The Bible Does Not Obsess Over Homosexuality. Christians Do.

The Bible Does Not Obsess Over Homosexuality. Christians Do.

This write-up addresses issues raised in the last post about God, Heaven, and Hell. It also doubles as my reply to a KDian whom I had been having a back-and-forth email correspondence with, regarding the subject of Homosexuality and God.

At one point, he’d said:

“What is worse and unbelievable is how you can use the words of a book that calls you an abomination to defend anything. I mean, how do you live with yourself? Why do you subject yourself to so much emotional torture? Would your church members accept you if you came out to them?”

Here’s what I have to say.

The Bible never singled out homosexuality for special criticism. Every sin is an abomination before God. In Proverbs, liars are called abominable. When God gave the commandments in Leviticus, He spoke them in one breadth. Not a single chapter is dedicated to the “curious case” of homosexuality. Actually, the Bible says nothing of same-sex attraction; it only censures all extra-marital sexual relations—of which homosexual sex is predictably a part of.

The truth is that the Bible doesn’t intend homosexuals to feel more guilt than the average sinner. The Bible does not obsess over homosexuality the way some Christians do.

God does not separate sins by “natural” and “unnatural” or ‘African’ and “unAfrican”. But my Church members do, and this is why they probably will not accept me when I come out to them. However, you must never judge God’s intentions or will or purpose by the actions of a bunch of flawed, hypocritical people who take the liberty of cherry-picking God’s commandments.

Why do you think Jesus was always angry with the Pharisees—the synagogue-going, tax-paying, alms-giving, holier-than-thou Jews, with their showy prayerfulness? These people would scoff at prostitutes and tax collectors, and would have nothing to do with them. Jesus never liked the Pharisees. He called them a “brood of vipers” and hypocrites. And how did Jesus treat the prostitute and sinful tax-collector? He ate in the house of the latter and allowed the former to wipe his feet. Jesus is making a point there.

Allow me to quote you what Chimamanda Adichie said last month:

“Let us look at how Jesus treated women. Jesus came from a society that was very patriarchal. The Jewish people at that time did not give any regard to women, like many cultures all over the world. Jesus came, and suddenly Jesus is treating women as though they’re his equals. Jesus is talking to women. And the old-fashioned Jewish people were scandalized. Jesus is making a point there.”

What point do you think Jesus is making when he forbade the angry mob from stoning the adulterous woman, even when Moses’s law commanded so? He wouldn’t even berate the woman. “I do not condemn you,” he said to her. He asked her simply to “go and sin no more.”

You see, this was the single, overarching aim of Jesus: to save sinners. No undue fixation on one sin. No ill-judged categorization of sins. And this is how you separate the few good Christians from the hypocritical majority. Like the Pharisees, some people mentally excuse their shortcomings and sins by playing up other people’s sins, and this tactic is employed by many religious people. But God is not fooled.

People talk about how what a revolutionary historical figure Jesus was. But if He were to visit our world today, He would yet be revolutionary, because people (Christians) would be scandalized at His actions, and He Himself would wonder at them, at whether they ever read His teachings.

So, my friend(s), I’m not in any emotional torture, wondering why God must hate me so much. He doesn’t. At least no more than He hates other sinners. I’m tortured, rather, by the hypocrisy and double standards of so-called Christians.

Let me tell you about a wonderful book I read. That book is Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis (the author of the classic Chronicles of Narnia). C.S. Lewis was an atheist who later converted to Christianity, thanks to friends like J.R.R Tolkien (author of The Lord of the Rings trilogy). What that book says about homosexuality is compassionate and heart-warming. C.S. Lewis as far back as 1945 was saying that God understands the struggles of gay people because He made them so. Don’t think for one moment that this is a random book. Mere Christianity was placed third in Christianity Today’s list of the most influential books amongst evangelicals since 1945. And if you are a lover of English literature, this book has great literary value. It’s an intellectual’s take on Christianity.

