By The Right Scoop


This is your thought provoking video of the night. Ravi Zacharias is the most intellectual Christian apologist I know and to put it shortly, he’s brilliant. And in this video a student asks him if a person can live a Christian life as a homosexual. I thought it was a great question but I’ll leave you to judge the answer.

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop


Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • Anonymous

    I think he’s correct. I’ve always looked at it as a sexual perversion and one of the milder ones. I think that everyone is tested in their own way by any number of sins. Some have to endure the difficulties of desiring the same sex. This sounds unfair but in comparison to those that are tempted by the flesh of the young and innocent it seems tame. What about those that are tempted by their own family members? This train of thought could go on and on.

    I just wish homosexuality hadn’t become so socially acceptable. There is a reason you should keep it in the closet, it doesn’t benefit humanity. All it really does is blur the line between a natural order and unnatural chaos.

    • Tyler

      That’s assuming that homosexuality is a choice…which it’s not.

      • Anonymous

        No it isn’t and I didn’t say that.

        • Tyler

          I know you didn’t say that. I’m really only correcting the last paragraph. You said that it should be kept in the closet because it blurs the line between natural order and unnatural chaos.

          You can leave the word “unnatural” out, if you know it’s not a choice. Also, if you know it’s not a choice…then it would of course be a part of the natural order therefore there is no blur in the line you mention.

          • Anonymous

            I’m glad you can admit that you made a completely false allegation. At least everyone knows who here is dealing in good faith and who isn’t.

            I know that child molesters exist and I know that they don’t choose to be that either. It’s some sort of strange perversion that drives them just like homosexuality. That’s why I said that homosexuality was one of the easier perversions to deal with.

            Cancer is natural right. That doesn’t automatically make it a good thing.

            • Anonymous

              Unlike cancer and pedophilia, homosexuality doesn’t actually harm anyone except the people that are bothered by it.

              It’s certainly not a choice – I’m glad we’ve established that, but if that’s the case, then how can you continue to insist that it’s somehow morally reprehensible? Assuming you’re not gay, then you presumably don’t know what it’s like to be completely uninterested sexually in members of the opposite sex (I know I don’t), so where do you derive the authority to insist that how they feel is somehow “wrong”? From a 5,000 year old book that was written down by people and then edited and translated and re-edited and then retranslated and then retranslated again and then re-edited (all while the original language in which it was written has changed so drastically as to be unrecognizable – meaning you can’t know for sure what they meant when they used specific words – particularly since it was written before the dawn of lexicography) and then retranslated etc.?

              • Rshill7

                “It’s certainly not a choice – I’m glad we’ve established that” (dmk)

                With respect, we have established no such thing.

                • Anonymous

                  In this dialogue, we actually had.

                • Rshill7

                  Then you need a new dialogue sir.

                • Anonymous

                  Or maybe you need to read the comments above mine to understand the context in which I said the things I said and either stay out of conversations you don’t want to be a part of or try and make a salient point.

                  Incidentally, how old were you when you chose to be attracted to women?

                • Rshill7

                  You need a new dialogue sir. You’ve not established what you say you have. You can pretend that you have, but you have not. I am fine with that. Your last question there is irrelevant. I believe I’ve said all I intend to on the subject, unless you want to go after the new dialogue, which will lead to the correct conclusion. The one you have reached so far is fanciful, a falacy, and a nice example of fiction.

                  Another thing. I will say what I want to say, to whom I want to say it, and as often as I want to say it. I’ll take your suggestion to the contrary and toss it in the same place where I have tossed your “established” conclusion. Thanks anyway.

                • Anonymous

                  You can say whatever you want to whomever you want, and you don’t have to accept the conclusions of others. I meant “established” in the context of the dialogue at hand, to which you added nothing other than a delineation of your own well-worn view on a specific aspect of the discussion which clarified nothing. Do you really think that we weren’t aware that there are people that hold the belief that homosexuality is a choice?

                  It’s like this:
                  (enter Person A and Person B)
                  Person A: So did you hear about the new movie?
                  Person B: Yeah, I really want to see it!
                  Person A: Me too! It’s supposed to be really good!
                  Person B: How about we go this Friday?
                  Person A: Sounds good! I get off work around 6, so how about we meet up at my place around 7?
                  Person B: Oh, wait, I just remembered I’ve gotta close up that night, so I’ll be at the store until 8. Maybe we should just see it next week…
                  Person A: Don’t be silly! Let me check my phone (pause) see, there’s a showing at 9:30 that we could catch.
                  Person B: Hmm, but if we do that we won’t get home til at least midnight…
                  Person A: Oh c’mon, it’s not like you have work the next day. And seriously, when’s the last time we went out together to do ANYTHING?
                  Person B: Yeah, I guess I could use to get out. Alright, I’m in.
                  Person A: Great – I think that there’s a bar by the theater so how about I pick you up from work and we can grab a drink and talk a bit before we head into the theater?
                  Person B: Sounds like fun. Alright, I’m getting excited – but if we’re gonna do that, make sure to buy the tickets beforehand – it’d be a drag if they sold out.
                  Person A: (tapping at her phone) Two steps ahead of you!
                  (enter Person C)
                  Person C: That movie was terrible; but maybe I’m biased, because I don’t really like comedies.
                  (exit Person C)
                  Person B: Uhh…
                  Person A: That was weird…
                  Person B: Do you know that guy or something?
                  Person A: No, I thought you did.
                  Person B: Nope, I thought you did.
                  Person A: So wait, he was just some random guy?
                  Person B: I guess so…
                  Person A: Well, whatever, so we’re still on for Friday, right?

