PURSUING A BIBLICAL RESPONSE TO HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE CHURCH
BY
HANNAH J. CUSHMAN
July 2024
Completed my summer class and this is my final paper. I have to say I learned a lot on this project. If this is something you are interested in or want to learn more about please check out the bibliography as well.
INTRODUCTION
Genesis means beginning. Therefore, this is where one needs to start, at the very being of Genesis. It is here in Genesis that one learns about creation and the institution of marriage. Our current society and unfortunately even many churches have turned away form a biblical world view and have lost many of its long-standing ethics. This has led to many professing Christians that are not able to stand up and defend a biblical worldview on issues that society is facing. Sometimes this lack of defense stems from a fear of being offensive or judgmental. Lately it seems to have become a norm and now many professing Christians are living a lifestyle not in agreement with God’s Word.
The viewpoint of man has become more authoritative than God’s Word. Many have not been in the Word studying and discerning for themselves what God’s truths are rather they have allowed themselves to be taught, persuaded and led by those living in sin. In the 1960’s the society in the United States started taking God out of schools by removing the Bible and prayer. They replaced a creation worldview with an evolutionary worldview. Through this God has been pushed out of our schools and one could say society has gotten rid of God. Once this was established the culture quickly moved to saying that right or wrong is no longer what God has taught in His Word but rather it is now up to the individual to decide for himself.
Today we face issues with the value of human life and the biblical standard regarding marriage. Society has moved away from the Genesis definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. Many believe that they can make their own definition of marriage to be whatever they feel suits them. It could be between a man and man or woman and woman. Whatever they feel is viewed as the final authority for them. It appears that changing the names of issues makes them more tolerable. Society has shifted in what it will accept as normal. Homosexuality is widely accepted as a normal lifestyle. This has affected the church and is causing the church to examine how they should Biblically respond to and view the homosexual lifestyle.
The Beginning of Man and Women
In the book of Genesis, we learn that in the beginning God created people, male and female, a man and a woman. He created them both as members of one race and in the image of God therefore they have intrinsic value as God’s image bearers.[1] Only humans have the distinction of being made in the image of God. Every boy, girl, man or woman is made in His image.[2]
God had plans for the man and woman he created. Together they were to be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over all things (Gen. 1:28 [ESV]). He intended the man to take leadership, begin a family, love his wife and provide for his family. God designed the woman to become the ‘mother of all living’ (Gen. 3:20).[3] Marriage was intended to bring delight to the couple as they enjoyed intimacy with one another and raised children. They were designed by God to complement each other. However, the fall of the man and woman into sin, brought a curse from God on His creation. The man still is the provider, but it is harder to fulfill his role. The woman still bears children but now with pain and suffering.[4]
It is important to recognize that God did not create Eve to be just like Adam; rather she was to complement him. She was suited to him but was not exactly like him. “We do not live in an age that celebrates the distinctiveness of the sexes.” Men and women are physically different. Men on average are stronger, can run faster, and do better in physical challenges. It does not mean that all men are stronger than women or that the stronger person has more value. Instead, it should be seen that there are differences between the sexes and these differences matter! Eve was created to fill an important role for Adam. He needed a helper and Eve filled that important role.[5]
“Scripture provides us with abiding truth based on God’s plan for men and women.” One is created by God and according to His plan they are born as a male or female, an indelible mark of who one is which can be embraced, even celebrated, and lived out to the glory of the God who gave it to them in the first place.[6]
Turning from a God Centered Society
Today our society openly mocks and has turned from the Lord God. It is similar to Israelite society in the time of the judges. The book of Judges ends with the sad commentary on the nation it stated that the people were living for themselves. In Judges 21:25 we read, “In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”[7]
The turning of western society from a more God centered philosophy based on God’s Word to a man-centered religion where anything is acceptable can be seen in the thoughts and writings of the philosophers over the years.[8]
The French philosopher, Descaartes, began his basis for knowledge by doubting everything. He came to realize that by doubting that he existed, he was admitting that he was. He expressed this with the famous phrase, “I think; therefore, I am.” This philosophy began to bring society to accept the idea that “Thinking is the ground of certainty”.[9]
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a philosopher from Geneva who taught that feelings were central to who one was. The problem with society, according to Rousseau, was that it prevented one from acting in a manner that was consistent with one’s feelings. One could not really act in an authentic and consistent manner with their feelings because of the structure and norms in society. He felt that society was the problem, not the individual. This idea is seen today in the statement, “I am a women trapped in a man’s body”. It would not have made any sense to our grandparents. However, today this is an accepted statement and aligns with Rousseau’s philosophy.[10] Another philosophy that has shaped our culture was the Romantic Movement. “The Romantics grant an authority to feelings, to the inner psychological space, that all human beings possess.” However, the Romantics did ultimately see that human nature possessed a moral structure. In time philosophers moved away from this Romantic notion of self. The modern notion of self-rejects this view of the Romantics.[11] The philosophers began to present the ideas that religion was no longer needed in society and that it was even a hindrance to people.