In any case, it is my conviction that God made me gay. I’m not a mistake. I don’t know why he would choose me—us—to bear such heavy cross, but I believe there’s a higher, deeper purpose.

Written by Patrick

Previous What Do You Do When You Find Out The Man Interviewing You For A New Job Was The Hookup From Last Week?
Next Dear KD: Can I Have Sex Now That My Warts Are Gone?

About author

You might also like

Our Stories 17 Comments


After reading Slim’s post on Sunday, something struck me, and I’d love to share my experience with you guys. In my first year in the university, I fell in love

Our Stories 14 Comments


Ok, before we dive in, I would like to say that my life was not always as fucked up as I’m about to narrate to you. I was my dad’s

Our Stories 30 Comments


Ko! Ko!! Ko!!! Brought back to earth by the knock on my toilet door, I inquired tersely, “Taani?!” Who is that?! Even though I knew who it was, I didn’t


  1. C'est Moi
    November 11, 06:36 Reply

    God bless you for this Patrick. Despite all I have suffered because of my sexuality, I actually have this deep-down feeling that your last paragraph is my life. I don’t know what the future holds but I know that in due time it will manifest. Shalom!

  2. Black Dynasty
    November 11, 09:05 Reply

    Amen @ the last paragraph. I was made how I am and God doesn’t make mistakes. I fortunately do not care for negative and primarily ignorant opinions about my sexuality, i tend to see the hypocrisy from a mile away.

  3. Tristan
    November 11, 09:49 Reply

    “In any case, it is my conviction that God made me gay. I’m not a mistake. I don’t know why he would choose me—us—to bear such heavy cross, but I believe there’s a higher, deeper purpose.”

    Oh dear, I should recite this everyday.

  4. Malik
    November 11, 10:21 Reply

    Someone should drop a comment I can agree with please.

  5. Dimkpa
    November 11, 12:23 Reply

    What I get from what you have written is that homosexuality is not a worse sin than any other.

    However you have not succeeded in proving it is not a sin and you have not, in my opinion, addressed the questions of the gentleman you mentioned on the beginning. By your own words, we should still feel guilty though not more than others. In addition we all need to go and sin no more i.e stop being gay or having gay sex.

    Why would God make you gay and then in his holy book, call it a sin. In it there’s a passage that says no effeminate/homosexual will inherit his kingdom/go to heaven. That will be regardless of whether he doesn’t hate you more than other sinners.

    So why indeed did he make you gay? What deeper purpose will it serve, if at the end of the day he will throw you into a lake of fire?
    Is it to watch you jump through hoops and tie yourself in knots as you struggle to both be and not be what you are. Does it satisfy some dark, twisted sense of humor of his?

    I decided in the past not to comment on religious matters because it is a bloody waste of time. People are out there in the world trying to discover the nature of the universe, inventing mind boggling gadgets, developing cures for terrible ailments, and what do we do? Argue about an abstract nonsense regarding made up stories that has not solved any tangible real world problems. Our cognitive abilities can and should be put to better use.

    One thing I resolved years ago is not to take responsibility for God’s inadequacies/mistakes/errors of judgement/indifference. If he thinks being gay is a sin then he should not have made people gay. It shouldn’t be a hard thing to do afterall he is omnipotent. If he claims it is the devil’s handwork, then he should undo it. That again should not be a problem for same reason as above. Until he does that, the higher and deeper purpose I shall pursue will be that related to the carnal pleasures of sex with humans of the same gender as me.

    End of…

    • talknado2
      November 11, 13:23 Reply

      @dimkpa; I love ❤ you from the bottom of my heart. We should be an item; for how did you get into my head; heart and mind to get the last paragraph of your comment?! Blessings brother. Gracias!

    • Patrick
      November 11, 20:36 Reply

      You will have us focus our mental strengths on tackling more pressing needs while we foreclose discourses on religion and homosexuality. Pray tell, how has science and technology improved our lot as gay men, or allayed the pervading sense of guilt that haunt many a gay man?