                  See?

                  So yes, you can go on saying whatever you want to whomever you want whenever you want. But that doesn’t mean you should.

                • Rshill7

                  OK. Have a nice weekend. Good football happening today. :-)

                • Anonymous

                  That is an interesting thing about subject proclivity, participants claim an earlier onset. For me, I became aware of the opposite sex after hormones and secondary maturation had set. For a short period, while in my 20’s I joined the crowd. But, I was uncomfortable and disappointed in myself for my failure to maintain my principles. Since I was no longer a virgin, I thought it was dishonorable to seek marriage and (no one asked) now am in my 50’s celibate (by choice). Like Ravi said, sexuality may start with your thoughts but you make the decision to fornicate.

              • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=652268583 Kurt Ramspott

                IF it is not a choice and is part of the natural wiring to an individual – then it would be reasonable to assume that the person born with that wiring, or ingrained propensity, would have no power to overcome it or do something about it otherwise. This thought you have raised then, that it’s not a choice, flies directly in the face of people whom have repented of the sin of homosexuality and found freedom through ministries such as Setting Captives Free and Exodus International and are now living a regret free heterosexual life.

                As well your argument that the bible, a 5,000 year old book is invalid because it was not transcribed well over time is vapid at best. Using your logic for the bible means then we have to apply the same rule to Socrates, Plato, Aristotle (and all other writings before scripture) that their writings also were not transcribed well over time – so who knows what they meant.

                It’s like playing poker with you. Your cherry picking of only the bible as not translated well – is your tell. I’d bet against that hand all day long.

                Finally, your claim that homosexuality does not harm anyone is also askew or inaccurate. You can not universally claim that ANY disposition of a person homosexuality/heterosexuality, etc. does not harm anyone. People harm people, and disposition of one’s character does not do the harming, people do.

                • Anonymous

                  Spokespeople for those organizations have “relapsed” (if you want to call it that) into regret free homosexual lives, and many many more have left them claiming that it’s all a crock of you-know-what. I believe that adults should have the right to do whatever they want, including attending those meetings and trying to “overcome” their homosexuality if that’s what they want to do, but I think parents sending a minor to such places by force should qualify as child abuse.

                  The primary Biblical condemnation of homosexuality is drawn from the Old Testament, the origins of which are unclear but it can date back as far as the 1200s BC – and no original copies exist. New Testament condemnations (drawn primarily from Romans, yes?) can be interpreted as referring more to pederasty more than contemporary homosexuality. On another note, I do find it interesting that if it’s such a big deal, you would think that Jesus might take the time out to refer to it at some point in his ministry, but that’s besides the point.

                  As for your other point – Socrates is an interesting example to give because he actually didn’t write anything – or at least nothing that we have access to. Our knowledge of him comes primarily through Plato’s portrayal of him, and as such, we can only assume that it is idealized at best. Secondly, if you’ve actually read any Plato or Aristotle in Classical Greek (which, incidentally, I have), you would realize that there is actually a TON of guesswork involved in figuring out what he means and there are a whole bunch of words that he uses that never appear anywhere else, so we can only attempt to figure out what they might mean by their context and derivation. No single translation can be termed “accurate,” particularly because Ancient Greek is an inflected language with a number of identical constructions that mean different things (i.e. the exact same sentence can be interpreted to mean a variety of things) and there’s still a lot of debate over how to read specific passages. That’s actually true of all classical literature in any language – hell, I just finished taking a course on interpreting the 梁塵秘抄 [ryojin hisho] (http://home.ix.netcom.com/~kyamazak/lit/_Jpoet/ryojin.htm), which dates to the 12th century and was written in a language (Classical Written Japanese) that was used in writing – pretty much unchanged – up through the 19th century and there are still whole poems that we can only guess at the meaning of.

                  And, the biggest difference between the Bible and Plato/Aristotle/Sun Tzu/Murasaki Shikibu etc. etc. is that nobody interprets the latter as absolute infallible unquestionable truth.

                  Incidentally, I don’t really accept the notion that somebody can be an authority on the bible unless they can read Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek. If you can’t read Japanese, you can’t be a serious scholar of Japanese literature; I don’t see why things theological shouldn’t be held to at least as high a standard as things academic.

                  As for your last point, if homosexuality is a sin, then is it not harmful in and of itself in a way that heterosexuality is not? Let me put it this way – heterosexuals can act upon their “disposition” without sinning and thus doing harm, provided that they’re married and, depending on you’re take on things, not using birth control. Is there any way that homosexuals can “act” on their disposition without sinning and, thus, doing harm?

                • Carolyn

                  Dmk- You mentioned that Jesus didn’t say anything about homosexuality. Maybe He didn’t specifically say that word in the red letters, but those of us who believe the Bible, know that the Bible is God breathed, and since Jesus is God the Son, the Bible is the Word of Christ (see John 1) He may have not said the specific word, but He did reconfirm God’s plan of man/woman relationship though marriage. And as He told the adulterous woman to “go and sin no more”, He is speaking those words to all believers.

              • Anonymous

                Here’s an example of how homosexuality inadvertently effects society. We’ve spent a ridiculous amount of money trying to cure HIV in comparison to all other disease’s out there. A disease which predominantly effects the gay community. Why aren’t we spending more money on cancer. Something that actually effects more people. A disease that people acquire out of bad genetic make up vs. unprotected sex.

