disagree and disagree strongly.

Nevertheless we must be clear on what we mean by tolerance, and how much anysociety can tolerate before it collapses under the weight of iniquity. What isthe difference between tolerating those of a different skin colour thanourselves and a homosexual lifestyle? As Christians do we simply tolerate thosewho belong to different human families or certain genetic differences? Not atall! We are not only to tolerate them, but we are to accept and embrace them.Why? Because they belong to the same human race as ourselves, and have the samefather and mother as ourselves, namely, Adam and Eve. When it comes to raceissues or gender issues, tolerance is the wrong word, and only total acceptancewill do.

But when it comes to homosexual behaviour, tolerance is the right word if weuse the word to mean what our English forefathers meant it to mean, and thatis, I will grant you the right to live in peace and without persecution, butthat does not mean I will accept or embrace your lifestyle as anything but adeviancy from that which is the norm. That means I will treat the homosexual asI would any other person made in the image of God, but who, like myself is afallen son of Adam. I will embrace such a one in the love of Jesus, but I willnot embrace his life style or deceive the homosexual into thinking that hislifestyle is anything but rebellion against the most High God. Further, byGod’s grace, I will seek to convert him to the life changing experience ofsalvation that can alone be found in Christ Jesus our Lord. Nevertheless,society as a whole has a deeper concern in this matter. Society, in theinterest of the health of the nation, must seek to contain behaviour that isclearly detrimental to the health (spiritual, moral and physical) of the body politic.

Further, as we are forced to accept the unacceptable, we see growingintolerance to those who resist and, for Biblical reasons, oppose homosexualpractices. We will soon discover that our Bibles are to be taken from us andthe words of Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:9-1 0: ‘Do you not know that the wickedwill not inherit the kingdom of God. Do not be deceived: Neither the sexuallyimmoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexualoffenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanders nor swindlerswill inherit the kingdom of God,’ will no longer be allowed to be read inpublic. Those who cry the most for tolerance of their position are usuallythose most intolerant of those who disagree with them.

Even now our Parliament is promoting a Bill by the well known homosexual MPSvend Robinson, called Bill C-250, which would make it a hate crime to speakagainst homosexual immorality publicly. We are assured by the drafters of thisBill that it will not interfere with our right to publish and read Scripturepassages that clearly condemn homosexual passages. But the assurances come ascold comfort given the recent judicial statutes which have time and againstruck down the rights of practicing Christians in favour of the rights of thoseon the fringes of society. The question is will we ever hear from the pulpitagain such verses as Revelation 22:14,15: ‘Blessed are those who wash theirrobes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through thegates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practise magic arts, thesexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who lives andpractises a lie’? Tolerance in a secular society has come to mean we willtolerate every deviancy and corruption, but will force anyone who opposes onBiblical ground to remain silent or be prosecuted by Big Brother and BigBrother’s judicial hammer, the Supreme Court of Canada.


The Homosexual Agenda – is there one? Most people are unaware how thoroughly compromisedour judiciary and our parliament is by the homosexual lobby and homosexuals inkey positions of government and authority. It is not simple equality that theywant but control of the state apparatus to promote their own far reachinggoals. Some homosexuals, who wish to remain anonymous, would protest thisportrayal of their aims, but the train will not stop at their station either.The homosexual agenda seeks to undermine heterosexual commitment which includesthe protection of children within the family unit. It teaches thatheterosexuals are the real queers, and that male headship is a brutal form ofdomination and violence towards those whom they are pledged to protect andlove. Dr. Henry McCaw writes that public schools virtually break the ice forgays. Twelve year olds are introduced to oral and anal sex. Phyliss Bennett,president of the Ontario Elementary Teacher’s Association, said, ‘The Union istrying to promote a more positive homosexual environment in schools.’ InBritish Columbia a school board has twice turned down homosexual material forkindergartners despite a court ruling to the contrary.

Gairdner shares this from the so-called ‘Project 10 ‘course (meaning tenpercent gay) used is some California High Schools: ‘A video of homosexuals inexplicit copulation is shown to thirteen year olds. It is shown again and againuntil the class is desensitized and thoroughly brain washed’ (384). CharlesColson in his book The Burden of Proof relates the following story. Thechapter is entitled ‘Innocence Lost’ and tells of how a group of lesbians stoodinside the doorway of an elementary school on Valentine’s Day and handed outheart shaped candy with pamphlets stating ‘Lesbians everywhere!. . . Girls wholove girls and women who love women are OK! Happy Valentines.’ Many parentswere outraged. One little girl said to her mother, ‘Nora is my best friend, andI love her. Does that make me bad?’ The mother had to explain the differencebetween homosexuality and heterosexuality to a child too young to be burdenedwith such details.

As one mother put it: ‘It is not fair to rob our children of their innocence.’In 1986, the International Lesbian and Gay Association adopted a positionsupporting what is called ‘the right of young people to sexual and social-determinationregardless of age.’ ‘Today,’ Colson adds, ‘we hear much about children’srights. But what does it mean? It really means ‘Lets get young people out fromunder the protection of their parents so they can be approached by gay andother adults.’

