Redeeming God

Liberating you from bad ideas about God

Learn the MOST ESSENTIAL truths for following Jesus.

Get FREE articles and audio teachings in my discipleship emails!


  • Join Us!
  • Scripture
  • Theology
  • My Books
  • About
  • Discipleship
  • Courses
    • What is Hell?
    • Skeleton Church
    • The Gospel According to Scripture
    • The Gospel Dictionary
    • The Re-Justification of God
    • What is Prayer?
    • Adventures in Fishing for Men
    • What are the Spiritual Gifts?
    • How to Study the Bible
    • Courses FAQ
  • Forum
    • Introduce Yourself
    • Old Testament
    • New Testament
    • Theology Questions
    • Life & Ministry
You are here: Home / Redeeming Life / C. S. Lewis on Gay Marriage

C. S. Lewis on Gay Marriage

By Jeremy Myers
46 Comments

C. S. Lewis on Gay Marriage

CS LewisAs far I know, C. S. Lewis never directly wrote about gay marriage (but see the update note at bottom of this post). But he did write about whether or not the government should be involved in defining what is marriage and what is not.

In his classic book, Mere Christianity C. S. Lewis wrote something which directly applies to the question in our courts and churches today about defining marriage. Lewis was writing about marriage between divorced people, but the idea can equally be applied to marriage between two gay people.

Here is what he wrote:

Before leaving the question of divorce, I should like to distinguish two things which are very often confused. The Christian conception of marriage is one: the other is quite the different question—how far Christians, if they are voters or Members of Parliament, ought to try to force their views of marriage on the rest of the community by embodying them in the divorce laws. A great many people seem to think that if you are a Christian yourself you should try to make divorce difficult for every one. I do not think that. At least I know I should be very angry if the Mohammedans tried to prevent the rest of us from drinking wine.

My own view is that the Churches should frankly recognize that the majority of the British people are not Christian and, therefore, cannot be expected to live Christian lives. There ought to be two distinct kinds of marriage: one governed by the State with rules enforced on all citizens, the other governed by the church with rules enforced by her on her own members. The distinction ought to be quite sharp, so that a man knows which couples are married in a Christian sense and which are not.

Incidentally, Lewis’ view appears to be quite similar to my view on the gay marriage amendment. It is time for Christians to recognize that the United States Government (or any human government for that matter) is not the enforcer of biblical guidelines and laws. Governments make their own laws which they believe will help bring peace, safety, and security within their own lands, but these laws are often at odds with the instructions and commands of Scripture.

Even though the government makes something “legal,” this does not mean that it is now legal for Christians, for we must follow both the laws of God and the laws of our government, with the laws of our King taking precedent in our personal behavior over the laws of our land. And we must be wary about trying to get our government to enforce Biblical guidelines on all the people in a country, for if it can be done with “Christian” laws, it can also be done at a later time with “Muslim” laws, or “Mormon” laws, or whatever religion is in “power” at the time. C. S. Lewis gives the example of Muslims and their prohibition to drinking alcohol, but if Mormons ever came into power over the country, maybe they would put a law into effect prohibiting the drinking of coffee. Then where would we be? Just imagine if Romney had been elected President!!!

I’m joking, of course, for I doubt Mormons would ever do that. But in some countries Muslims are trying to enforce their Sharia law upon everybody in that country, just as here in the United States some Christians are trying to enforce some of our laws on all the people in our country. If anything has been learned from history, we know that it is bad for everybody when any religion picks up the sword of government and tries to enforce religious laws on anybody.

UPDATE: In re-reading The Four Loves recently, I discovered that Lewis did in fact write about homosexuality, but mainly in the context of male friendship. He scoffs at the idea that some modern proponents of homosexual marriage see homosexual behavior in the deep male friendships of ancient literature. Here is some of what he says:

It has actually become necessary in our time to rebut the theory that every firm and serious friendship is really homosexual (p. 245)

Which Lewis then goes on to do for the next page or two. He concludes with this:

Kisses, tears and embraces are not in themselves evidence of homosexuality. The implications would be, if nothing else, too comic. Hrothgar embracing Beowulf, Johnson embracing Boswell (a pretty flagrantly heterosexual couple) and all those hairy old toughs of centurions in Tacitus, clinging to one another and begging for last kisses when the legion was broken up… all pansies? [His word; not mine!!!] If you can believe that you can believe anything (p. 247).

