What is Islam's position on homouality?

Islam goes beyond mere disapproval of homouality.  Sharia teaches that homouality is a vile form of ion, punishable by death.  Beneath the surface, however, there are implied references to homoual behavior in paradise, and it has been a part of historical Arab and Muslim culture.

Qur'an (7:80-84) - "...For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.... And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone)" -  An account that is borrowed from the Biblical story of Sodom.  Muslim scholars through the centuries have interpreted the "rain of stones" on the town as meaning that homouals should be stoned, since no other reason is given for the people's destruction.  (The story is also repeated in suras 27 and 29).

Qur'an (7:81) - "Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you?"  This verse is part of the previous text and it establishes that homouality as different from (and much worse than) adultery or other ual sin.  According to the Arabic grammar, homouality is called the worst sin, while references elsewhere describe other forms of non-marital as being "among great sins."

Qur'an (26:165-166) - "Of all the creatures in the world, will ye approach males, "And leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your mates? Nay, ye are a people transgressing"

Qur'an (4:16) - "If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, Leave them alone"  This is the Yusuf Ali translation.  The original Arabic does not use the word "men" and simply says "two from among you."  Yusuf Ali may have added the word "men" because the verse seems to refer to a different set than referred to in the prior verse (explicitly denoted as "your women").  In other words, since 4:15 refers to "your women", 4:16 is presumably written to and refers to men.

Interestingly, the same rules don't apply in paradise, where martyrs for the cause of Allah enjoy an of s and "perpetual youth" Qur'an (56:17) (otherwise known as "boys"Qur'an (52:24)).  Qur'an (76:19) bluntly states, "And immortal boys will circulate among them, when you see them you will count them as scattered pearls."  Technically, the mere presence of boys doesn't necessarily mean , however it is strongly implied from the particular emphasis on the effeminacy, handsomeness and "freshness" of the boys.  The female s of paradise are also compared to pearls (56:23).

[Editor's note: We are not implying a link between homouality and ia here anymore than we are implying one between heterouality and ia when mentioning that Muhammad's preferred wife was a 9-year-old girl.]
 

From the Hadith:

There are several lesser hadith stating, "if a man comes upon a man, then they are both adulterers," "If a woman comes upon a woman, they are both Adulteresses,” "When a man mounts another man, the throne of God shakes,” and “Kill the one that is doing it and also kill the one that it is being done to."

Abu Dawud (4462) - The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, "Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.".

Abu Dawud (4448) - "If a man who is not married is seized committing sodomy, he will be stoned to death."  (Note the implicit approval of sodomizing one's wife).

Bukhari (72:774) - "The Prophet cursed effeminate men (those men who are in the similitude (assume the manners of women) and those women who assume the manners of men, and he said, 'Turn them out of your houses .' The Prophet turned out such-and-such man, and 'Umar turned out such-and-such woman."

al-Tirmidhi, Sunan 1:152 - [Muhammad said] "Whoever is found conducting himself in the manner of the people of Lot, kill the doer and the receiver." 

Reliance of the Traveller, p17.2 - "May Allah curse him who does what Lot's people did." This is also repeated in three other places.

Additional Notes: 

When Mehmed conquered Constantinople in 1453, the Muslim general demanded the 14-year-old son of one of the city's Christian leaders as his ual concubine (the father and son chose death instead).  Subsequent Ottoman administrators also engaged in homouality, often with the boys of conquered populations who could not afford to satisfy the jizya (poll tax on non-Muslims) in any other way than to relinquish their own children to the Religion of Peace.

And yet, homouals have been beheaded, hung and stoned in modern Saudi Arabia and Iran, where Muhammad's laws are applied most strictly.  Five other Muslim countries also have the death penalty on their books for homoual behavior.  In the past, gays were burned as well.  As one cleric recently put it, the only point of theological debate is overhow the offender should be killed.

Thus illustrates the moral confusion that Islam has with homouality.  Small wonder that the Islamic Republic of Iran hangs gays but allows men to get a change (sometimes at public expense).

There are several places in the Qur'an where the story of Sodom is repeated, with emphasis placed on the destruction of the town for homoual lewdness.  Also, according to Serge Trifkovic:

Mohammed’s first successor Abu Bakr reportedly had a homoual burned at the stake. The fourth caliph, Mohammed’s son-in-law Ali, ordered a sodomite thrown from the minaret of a mosque. Others he ordered to be stoned. One of the earliest and most authoritative commentators on the Koran, Ibn ‘Abbas (died 687) blended both approaches into a two-step execution in which “the sodomite should be thrown from the highest building in the town and then stoned. (source)

Ayatollah Abdollah Javadi-Amoli of Iran said, in April of 2012, that homouals are inferior to dogs and pigs, since these animals (presumably) do not engage in such acts. In November of that year, a cleric on British television stated, "What should be done to those who practice homouality? Torture them; punish them; beat them and give them mental torture."

A 2014 fatwa from the mainstream OnIslam.net proclaimed that homouality is "abnomal" and abhorrent" and confirmed that gays should be killed: "The punishment for men or women who are unwilling to give up homouality and therefore are rejecting the guidance of Allah Most High is in fact death according to Islam." 