      Is religion not the chief opposition to homosexuality. Its so easy to say, ‘yeay! we are cursed, we are all going to hell!’ Try telling that to the mass of suicidal teens barraged by notions that they are an abomination. I have come to hate this one word: abomination, because of the hypocrisy and bigotry associated with its use.

      You conflate being gay with having gay sex. I think they are different, and this distinction is very important. The bible calls gay sex a sin. There’s no need grasping at straws on the issue. It’s a question of whether you believe the bible or not. But it also does not call my attraction to the same sex a sin. I believe this allows many tortured gays to live better with themselves, especially those with faulty religious upbringing.

      Its interesting how Paul confessed that his sinful nature often caused him to do the wrong things. This was post-conversion Paul o. But he didn’t beat himself up about it. And neither should we.

      So if you think you are abominable and cursed and hell-bound, merely because of your sexuality, then I’m sorry, THE BIBLE DOES NOT PROVIDE A PREMISE FOR YOU

      • Bee
        November 12, 00:06 Reply

        I’m not sure I see how you (or anyone else) buy that being-gay-is-not-a-sin-but-gay-sex-is narrative and still be happy. Sex is a fundamental part of our livesssss!!! It’s not like anger issues that we can grow from or lying or kleptomania. It’s motherfucking sex. If you believe that a God that you love and that loves you, hates something you’re compulsed to indulge in, that you’re a walking contradiction. Unless you’ve chosen to live without sex. If so, then I’d like to know how much “good fruit” that is bearing in your life ‘cos that’s, like, meant to happen if you follow Christ truthfully … right?

        I’ve been nasty. Sorry. I actually follow through with a lot you’ve pointed out in your article. But, you can’t possibly tell me that you believe that God hates gay sex and then have gay sex freely. Then, you hate God. It’s not a matter of “God has forgiven me.” You hate God to enjoy constantly hurting Him (or Her, whatever ?).

        => “The bible calls gay sex a sin. There’s no need grasping at straws on the issue. It’s a question of whether you believe the bible or not.”

        You sound like you’ve read Justin Lee’s article. If not, you really should: .
        If you have, then you really didn’t get the point of his article. Read his last few paragraphs again. I’d love to hear from you though. (You could ask Pinky for my email.)

      • Dimkpa
        November 12, 02:34 Reply

        Now you are being ridiculous. Your arguments is just going round in circles.
        Same sex attraction is not a sin. Same sex activity is a sin. However you can have same sex and continue to sin because Paul sinned and didn’t beat himself up about it.
        What then is the point of religion, if all you need do is pay lipservice to it while you continue to commit sin.

        Your idea that people can be gay but not have gay is not only laughable but dangerous. It is an exercise in semantics and only an attempt to soften the horrible nature of religious ideas towards homosexuality. It is like telling a thirsty person ‘here’s some water but don’t drink it.” Or to the hungry “here’s some food but don’t eat it.” Good luck with that. It is deceitful and should stop.

        Sexual urge is one of the greatest motivations for a lot of human actions. It is a great desire. Conventional wisdom holds that men think about sex every 7 seconds. Think how difficult it is to resist that everyday for years on end. How does that lead to living a better life? How does it make one happy thinking about something a thousand times a day but not being able to do anything about it. Is that not a great psychological stress? Is the guilt associated with committing the sin of having gay sex not a worse burden on mental health? I have seen such guilt lead to depression and full blown psychosis. So if you think it is OK to tell, tortured gay youth that being gay is OK but gay sex is a sin, you are mistaken and actually causing more harm than good.

        You seem to think that acknowledging that being gay is not a sin somehow makes it acceptable to the religious. It is your precious Bible that calls having gay sex an abomination. It is it that says that people who have gay sex (essentially gay people) should be killed and will not go to heaven. These are the arguments used by people against us. How does saying same sex attraction is not a sin solve that? How can you use the same religion that condemns to try to absolve people of the same thing.