So he did say a little something on the subject after all…

UPDATE 2: I have been reading the letters of C. S. Lewis compiled in Yours, Jack. C. S. Lewis wrote a letter to Sheldon Vanauken about homosexuality (p. 241). In it, he wrote this:

I take it for certain that the physical satisfaction of homosexual desires is sin. This leaves the homosexual no worse off than any normal person who is, for whatever reason, prevented from marrying. Second, our speculations on the cause of the abnormality are not what matters and we must be content with ignorance. The disciples were not told why the man was born blind (John 9:1-3): only the final cause: that the works of God should be made manifest in him.

… What should the positive life of the homosexual be? I wish I had a letter which a pious male homosexual, now dead, once wrote to me–but of course it was the sort of letter one takes care to destroy. He believed that his necessity could be turned to spiritual gain: that there were certain kinds of sympathy and understanding, a certain social role which mere men and mere women could not give. But it is all horribly vague–too long ago. Perhaps any homosexual who humbly accepts his cross and puts himself under divine guidance will be shown the way.

Did you like this post? Share it below! Also, you may like to read what Jesus taught about homosexuality.

God is Redeeming Life Bible & Theology Topics: CS Lewis, Discipleship, gay marriage, homosexual, homosexuality

Advertisement

Learn the most essential truths for following Jesus!

Get FREE articles and audio teachings every week in my discipleship emails!


Comments

    Leave a Comment or Question Cancel reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. John Bolton says

    May 1, 2014 at 5:39 am

    I appreciate your (and Dr. Lewis’) perspective on this subject. As a conservative and as a Christian I am often troubled by the desire to pass a law to enforce a view with which I agree. Even things like drug enforcement and abortion become a challenge. A simple example to me is the desire by many to allow religious practices or symbols on public property. My question is often, “What do we do when our people are no longer in charge?” I’d rather see no religious practices in the Capital Building than allow it to be used for Wiccan rituals or Atheistic teaching! I am not concerned that the government does not adhere to biblical principals, but rather that the church does not. We say we are defending marriage and yet 50% of all marriages end in divorce. That includes “Christian Marriages” and until recently only referred to heterosexual marriages. I think we have already seen the loss of the “sanctity of marriage”.

    Reply
    • Jeremy Myers says

      May 6, 2014 at 5:18 pm

      Yes, I agree completely. We Christians do not have much right asking the government to pass laws to force our morals on other people when we cannot keep the most basic rules of love, kindness, generosity, and faithfulness in our own church communities.

      Christians often decry those cultures where the government tries to enforce Muslim sharia law on the citizens, but from the perspective of many in our own culture, that is very similar to what Christians are trying to do when we try to enforce Christian law on non-Christians.

      Reply
  2. Mark Richmond says

    November 12, 2014 at 11:21 am

    There is a huge difference between enforcing and influencing.

    Reply
  3. Mark Richmond says

    November 12, 2014 at 11:28 am

    I believe this is somewhat a “red herring” argument. We as Christians cannot enforce ENFORCE anything from a governmental perspective. If we were a theocracy we could WE ARE NOT. We are a democratic republic whose basic rights emanate from a divine perspective. That being the case we CAN HAVE AN INFLUENCE and vote in leaders and principles that reflect our beliefs. We as Christians are encouraged to be good citizens and participate in the countries debates on what becomes law. There appear to be two views in many peoples minds- both equally wrong- 1st to badger and attempt to enforce views and in the process become obnoxious. The 2nd and equally destructive is to spiritualize on these issues and state “It matters not because as believers our home is in the bye and bye. These issues are important to our children and our children’s children so ignoring them and stating “politics is too dirty for a saint such as I” is a dereliction of our responsibilities.