The Lesbian avengers on that Valentine’s Day made it very clear as to theirintent – they wore a T-shirt emblazoned with this slogan: ‘We recruit.’ InCanada, a refusal to print that T-shirt would bring you to the Human RightsCommission and include heavy fines if not jail.


Perhaps, the saddest part of all of this is so many churches have swallowed thelie and are now amongst the greatest boosters of so called ‘gay rights.’Denominations opposed (whether Lutheran, Baptist or Catholic) have gay rightsboosters in their camps. The Presbyterians are saddled with a group called ‘MoreLight’ (not necessarily all homosexuals) who wrote: ‘We believe the timehas come to stand for those denied full participation in our churches: lesbian,gay, bisexual and transsexual Presbyterians whom God has called to theministry. We have no choice. We do this because it is right.’ The irony of itall is by what standard? To do this because it is ‘right’ means that somewherethere is an absolute right. And the only absolute right is the Word of Godwhich denies their basic premise that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle.Of course, if there is no God, then there is no absolute right, and they are nomore right in promoting homosexual ministry than I am wrong in opposing it! Letus be clear about this: we are not opposed to sexual perversion because it is ahealth problem – and it is: nor because it threatens the well being of marriageand our children – and it does; but because it is contrary to God’s will asclearly stated in Leviticus 18:22: ‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with awoman; that is detestable.’ In June of 2002, the Synod of the Diocese of NewWestminster authorized its Bishop to produce a service for the blessing ofsame-sex unions. They wanted a ritual to use in each congregation enabling thehomosexual couple to seal their relationship with the church’s authority andblessing. The majority of delegates favoured the move but some walked out. Onewho walked out was the esteemed Dr. J. I. Packer who stated the followingreason for his protest: ‘Because this decision falsifies the gospel of Christ,abandons the authority of Scriptures, jeopardizes the salvation of fellow humanbeings, and betrays the church in its God-appointed role as the bastion andbulwark of divine truth.’ It was then interesting to see that those who walkedout claimed to still be in fellowship with the wider communion of Anglicanchurches, only to learn that Dr. Rowan Williams the new Archbishop ofCanterbury saw no reason why homosexuals had to remain celibate, and thenordained a priest who had a homosexual partner. In turn, the African arm of theAnglican church made strong protest against the Archbishop’s action revealingthat darkened Africa has become enlightened while enlightened England hasbecome darkened.


What if God makes homosexuals that way? How can they help it if they were bornwith a nature that desires the same sex? The truth is God did not makehomosexuals that way. All sexual perversion, homosexual or otherwise, is aresult of Adam’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden. Only, Jesus Christ, ourLord and Saviour was sexually pure for ‘All have sinned and fall short of theglory of God’ (Rom. 3:23). To blame God for one’s homosexual proclivities is toblame God for every other sin man commits. The adulterer has just as much rightto say God made me that way as does the murderer or thief. We are allpredisposed to sin and certain experiences may give us a predilection in onedirection or another, but we were not created by God to live contrary to hisrevealed will in these matters, nor is anyone genetically predetermined as theUniversity of Toronto Professor of Psychiatry Joseph Berger writes: ‘I havenever come across anyone with innate homosexuality" (Gairdner 366).

Further, to insist that homosexuals are born that way traps them into alifestyle that many desperately want to be delivered from. The myth of thehappy gay is just that – a myth. Gairdner encourages us to use the word’homosexual’ and not ‘gay’ when speaking of these things. He points out thathomosexuals are anything but gay: ‘Twenty-five percent of homosexualsthemselves say they have an emotional disorder, one-quarter to one-third arealcoholic, very high percentages are in fact physically sick much of the timefrom sexually transmitted diseases, and when asked sincerely by a young personabout pursuing the gay lifestyle, they counsel against it, four to one'(p.377). Not only so, but same sex marriages, once the celebration dies down,are bound to fail and they will fail because homosexuality is flawed in a wayheterosexuality is not. Promiscuity amongst practising homosexuals is notoriousif not part of the outcome of such deviancy. Gairdner points out, ‘That theaverage [homosexual] had 300 to 500 partners in a lifetime. ‘Cruising’ for sexwith total strangers was the preferred pastime’ (p.391). The mass media givesthe impression that all homosexuals want is a lifestyle like heterosexuals,marriage to one partner and a family. But nothing could be further from thetruth, and time will show that the vast majority of homosexuals want nothing todo with marriage vows that commit them to one partner for life.

A former lesbian converted by the grace of God, Anne Paulk, said of herexperience, ‘As a lesbian I found hurt people just [looking for] love. As aChristian I found loving people just wanting to heal my hurt’ (Colson 260).Packer is right when he insists that churches who accept the gay agendajeopardize the salvation of fellow human beings.’ The gospel promisesdeliverance as well as strength to overcome our sinful lifestyles. All of usare trapped in the web of sin and deceit that we are born into. Only in God’sgrace can we find true liberation to live lives fully blessed in him. Workamongst homosexuals has proven that the above statement is true: ‘According toBill Consigho, director of Hope Ministries, 40 percent of homosexuals who seekchange ‘move into full heterosexuality, with many entering marriage andparenthood.’ An additional 40 percent are able to commit themselves to livingas celibate Christian singles’ (Colson, p.260). We owe as a debt and obligationto our homosexual neighbour to introduce him to the Christ who delivered usfrom our sins and sexual impurities, and can do the same for him.