                We do this because we’re being trained to believe that homosexuals are more important than heterosexuals. Their sexual orientation sets them apart as a special protected class that requires special laws. As soon as any group has special hate laws protecting them they get under my skin.

                Homosexuals have actively attacked religion as the problem with society. In case no one has been paying attention religion is actually more responsible for the fact that we even have a society at all then anything else. Most societies that have removed religion from the landscape have some horrible human rights records if not down right atrocities.

                The Marriage debate is another example of homosexuals trying to change things that are not any of their business to begin with. “It’s the alternate life style you have to accept it. And now you have to accept that we’re going to take a religious practice and twist it to suit our needs because we’re special. A protected class that gets what ever we want because we’ll paint you as evil for daring to have a differing opinion.”

                Homosexuals went crazy on Mormons for daring to defend their belief in what Marriage means. They for some reason didn’t have much to say about the African American community that was the major swing vote for Prop 8.

                That being said I’m ok with civil unions as a legally biding alternative but I’m pretty sure it has little to do with a legally binding agreement and everything to do with taking a sacred act Marriage and desecrating it.

                Perhaps we should focus on finding a cure for homosexuality so we can just inoculate children at birth. How evil is that thought in the gay community that actively says they would never choose to be gay.

          • Anonymous

            I think natural order and unnatural chaos is a false binary. Ever hear of entropy;-)

      • katy

        Tyler…no, he is not assuming anything. You are.
        He is simply stating his clear understanding of what God’s word says. Ravi explains it is a disposition. He did not make a case about choice or genetics. He said it is a very difficult disposition to live with and still walk in clarity and firmness with God’s word.
        Listen with an unbiased mind and you will “hear” and grow.

        • Tyler

          My non-reply comment might clarify who I was talking about…not to mention the rest of the discussion between BS and I.

          • Anonymous

            Where did you go Tyler? You’ve accused me of a some silly stuff here. I’m ready to debate this issue. I’m not afraid to say that I think homosexuality needs to get back in the closet. You’ve yet to make an honest point. Except to disappear into the internet ether. I think you’re a Moby, I started thinking that last night after your comments but I’m pretty sure of that, after tonight.

            • Tyler

              A “Moby?” I’m not even sure what you mean by that.

  • Tyler

    This guy is simply wrong because one can use Christianity as a philosophy as opposed to a religion. I do this everyday. If a homosexual takes Christianity as a philosophy as opposed to a set code of conduct with rigid rules against his behavior…then he can truly be a great person with kindness and love as Jesus wanted yet still be a homosexual.

    • Anonymous

      Only if he’s in denial of what the lord has said, you doing it doesn’t make it right.

      Isn’t it possible that every sin is a genetic defect?

      Why do some people kill?

      Why do some people steal?

      Why are some people addicts?

      Homosexuality is no different than all these other temptations. It’s not beneficial to society like killing isn’t or like stealing isn’t or like addicts aren’t.

      You can try and justify it however you want but I’ve seen Gay Pride parades and they’re deplorable. Would you take a child to one? Hey they’re extremely proud that they all like feathered boas and leather.

      Why are they all naked to boot, well golly that’s a great question son……because they’re gay, normal morality and decorum doesn’t resonate with them.

      Why are they performing oral sex on each other in public. Well I’m glad you asked son even though that sort of question should never come out of a child’s mouth or have to be witnessed by one. They are so enamored with their sin they think the world needs to experience it with them.

      Here’s my question for you Tyler what’s wrong with NAMBLA?

      • Anonymous

        Can I answer your last question?

        Children can’t give informed consent so any adult-child relationship, be it homosexual or heterosexual, is inherently wrong. What’s wrong with NAMBLA is the same thing that’s wrong with rape.

        Also, most gay men aren’t pedophiles.

        • Anonymous

          I’m not saying that all gay men are pedophiles, I’m just wondering when we’ll be asked to accept their lifestyle as well. We’ve now got two feet on the slippery slope.

    • grizzlybarrmomma

      T- I don’t mean to be rude and butt into your conversation, but had to put my $.02 in. (ooops! I think inflation puts it at about $20.00 now!)

      “This guy is simply wrong because one can use Christianity as a philosophy as opposed to a religion” you stated.

      But one cannot “use” Christianity as a relationship with the Almighty and walk in SIN. (Oh, there’s that annoying little 3 letter word again.)

      • grizzlybarrmomma

        Oh! and one more thing. Ravi wrong!? Not happening….

    • Fleur Lewis809

      Hi Tyler, just happened to come across your debate. If you choose christianity as a philosophy, then it,s just that, philosophy and not a new regenerated heart through christs holy spirit,which is the only way to live a christian life in jesus Jesus said ” I am the way, the truth and the life, no one can get to the father except through me. If you truely except Jesus as your saviour,…and the Lord knows your heart,…he , through his holy spirit will convict you of your homosexuality and deliver you,…and only you know if you truely want to be delivered.

    • Rshill7

      You might want to deck your table out with a Kingly feast and take a picture of it, appreciate it, paint it…but not eat it. It ain’t a meal, it’s art…I’ll apreciate it in that fashion. Yes, art it could be, or, the philosophy of food. Absolutely useless and good for nothing else of a nutritional value at least, until eaten :-)

  • Anonymous

    Wow! Unbelievable answer that rocks the soul.

    • http://www.therightscoop.com/ therightscoop

      That’s exactly how I felt.

  • http://arttelles.com/stop-islamization-of-america/ Art

    Brilliant…

    Ravi’s operative word “disposition” is another way of clarifying “do” vs. “be”… are human beings who were created from the “adamah”, the earth, predisposed to “do” something or to “be” something?