        You ask how science has helped gay people? I would ask how religion has. It is scientific thinking that has tried to explain homosexuality not religion. It is the same process that led to it not being considered a psychiatric illness and it is changing the thought on transgender people as well. If it were left to religion, none of this would happen.

        Paul was a man like us. If he were alive today he would be no different from any of your ‘men of God’ today. He was only lucky to be the first among many chancers. His views bekong to his era and have no bearing on the modern world. For example he said women should not talk in church. He was pompous enough challenged Peter who actually was with Jesus about things he only heard of. So don’t come to me with ‘Paul o!’ as if he us some demigod. Snd whike your at it, take time to research the origin of your precious Bible. It did not drop from the sky. Find out why some books were included and others not. Find out how it was decided which doctrines to add and those to be dropped. Then after reading about these inputs from fellow men like you, come backnto me and try to use this as proof for universal truth.

        • Patrick
          November 12, 19:01 Reply

          ‘Conventional wisdom holds that men think about sex every 7 seconds.’ ????

          I suppose for people who must have sex everyday, your so-called conventional wisdom will hold true. Priests and Monks go without sex in a lifetime. You know, even the most difficult, mundane task becomes easier with time. Many people simply think sex dirty and abstain from it. Asexuals would rather read a book.

          Religion puts a constraint on human behaviour, even what you’d call normal behaviour. That’s the point of religion. If everyone were left to their devices, were allowed to act upon every thought and desire, wouldn’t our world be in disarray. You seem to fancy a religion which says, have all the sex you want. You say sexual urge is one of the greatest motivations for a lot of human actions, a great desire.’ Well, so is pride and power. And by your admonition, we should pursue all these great motivations to their fullest.

          And people who have such strong attraction to a family member must feel such great psychological distress because the Bible and us (gay people) have said that incest is bad (I once read of twin boys who fell in love with each other and consummated that love, and I couldn’t find it in me to begrudge them that). I am of course not equating homosexuality with incest, but I haven’t read yet that incestuous feelings is a mental illness. My point is that religion (at least Christianity) seeks to put a constraint on our worst instincts, a cut-off, between what is acceptable or not, and no matter how imperfect (and sometimes very unfair) these restrictions are, they’ve largely created some order. The mosaic law has influenced much of our existing laws.

          When I referenced Paul, I was merely trying to make the point that good Christians do break the law on occasion. They don’t however go on sinning.

          You should want to read Bee’s for better insight

          I concede the point about science to you.

          • Ace
            November 12, 23:10 Reply

            I agree that religion is a form of restraint for man’s most basic vile instincts…if only it didn’t just repress them at worst and sublimate at best.

            As for the point you made about incest and mental illness, I’d like to point out that from what I’ve gathered over the years, our aversion to incest is as a result of the genetic defects that usually accompany the offsprings of said relations due to homozygosity leading to the expression of recessive and deleterious traits/mutations. Therefore, it is not a stretch to assume that the taboo associated with the act must have been an evolutionary trait solidified into a basic instinct to ensure the production of viable offspring. Of course, the damaging effects of inbreeding tend to be greatest in first generation relations than in distant ones which might explain some people’s acceptance of sexual relations with cousins.

            Also, mental illness isn’t just anything people are uncomfortable with or feel isn’t right, there are criteria to be met and contexts to be considered e.g personal distress, impairment in relationships and work, etc. This is one of the things that irks me most about people who are quick to play the mental illness card on gay people when in fact, society is responsible for what supposedly qualifies them as mentally disordered in the first place.

            Sometimes I wonder if the aversion some people have towards homosexuality is due to the danger it might have posed to reproduction in the early years of mankind before technology.

            Then again, it might just be our primal fear of change and difference.

  6. Beryl04
    November 11, 14:01 Reply

    In all and the the way I see things, religious people especially Nigerian Christians and Moslems are always in the way of the fight for marriage equality and repeal of the SSMPA law. For when you sit there and still believe your sexual orientation is a sin,how then are you going to stand up and fight for your right to live and to love? Naija Christians,you guys are big a clog in the wheel of LGBTQ progress and emancipation in this part of the world.