Karl Marx moved away from the Romantic teaching of moral structure. He taught that religion was a false idea and that the God of Christians did not exist. He was most interested to understand why people continued to believe in God. He saw economics as the fundamental basis for who people are and how they think. Religious teaching was only a means for the employers to keep their workers in line and productive. Religion was only a human creation needed to keep the workers under the control of the factory owners. Freedom would come only if religion was abolished. Only then would society’s injustices and inequalities be made right.[12]
Finally, Friedrich Nietzsche, a philosopher during the Enlightenment, was surprised that there were those who persisted in religion. He believed that God was dead. He thought the philosophers of the enlightenment had successfully proved that God is dead. However, God’s power persisted among men long after His death. Nietzsche then told a story of a madman who sought God but feared that all men had killed Him. God was not just irrelevant over time, He was dead. God cannot be pushed aside for that will ultimately kill Him and change everything. Nothing is guaranteed to stay the same. With God gone, there would be moral stability. According to Nietzsche, one is his own master now since there is no God. Good and evil are determined by what one wants to acknowledge as moral or ethical.[13]
The philosophers in the enlightenment period showed that when there is no higher power or authority there is no moral structure. One is a human because he can think and know, he was free to think, do and be whatever he wants.[14] One may ask, “What dam broke that unleashed the torrent of this new sexual morality?” The answer is simple, the rejection of biblical authority. Our culture has abandoned Scripture. There was a chipping away of biblical authority and credibility and slowly cultural thinking progressed away from God and focused on man.[15]
In the decade of the 1960’s many societal norms and traditions were challenged. Although many attitudes toward sexual activities outside of marriage had been slowly changing in the decades preceding the 1960’s, one often thinks of this decade as the time which ushered in the “sexual revolution”. The birth control pill was released, and this helped to reduce the chances of unwanted pregnancy thereby becoming one factor that allowed sexual activity to increase. This decade was also a time when society distanced itself more and more from God, the Bible, and morality. As prayer and the Bible were removed from the public schools the phrase that “God is dead” was again heard. This thought seemed to free people from the moral tenets of the Bible, and they could now define morality in their own way. This led to more children born out of wedlock along with an increase in the acceptance of pornography and the homosexual lifestyle.[16]
The notion of self or “the real me” helps to unify the changes we see in societal chaos around us. This idea of who we are is connected to our concept of “expressive individualism, the sexual revolution and social imaginary.”[17] Expressive individualism is realized when one acts outwardly in expression of their inner feelings. This view is sensitive to any criticism of another’s personal lifestyle choices. It sees the world as a place where one is free to choose to live however, they want, and any criticism is thought to not only be against the behavior but also against the person.[18]
The sexual revolutionist less defined today by societal codes and legal limits – such as pedophilia – but rather the defining issue revolves around the issue as to whether those involved consented to the acts. It now has come to a belief that “the sexual acts in themselves are seen as having no intrinsic moral significance; it is the consent (or not) of those engaging in them that provides the moral framework.”[19]
The social imaginary is defined as a shared understanding among people that allows them to develop common practices which in turn give the understanding a feeling of being legitimate. This is seen in the increased use of the pill. Sex was separated from reproduction, so it became more of a recreational activity. “Environment and culture may shape us, but they do so within boundaries established by the basic moral tendencies of a human nature that tilts toward the dark side.”[20] Many have turned from the belief that “God is the standard of correct morality”[21]
Sexuality and Marriage in Society
When God created the man and woman (Gen. 1:27) He instituted marriage and established the purpose and foundation for a man and woman to become one and establish a family (Gen. 2:24). Today many of the problems surrounding marriages stem from a battle over authority. One will either see God as the ultimate authority or one will take their own ideas as their authority. This has been devastating to the cultural tradition of biblical marriage. It began with man questioning if God really said marriage is between man and woman. Many today have come to believe that the biblical position is biased, and they must therefore accept the secular position that they view as “neutral”.[22]