    Here’s a very quick look at being “disposed” to “do” vs. to “be.”

    Are we predisposed to “do” what males and females do or to “be” what males and females “are?” (… i.e., male and female)

    To “do.” We have no control to “be” what we “are”… male and female.

    Did our intelligent designer create us to “be” heterosexual AND homosexual?

    No.

    Did our intelligent designer create us to “be” male and female and “do” what heterosexuals “do” to multiply?

    Yes.

    Did our intelligent designer create us to “be” male and female and NOT “do” what heterosexuals “do” to multiply?

    No.

    Did our intelligent designer create us to “be” heterosexual or to “do” what heterosexuals “do?”

    To “do.”

    (To also ask if we were created to “be” male and female to “be” heterosexual AND to “do” heterosexuality is an irrevelant digression into the swamp of incoherent logic. We were created to “be” good people who “do” good things, not bad things.)

    Did our intelligent designer create us to “be” homosexual or to “do” what homosexuals
    “do?”

    Neither.

    (To also ask if we were created to “be” male and female to “be” homosexual AND to “do” homosexuality is an irrevelant digression into the swamp of incoherent logic. We were created to “be” heterosexual in conduct, the “good” thing, NOT to “be” homosexual in conduct, the “bad” thing.)

    If Yahweh created us to “be” heterosexual, then he created us to “be” homosexual also.

    That is sensible.

    If Yahweh did NOT create us to “be” heterosexual, then he also did NOT create us to “be” homosexual.

    That is sensible.

    If Yahweh created us to “be” what we “are”… male and female, then he created us to “do” what heterosexuals “do” and NOT what homosexuals “do.”

    That is sensible.

    If Yahweh created us to “be” male and female and to “do” what homosexuals “do,” by what common sense logic did he create us to “do” what homosexuals “do” but NOT to multiply and increase the creatures made from the “adamah,” the earth?

    That is sensible.

    (Sin and concomitant depravity are a separate issue, relevant but a digression from Ravi’s brilliant (pre)”disposition” comments.)

    Art
    Only Yahweh (YHWH) can … STOP! Islamization Of America … with our informed speech and action

    • Anonymous

      Does your entire premise rest upon the acceptance of a Supreme Creator whose morality you claim to be able to discern by looking at the natural world?

      Yes.

      Does everyone feel the way you do?

      No

      Do most people around the world generally adhere to the same basic rules when it comes to morality?

      Yes, more than you would think, actually. Read some 13th century Japanese writings – people were concerned with the same stuff back then that we are now.

      Does this mean that generally we are in harmony with one another?

      Yes

      Do, unfortunately, our senses of morality differ on 5-10 percent of issues?

      Yes, that’s why we argue and fight.

      Do billions of people around the world consider your particular world bent to be extremely western and, thus, foreign?

      Yes

      Would it behoove you to expose yourself to different world views with an open mind?

      Probably

      So, with many gay friends and relatives leading happy, well adjusted, monogamous lives and contributing greatly to society at large, do I reject your argument as facially insufficient and failing to meet any reasonably objective standard of truth?

      Yes

      P.S. Have gay people existed pretty much since the beginning of time?

      Yes

      If society was structured as such that gay people didn’t feel the need to lead “gay pride parades” because there was no systemic prejudice against them would “they” (i.e. a very very very small minority) still be fellating each other on the street?

      Probably not.

      Are fellatios in public places unique to the homosexual community?

      No. Remember highschool/college? (just so we’re clear, parked cars are still in the realm of “public”)

      Are there gay men and women who lead very depraved lives?

      Yes

      Are there straight men and women who lead equally depraved lives?

      Oh yes.

    • Anonymous

      Does your entire premise rest upon the acceptance of a Supreme Creator whose morality you claim to be able to discern by looking at the natural world?

      Yes.

      Does everyone feel the way you do?

      No

      Do most people around the world generally adhere to the same basic rules when it comes to morality?

      Yes, more than you would think, actually. Read some 13th century Japanese writings – people were concerned with the same stuff back then that we are now.

      Does this mean that generally we are in harmony with one another?

      Yes

      Do, unfortunately, our senses of morality differ on 5-10 percent of issues?

      Yes, that’s why we argue and fight.

      Do billions of people around the world consider your particular world bent to be extremely western and, thus, foreign?

      Yes

      Would it behoove you to expose yourself to different world views with an open mind?

      Probably

      So, with many gay friends and relatives leading happy, well adjusted, monogamous lives and contributing greatly to society at large, do I reject your argument as facially insufficient and failing to meet any reasonably objective standard of truth?

      Yes

      P.S. Have gay people existed pretty much since the beginning of time?

      Yes

      If society was structured as such that gay people didn’t feel the need to lead “gay pride parades” because there was no systemic prejudice against them would “they” (i.e. a very very very small minority) still be fellating each other on the street?

      Probably not.

      Are fellatios in public places unique to the homosexual community?

      No. Remember highschool/college? (just so we’re clear, parked cars are still in the realm of “public”)

      Are there gay men and women who lead very depraved lives?

      Yes

      Are there straight men and women who lead equally depraved lives?

      Oh yes.

      • http://arttelles.com/stop-islamization-of-america Art

        Interesting, but…

        You did not even touch on Ravi’s main point… “disposition” to “do” something that our intelligent designer did not create us to “do”.

        Reality does not matter what I or you or the Hindu in India thinks, believes, feels, etc. about reality… reality is what it is.