    Reply
  4. Mark Richmond says

    November 12, 2014 at 11:40 am

    Christians often decry those cultures where the government tries to enforce Muslim sharia law on the citizens, but from the perspective of many in our own culture, that is very similar to what Christians are trying to do when we try to enforce Christian law on non-Christians.—-Jeremy I like your views for the most part. I am glad you have the articles you do and I hope you continue as you are very bright and insightful. However the comment above is so beyond the pale I have to state my adament not only disagreement with it but also ludicrousness of it. Too compare present day Christendom with Sharia Islam is so ridiculous to be laughable. The perspective of the extreme left (And I know many on the extreme left) is if you mention Jesus’ Name you are a religious fundamentalist attempting to enforce your beliefs. There is no reason on the extreme left. I am a member of the Tea Party and the lies told about me and the group I belong to are so scandalous and absolute fabrications its ridiculous. If anything Christians are not BOLD ENOUGH in either the gospel or values. So please do not state such untrue things. The Islamic Jihadist movement has ZERO to do with Christianity. I have had people use Westboro Baptist as an example of this comparison and while I abhor them and there horrible behavior I still havent seen a head rolling down the street and ir the attempt to ENFORCE what they believe. Its not a reasonable comparison.

    Reply
  5. Vaughn says

    June 27, 2015 at 6:31 pm

    Canada legalized gay marriage 10 years ago. We are still here!!! life goes on. Here is a link on what to expect for the laws to change as a general idea

    http://www.therebel.media/canada_legalized_gay_marriage?recruiter_id=38651

    Reply
  6. Matthew Richardson says

    June 27, 2015 at 8:57 pm

    I have always blieved that legislating morality is a bad idea. I believe the purpose of law is to protect people from unwanted actions/harm by others. That whatever is agreed upon (without coersion) between individuals should be allowed under law. Morality is an issue of societal norms, not legal mandate. Christ taught that we are to lead by example and be (not shine) a light for the world, not that we should force others by law to conform to our ideas. That is the perview of other religions.

    Reply
    • Jeremy Myers says

      June 29, 2015 at 8:39 am

      Yes, you can make good laws, but you cannot change people’s hearts. People always find a a way around them.

      Reply
    • Matthew Richardson says

      June 29, 2015 at 3:17 pm

      It’s why prohibition didn’t work. It might have had better success had it merely prohibited hard alcohol. Instead, the demand opened the way to a stronger mafia. Evil loves taking advantage of foolish laws.

      Reply
  7. Kenny Wollmann says

    June 28, 2015 at 12:17 am

    You can find Lewis’ thoughts on the issue in the published collections of his personal communication.

    Reply
    • Redeeming God says

      June 29, 2015 at 8:46 am

      Yes, I added some notes from an abridged version of his letters I recently read. It is called “Yours, Jack.” I imagine he wrote more on the topic in the collected letters?

      Reply
    • Kenny Wollmann says

      June 29, 2015 at 8:50 am

      Not that familiar with the collected letters. Also look at Sheldon Vanauken’s “A Severe Mercy”. It is an account of the author’s interaction with Lewis.

      Reply
    • Redeeming God says

      June 29, 2015 at 9:12 am

      Oh yes. I have that book and read it years and years ago, but forgot what it was about. Thanks!

      Reply
  8. Mike Gantt says

    June 28, 2015 at 1:43 am

    Jeremy, it’s true that we shouldn’t expect unbelievers to live up to the same standards that the Lord requires of us who know Him. However, it’s false to say that the Lord requires nothing of them. SS”M” is an assault on the created order and if we were to say nothing to our fellow human beings about it we would be derelict in our duty of love to them. I think that expecting unbelievers to shun divorce is asking too much. By contrast, I think asking them to let stand the definition of marriage that has existed among all cultures for millennia is not.

    Reply
    • Redeeming God says

      June 29, 2015 at 8:45 am

      Yes. I did not say (nor did Lewis) that God requires nothing from those who do not know Him.

      Reply
    • Mike Gantt says

      June 29, 2015 at 9:37 am

      That’s not clear from the paragraph you wrote above.