When God created Eve, it showed that His plan for marriage was between male and female. God only made one female for Adam which shows that His plan was for a monogamous heterosexual relationship.[23] We also see that Paul uses the example of marriage to explain the relationship between Christ and the church. The man was to love his wife just as Christ loved the church and gave his life for it. The wife was to submit to the husband’s leadership and authority (Eph. 5:22-33).[24]
There has been a push to redefine marriage. There are those who want the definition of marriage to include couples of the same sex. They want to make the definition of marriage as a union of a man and woman that God established, obsolete. In their view, any two people who love each other should be allowed to marry. They have turned for recognizing God as the final authority.[25]
With the cultural movement toward the individual determining what is right for oneself, there has been a drifting away from many cultural norms based on biblical principles. This can be seen in the way the courts have interpreted gay marriage as a constitutionally protected right. With the overturn of section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in United States v. Windsor in 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that the reason that DOMA had been instituted was to marginalize homosexuals and therefore it struck down this act as unconstitutional. Subsequent rulings, such as Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, have upheld homosexual marriages as a constitutionally protected right. They based this ruling on the principles that: one can chose who they want to unite with, a two-person union also offers security to the committed individuals, it safeguards children and families by giving them some security, and finally marriage is a national tradition in establishing social order.[26]
Culture has not stopped with only redefining marriage they are also redefining genders. Today our culture says that one can feel distressed when they do not think the gender their biological sex, they were assigned at birth really matches the gender identity they feel. Society now tries to help these people, adults and children, to change their bodies both with hormones and surgery to match what they think they are.[27]
Defining Homosexuality
Homosexuality is defined as those who have a sexual desire for persons of the same sex.[28] The Old Testament makes it clear that God established the principle of heterosexuality. We see this in Genesis at the time of creation, God made them male and female. A homosexual relationship cannot lead to procreation which was part of God’s stated plan for marriage. Sodom and Gomorrah were judged because of their acceptance and proliferation of homosexuality (Gen. 19:1-29). It is also clearly stated in Lev. 20:13 that God’s prescribed punishment for those taken in homosexual acts was death.[29]
Those who attempt to revise the accepted hermeneutics used in the past, which have taught that homosexuality is sin, are known as revisionists. They attempt to find a way to make the Scriptures align with the practice of homosexuality. They want to “reinterpret the classic texts of Scripture that teach against homosexuality and to make it seem as though they do not speak to the experience of homosexuals in contemporary culture.” Some argue that the homosexuality spoken of in the Bible is not the same as what we see today and therefore, the Bible does not prohibit what we see today.[30]
Others argue that one is born with homosexual bents. They say that you cannot choose your sexual orientation any more than you can choose your eye or skin color. To be homosexual is pre-determined at birth therefore how could it be a sin? In Ken Ham and Charles Ware’s book, One Race One Blood, they trace this argument to Darwin’s teaching on evolution. If evolution is true, then one is nothing more than a product of a bunch of cells (genetics) and one’s environment.[31]
There are those that argue that the New Testament does not condemn homosexuality. In 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 four sins are mentioned. Three of them are sexual in nature: adulterers, malakoe, and arsenokoitai while the fourth mentioned was stealing. In examining the meaning behind malakoe, and arsenokoitai we find they both deal with homosexuality. These words refer to behaviors as seen in 1Corinthians 6:11. Paul declares that “Such were some of you”. The term arsenokoitai has been the center of debate over the last few years. Some who seek to have a pro-homosexual stance say that the word arsenokoitai is not a common term in other homosexual literature of the time. Therefore, they believe that the word refers to “masturbation” and “male prostitutes”. Others say that it is referring to adult male relations with young boys and this was what Paul was condemning. Still others interpret the verses to mean only homosexual relations that were not mutually consenting or were abusive. Others say it means only relationships that were not exclusive between two people.[32]
In response to these arguments for the acceptance of homosexuality in the New Testament one should consider the writings of Paul, particularly in Romans. It is not likely that the New Testament would approve something that was so greatly condemned in the Old Testament. It appears that the term arsenokoites may have been invented by Paul or another writer of his time and it refers to males who sleep with other males. This would indicate a broad interpretation of the term to include all forms of homosexuality not just specific behaviors.[33]