        Either human kind was or was not created by an intelligent designer.

        THAT is reality, isn’t it?

        Either human kind did or did not come into existence with input by an intelligent designer.

        THAT is reality, isn’t it?

        Well, if one person or a society does not believe in an intelligent designer, reality does not care what one person or billions of people believe… reality is what it is.

        The atheist, evolutionist, neo-darwinian belief that rejects an intelligent designer does not change reality, does it?

        So, if a belief system does not include an intelligent designer, so what? Well, reality bites when error is promoted as truth.

        Reality is adamant that the exit part of the male and female body is NOT for sexual gratification.

        Anybody that says that it does not matter how the human body is used sexually is not in touch with reality.

        Either male and female were or were not crated to “be” male and female and “do” what heterosexuals “do” to multiply.

        Either male and female were or were not created to “be” male and female and “do” what homosexuals “do” without regard to multiplying and producing children.

        Either male and female were created to “be” male and female and “do” what heterosxuals “do” AND what homosexuals “do”… or they were NOT.

        Both would not be created by an intelligent designer to “do” contradictory activity.

        Now, here is where reality bites the error that is proudly parading as truth.

        Either male and female happend by chance to come into existence to “be” male and female and “do” what heterosexuals AND homosexuals “do”… or they were NOT.

        Either mindless evolution decided that BOTH heterosexual AND homosexual activity would promote the survival of human kind… or it did NOT.

        Reality bites, doesn’t it?

        Whether a belief system promotes creation by an intelligent designer or “creation” by mindless evolution and survival of the fittest, heterosexuality activity or homosexual activity is what we “do”… not what we are.

        Heterosexual activity is what male and female were created to “do”… not to “be.”

        Homosexual activity is NOT what male and female were created to “do”… or to “be.”

        Male and female are what we were created to “be” to promote the survival of the fittest from the evolutionist perspective… or to “be” from the intelligent designer perspective.

        Reality… ouch.

        Male and female were created to “be” male and female, not to “be” heterosexual. Heterosexual activity is what male and female “do,” not what they “are.”

        Male and female were created to “be” male and female, not to “be” homosexual. Homosexual activity is what males and females “do,” not what they “are.”

        Male and female exist to “be” male and female… and to “do” what it takes to promote the survival of the future generations who will also “do” what heterosexuals “do”… not what homosexuals “do.”

        Reality… ouch.

        Art
        Only Yahweh (YHWH) can … STOP! Islamization Of America … with our informed speech and activity

        • Anonymous

          Art, this is good sir. You went after them in the same way they went after truth.

          I liked all of it and read all of it. (I don’t always do that to longwinds, not that yoiu are one of those) but here is the line I think that I like best:

          “Now, here is where reality bites the error that is proudly parading as truth.”

          Kudos !

          Thanks for that. I don’t think “turning the other cheek” means, ‘go ahead and get run over by that truck’, even if it is driven by a ________. I shan’t say it.

          Good night and keep up the fight. Truth tends to end up with it’s head above water…and every other thing.

      • Carolyn

        Dmk– you make a good argument here, except the whole reason for this discussion is about the answer Ravi gives this young man, concerning homosexuals who are Christian. It is between the person and Christ if He is who they claim to be believers in, not hindus or any other religous/philosophical view. Can homosexuals be happy people, I have known many who are- but they are not Christian. If they were, we as a Christian could discuss Jesus’ commands- to love God with all our heart, mind, spirit and body. We could discuss Jesus’ word that our bodies are temples of God.
        I can’t have a discussion with a homosexual non believer or any other religious person, because they wouldn’t understand.

  • Mikemorrison281

    Ravi is our generation’s C.S. Lewis.

    • Rshill7

      Oh yes.

    • Conservative Hippie

      Agreed!. Just from his answer alone he has changed my position on homosexuality. Well said Mike!

      • http://www.therightscoop.com/ therightscoop

        That’s amazing. I thought his answer was quite profound myself.

  • Smcaronx

    Homosexuality is a Choice.

    You don’t wake up and find you’ve accidentally been playing hide the hotdog with your home boy.

    • Anonymous

      So, at what point did you sit down and think, “I think I’ll be attracted to the opposite sex from now on.” Did you have a party to celebrate your momentous decision? Or were you born that way?

      • Goldni007

        Which morning did someone wake up and say “I think I will smoke a cigarette today?” At what point did someone all of sudden decide to read pornography? I think I will beat my kid today. I think I will curse out my friend today. There are alot of choices we’ve made that we can’t recollect. The exact time and precise location does not matter.

        • Anonymous

          A general age would have sufficed. But those are false comparisons one and all, as well as all actions, not hormonal reactions to the opposite or same sex. Pornography was too broad, there is heterosexual and homosexual pornography, and which kind that tempts someone is based on that sexual orientation.

          Go look an porn of two gay men and try not to be physically repulsed.

          Sexual orientation is hardwired in their heads, it is part of their facticity. David Reimer is the best example for this. The man was the victim of a circumcision accident shortly after birth and was given a sex change and instructed by a psychotherapist to raise them as a girl. And so he was, name changed, dressed and treated as a girl, was slipped estrogen at puberty age to continue the farce.

          There was a small problem with the whole charade insofar as sexual orientation, though, the “girl” was a “lesbian.” David had a sexual attraction to females despite being raised as and believing that HE was a SHE. He also complained of never actually feeling right.

          Which is more likely, that this random person and random accident just happened to be part of the 5% of the population that “choose” to be homosexual (lesbian with his understood identity)? Or was he physiologically wired/predisposed to be attracted to females as he was born a male?