  7. Ace
    November 11, 18:17 Reply

    This is the first time I’ll comment on an article online but I feel like this needed to be said. While I appreciate the sentiment behind the author’s post, I would like to point out a few things, one of which is the fact that this post while trying to absolve the Bible of blatant homophobia, only succeeds in painting a picture where it is supposedly a by-product or a side mention, a regular sin if you will. However, that seems to be a paradox because the author, at least the way I see it, is trying to show that the bible wasn’t particularly concerned with homosexuality as a huge sin but even if that were to be true, it is held that sin is sin is sin so I honestly don’t understand how even a supposedly minute mention of homosexuality as sin matters.

    Let me be clear, people do interpret the bible to suit their needs but you cannot deny that the source material itself is inflammatory regarding homosexuality. You cannot deny that the attitude towards gay people in the Bible was almost exclusively murderous.

    The examples you gave where you talked about Jesus accepting sinners and absolving them yo “sin no more” does not hold water to me because as far as I know there is no point where he came across a gay person and gave them the same treatment and this is predicated on a scenario where homosexuality has been considered sin. Loving an abused child does not erase the abuse.

    And while I respect your decision to see homosexuality as a divine burden, I disagree wholeheartedly. A “God” who supposedly considers something as sin, abhors it, then goes on to actively create and introduce it into his creation is a cruel one. If you create something, everything that made it that way came from you or your awareness, so if I were to believe your postulation, I would have to assume that God himself is a sadistic pansexual. But then, I left that world behind ages ago.

    TL;DR I’ll leave you with this quote “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

    – Epicurus

  8. Bee
    November 11, 23:02 Reply

    I think the agnostic bunch of us (or whatever you call yourselves) shouldn’t be so quick to dismiss discussions bordering religion as unnecessary banter. You think religion is a problem? The only way to solve that problem is to talk about it, to engage actively in debates about religion. That, or kill all the religious people.

    • Malik
      November 12, 07:17 Reply

      I fantansize about the last option pretty often…

      • Eddie
        November 12, 08:02 Reply

        Lmao….thought I was the only one

  9. Eddie
    November 12, 08:14 Reply

    My own opinion is that we love ourselves no matter what religion says or what society dictates or the inane perceptions of man( because mankind will always hate what they perceive as different except the few who are “illuminated”)… If you wanna marry a chick,please do…if you wanna marry a dude,please do…if you wanna stay single and sample the buffet,please do…do what thou wilt if it’s not hurting anyone… I know it’s hard to but we should try to seek validation not from the rest of the world but from ourselves as individuals,having the knowledge that we are part of nature’s intricate tapestry… And that’s what I’m gonna try to do.

  10. Eric
    November 15, 16:01 Reply

    At the beginning of this post, I thought I had found the article that would eventually reconcile my Christian faith with my sexuality, but at the end, I realized it’s just the same old thing I’ve been hearing. I don’t know why but I find staunch Christians who have come to accept their homosexuality and still see homosexuality as a sin very scary. It’s like you are consciously, unintentionally and unapologetically living in sin and God loves you like that. And please, don’t use the “living under grace” excuse. These are the kind of people that are still waiting for the year, month, day and hour the lord shall decide to bless them with their own heterosexuality goody bag.

    No offence but in as much as I want to use that your last paragraph as my everyday motivation, I won’t deny the fact that it kinda doesn’t correlate with the entire write up. You first said that homosexuality is a sin no greater or less than other sins then went ahead to say that God created and loves you like that. Then I guess since stealing and committing murder are sins, it’s possible to say that God created some people thieves and murderers and He loves them like that.(forgive me for comparing homosexuality with theft and murder).

    This doesn’t really prove anything. It just seems brainwashing and defensive. But since you’ve managed to find peace between your faith and sexuality, then good for you!

Leave a Reply