Brain Scans Showing Brains of Homosexuals Resembling People Of Opposite Sex Is The Result of SIN!
Posted by Job on June 17, 2008
People are going to use articles like these to assert that what the Bible teaches regarding homosexuality is wrong because homosexuality is an immutable biological characteristic like sex or race. (If anything, they view homosexuality as even more fundamental then sex – falsely commonly called gender, which is a political term created by homosexual feminists to suit their purposes – because sex change operations, now being given even to small children, are done to accommodate homosexual preferences.)
However, findings like these do not oppose the Bible, but rather confirm it. They should not weaken faith, but rather strengthen it. Why? Let me give you an example. I am not among those that claims “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy as a Christian allegory, and J.R.R. Tollkein’s vehement denials that it should be considered as such should be respected rather than claimed by Christians desperate to have a piece of popular culture all their own. Still, those familiar with the movies or books remember consider the effect that the ring, which represented evil and sin, had on Gollum. Consider not merely the effect that the ring had on Gollum’s MIND, giving him a split personality which Sam Gamgee named one “slinker” (after Gollum’s sneaky subversive subtle evil nature like Satan as the serpent in the Garden of Eden) and the other “stinker” (after Gollum’s more direct, malevolent, and aggressive evil nature like Satan as the dragon). Instead, also consider the effect that sin had on Gollum’s BODY. Where Gollum was once a hobbit like Frodo and Sam, sin transformed him PHYSICALLY into a twisted monstrosity that Aragorn referred to as “the footpad” after his froglike feet. Further, there were the orcs … originally elves but so PHYSICALLY twisted by Sauron’s witchcraft that not only did their appearance change, but they could no longer even bear sunlight! Again, “Lord of the Rings” is NOT CHRISTIAN, as Tollkein himself stated that it was his attempt to create a system of pagan mythology for Great Britain to go along with the Greek, Roman, and Norse mythology that he loved studying. Still, Gollum, the orcs, the trolls, etc. are examples of the physical effects of sin as told by a Mary – worshiping Roman Catholic that was very familiar with the subject, and as such makes for a very good secular nonbiblical contemporary example that can be used to illustrate a Biblical point.
Here is the sad part: orthodox, evangelical, fundamentalist, conservative, Biblical, etc. Christians have no problem acknowledging that Adam’s fall and the resulting effects of sin and death entering creation had a tangible effect: that the spiritual consequences of Adam’s sin had a real and discernible effect or manifestation on the natural world. So what is the problem? Contemporary Christians compartmentalize. They only believe that the “spiritual stuff like that” happened BACK THEN. Modern Christians, even Bible – believing ones, have the modern secular humanist mindset that in these times, the spiritual God of heaven has basically gone deist and left the workings of the world to science, economics, politics, religion, culture, and the alleged ability of man to use those things to take dominion of and rule the earth. Yes, even according to theologically conservative Christians, when the apostolic age ended not only God but the entire spirit realm went on holiday, and God and the ability of the spirit realm to have a regular tangible discernible effect on the natural realm in a way that billions of people can witness and acknowledge will not happen again until the rapture, the great tribulation, or the return of Jesus Christ (depending upon your eschatological position … full disclosure mine is historic premillennialism, which was the position of the early church before eschatological viewpoints were corrupted by Greek pagan allegorizing and the political needs of the Roman Empire).
But no. Spiritual things and their ability to influence the natural world did not go away when Jesus Christ ascended back into heaven. The tangible physical effects of God’s grace are still present in all creation! God still causes the sun to shine and the rain to come for the good and the evil Matthew 5:45. What is it, modernist evangelical Christian? You do still believe that it is God that runs and sustains creation, right? Or have you been seduced by some corrupted form of natural theology that makes you more acceptable to the elite scholars and theologians? Well let me warn you … it was precisely that sort of corrupted natural theology, a form that made Christians marginally palatable to the atheist humanist enlightenment European academic community, that caused the Lutheran Church of Germany to vigorously endorse Adolph Hitler! The Lutheran Church of Germany actually issued a proclamation stating that God had placed Adolph Hitler in power to lead Germany back to greatness! So people, look at the horror of World War II and the blood of millions of innocent Jews and see the result of theologies that deny and run away from true spirituality, making God so transcendent, so detached and removed from His creation as to be functionally deist. And yes, I should point out that Hitler did murder homosexuals in his concentration camps too! People, be not deceived, Hitler was not evil because he hated homosexuals. Hitler hated homosexuals because he was evil!