          People also seem to confuse the 2 issues of ACTION (participating in homosexual sex acts) and the ORIENTATION. I agree that all ACTION is a choice, but to suggest ORIENTATION is optional is just nonsense. I personally also find it primitive and absurd to condemn a person as morally reprehensible for a personality trait which is part of how god made them.

          Unrelated but still interesting;
          1. I thought Christ “fulfilled the law,” which is why Christians claim to not have to explain away the brutal old testament laws. If that is the case then why the sentimental and prejudiced lingering grasp on the 10 Commandments and anti-gay doctrines.
          2. Homosexuality in the old testament was mostly added in as Deuteronomist revisionism under King Josiah, including the Sodom story, so it’s silly to consider that a sound basis for denouncing anything.
          3. The new testament only mentions homosexuality in 3 places, and all from Paul, which he only refers to “sodomites” (a term applicable to anyone not engaging in strict intercourse) or pedophiles.

          • Anonymous

            :-)

            :-)

            :-)

          • Anonymous

            Dan. You’re about 23 yrs. old aren’t you, and used to being the “smartest” guy in the room(?). You convince yourself with many words sir. I’ll wager you can post a ‘proof’ that a blue whale is actually a flea. And after that whale swallows you whole you’d still swear, and ‘prove’ that you are still inside a dog’s ear.

            Ahem…Thars a hole, thars a hole, thars a hole in the bottom of the…argument(s).

            No hard feelings sir. If you were here and I could pat you on the head, I would, with humility.

    • Anonymous

      Skip the first minute to get the relevant part, but it’s funny all the way through.

    • Goldni007

      Agreed! It is a choice. Just like ‘choosing’ to smoke a cigarette. Just like ‘choosing’ to drink a beer. I am conflicted with the two latter ‘choices’ everyday. Would it be enjoyable to get drunk? Yes..till the hangover. Is the ‘drunk feeling’ good? Yes! Just like smoking a joint. I choose not to because what is ‘good’ is very well ‘bad’. Sex with my next door neighbor’s wife would be ‘good’ would’nt it? Choice!

      Self Control: Knowing that I can, but deciding that I won’t.

  • Rshill7

    With possible exceptions that I cannot think of at the moment…EVERYTHING you do is a choice or nothing is. The exceptions would of course be, eliminating waste, vomiting, eye-blinking, stuff like that. It is a behavior. A behavior is something you DO not something you ARE. Some of you here seem to presuppose:

    1. That you (or whoever) can’t help it. That is BULLSHIRT. A big fat bull wearing a big fat shirt. Deal with it. People are not automatons. We have free will. Some of you have forgotten that. While some of us do fly south for the winter, it is not an urge that cannot be controlled. Some of us also hibernate in the winter but still get out from time to time even if it’s only to shovel snow or ice fish.

    Is Homosexuality just a state of mind then with out the attached behavior? In other words, would you still be one if you never acted upon the impulse? No. I don’t think you would be. You are confusing temptation with your entire being. That’s a mistake. Nothing special with homosexuality. It doesn’t get to have it’s own heart, brain and circulatory system. It isn’t a living thing. It’s a behavior and The Holy Bible strongly condemns it as a sin, like gluttony, bearing false witness and the rest. If you can’t deal with that, try a different religion. There is no reason to put a crown and a robe on this BEHAVIOR and proclaim it any different than any other sin.

    Does God love homosexuals? Of course he does. He’s got the can’t help-its. He IS love. It’s what he does. Another thing he does is tell us the truth…about life and eternity and how to work those two out.

    Note:
    Ravi is the king of apologetics. If you have heard only this from him, you might want to hear a lot more. He has a site called Let My People Think.
    Cheers!

    • Goldni007

      Sir (or maam). Proud of our argument! From one Bible Thumper to the next..here here. Cheers!

      • Rshill7

        :-) !

  • Peter Warner

    Ravi Zacharias concluded:

    ‘… it ends up dying the death of a thousand qualifications, and the character of G-d is impugned in the process.’

    This man is stunningly brilliant and enlightening.

    And Calin_BS, I appreciate your comments.

    Best regards, Peter Warner.

  • Foster62

    A person has a choice on how to act on a disposition: The cathechism of the CAtholic church says it beautifully:
    Chastity and homosexuality

    2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.”142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

    2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

    2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

    • Cheryl~

      And this is the beauty of the Catholic Faith-I love the CCC!! Thanks for the post!

  • Conservative Hippie

    That was Brilliant!

  • Vidg2003

    Wow! That was amazing!

  • Mbradonarchcc

    Poor guy didnt ask what it would take to be a member of a group of believers (7:45). Joseph Cambell share’s an abundance of wisdom in his interview with Bill Moyers.

  • Alborn

    I have been reading a lot of the dialog here and feel that the main point is being missed by some. There are homosexuals and have always been. They may be good or they may be bad same as with heterosexuals. But for a person who is disposed to be homosexual to be a Christain and accept Jesus as the son of God and be among his true and committed followers(not the christian pretenders) he/she would have to not act upon those desires or temptations. But if you do not believe in the Bible and one does not accept Jesus as the son of God then the rest of the discussion is mute and futile.

  • http://www.facebook.com/GregoYatzee Gregory Yates

    I disagree with the very last portion of his answer. If you are living a homosexual lifestyle, which is in contradiction to Scripture, you are willfully living in sin. If you are willfully living in sin, you cannot be looking upon the face of Jesus. You will sink into the water as Peter did. When you are walking in sin (as opposed to sinning on an occasion) you have turned your back on Him, you have turned your back on your salvation.