      Reply
    • Redeeming God says

      June 29, 2015 at 10:20 am

      A paragraph can only say so much, and the longer article to which the post points says much more. But regardless, the post said nothing whatsoever about what God does or does not require. In fact, the paragraph doesn’t mention God at all.

      Reply
    • Mike Gantt says

      June 29, 2015 at 11:15 am

      Jeremy, I cannot tell whether you are sincerely confused or if you are disingenously trying to avoid defending the position you have taken. On the assumption that you are genuinely confused, let me explain that I was taking issue with your thesis – your thesis as found both in the paragraph above and in the article which is linked, which is that Christians should not seek to stand in the way of homosexual marriage on the basis that it is not biblical. Now perhaps you can re-read what I wrote and understand what I meant. Then, if you disagree with me, you can defend your position. Or you can simply admit that you were wrong to criticize Christians who have worked to defend marriage – not just as Christians have known it for thousands of years, but as practically all societies have known it for thousands of years.

      Reply
    • Redeeming God says

      June 29, 2015 at 11:45 am

      Mike, I am neither confused nor disingenuous. You are reading a whole bunch of ideas found from other blogs and news networks into my post which I neither said nor stated nor implied.

      I am inviting you to re-read my post for what it says, and nothing more. Don’t try to read between the lines or import ideas into my post from other sources.

      You state that my thesis is “that Christians should not seek to stand in the way of homosexual marriage on the basis that is is not biblical.” I am not sure where you get this thesis from, but it is not from me or from anything I wrote in this article. Other people might say that, but I did not.

      You are importing this idea into my post from somewhere else. That is not my thesis and I did not state that as my thesis.

      If you have a complaint about something I specifically wrote, then we can discuss that.

      Reply
    • Mike Gantt says

      June 29, 2015 at 12:03 pm

      Jeremy, I read the article and also the article to which it linked. Both seemed straightforward in what they were saying, and that’s what I was reacting to. Since you say you meant nothing like that, I don’t know what to think…so there’s nothing further for me to say.

      Reply
  9. ward kelly says

    June 28, 2015 at 2:10 am

    I think what is often missing in discussions of gay marriage, government and the church is the Trojan horse activism which will come. Christianity that is rooted in the adherence to the biblical message, not the dead or feel good churches, is being destroyed. When our President and wife say the will transform, rewrite, America and its institutions, the bible believing churches is a target.

    Obamacare sought to destroy religious based institutions by forcing anti Christian laws on them with the fear of onerous fines looming over them. Simultaneously the gay activists are with premeditation picking small businesses to force their agendas on, or go out of business.

    Their next attack will be on churches across this land in an attempt to destroy them through government enforcement and loss of tax exempt status. The President says he will not let that happen. First he doesn’t have that power, and second he s a habitual liar.

    In perfect world the government would not be in the marriage business at all. If this “right” were truly the end game I think many would accept it and move on. But like myself, I don’t see this the end, but the beginning. We can all pat each other on the back for our tolerance, and love motivated response, as witness the death of many a church which tried to take a stand against gay activism.

    Reply
  10. Daniel Darling says

    June 28, 2015 at 4:54 am

    That’s inconsistent. Every law legislates morality. I’m glad the U.S. legislates the biblical morality of civil rights for African Americans after a shameful history of oppression and slavery. I’m glad the Court forced its morality on the nation in Brown versus Board of Education.

    Reply
    • Matthew Richardson says

      June 28, 2015 at 5:49 am

      Slavery was being forced onto those people. Under my definition the law would intercede to prevent such an act of one group against another.

      Reply
  11. Bill Hoidas says

    June 28, 2015 at 4:56 am

    🙂

    Reply
  12. Jordan Hofer says

    June 28, 2015 at 12:42 pm

    Lewis would have an epic youtube channel were he alive today.

    Reply
    • Redeeming God says

      June 29, 2015 at 8:46 am

      Yes! He would dominate.

      Reply
  13. Yuri Wijting says

    June 29, 2015 at 8:59 am

    Interesting quote and a common sense one. People sometimes confuse the law with morality. Laws are socially created while morality is recognized. Laws have loopholes because it is very difficulty to anticipate every possible set of circumstances and every possible set of unethical behavior, but morality does not have loopholes.