Surely, it is a simple matter of justice? That is how Bishop Tutu sees it,’Now,’ he tells us, ‘that slaves, woman and blacks have been liberated, gayliberation is long overdue. What civil rights activists were in the 1950’s and60’s, gay rights activists are today. We should support them in their cause andjoin them in their struggle (Feddes, June-2003)’ In saying these things, BishopTutu really demeans the struggle for true freedom and liberation in regard torace and gender. As one black civil rights leader put it, ‘The freedom bus thatwent to Selma, was never intended to go to Sodom.’ The Bishop, nevertheless,presses all the right ‘word buttons’ such as struggle, liberation, and justice.It all sounds so noble, so right, so in, so with it. Who is not for justiceunless it is a matter of abortion? Who is not for freedom and liberty unlessyou refuse to print gay literature? Who is not for tolerance unless you believethe Bible and want to live by what the Bible says? Who is not for freedom to doas you please unless you mention responsibility and accountability?

God never ordained slavery (although the Bible moderated slavery until the fulllight of the Gospel came), God never ordained discrimination due to the colourof one’s skin, but God did ordain marriage – heterosexual marriage, and anyother form violates God’s intended purpose for his creatures. There is noinjustice done when evil is proscribed and righteousness is encouraged. As JohnR. Stott writes in Same-Sex Partnerships: ‘If on the other hand, the’wrong’ or ‘injustice’ complained of is society’s refusal [no longer so] torecognize homosexual partnerships as a legitimate alternative to heterosexualmarriages, then talk of ‘justice’ is inappropriate, since human beings may notclaim as a right what God has not given them’ (57). The fact is, trueliberation (as Bishop Tutu seems unaware of) is found in God’s revealedpurposes for His creatures and their obedience to that revealed purpose.


What is our attitude towards homosexuals to be? We must tell them the truth oftheir lifestyle and the end of such a lifestyle. We must be faithful to God’sWord which teaches that the soul that sins will surely die. We cannot, if wewish to be Christ’s disciples, compromise on this point. The truth, as taughtin God’s Word, will not be well received by the world and never is. Homosexualswill label it hate propaganda and hate literature. But salvation does not takeplace in a vacuum. A sinner does not come to Christ unless his or her eyes areopened to their transgressions. Does God not accept us as we are? Absolutely,but not to leave us as we are. ‘God welcomes us in order to redeem andtransform us, not to leave us alone in our sins. No acceptance, either by Godor by the church, is promised to us if we harden our hearts against God’s Wordand will. Only judgment’ (Stott 59).

But we must speak the truth in love. That is by action and word we must showourselves both friendly and kind. We do not embrace the sin, but, by God’shelp, we embrace the sinner. We must show in our speech coupled with ouractions, that although we too are sinners lost and undone, God delivered usfrom the swamp of our iniquity and can do the same for them.

In Corinth, when Paul was speaking to the church, he mentions a list of sinfulbehaviours and says ‘and that is what some of you were’ (I Cor. 6:11), yet thelist does not simply include homosexual sinners, but sinners of every stripe.Then Paul goes on, ‘But you were washed, you were sanctified, you werejustified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God'(v.11). This is what God has done and is doing in our world today, and if he hasdone it for you and I, he can do it for those who are his elect in thecommunity of gays. In fact, in a strange way, God has brought homosexuals outof the closet, so we can now target them with our love, and direct them toorganizations and those who have experienced God’s forgiveness and help fortheir sin.

Truly, our nation has taken a turn for the worse from one viewpoint, but Godhas given us a glorious opportunity to let our light shine in the night of ourtravail. We as a people of the Bible must stop relying on government tosafeguard our Christian faith and look to the Father of light and all goodnessto make us instruments of reconciliation in a fallen world.

With permission from the author who edits the Sovereign Grace Journal, Volume6, Issue 3, September 2003.

Latest Articles

How to Read a Soul-Improving Book 20 June 2024

The following, which appeared in Issues 611–612 of the Banner of Truth Magazine (Aug–Sep 2014) is from John Angell James, The Anxious Inquirer After Salvation Directed and Encouraged*. We are grateful to Mr Martyn Jolly for bringing this extract to our attention and supplying the text. It may seem strange to some persons, that I […]

The Real Evidence about Scripture and Homosexual Practice 1 June 2024

1. Jesus Claim: Jesus had no interest in maintaining a male-female requirement for sexual relations. What the evidence really shows: Jesus believed that a male-female requirement for sexual relations was foundational, a core value of Scripture’s sexual ethics on which other sexual standards should be based, including the ‘twoness’ of a sexual union. Jesus predicated […]