  • Carolyn

    I have to admit, eventhough I am drawn towards apologetics, and I love Ravi as he is one of the best- sometimes his answers are beyond my simple intelligence. This though is the best answer to one of the toughest questions I’ve heard from anyone. Not only does he give his typical for instances, but he answers reasonably without one hint of holier than thou attitude. Again, one of the reasons why he is so gifted at what he does! Thank you for posting this, and thank you Mr. Zacharias!

    • Anonymous

      That’s a good post C.

      Often, when I listen to him on his site “Let My People Think” I’ll listen to a certain part repeatedly until I get it. I am 48 yrs old and he is the best I have ever heard since C.S. Lewis.

      Some of these atheists would do well to give these two a chance. Once compared with the vacuous propositions from the left and from atheists (often, the same camp), a light will click on, the scales will fall from their eyes, and they will see for the first time. A good polarized pair of sunglasses is suggested.

      • Carolyn

        I know what you mean- both about having to listen to the parts over again to understand (and I usually have to have my dictionary handy!) but he really is our generation’s C.S Lewis. Sometimes listening to Ravi going around with atheists- or rather atheists trying to go around with him, gives me a headache- as they never really focus on the points made by Ravi, and skip ahead to something completely different. The sunglasses idea is a great one :-)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QSIMIELSN7JAIWGVNKHCJ7L5OU Ryan G

    In life there are certain situations in which you can let things go and certain area where you take a stand and because of your beliefs. Gay marriage is an issue I take a stand with. Now before i state my purpose for it, I will say anytime especially as a disciple of Jesus Christ you will get hammered by people trying to come against your belief and that is fine.
    People have homosexual feelings isn’t the issue of having love for someone of the same sex it is taking action on that lust. We are told to deny the flesh daily, and we don’t hate homosexuals we hate the sin. Choosing to enter into that life style is a choice. We all in this world have urges to do things, but we have to weigh it out and say is this right, or is this wrong. If you are a follower of Jesus Christ and know him to be Lord and Savior you need to realize we all make sacrifices. This is a good solid answer and I respect any one who is willing to take a public stance on an issue that gets so many people angry, but knows what the Word of God says and realizes that it is the Word of God and that he must be obedient to what the Word says.

  • Anonymous

    I am reminded of a saying in my youth, “Celibacy is not Hereditary”. Too may times we as human beings think of things in binary terms, on/off, left right, and many other examples. Sex drive is a continuous experience that varies from person to person, and even within a person over time. While it is PC to state that Homosexuality is not a choice, a cursory look at the data and experiences lead to a much more complex situation.

    Many mono-zygotic twin studies have shown that there is not an identifiable genetic predisposition for homosexuality. I personally have seen this with my family members, and is well documented. Now before all of the snarky PC people get their blow torches out into a flame war, I speak facts not opinions. These are observations that have been documented in many journals. You also have to explain a genetic condition in which the genetic material that causes it is not procreated easily. There are also people who come into a homosexual relationship after having been a heterosexual person. Given these observations, there has to be some entertainment of the real possibility of choice in this behavior.

    When you look at the human mind, you realize the great ability to adapt to many different tastes and desires. My first taste of beer at the age of 18 is still vivid in my mind. I said to my mother you paid money for this stuff? There is turpentine in the basement that tastes better and costs less! Yet my mother liked beer, and drank it regularly as an “acquired taste”. How did she acquire this taste? Her mind chose to refashion what she thought tasted good to accept this new taste. I however would never do that, and do not drink to this day. I cannot stand the taste of wine, beer, or ETOH in general. Is this genetic? Possibly, but I have a significant number of relatives that are alcoholics on both sides of my families. Also I have always been very tolerant of alcohol when on those rare occasions I did drink. Possibly I chose not to drink due fear that I would become addicted. But this is not about my drinking, it about the malleability of the human mind. It has always been adaptable to various situations, both overtly, and inadvertently.

    I am always given choices, be it monogamy, spirituality, or sexually. What I do with those choices define me, not the choices I have available to me. Scripture is clear in the definition of Marriage, and the relationship between individuals. This cannot be ignored, or explained away in a PC friendly “god”. Our God gave us instructions and a moral basis for our lives. I will never be able to live by those commands perfectly, and rest assured in my belief in Christ, that by confessing my sins to God I will be forgiven. That being said, I am obliged to try to make choices that follow those commands. If doing that requires me not to practice certain activities, be they drinking, sex, or any other activity, then by my faith I should refrain. I cannot deny that I am a sinner, no better or no worse than any other. Can a practicing homosexual really say that they have followed Christ? Are they refraining from an activity that is against the morals of God? Christ told the woman accused of adultery, “your sins are forgiven, go and sin no more”. While we remember the first part, too many times the second half get ignored. That is really the whole point of the argument, will you cease an overt sin. To be a Christian is to answer, yes Lord I will sin no more.

    • Anonymous

      I’ve been saying good night to folks for a while now. But first, let me say to this dear person. Good, good, post. Keep the faith. Nothing else compares to it with regards to value or truth.

      Freewill versus Predetermination. It’s a paradox. The Bible is one of the few books I know of that contains these. The best explanation that I’ve heard is this…for that:

      God’s foreknowledge is not causative.

      Does that make your head hurt? Me Too :-)

      “…as high as the heavens are above the earth, so are his ways higher than our ways…” a Biblical quote that may not be perfect, though I think it is)

      Thumbs up!