Although some Muslim political leaders in the West join with social liberals in alliances that occasionally include peripheral support for gay rights and civil unions, this appears to be more a matter of expediency than genuine concern.  There has never been any noticeable effort on the part of Muslim leaders in the West to relieve the plight of homouals in Islamic countries overseas - where their influence would surely carry more weight than that of their secular allies.

(As a side note, in 2012, a cleric issues a fatwa endorsing sodomy as a means of widening the in order to pack it with enough explosives to kill bystanders in a suicide bombing.  As Sheikh Abu al-Dema al-Qasab put it, "Jihad comes first, for it is the pinnacle of Islam, and if the pinnacle of Islam can only be achieved through sodomy, then there is no wrong in it."

CHRISTIANITY ABOUT GAYS

The issue of homoual behavior has had a lot of publicity of late. Homouals say that the slaves have been freed and women have been liberated, so gay rights are long overdue. Society does seem to be moving in that direction. Many homouals are “coming out” and openly declaring their homouality. In many parts of the western world, homoual couples receive the same recognition as heteroual couples with regard to social security benefits. Some church leaders are giving their blessing to homoual relationships, homoual church members and even homoual ministers.

Many homouals’ claim that…

1. They are made that way.

2. Homouality is of no harm to the participants or to anyone else.

3. If it feels right to those involved, it is nobody else’s business.

4. Homoual relationships and heteroual relationships are equally valid. (Some even claim that the Bible condones homoual relationships.)

Made that way?

Since other groups who have been discriminated against (such as women, blacks and the disabled) have been given equal opportunity, homouals claim that they, too, should be liberated. However, as one Christian expert has said…

“Gender, race and impairment all relate to what a person is, whereas homouality relates to what a person does.”1

In contrast, homouals claim that scientific studies have shown that there is a biological basis for homouality.

Three main studies are cited by “gay rights” activists in support of their argument2Hamer’s X-chromosome research,3 LeVay’s study of the hypothalamus,4 and Bailey and Pillard’s study of identical twins who were homouals.5

In all three cases, the researchers had a vested interest in obtaining a certain outcome because they were homouals themselves. More importantly, their studies did not stand up to scientific scrutiny by other researchers. Also, “the media typically do not explain the methodological flaws in these studies, and they typically oversimplify the results.”6 There is no reliable evidence to date that homoual behavior is determined by a person’s genes.

To the extent that biological or social factors may contribute to a person’s bent toward homoual behavior, this does not excuse it. Some people have a strong bent towards stealing or abuse of alcohol, but they still choose to engage or not engage in this behavior and the law rightly holds them accountable.

The final report of the Baptist Union of Western Australia (BUWA) Task Force on Human uality states “that a person becomes a homoual ultimately by choosing to be involved in same- activity… This is in contrast to innate characteristics such as gender and ethnicity.”7 The report affirms that “the Bible is clear that sin involves choice, and it unequivocally condemns homoual behavior as sin.”7

The foundational teaching on marriage and ual issues is found inGenesis chapters 1 and 2. When Jesus was questioned about marriage, He referred to these 2 chapters (Matthew 19:1-12; Mark 10:1-12).Genesis teaches us that “male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27). We were created to a plan, male and female complementing each other. That is, God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, nor Madam and Eve.

Genesis also teaches that God instituted and designed marriagebetween a man and a woman (Genesis 2:18-25). There are a number of reasons why He did so.

1. The complementary structure of the male and female anatomy is obviously designed for the normal husband-wife relationships. Clearly, design in human biology supports heterouality and contradicts homouality.

2. The combination of male and female enables man (and the animals) to produce and nurture offspring as commanded inGenesis 1:28 “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth.” This command is repeated to Noah after the Flood (Genesis 8:15-17).

   But procreation is not the only reason God made humans as ual beings. The BUWA report affirms “that ual intimacy between husband and wife is good, and is intended by God for bonding, pleasure and procreation.”7

3. Thirdly, God gave man and woman complementary roles in order to strengthen the family unit. Woman was to be the helper that man needed (Genesis 2:18). However, the woman’s role as the helpmate is certainly not an inferior one. The enterprising, God-fearing woman in Proverbs 31:10-31 is an inspiring role model.

No harm?

Andrew Lansdown points out that “homoual activity is notoriously disease-prone. In addition to diseases associated with heteroual promiscuity, homoual actions facilitate the transmission of herpes, hepatitis B, intestinal parasites, Kaposi’s Sarcoma and AIDS.”1Research on the life expectancy of a group of homoual men in Canada in the early 1990s indicated that they could expect 8-21 years less lifespan than other men.8

Effect on others

Secular psychologists assure us that “children raised in lesbian and gay households are similar to children raised in heteroual households on characteristics such as intelligence, development, moral judgments, self-concepts, social competence and gender identity.”6 The humanistshave, however, forgotten one important ingredient.

“Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6).