    Reply
  14. Stephen Cornell says

    July 1, 2015 at 5:59 am

    They are applicable and this is worth sharing!

    Reply
  15. Angel says

    January 21, 2016 at 12:35 am

    So what exactly did Lewis try to say? That there’s nothing wrong about same sex marriage and acts? please simplify for me. And not too much big words.

    Reply
    • Peter W. Rouzaud says

      February 2, 2016 at 4:41 pm

      Angel; I noticed your question was unanswered. I hope you don’t mind me answering your question. There are at least two sides to the argument here. Basically, one side says we need to do our best to make our society more moral, like ‘Christianity’. These people believe politics are legitimate ways to do this. What CS Lewis saying, we cannot expect to force Christian values on our society; for instance, divorce and homosexual marriage. By the way, my view is that we confuse (and undermine) our mission by tying social agenda to Christianity. Something the Apostle Paul never did. As an example, he made an appeal to slave holders, but, as far as we know, did not picket in front of Philemon’s house. It is also unlikely he started a ‘Christian coalition’, to legislate against Nero from crucifying Christians. There were no armed rebellions or the like. Jesus, and Paul later, didn’t see the invisible Kingdom of God as something that should be promoted in a carnal world system. No doubt we need to help make our world a better place. But let’s leave the ‘authority of the Bible’ out of it.

      Reply
      • Angel says

        February 23, 2016 at 12:37 pm

        Thanks. I have a better understanding.

        Reply
      • Thabani says

        May 8, 2016 at 12:58 pm

        Peter,

        Well said. The Gospel is about persuasion in love.

        Reply
  16. Kyle says

    August 29, 2016 at 3:35 am

    Hey! So I came across your website because my Christian love for classical paganism. I was reading some of your articles on the subject and a few others and I thoroughly enjoyed it. You have a few articles about C.S. Lewis. I LOVE C. S. Lewis. I was raised in a context where God was essentially an angry bastard in the sky. Some kids fear the monsters under their bed. I dreaded God for some of my childhood and throughout my teen years. I’m 20 now and still sometimes struggle to bring down the idol of death I was given in the place of the God who is love. It pops up its ugly accusatory head at times to try to fill me with fear. C. S. Lewis planted the seeds of a very different view of God. First, he did this in his Narnia books. Aslan loves little kids. He doesn’t threaten them with hell or ridicule them. One article I read about CS Lewis was one that I wanted to push back in a bit. I sometimes wish the man were still here so I could provide push back myself and hear his response. That article was the one titled “CS Lewis on gay marriage” which is about whether or not those who disagree with gay marriage for religious reasons should appose it on a legislative level. I agree. The part in the middle was something about friendship and homosexuality. I’m not quite sure what Jack was even referencing there. I’ve never heard anyone claim that all close friendships between men are gay. The last part was the part that puzzled me. Now I think I had actually read this in my teen years at some point because I knew he had written something about homosexuality at some point but rereading it now that I am 20 and have evolved and changed so much I realized just how mush I disagree with this man I admire so deeply. I attribute it to being a man of his times. He was significantly more evolved than most even going so far as to concede that people might be gay because of biology. “Born that way” as lady gaga put it. So I want to start by saying that I’m the G in LGBT. In the gay Christian community they would call me a side A Christian. Side A being gay Christian who believe that there is nothing wrong with a gay orientation and side B being those gay Christians who know who they are but do not believe that they can live partnered lives with the blessing of God so they strive to be celibate. Obviously it’s not so black and white for some folks and there a spectrum but those are the binaries. I myself know that as a teenager I went from pray the gay away to something like a side B position to side A.