    • Carolyn

      Excellently put!!

  • John

    Great video. Another good person on these issues is Catholic Professor Robert George of Princeton University.

  • Denis Newland

    I would like to make one point very clear. regardless of one’s personal knowledge of Greek or Hebrew language, The Bible is the most researched book in history. Thousands of scholars have spent years researching every nuance of the above languages in far more detail and with more knowledge than most can muster. In it’s entire context specifically it’s historical one the many discoveries in archeology through the ages has only proven the so called Myth to be a reality. I only hope that one day they will truly find Noahs ark then that should lay all criticism to rest once and for all.

  • Jecolon

    As an ex-homosexual and having an out of body experience in my youth after a dreadful sorrowful incident, I heard the voice of Yeshua, and NO, you will not be in the same realm that the creation of G-d has prepared for us. Sodomy and Unclean acts are noted in Roman 1 verse 26-32, and the end is death of spirit. Period.

  • Jecolon

    As an ex-homosexual and having an out of body experience in my youth after a dreadful sorrowful incident, I heard the voice of Yeshua, and NO, you will not be in the same realm that the creation of G-d has prepared for us. Sodomy and Unclean acts are noted in Roman 1 verse 26-32, and the end is death of spirit. Period.

  • http://www.okiepatriot.blogspot.com/ Greywolfe

    I have to admit that I have never had the opportunity to listen to this man speak before. Having said that, I thought he was going to give some form of prevarication when he said that he was going to take a few minutes answering.

    I guess I’m jaded by politicians and liberal christians. They uses verbosity to beat down opposition.

    He is brilliant in his delivery. And I find no argument with his logical progression at all. I’ll have to do some research on him and the church that he belongs to. Thanks for posting this.

    • Carolyn

      Grey wolfe- you can find his website here-http://rzim.org/default.aspx
      There’s a lot of interesting things, but if you go to his “let my people think” page and listen to some of his lectures- they are well done!

  • Kevin D.

    What I like to mention to my Christian friends is that to oppose homosexuality you don’t need to appeal to the Bible when Darwinism works just as well.

    Question: If evolution is passing on our genetic traits to the next generation, is homosexuality an evolutionary dead end?

    The answer is obvious: Of course homosexuality is an evolutionary dead end. If there’s no reproduction there’s no passing on of traits. Knowing this, doesn’t it behoove us to correct this abnormality through whatever means at our disposal – psychological or medical? If not, for what purpose do those fields exist?

    There are diseases men are born with that we will not hesitate in calling such. Blindness, deafness, cancers, whatever. But homosexuality? We don’t want to call it a disease or a psychological ailment. But it’s clearly unnatural in that it keeps one from participating in the most basic part if the life cycle – procreation.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but if scientists saw a endangered mammal in the wild and the males, for whatever reason, began to ignore the females and started mating amongst themselves, wouldn’t they 1) try to figure out what went wrong and 2) force the males an females to breed to ensure the survival of the species?

    Why won’t we?

    • Anonymous

      1. Homosexual behaviors are exhibited naturally by hundreds of other species, not all of them even mammals. And before you push back with it, we ARE animals in every single sense in which anything else on the planet can be classified under Animalia.

      2. Disabilities like blindness and deafness are not diseases. They are sometimes caused by diseases but there’s a distinction there. I don’t see people trying to establish discriminatory laws against blind or deaf people.

      3. There is a correlation shown between women with a close homosexual relative and greater than average fertility. Correlation is not causation, but it’s still interesting and my cause homosexuality in humans to be a net neutral effect.

      4. Naturally occurring means that it occurs in nature, which it always has and likely always will. Some small portion of the population are just anomalous for whatever reason.

      5. If another animal species were endangered and not mating it would either go extinct or the zoologists would resort to artificial insemination. Animals going extinct is an EXTREMELY common occurrence, over 98% of all life that has ever lived on this planet is already extinct, so the terror evoked by the though of another joining the ranks baffles me.

  • GregRonco

    @Kevin D. Humans aren’t endangered though.  And being gay doesn’t hurt yourself or anyone else.  It doesn’t kill people like cancer does.  And the main goal of mankind is not to populate the earth as much as possible.  In fact, it’s overpopulated.  And do you have any idea how many children live in orphanages?  Plus gay people are vastly in the minority, so there is no chance that humans will die out because of gay people.  The evidence behind that being that there have been gay people living in our society since the dawn of mankind and our population is still growing.
    The only way being gay affects your life is changing the gender you are attracted to.  It doesn’t harm you or hurt you, unless some ass decides it’s against their beliefs for you to exist.  I know dozens of gay people.  They are almost all very happy, healthy people.  They don’t detract from society, they benefit the economy, and they’re generally more pleasant and empathetic than bigoted straight people.
    If you’re going to rage against people who don’t reproduce you need to add a few people.  Your list should include: old people, children, priests, monks, nuns, people who just don’t want children, people who get vasectomies, and people with annoying personalities that can’t get laid.
    And here’s a fun fact about genes.  There purpose is to keep their species alive for as long as possible.  If being gay was detrimental to the growth of a species, it would be deleted from the code.  Not only has it not been deleted from human genes, it can actually also be found in thousands of other species.  If it was so terrible, it wouldn’t exist.  I think it’s natures way of reducing overpopulation.
    One last thing.  Humans should not be meddling with endangered species anyways.  Billions of species have lived and died out since earth formed.  It’s the circle of life.  Most species end up fading away.  It’s not up to mankind to determine what lives and what dies.