You cannot faithfully teach God’s Word to your children while living a lifestyle specifically condemned by God’s Word. All Christians aresinners forgiven by God’s grace, but living in a homoual relationship constitutes habitual, unrepented sin.

Nobody else’s business?

Gay activists claim that homoual activity is nobody’s business other than those involved in the relationship. However, this is not true. God, our Designer and Creator, has authority over all aspects of our lives. He makes the rules, and He quite specifically forbids homoual behavior.

“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22; see also Leviticus 20:13).

Disobedience of such a clear command indicates rejection of God’s authority.

Some people argue that the Old Testament law (including Leviticus 18and 20) was superseded with the coming of Christ. However, we should at least consider as binding those aspects of the law that are renewed in the New Testament. The teaching of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 was certainly reaffirmed in the New Testament.

Equally valid?

Some people claim that homoual behavior was only condemned in the Bible because it was associated with idolatry (e.g., 1 Kings 14:24). However, it is clearly condemned apart from idolatry as well (e.g,.Leviticus 18:22). It is described in Scripture as an unnatural, immoral ersion.

“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…” (Romans 1:26-27).

The Greek word arsenokoitai used in 1 Timothy 1:10 literally means “men who sleep with men.” It is the same Greek word used for “homoual offender” in 1 Corinthians 6:9, variously translated as “abusers of themselves with mankind” (KJV), homouals (NASB) or homoual offender (NIV).

Some people claim that the sin involved in Sodom was rejecting hospitality customs or selfishness rather than homoual behavior. Certainly, the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah was great and their reported sin was grievous to God (Genesis 18:20). God sent angels toSodom and…

“Now before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both old and young, all the people from every quarter, surrounded the house. And they called to Lot and said to him, Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have with them” (Genesis 19:4-5).

“While it is true that the Hebrew word yadha does not necessarily mean ‘to have with,’ nonetheless in the context of Sodom and Gommorah, it clearly had this meaning. …It means ‘to know ually’ in this very chapter when Lot refers to his two daughters not having “known” a man (19:8).”9 You would not offer s to appease a mob if their sin was lack of hospitality, but only if their desire was ual.

Although Ezekiel 16:49 condemns Sodom for its selfishness with regard to poverty, etc., this does not contradict its condemnation for homoual practices. “The very next verse of Ezekiel (verse 50) calls their sin an ‘abomination.’ This is the same Hebrew word used to describe homoual sins in Leviticus 18:22.”10

It is also used in Scripture to describe such things like the practice of offering children to Moloch, but never such things as mere selfishness or lack of hospitality. Even in legal parlance, the word used to refer to one aspect of homoual practice is ‘sodomy.’

Another argument is that Jonathon and David were homouals as “Jonathan loved David” (1 Sam. 18:3), that Jonathan stripped in David’s presence (18:4), [and] that they kissed each other (20:41).11

However, “David’s love for Jonathan was not ual () but a friendship (philic) love. And Jonathan did not strip himself of all his clothes, but only of his armor and royal robe (1 Sam. 18:4).”12 Also, akiss was a normal greeting in that day, such as when Judas kissed Jesus. In several cultures today, men normally greet each other with a kiss, too. Further, David’s love for his wives, especially Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11), clearly reveals his heteroual orientation.

Isaiah 56:3 states that eunuchs will not be excluded from God’s presence (“my temple”), but practicing homouals are not eunuchs.Eunuchs have no ual relations at all.

Other Scriptural arguments for homouality can similarly be easily refuted. It is clear that heteroual marriage is the only form of marriage sanctioned in the Bible and that homoual practice is always condemned.

[See: What does the Bible say about same marriages? Answer]

Punishment

The Bible not only describes homoual behavior as detestable, but it also calls for the punishment of those involved (Leviticus 20:13). Their unrepentant attitude caused God to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:24-25).

Just as homoual conduct has been punished in the past, so it will also be punished by God in the future.

“…Neither ors, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homouals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nordrunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit thekingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).

Hope

However, there is hope for the homoual. God forgives and cleanses a person who repents and turns from their sin, including the sin of homoual behavior (1 Corinthians 6:11). As well as forgiveness, God’sgrace brings with it the power to live a life that is pleasing to God (Romans 6:6-7). If repentance and reform are genuine, prior homoual actions should not be a bar to church membership or ministry, as all Christians are reformed sinners.

“Liberal” churches espouse tolerance of homoual behavior in the name of “love.” They plug for the acceptance of homoual conduct as normal, “because they can’t help it.” They are not only wrong about the latter, but they are actually not being at all loving towards homouals, because, contrary to the Bible, they reduce the homoual person to the level of an animal, driven by instinct. In removing moral responsibility from the person, they dehumanize them, whereas the Bible says we are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27), with the power of moral choice.

Furthermore, the gospel proclaims liberation from the of sin, including homoual sin, whereas the “liberals” tell the homoual that they cannot help it, and they can’t help them either, so they will accept them as they are! However, many a person has been gloriously rescued from the of homoual sin (and other sin) by the power of the Holy Spirit, but only Bible-believing Christians can offer such hope.