Man will change the name of an action if the original name gains an unwanted reputation. The new name is an attempt to sanitize it and cause few people to notice or object to the action. For example, a homosexual may prefer being referred to as “gay”, or a pedophilia may prefer “cross-generational sex” or “child-lover”. In this way, when man rejects God and His Word as the final authority in their lives, anything goes. If you can make your own rules and decide what is right for you, why keep your behavior within the limits of what others accept?[34]
Many who are considered transgender, or homosexual are actually intentionally rebelling against God and His God-given distinction between male and female. They have joined in a cultural war against God and the way He made them. It is not possible for them to think correctly as God has blinded their eyes due to their rebellion (Rom. 1:18-28, John 12:40, 2 Cor. 4:3-4, Eph. 4:17-19, Titus 1:15-16, 2 Tim. 2:23-26).[35]
The Bible argues with clarity that homosexuality is morally wrong. “Morality is not some philosophical, abstract concept. Things that are morally wrong have serious repercussions in practical life.”[36] These repercussions have consequences that are not positive. “If one truly believes a behavior is morally wrong and detrimental to both individuals and society, is it right to ignore or accept such behavior?”[37] “The kingdom of God and heaven will have no one who is an unrepentant homosexual or adulterer (I Cor. 6:9, Rev. 22:15). Thus, anyone who wants to love their sin more than Christ will have a rude awaking on judgment day. God wants us to repent (II Pet. 3:9).”[38]
A Church Responding Biblically
In today’s culture, the act of homosexuality is what one takes on as their identity. Therefore, they do not see how one could love them and hate their sin. They define who they are by their acts. Their “notion of selfhood is psychological.” In their view, “to hate the sin is to hate the sinner.” If Christians do not recognize this, it will be difficult for them to understand why the homosexual is so offended with them. Personal religious beliefs are a concern today in a different way than in the past. It used to be that if one’s beliefs did not harm one physically or economically then it did not matter, one was free to hold whatever beliefs they wanted. Today feelings are very important in how one perceives to be harmed. If we disagree with others today than it is implied that one of us is wrong and the other one will feel oppressed and marginalized.[39] This is an important understanding the church needs to remember in her dealings with homosexuals.
There are some who teach that Christians should stop discussing their opposition to homosexuality. They say Christians need to be silent on this issue in order to not offend others in society. Yet one must ask themselves how they can hold to Biblical authority and be silent? In 1 Corinthians 6:9 Paul taught that homosexuals among others will not inherit the kingdom of God. How can one be silent knowing another is on their way to hell unless they repent?[40]
In 1 Corinthians 5:9-11 Paul informed the church to not associate with those who claims to be a Christian but has sexual immorality in their life. Paul recognized that it was impossible to not associate with all sexual immoral people as that would mean we would have to get off the planet. We are to seek to win them to Christ but those who say they know God yet disobey his word we are not to associate with or even to eat with them. Paul taught that they should be removed from one’s fellowship in the hope that they would repent and turn to God.[41]
The church today is often presented with a false choice, they can either reject homosexuals and be seen as homophobic or they can surrender their convictions and view homosexual practice as normal. Neither extreme is necessary. The church is called to love and minister to all people, including those in the homosexual lifestyle. However, the church must never alter the biblical values and morals it holds. At all times the church must be ready to minister to any who come wishing to break free from the grasp of homosexuality.[42]
The church needs to be conscious of three factors as it meets the cultural challenges of homosexuality. First, the church needs to be aware that because of the emphasis of individualism, personal reasons and stories will be presented as evidence in shaping morality. The church needs to guard against deciding on their response based on these personal accounts. Rather, the church must decide the issues based on moral principles and biblical doctrine.[43]
Second, the church must be a place where people can realize a sense of community. This sense of community is no longer felt in the nation or state because the world is becoming more globalized. One can remain anonymous in the city or even in the suburbs where one spends only a part of one’s time as one sleeps in an area and works in another area. There are now “online communities” where people do not meet each other face to face. These new definitions of community lack one being present physically with others. The church needs to recognize this void and seek to be a place where people can meet with one another and find support and fellowship.[44]
