Is homosexuality innate or natural for some people?


I have a question about something that I'm really confused on. It deals with homosexuality. In Romans 1, it talks about men and woman going against nature and having unnatural relations with the same sex. I've read on a pro-gay theology site about how the original greek words phusikos and phusis, which both mean natural, are about what comes "instinctively" to them (to quote from the site). Just to make sure they weren't reading too much into it I checked some other sites which say the same thing, such as it being innate. So how can it be seen as condemning all homosexuality? I hope my question makes sense.


"For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due" (Romans 1:26-27).

The word "natural" translates the Greek word phusikos. It refers to what is naturally inherent to object, instinctive, or what is in accordance with the intentions of the Creator.

The word "nature" translates the Greek word phusis. It refers to the natural characteristics or attributes inherited from its ancestors. It can also refer to the natural order of things -- the way things ought to be or behave.

The typical argument is that having homosexual sex is "natural" for some people. The claim is that is wrong for heterosexual to have homosexual sex, and, therefore, it is wrong for the homosexual to have heterosexual sex.

The argument works through a shell game. The claim that homosexual sex is instinctive or inborn is not proven, only asserted. Since it can't be claimed by physical reproductive organs which are designed for heterosexual sex, the fall back argument is that it is an internal or mental inclination. There are attempts to claim homosexuality is genetic, and thus natural, but these studies have all failed. The best that any have been able to make is that there might be a inclination toward homosexuality because of genetics, but even that is uncertain.

But look at what Paul actually stated. He stated that men left the natural use of women. “Use” comes from the Greek word chresis, which started out having a general meaning of “use.” But in Aristole and Polybius' usage "chresis is 'intimacy' or 'acquaintance;' and Isocrates (Fourth Century B.C.) where literally hai oikoi chresis, "the use of houses," means practically sexual 'intercourse' with women" [The Complete Biblical Library Greek - English Dictionary]. Paul is asserting that it is natural, inbred, or designed by the Creator for a man to have sex with a woman. Further he uses the example of men having sex with men as acting indecently, shamefully, or against nature as he stated in Romans 1:26. Therefore, Paul is contrasting heterosexual sex and homosexual sex -- not going with or against one's inclination for sexual partners.

This is the point Christians have been making for a long time. God tells us that homosexuality is not innate to a person. It is a choice a person makes to sin by having sex with someone of the same gender. Like any choice, it can be changed and history has shown has been changed if the person wants to leave sin behind.

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God" (I Corinthians 6:9-11).

OK. Thanks for answering!