    So with that background here’s the pushback. Let’s just for the sake of argument assume that having a gay orientation is a sign of brokenness. It goes against God’s original Edenic intent for men and women. So gay people are in their emotions/feelings/bodies/sexuality broken and any expression of their sexuality is an expression of that brokenness. I don’t think that necessarily precludes that expression and here’s why. The name of your website is the redeeming God, right? God is in the business of taking broken things and using them to do beautiful things. In fact I would argue that the original creation in Genesis 1 was broken but God still called it good. I also don’t think that God called it that in spite of its brokenness. I think the brokenness is a part of what God sees as good. So let’s consider that maybe being gay is a sign of brokenness. Why could God not redeem it? Can it not be made something beautiful? I think it can and has in many same sex couples. I am not married but I remember falling in love with a friend in high school and even tho at the time I was side Bish I found that it took a lot of mental effort to make myself believe that the connection I had with this person was not a gift. So like many proofs of the Fall God might actually be able to create beauty out of this brokenness.

    I should be clear that I don’t actually share this assumption that God’s perfect world would ideally only be inhabited by heterosexual traditionally masculine men and heterosexual traditionally feminine women. I can remember a time when as a kid I was totally ignorant to the sinfulness of my sexuality. Kind of like Adam I, and most gay people, had to be taught to be ashamed of their sexuality and much like Adam I also remember as a teenager being so shy about showing any skin. Sexuality can’t be separated from embodied identity so when demonic shame attacks our sexual selves we instantly feel the need to cover up. Shame about being gay is unnatural. There is no self evident wrongfulness about having a queer orientation.

    The next thing is at one point CS Lewis says “the homosexual person is no different than anyone else who is prevented from marriage.” Well let’s break that down.

    Say if someone simply couldn’t find a partner how is that any different than a gay person? Neither the gay person nor the straight single is able to find an opposite sex partner. This is way off for the following reasons:

    1. The gay persons unpaired state isn’t due to an inability to find a partner but to their “disordered” sexuality. This almost seems cruel and condescending to pretend that these things are at all similar. So unlike the person who simply can’t find love the gay person doesn’t even have that possibility.
    2. On this view the gay person is doomed to celibacy. It is fated to him/her against their will. Traditionally celibacy is a call and gift not a mandate. The throw back is usually “well why do you have to be so negative about celibacy. Jesus was celibate after all.” I chuckle whenever I here this. If it’s so wonderful why don’t you do it? There’s also sometimes the implication that the gay persons resistance to the idea of celibacy is due to an overvaluing of sex or lust. To the person for whom celibacy is a gift this call might be taken with open arms but to the person who feels like there is no other choice it feels much more like a curse. When I feel in love for the first time it totally felt like a curse. Fun fact. CS Lewis is actually the first person in church history to make the logical conclusion that the inevitable result of same sex attraction is celibacy. That’s because prior to that time sexual orientation was not understood.
    3. Unlike the straight person who just can’t find a partner the gay persons chastity is grounded purely in shame. So it’s not the same logically or emotionally.
    4. Last thing is CS Lewis statement that gay people just need to “take up their cross.” Much like my response to the “celibacy is awesome!” argument I’m tempted to simply respond “oh save me haha” and walk away but because it’s CS Lewis I’ll stay and chat. The call to take up the cross is a call to mortifying your selfish desires and be pored out for God and others. I think actually a much better response is to say to the conservative Christians “you need to take up your cross and suffer with and for the LGBT people who’ve suffered at the hands of the church.” The call to take up your cross is not a call to lifelong shame or mandatory celibacy. From what I’ve heard from married folks marriage is itself a cross but not in the shame/self imposed repression Lewis so flippantly suggests but as a school where God teaches you to ditch your selfishness.
    5. Taking up your cross is almost always for the sinners own good. In this case I think it is much more about the discomfort of straight conservatives than the good of queer people.

    Well that’s all I have to say. Please write more. You have a great website. God bless!

    Reply
    • Chris says

      September 6, 2016 at 7:00 pm

      Thank you so much Kyle for your post. I really appreciate the way that you have explained your position and your views. Just as a matter of explanation… the middle section about friendship I think is referencing people who say that homosexuality is presented in the bible primarily through examples such as David and Jonathan’s friendship (kissing and hugging). I, like Lewis, agree that drawing these immediate conclusions does a grave disservice to our notions of friendship. As you have encouraged this website to write more, I encourage you to please also continue sharing your well considered thoughts and views.