So, a person that honestly believes in the spirit realm, sin and righteousness, good and evil has no problem accepting the fact that sin can and does cause physical changes in people. I am not merely talking about how alcohol abuse can destroy your liver, or gluttony can give you cardiopulmonary disease, though that certainly is true. I am stating that the spiritual effects of sin can and does have a tangible effect on a person’s biology, and moreover that said tangible effects can be passed onto one’s offspring. Again, go back to Adam! Why did eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil cause his death? Was it arsenic, strychnine, ricin, or some other poison? Did it contain anthrax, ebola, or some other pathogen? If so, it certainly took a mighty long time to work, didn’t it, because Adam lived to be 900, and spent a great deal of that time having children! And also, that would not explain how the ricin or the anthrax got into Adam’s children, grandchildren, great grandchildren, and so on! No, there was nothing intrinsically harmful about the fruit itself. The Bible even says that it was good for food! The only issue was that God told them not to eat it. The death that entered Adam and the entire creation was the physical effects of sin. You know what? Medical science explains it. Our DNA, RNA, chromosomes, etc. are imperfect. We die because over time our body ceases to create enough healthy new cells to replace the cells that die, and we are also prone to conditions where malformed cells overtake and destroy healthy ones (i.e. cancer). That genetic defect has been passed on to every man born of Adam! And if the spiritual consequences of Adam’s sin had a physical manifestation back then, the spiritual consequences of our sins have physical consequences right now!
That is why Christians need not unconditionally reject the notion that some conditions, including homosexuality, may in fact be genetic. We should not be so quick to adopt the recent – and humanistic and ultimately Marxist – notion that everything is the result of free will and surroundings. If the effects of Adam’s sin are propagated throughout all humankind, why cannot the biological changes that result from sin be passed down? Doesn’t the Bible itself say so, that the effects of sin go from generation to generation? Even better: does not the Bible say that we are born in sin? Do not words MEAN things? Well, so – called Bible believing Christians know full well what being born in sin means. We know it, BUT WE DON’T WANT TO BELIEVE IT! That is why we are so willing to cast off what the Bible says in favor of the scientific, philosophical, and political imaginations that are products of minds that have specifically rejected Jesus Christ! I want someone to show me where it says in the Bible that anyone was a victim of their environment, surroundings, and circumstance. The one instance that I can think of, the infant son of wicked king Jeroboam that the sovereign God who predestines and elects knew was righteous, well God took that child out of that bad situation, didn’t He (1 Kings 14:12-14)?
That is why we as Christians have to get serious. Sin in the time of Adam, the flood, the patriarchs, Israel, etc. is the same as sin today. It has the same effect on the spirit, the same effect on the mind, and the same effect on THE BODY. We Christians have to eliminate from ourselves these worldly considerations that make it so easy to reject our faith and start to believe THE BIBLE. So, instead of wallowing in the filthy pit of the church of judge not touch mine anointed excuses, we have to consider the effects that sin has on our physical bodies. And since there is a thing called genetics, we have to consider the effects that our sin will have on the bodies of our CHILDREN and our GRANDCHILDREN and so on. What about the work of Jesus Christ who was wounded for our transgressions, bruised by our iniquities, and by and with His stripes we are healed? That is true for those who REPENT. REPENT does not just mean giving mental verbal intellectual assent to being a sinner and saying that you are sorry. That is “salvation prayer easy believism.” REPENT does not mean being truly legitimately heartbroken. That is deception. The best evidence of this is the Old Testament where after Israel provoked God in the wilderness, God REPENTED of His desire to destroy them. God didn’t say He was sorry. Why? What does a sovereign holy God have to apologize for? Who does He apologize to? Especially when it comes to His desire to destroy wickedness? And no, God did not destroy Israel 1000 times and just feel so horrible, terrible, and afflicted about it that He had to go to the confession box, talk to the priest, and say the rosaries and hail Marys. So what did it mean when God repented concerning destroying Israel? IT MEANS THAT HE DIDN’T DO IT! Repent isn’t the EMOTION of feeling sorry, it is the ACTION of turning aside, changing your path! So, for Jesus Christ to heal the sin effects present in your body by and with His stripes – with His work on the cross – you have to REPENT of your sins which means YOU HAVE TO END YOUR SINFUL LIFESTYLE. Modern theology says that you can keep sinning and be healed so long as you are “Godly sorry” each time you sin. THE BIBLE says that the Holy Spirit writes God’s law on your heart and gives you such an aversion to sin that painfully vexes you. Which one are you going to believe?
