Tweet
God Hates Asexuals
We spend a lot of time on this forum deploring homers, and rightly so. But there is a new group of perverts that until recently has been flying below the radar. The asexual agenda has been gaining momentum over the last few years, so much so that supposedly “acephobia” is now a thing. Asexuals are people who say they have no desire to have sex. They claim it is a sexual preference or orientation just like heterosexuality or homosexuality. Most liberal Christians view asexuality as okay. After all, doesn’t Jesus condone celibacy (Matt 19:12)? And doesn’t Paul speak of a “gift of singleness” (1 Cor 7:7)?
First off let me say that there is doubt even in the secular community as to whether asexuality really exists. Wickedpedia says, “[Other scholars] state that it is the denial of one's natural sexuality, and that it is a disorder caused by shame of sexuality or anxiety....” It is possible that many asexuals are suppressing their desire for marriage and children simply because they are impotent or queer or too ugly to find a partner. But the fact remains that there are a growing number of people who claim to be asexual, and many of them use passages like Matt 19:12 and 1 Cor 7:7 to justify their behavior.
The Biblical Standard
Right at the outset of the Bible, God makes it clear that a man shall “leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh” (Gen 2:24). Men ought to marry and, once married, cleave to their wives and become one flesh with them — in other words, have sex. Sexless marriages are not an option for asexuals, not an easy out, for Paul says to married couples, “Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency” (1 Cor 7:5).
Procreation is another divine requirement. God told Adam and Eve to “be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it” (Gen 1:28a). It is especially important that a woman not shirk her duty to bear sons, for “she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety” (1 Tim 2:15). All women should strive to be like Rachel, who said to her husband Jacob, “Give me children, or else I die” (Gen 30:1). In fact, all beings are expected to be fruitful and multiply (Gen 1:22). Studies done by secular scientists claiming that asexuality is observable in the animal kingdom must therefore be rejected. They are as spurious as the claims that homosexuality has been observed among animals.
The Controversy
Now let’s examine Matt 19:12 — “For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake.” Does this passage really condone asexuality? Jesus describes three kinds of eunuchs:
1) Those “which were born so from their mother’s womb.” These are people born without the ability to reproduce. It is significant that Jesus calls them eunuchs, suggesting that they have some sort of congenital defect that prevents them from reproducing or engaging in sex. Asexuals cannot use this passage to say that they were “born that way,” without the desire to have sex. All babies are born without the desire to have sex! Satan only begins to tempt people with sexual desire when they hit puberty.
2) Those “which were made eunuchs of men.” These are real eunuchs, men who have been castrated. It is important to remember that “he that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord” (Deut 23:1).
3) Those “which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake.” Of course eunuch in this sense is metaphorical. Where in all of God’s holy Word does He require His people to physically mutilate their genitalia? These people deny their desire to serve God in marriage and procreation that they may serve God in the furtherance of His kingdom. No doubt this sacrifice is like having one’s stones cut off, hence Jesus’ choice of the word eunuch. I believe this is an extremely rare calling, but more on that later.
This verse says nothing about women. Women can’t be eunuchs. And it doesn’t let the unsaved off the hook. 2) Those “which were made eunuchs of men.” These are real eunuchs, men who have been castrated. It is important to remember that “he that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord” (Deut 23:1).
3) Those “which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake.” Of course eunuch in this sense is metaphorical. Where in all of God’s holy Word does He require His people to physically mutilate their genitalia? These people deny their desire to serve God in marriage and procreation that they may serve God in the furtherance of His kingdom. No doubt this sacrifice is like having one’s stones cut off, hence Jesus’ choice of the word eunuch. I believe this is an extremely rare calling, but more on that later.
So what about the “gift of singleness?” It’s important to get 1 Cor 7:7 in context. Many asexual activists conveniently ignore the fact that just five verses earlier Paul wrote “let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband” (v2). When Paul writes, “But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that,” he is speaking of Christians. Every Christian has a gift of God. The unsaved don’t receive spiritual gifts from the Holy Ghost. Therefore the unsaved cannot have the gift of singleness. They are still obliged to marry and have sons or else incur God’s displeasure.
We know that when Paul wrote his letter to the church in Corinth, he was single (1 Cor 7:7-8), though he may have been married earlier in life. He describes his singleness as a gift. He had made himself eunuch for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. But how common is this gift? Paul himself told Timothy that “a bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife” (1 Tim 3:2) and “let the deacons be the husbands of one wife” (1 Tim 3:12). Elders and deacons are required to marry so that they can prove their leadership skills to the church by “ruling their children and their own houses well” (1 Tim 3:12). Therefore elders and deacons cannot have the gift of singleness.
I believe the gift of singleness is very rare. I would be very suspicious of any professing Christian today who claimed to have the gift. The Apostle Paul was an incredibly gifted man, able to perform signs and wonders (Acts 14:3, 1 Thes 1:5), heal the sick (Acts 28:9) and, on one occasion, raise the dead (Acts 20:9-10). He was working to expand the kingdom of heaven. We also know that Paul suffered many tribulations: “Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more; in labours more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; in journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness” (2 Cor 11:23-27). God probably decided he didn’t need the additional burden of caring for a woman and so bestowed on him a special gift.
All these passages tell us is that God may grant a gift of singleness to a True Christian™ who is working to expand His kingdom. I would not dare call such a person an asexual. Asexuality applies only to unsaved people who refuse to marry and have sons because they claim to have no sexual desire.
As we’ve seen in the oft-misquoted passages above, there is no Scripture that by any stretch of the imagination excuses the unsaved from following the Biblical imperative to be fruitful and multiply. Yet asexuals use their “orientation” as an excuse to disobey God. Asexuality is as unnatural as homosexuality, for even the majority of the unsaved by nature have the decency and the desire to marry and have children. The asexual agenda is a secular movement, not one dedicated to furthering the kingdom of heaven.
The Mary-worshipping, ring-kissing papists have been endorsing asexuality for centuries. They think it’s okay for their nuns, monks and priests not to marry. But Catholics aren’t Christians, and for many priests asexuality is a gateway preference that leads to pedophilia and homosexuality.
Contemporary secular concerns about climate change and overpopulation have been debunked numerous times on this forum, so I won’t go into here, only to say that it is no excuse for remaining single and childless.
To the unsaved asexuality may seem trivial, benign. Yet we know that “whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all” (Jas 2:10) and “cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them” (Deut 27:26a). We know that in Noah’s day, men had become so wicked that “it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth” (Gen 6:6). Yet even these guys still “did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all” (Lk 17:27). Ultimately, if you choose to be asexual in this life, if you spit on God’s institution of marriage and family and undermine the fabric of society, you will spend an eternity in outer darkness, where “there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt 8:12) and “where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” (Mk 9:44).
The Solution
If you have been born with a condition that prevents you from reproducing or having sex, or if you have been castrated or sustained an injury to your manhood, that’s too bad; you’d better pray for a miracle or something. Otherwise
MAN UP AND GET MARRIED!
Jesus wants you.
) Bombing people? That appear to be trying to be portrayed as Muslims. This does not seem very accept or kind the way Christians are supposed to be. We do not bomb people we convert them.
Comment