      Reply
      • Kyle says

        September 7, 2016 at 4:10 am

        That makes more sense if that’s what he’s referring to. I think that particular theory comes from people’s desire to find someone/s in the bible that they can relate to more. Also perhaps the fact that in our culture we over sexualize physical touch.

        Reply
    • Phil says

      September 12, 2016 at 9:01 am

      I believe that the dynamic of shame you refer to applies to anyone who has fallen into a sexual addiction or fetish. (I am one of those, but not of your stripe.) The associated desires can’t be satisfied legitimately but at the same they stand in the way of healthy God-honouring sexual fulfilment. For such as us I see the the call to discipleship as first of all a call to a sort of eunuchhood which may or may not have healing on the other side. (I believe that healing in the sense of a restoration of normal attraction is a possibility but as with any illness it is not guaranteed.)

      So yeah, taking up our cross is a very real part of dealing with our sexual sin. I relate it to God’s call in Isaiah 56:4,5:

      For thus says the LORD, “To the eunuchs who keep My sabbaths, And choose what pleases Me, And hold fast My covenant, To them I will give in My house and within My walls a memorial, And a name better than that of sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name which will not be cut off.…

      Reply
      • Kyle says

        September 12, 2016 at 2:03 pm

        The dynamic of shame being shame around your gay orientation? My point was that such shame is unnatural. It is imposed on a person. Also being gay is not a sexual addiction or a fetish. As I stated above I total disagree with the assumptions that your reply has woven throughout. Sickness? Healing? Being gay or bi or any stripe on the rainbow is no more a sickness than being straight. Any shift in the way a person identifies I don’t think is a sign of “healing” (nothing wrong to begin with) but is either repression or a an expression of something that was already there. As for the spiritual eunuchhood part if that’s what you want to do then go ahead. I don’t feel a call to celibacy. As for taking up your cross I’d much rather see Christians take up their crosses and be allies to the marginalized then use passages like that to beat people into submitting to a teaching that is self evidently damaging. As I said at the very end of my comment taking up your cross is not about self destruction or repression. Baring your cross is supposed to bring good not death so I don’t see it applying.

        Reply
    • brentnz says

      September 17, 2016 at 6:58 pm

      To me the debate is not over sexuality its about who we will serve if Jesus asked you to give up that which was most precious to you.The rich young ruler was given the same choice he defined who he was by his wealth he believed that he was nothing without it.So when Jesus said to him sell all you have and follow me he was scared who would he be without his money and power so he chose not follow Jesus.We all come to that place where we must decide between who we want to be and live like the world and do what the world does or we can surrender our hearts and lives to Jesus Christ and be conformed into his likeness.The question is who will you choose? brentnz

      Reply
      • Kyle says

        September 17, 2016 at 7:36 pm

        I didn’t get the impression that the article or the above debate was about who will serve Jesus. I would think, as Christians, the amass to that would be obvious. From what I understand it’s about CS Lewis opinion on gay people and their relationships.

        Reply
        • Kyle says

          September 17, 2016 at 7:42 pm

          And whether or not that opinion is right. he thinks that gay people should not have relationships. I totally disagree. He also stated that he doesn’t think there is a difference between a gay person and a straight person who can’t find a partner and I argued he was wrong. That’s what the debate was about.

          Reply
  17. Ann says

    September 14, 2016 at 12:29 pm

    I survived Hell so I place all my faith God, the father of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. I don’t force my beliefs on anyone nor do I condemn anyone who offers a different point of view. I celebrate diversity however, I am tired of a government which forces everyone to participate in detestable secular practices or suffer the destruction of one’s entire livelihood. This is why I will never vote democrat.

    Whether or not C.S. Lewis wrote directly about homosexuals is not important. To a Christian, the only truth that matters is found in the Holy Bible.