But the bottom line is that we should not be surprised when the sinful actions of people cause tangible physical outward signs that are not direct physical consequences of their behavior and otherwise cannot be explained. Honestly, what do you suppose all those references that Paul made to being delivered up and given over to all manners of corruption and wickedness actually means? People, in particular go study Romans 1:18-32, and instead of focusing only on the tidy neat inoffensive little notions acceptable not only to modern theology but also to the little theories of perverts like Sigmund Freud, Alfred Kinsey, and most who followed after them that this only applies to people’s behavior, minds, and character. No, look at those verses and consider that they mean for THE PHYSICAL BODY, and not just for individuals, but for people’s offsprings and entire cultures! Phrases like “corruptible man“, “gave them up to uncleanness“, “to dishonour their own bodies“, “gave them up unto vile affections“, “change the natural use into that which is against nature“, “leaving the natural use“, “men with men working that which is unseemly“, and the clearest example “receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” Now I am not going to deny that this also does not refer to changes in mindset, morality, and character, but how can one deny that this also does not refer to the spiritual effects of sin changing the physical body to the point where it simply is physically not what it was prior?
If one accepts that sin is inherently unnatural to creation and as a result has effects far broader and greater than the mere direct and immediate consequences of the act – the Biblical view – then one should have no problem with this whatsoever. But if one takes on the modern, humanistic worldview that sin is more or less natural and therefore Christians should resign themselves to it and even tolerate it to a great degree – the “stop all the condemning, stop talking about what we are against and start talking about what we are for” mindset – then being confronted by medical science such as this can only leave you with two options.
1. This is the bogus pseudo – scientific result of liberal agenda – driven politicians masquerading as people with Ph.D’s in biology, medicine, engineering, physics, etc. A conservative Republican family values Christian would have known to use only the “right” equipment and the “right” procedures and interpreted the data the “correct” way in order to get the “right” results that would have “scientifically proven” man’s free will. GOD FORBID THAT MEDICAL SCIENCE WOULD PROVE THE TOTAL DEPRAVITY OF MAN AND HOW BADLY MAN NEEDS THE HOLY SPIRIT TO INTERVENE IN ORDER FOR US TO BE SAVED! WELL GUESS WHAT SOPHISTICATED CHRISTIANS – SCIENCE HAS ALREADY DONE IT WITH BABIES! SO WHY CANNOT SCIENCE DEMONSTRATE THE TOTAL DEPRAVITY OF MAN WITH ADULT PRACTICING HOMOSEXUALS? (I am supposing that theological sophisticates are waiting for scientific results that would tend to confirm Pelagianism or Arminianism?) Of course, I am not saying that agenda – driven sham science does not exist: evolution is bogus for instance. But Christians have NO CASE for dismissing these findings until the science behind it is investigated. That has been the case with evolution: Christians have studied the science, forced even leading evolutionists to acknowledge that it is a sham, and as a result evolutionists have had no recourse other than to make it illegal to even mention the holes in evolution in public schools and universities and research labs have actually stopped hiring and admitting Christians into research programs. But in this instance, Christians need to investigate the science before they say that it contradicts the Bible. As it is, the only reason for claiming that these results violate the Bible in the first place is because modern theology presents a functional deism where the spiritual is replaced by the secular, the acts of God are replaced by the acts of man, and this creates a Christian mindset that is much more accommodating to amillennialism, dominionism, reconstructionism, and SIN.
2. Or you can decide “hey, well this proves that the gay rights activists like Soulforce and the Human Rights Campaign and Act Up are right, so we have to accept that modern science and ethics have proven the Bible to be wrong.”
Both options are, of course, unacceptable to me. Instead, the route that I choose is one that the Bible has makes plain from Genesis 3: the spiritual effects of sin causes changes in the natural world, including but not limited to twisting, deforming, and setting at odds with its natural purpose the bodies of men. Think about it: the corruption of man and beast and the earth itself due to sin caused God to destroy the world with the flood! Similar to Romans 1, take a look at Genesis 6! “The earth also was corrupt before God.” “And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” “And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.” But here is the clincher: “There were giants in the earth in those days.” Do you realize that there is an emerging consensus in the evangelical scholarly community that the giants of Genesis 6 merely referred to arrogant tribal rulers? Never mind that the exact same Hebrew word in that passage was used in Numbers 13:13, the giants of the sons of Anak. What did Israel say? “Compared to those GIANTS we look like GRASSHOPPERS! We can’t defeat them in battle, so we aren’t going to go in the Promised Land!” I guess “we are grasshoppers compared to them” was just a figure of speech; they were simply speaking of how mighty the tribal kings were. So I guess these Anakite kings were supposed to be mightier than PHAROAH OF EGYPT or something? So if they were grasshoppers before the Anakite kings, what was Israel before pharoah, who ruled the most powerful nation in the world? Amoebas? It sounds like to me that these leading evangelical scholars are doing all that they can to deny that sin really is and what sin really does. Which is precisely why I am certain that since these great respected theologians cannot take position 1) above and retain their esteemed positions in the academy, the day is soon coming that findings like this will make position 2) will be their only recourse. And the question is … when that day comes, will you go also with them? Or will you go with the Bible and those of us that believe in what it actually says and means?