The church finally, must teach her people “coherently about moral principles.” The pastor must be prepared to answer any questions those in his congregation may have about multiple moral issues. The church must “maintain its commitment to biblical sexual morality, whatever the social cost might be.”[45]
It is necessary for the church to recognize, teach and help the homosexual to change. The prevailing teaching in society says that change is impossible but if we truly believe that God has clearly commanded that homosexuality is sin, then we must teach one how to claim God’s strength and grace to obey His commands. One must realize change is positive and possible. It does not come just through the teaching of biblical ethics or a desire for heterosexual companionship. Change comes through deep repentance. Solomon taught that our behavior comes from our hearts (Prov. 4:23). Jesus also taught this in Mark 7:15 when he explained that all behaviors come from within a person.[46]
Many today, even evangelical Christians, do not understand that it is possible for a person with same sex attraction to change. It is important for the church to teach and give this hope to those who truly want to repent and change their lifestyle in order to be obedient to God and His Word. In Ephesians 5:1-2 we are told that when one repents and seeks to imitate God they are to walk in love. As one seeks to imitate God, their sexual life will line up with the biblical ethics God has given in His word. “No Christian has ever been helped by seeking out the virtuous elements of his or her sinful tendencies. Such people are helped only as they confess their sin, ask God for his forgiveness, and trust his grace to change.”[47] Those who struggle with an identity crisis need to find a new identity rooted in Jesus Christ. Only He can free them from the penalty and power of sin.[48]
In Ephesians 5:3-4 Paul provided further steps toward achieving lasting change. In place of sexual immorality, impurity, or covetousness, one should be filled with gratitude and thanksgiving. A grateful heart looks to God and is thankful for all that God has given them, in contrast to the covetous heart that sees what it has and wants more.[49] “The best way for people to be transformed in their experience of homosexuality is to be transformed in their thinking about homosexuality.”[50]
Finally, Paul points out in Ephesians 5:5-8 that one’s change in behavior to walk in the light is evidence of whether one is really living in the light. It is not possible to know Jesus and yet make it a habit to live in sin. In 1 John 2:6 we see that “Christ does more than forgive us our sins. He changes our life so that we can walk the way he walked.”[51]
CONCLUSION
Since man no longer needed to have God around, Nietzche declared God dead. This is very evident in Nietzche’s story of the madman who ran into the marketplace looking for God.
The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes. “Whither is God?” he cried: “I will tell you. We have killed him-you and I. All of us are his murderers. But how did we do this? How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Wither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns? Are we not plunging continually? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there still any up or down? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is not night continually closing in on us? Do we not need to light lanterns in the morning? Do we hear nothing as yet of the noise of the grave diggers who are burying God? Do we smell nothing as yet of the divine decomposition? Gods too decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.”[52]
How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us?[53]
In order to bring about a revival in our culture, it is imperative that both our homes and churches return to the truth of God’s Word and teach it to our youth. They must learn the truth in the Bible and see history, science and morality from a Biblical worldview. There are ultimately two religions in the world. One centered on God and His Word. The other is centered in man and his word.[54]
Ken Ham has summarized the response the church needs to take by saying:
The battle against gay “marriage” will ultimately be lost (like the battle against abortion) unless the church and the culture return to the absolute authority beginning in Genesis. Then and only then will there be a true foundation for the correct doctrine of marriage – one man for one woman for life.[55]
[1] Ken Ham and A. Charles Ware, One Race One Blood (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2013) 172.
[2] Owen Strachan and Gavin Peacock, The Grand Design: Male and Female He Made Them (Ross-shire, Great Britain: Christian Focus Pub., 2016) 22.
[3] Ibid., 24-27.
[4] Ibid., 37-40.
[5] Ibid., 29-33.
[6] Köstenberger, Andreas J. and Margaret E. Köstenberger, God’s Design for Man and Woman (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2014) 17.
[7] Ken Ham and Avery Foley, “Cultural Decline”, in The Gender & Marriage War eds. Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham & Avery Foley (Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis, 2021), 1.
[8] Ibid., 2.
[9] Carl R. Trueman, Strange New World (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2022) 33.