    Because people did those things, God left them and let them do the shameful things they wanted to do. Women stopped having natural sex and started have sex with other women. In the same way, men stopped having natural sex and began wanting each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and in their bodies they received the punishment for those wrongs… They know God’s law says that those who live like this should die. But they themselves not only continued to do these evil things, they applaud other who do them. – Roman 1:26-27, 32

    I am not saying I am any better than anyone. I, myself, had to stumble across this passage as I tried to rid myself from my own addiction to sin. Praise God, I am now a new creation, freed from the sins that held me bound but, that is not to say I am perfect. My imperfections are why I realize am still in need of my Savior, Jesus Christ. I want to offer others the same mercy and grace God has shown me. Therefore, I love the sinner. Just like His true love, I also want to love bravely enough to say it is not okay to teach others to celebrate the act of sinning. Anyone seeking the truth need not look any further than the Good News found in the Holy Bible.

    Thank you for the blog and the opportunity to share. Blessings.

    Reply
    • brentnz says

      September 17, 2016 at 7:07 pm

      From what you written you have been through some dark times i praise God that he has come to your rescue and set you free from your past.One of the verses that has been a comfort to me is that sin shall not have dominion over me.We dont battle on our own but Christ strengthens us in our weakness.God wants to bless your life he gives us a hope and a future and purpose to live.regards brentnz

      Reply
    • Kyle says

      September 17, 2016 at 7:54 pm

      Couldn’t but notice this comment and thought I’d give my two cens. I think it’s important to do so since in Christian circles the conversation is almost always a bunch of straight identified people talking about us and not to us or with us. We are almost never thought to be included in these conversations. First no one is being forced to participate in “detestable” practices by which I’m assuming you mean two people of the same sex vowing fidelity and love for each other. Public business and government employees who discriminate are doing something that is illegal. Whether it is a gay person or a black person or a Muslim if it is discrimination it is illegal in those contexts. That’s the law. What is truly unfortunate is that parents can still send their underaged kids to conversion therapy. I think that’s far more inserting than Kim Davis getting in trouble for not doing what the law says. Being gay is also not an addiction it is an emotion/sexual/romantic orientation.

      Reply
    • Kyle says

      September 17, 2016 at 7:58 pm

      For any questions about exagesis I suggest http://emmykegler.com/. She has some good blog posts about it.

      Reply
  18. Kyle says

    September 17, 2016 at 8:02 pm

    Also everyone it’s 2026… No one identifies as a “homosexual” haha

    Reply
  19. Paul Ashley says

    October 9, 2017 at 1:42 pm

    Lewis did write about “gay marriage” in a letter to a friend who was asking him how to think about homosexuality. Lewis stated that “Perhaps any homo.[sexual]. who humbly accepts his cross and puts himself under Divine guidance will, however, be shown the way. I am sure that any attempt to evade it (e.g. by mock or quasi-marriage with a member of one’s own sex even if this does not lead to any carnal act) is the wrong way.”

    http://www.ncregister.com/blog/mark-shea/interesting-letter-from-c.s.-lewis-on-homosexuality

    Of course, this has not direct bearing on what a government can of cannot do with regard to defining marriage for legal purposes. It does, however, bear on how Christians should view any governmental decision.

    Reply

Leave a Comment or Question Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Join the discipleship group
Learn about the gospel and how to share it

Take my new course:

The Gospel According to Scripture
Best Books Every Christian Should Read
Study Scripture with me
Subscribe to my Podcast on iTunes
Subscribe to my Podcast on Amazon

Do you like my blog?
Try one of my books:

Click the image below to see what books are available.

Books by Jeremy Myers

Theological Study Archives

  • Theology – General
  • Theology Introduction
  • Theology of the Bible
  • Theology of God
  • Theology of Man
  • Theology of Sin
  • Theology of Jesus
  • Theology of Salvation
  • Theology of the Holy Spirit
  • Theology of the Church
  • Theology of Angels
  • Theology of the End Times
  • Theology Q&A

Bible Study Archives

  • Bible Studies on Genesis
  • Bible Studies on Esther
  • Bible Studies on Psalms
  • Bible Studies on Jonah
  • Bible Studies on Matthew
  • Bible Studies on Luke
  • Bible Studies on Romans
  • Bible Studies on Ephesians
  • Miscellaneous Bible Studies

Advertise or Donate

  • Advertise on RedeemingGod.com
  • Donate to Jeremy Myers

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!

© 2025 Redeeming God · All Rights Reserved · Powered by Knownhost and the Genesis Framework