13. What are the basic problems of the "cultural conditioning" argument?
 

    First, the scripture rejection of homosexuality is based primarily on the Genesis creation account, which applies to all cultures. This account predates the Mosaic law and Israel's theocracy, and therefore is not culturally bound.
    The scripture rejection of homosexuality is based squarely on God's original creation of man as male and female, and on His instructing of heterosexual marriage and the family-sometimes upheld by Jesus (Matthew 19:4,5). Because it is a teaching that transcends culture, it cannot be relegated as obsolete by culture.
    Second, what Scripture teaches morally in the Old Testament, it also teaches morally in the New Testament. This uniformity also proves that these Scriptures transcend alleged cultural limitations. Because God's holy character never changes, His moral law never changes. God is sovereign over culture, not subject to it. Society's changing values do not change God's moral law, which is valid for any and every culture regardless of its beliefs.
    Indeed, when God wishes to specify that something is temporal or "culturally conditioned," He does so. For example, the ceremonial aspects of the law of Moses that were instituted in the Old Testament are rescinded in the New Testament. From this we may conclude that if God's prohibitions against homosexuality were restricted to specific times or practices and no longer relevant, God would certainly have told us so in the New Testament.
    Finally, the culture argument backfires. All cultures have placed limits on homosexuality, and no known culture has ever permitted preferential homosexuality for most adults for the major portion of the life cycle.
    Some of the most liberal theologians will freely admit the Bible does condemn modern homosexuality. Even some gay theologians have made concessions. For example, "The four verses cited from the New Testament...indicate with no possibility of qualification that homosexual practices were considered by Paul (and the writer of 1 Timothy) to be concrete sins on a par with adultery and murder." Such admissions do prove that when gay theology teaches these verses do not condemn homosexuality, the burden of proof rests with them. Has the homosexual community established its burden of proof? No-not for a single Scripture.
 

Taken from The Facts On Homosexuality, by John Ankerberg and John Weldon, Published by Harvest House Publishers.

Are You Rapture Ready?