[10] Ibid., 31-39.
[11] Ibid., 46-51.
[12] Ibid., 52-59.
[13] Ibid., 59-64.
[14] Ibid., 69-70.
[15] Bryan Osborne, “Making Free Sex the Norm”, in The Gender & Marriage War eds. Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham & Avery Foley (Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis, 2021), 33.
[16] Tommy Mitchell, “The Sexual Revolution in the 1960’s”, in The Gender & Marriage War eds. Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham & Avery Foley (Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis, 2021), 29-31.
[17] Trueman, Strange New World, 21.
[18] Ibid., 23.
[19] Ibid., 25.
[20] Ibid., 28-30.
[21] Bodie Hodge, “Biblical Standard of Morality”, in The Gender & Marriage War eds. Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham & Avery Foley (Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis, 2021), 11-13.
[22] Bryan Osborn, “Attack on Biblical Marriage”, in The Gender & Marriage War eds. Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham & Avery Foley (Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis, 2021), 5.
[23] Andreas J. Köstenberger, with David W. Jones, God, Marriage, and Family: Restoring the Biblical Foundation (2nd ed.; Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010) 25.
[24] Strachan and Peacock, The Grand Design, 41.
[25] Dana Sneed, “Destroying Marriage”, in The Gender & Marriage War eds. Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham & Avery Foley (Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis, 2021), 9.
[26] Carl R. Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020) 308-311.
[27] Bodie Hodge and Avery Foley, “Gender Dysphoria-Attacking Male and Female”, in The Gender & Marriage War eds. Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham & Avery Foley (Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis, 2021), 81-85.
[28] Denny Burk and Heath Lambert, Transforming Homosexuality (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2015) 29.
[29] Köstenberger with Jones, God, Marriage, and Family, 36.
[30] Burk and Lambert, Transforming Homosexuality, 23.
[31] Ham and Ware, One Race One Blood, 169.
[32] Köstenberger with Jones, God, Marriage, and Family, 210-213.
[34] Bodie Hodge and Avery Foley, “Gender Dysphoria-Attacking Male and Female”, in The Gender & Marriage War, 81-85.
[36] Ken Ham and A. Charles Ware, One Race One Blood, 175.
[38] Bodie Hodge, “Biblical Standard of Morality”, in The Gender & Marriage War eds. Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham & Avery Foley (Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis, 2021), 11-13.
[39] Trueman, Strange New World, 157-158
[40] Denny Burk, What is the Meaning of Sex? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2013) 196.
[41] Köstenberger with Jones, God, Marriage, and Family, 210.
[42] Burk, What is the Meaning of Sex? 205.
[43] Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self, 402-404.
[44] Ibid., 404-405.
[45] Ibid., 405-406.
[46] Burk and Lambert, Transforming Homosexuality, 63-79.
[47] Ibid., 83-88.
[48] Bodie Hodge and Avery Foley, “Gender Dysphoria-Attacking Male and Female”, in The Gender & Marriage War, 81-85.
[49] Burk and Lambert, Transforming Homosexuality, 89-92.
[50] Ibid., 15.
[51] Ibid., 92.
[52] Trueman, Strange New World, 60-61.
[53] Ibid., 61.
[54] Ken Ham and Avery Foley, “Cultural Decline”, in The Gender & Marriage War, 2-3.
[55] Ken Ham, The New Answers Book 2 (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2008) 158.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Burk, Denny and Heath Lambert. Transforming Homosexuality. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2015.
Burk, Denny. What is the Meaning of Sex? Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2013.
The Gender & Marriage War, edited by Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham, and Avery Foley, 1-85. Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis, 2021.
Ham, Ken. The New Answers Book 2. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2008.
Ham, Ken, and A. Charles Ware. One Race One Blood. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2013.
Köstenberger, Andreas J. with David W. Jones, God, Marriage, and Family: Restoring the Biblical Foundation. 2nd ed. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010.
Köstenberger, Andreas J., and Margaret E. Köstenberger. God’s Design for Man and Woman. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2014.
Strachan, Owen, and Gavin Peacock. The Grand Design. Ross-shire, Great Britain: Christian Focus Publications, 2016.
Trueman, Carl R. The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020.
Trueman, Carl R. Strange New World. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2022.
Hands of Little Shepherd 
Leave a comment