Thursday, March 15, 2007

Dr. Albert Mohler Takes Some Heat

At the end of this post there is a link to an article written on March 4th by Dr. Albert Mohler. Since writing this article, Dr. Mohler has received attack from both Christian conservatives as well as homosexual advocates. The article is called "Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?"

I took the time to read this article and I wanted to weigh in on the subject. There is no doubt that Dr. Mohler took on something that is to say the least "controversial." However, did he say anything wrong? Did he defy the word of God? Let's look at what was said that has everyone in such an uproar.

In the opening statement of the article we are tolde all that we need to hear in order to know that this article will certainly get some people talking.

"What if you could know that your unborn baby boy is likely to be sexually attracted to other boys? Beyond that, what if hormonal treatments could change the baby's orientation to heterosexual? Would you do it? Some scientists believe that such developments are just around the corner."

I'll let you read the article for yourself. You should indeed do that if you want to have and state any opinion over the matter of what Dr.Mohler actually said. I will however offer my synopsis of what I think Dr. Mohler was trying to do.

Let's say that scientist were to somehow conclusively prove that there is a link between homosexuality in human beings and genetics. Would that or should that change the position of the church on the issue of homosexuality? No.

Mohler rightly points out that we live in a fallen world that has been effected and infected by sin every way. Could this not have effected our biological makeup to the point where anomolies are caused in the formation of an infant in the womb? Of course. We see that there are all kinds of birth defects today. We also see that there are those whom seem to be more easily addicted to alcohol and drugs than others.

Dr. Mohler rightly points out that regardless of whether science can prove a genetic link or not, homosexuality would continue to be a sin. Why? Because God says so. We are sinners not on the basis of our temptations but our indulgence of our temptations. We are all born in the "flesh" and are drawn naturally to sinful desires to do all kinds of things, but we are condemned not upon our nature but our acts.

Scripture says in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 "9Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

Regardless of whether someone is born with a disposition towards homosexuality or not, they are held accountable to their actions. As is the one who has a disposition to addiction. Perhaps we could prove that those who steal or murder have a disposition from birth that urges them to do so, should we really just say that it's not sinful?

So I would have to say that I think that this is a wise, preemptive strike by Dr. Mohler, not saying that there is scientific proof that homosexuality is linked to genetics, but that if it were proven, it would not change the Christians view of homosexuality as a sin that needs to be avoided, repented of and abstained from while turning to Christ alone for salvation by God's grace through faith, relying on God for strength to not sin in this manner. All Christians must rely on God for strength to stop sinning.

The other issue that was brought up was whether or not we should alter the fetus as it grows to prevent a child being born with a homosexual bent. Some scientist have said that they think through hormonal treatment of the child while still in the womb that this could be corrected. Dr. Mohler did say if that were possible then it should be done. I'm hesitant to agree or disagree.

We do give children medications all the time that alter their personality. Drugs for depression and ADD or ADHD. So it's not a new idea to treat a child with medication in order to correct their behaviour, but here we are talking about hormone treatment while the baby is still developing. It is no doubt a difficult issue to think through.

On one hand if there is a genect defect in a developing baby that can be cured without harm to the baby or the mother, should we not persue fixing the problem?

On the other hand, there is a dangerous line that we approach when we start to tamper with the unborn to alter this or that. Obviously we should not alter children just to our liking and pick their eye color and hair color. But if we can keep a child from developing a serious disease, are we not obligated to treat the unborn?

There is one thing certainly not in question for Dr. Mohler and anyone else who believes in Christ Jesus, life is precious. Regardless of whether or not it is possible that a person could be born with a disposition that makes homosexuality more likely or not, we must never endorse abortion, but correcting unbalanced hormones in the development of a child? Maybe.

I would be remiss if I left out one other facet of this conversation. I have known and even ministered to a number of people who are homosexual, or have at some point dabbled in homosexual acts. As far as those whom I personally have encountered, they all come from broken homes, or homes with one overbearing parent and one distant parent, and things of that nature. Not healthy, loving, Christ centered homes. I mentione this only to say, that I do think that largely homosexuality is still a choice. Perhaps there could be a genetic malfunction that makes some people more inclined, maybe. But regardless, I think if even it were proven to be scientific fact, even if it were proven able to be cured, even if that cure were applied to every child in the womb, I still think we would have homosexuality in the world. Because I honestly believe that though it could, maybe, possibly be that there are those who might be genetically more drawn to homosexuality, that there is a large group of homosexuals who have chosen that lifestyle and their upbringing and various life situations have pushed them to choose that lifestyle.

What do you think. I think, good for Dr. Mohler for making us think.

Dr. Mohler's article: http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_print.php?id=891

A secular view of Dr. Mohler's article: http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/furor-over-baptists-gay-baby-article/20070315023809990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Both homesexuality and abortion are very controversial issues in our society today, and I'm glad that they are at least being addressed and talked about! So many Christians shy away from the hard topics, which creates both ignorance and misunderstandings. Keep bringing the hard topics to light! God's Word has answers, and it's nice to see that some people are looking.

risen_soul said...

Ignorance is certainly a real problem amongst many Christians. I think many who are upset about Dr. Mohler's article probably haven't even read it. They have just heard about it or seen it charicatured by some secular article putting words in Dr. Mohler mouth or quoting him without any context.

Thanks for your positive comment.

shaton said...

The information will help you to get focused on your present and future projects. This is about Attention Deficit Disorder and also having the information about ADHD,adult and child.ADD vs.ADHD

risen_soul said...

shaton,

thanks for the info, though I really wasn't trying to make any specific point about ADD or ADHD, just usin them as an example of one way we often use drugs in America to treat children's behavior.

Papa J said...

Your last paragraph hits the nail on the head. Homosexuallity is a choice. A person can not choose ethnicity, it is inherited. A person can always choose his actions.

You should have put that disclaimer first. Its a long blog and such an important point should be placed at the forefront.