God and the Gay Christian Reviews

Recently a book came out saying that Christians have a  moral and Biblical obligation to accept same sex relationships. No longer does the Bible just tolerate homosexuality, but now it demands that the Church accept it and smile upon it. Here are some responses to the foolishness if you are interested.

Here is a free e-book that includes short chapters by Al Mohler, Denny Burk, and Owen Strachan. I read it this morning and found it helpful in cutting through the fog that these types of books like to put in our minds.

Here is a list by James Hamilton of some of the logical fallacies in the book.

Here James Hamilton calls upon the author to repent and turn from his sins.

Here is a review by Andrew Walker over at Canon and Culture.

These reviews are excellent to remind other Christians of what the Bible actually teaches and to strengthen their faith in Christ and trust in the Bible. But it will not convince homosexuals to change. This debate may have been about exegesis at some point in the past, but it no longer is. The Bible is no longer the real authority. The ultimate authority is my own experience. Below is a quote from a liberal New Testament scholar who believes homosexuality is fine. Unlike the author of God and the Gay Christian he is honest. He thinks the Bible is wrong and that his experience his right. All those “Christians” who think homosexuality is fine should just come out and say it as plainly as Luke Timothy Johnson does.

I have little patience with efforts to make Scripture say something other than what it says, through appeals to linguistic or cultural subtleties. The exegetical situation is straightforward: we know what the text says. But what are we to do with what the text says? … I think it important to state clearly that we do, in fact, reject the straightforward commands of Scripture, and appeal instead to another authority when we declare that same-sex unions can be holy and good. And what exactly is that authority? We appeal explicitly to the weight of our own experience and the experience thousands of others have witnessed to, which tells us that to claim our own sexual orientation is in fact to accept the way in which God has created us.

All Three Genealogy Posts

I did some work on the Biblical genealogies. There are three total posts.

Here is the first, and most important one, on the Bible’s genealogical record from Adam to Abraham.

Here is the second on the lines of Japeth and Ham.

Here is the third on genealogical record from Abraham to David and then David to the exile. This includes a discussion of Matthew’s genealogy.

Genealogies Post-Abraham

I spent a bit of time on the genealogies from Adam to Abraham. I think these prove the point that the Bible leaves no room for gaps of any substance between Adam and Abraham. I wanted to take a little more time and look at the genealogies from Abraham onwards. Do these genealogies show that there are large gaps between the men listed? The text will answer that question for us.

Here are the main dates in the Biblical timeline from Abraham onward. These are accepted by most, if not all orthodox, Bible-believing Christians, as the approximate dates of key events. All dates are general and can be flexed a few years in either direction.

2100 B.C. Abraham Leaving Ur
1450 B.C. The Exodus
1010 B.C. David Become King
931 B.C. The Kingdom Splits
586 B.C. Southern Kingdom Falls to Babylon

The entire time from Abraham to the exile was only about 1500 years. Let’s look at the data and see if there is proof of gaps in the genealogies. This would not be a strong argument for those who believe there are thousands of years of gaps in the genealogies, but it could at least prove there were gaps.

We know that the chronology from Genesis is Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and then his twelve sons. Without this exact chronology the narrative of Genesis falls flat. Then you have a c. 400 year gap between Joseph and Moses. After Moses you have Joshua entering the promise land and then the time of the Judges. It is clear from Judges 2:10 that generation of Judges immediately follows Joshua’s generation. So there is no huge gap between Joshua and Judges. Then we enter the time of the Kings. So there are no gaps in the genealogical record from Abraham to David in the narratives.  Now let’s look at various genealogical records of that time period and compare them with Matthew 1.


First we can compare the genealogies in Ruth to the one in I Chronicles and then to Matthew 1. I highlighted the names in I Chronicles and Matthew 1 to help the reader.

Ruth 4:18-22
(18)  Now these are the generations of Perez: Perez fathered Hezron,
(19)  Hezron fathered Ram, Ram fathered Amminadab,
(20)  Amminadab fathered Nahshon, Nahshon fathered Salmon,
(21)  Salmon fathered Boaz, Boaz fathered Obed,
(22)  Obed fathered Jesse, and Jesse fathered David.
1Chron. 2:4-15
(4)  His daughter-in-law Tamar also bore him Perez and Zerah. Judah had five sons in all.
(5)  The sons of Perez: Hezron and Hamul.
(9)  The sons of Hezron that were born to him: Jerahmeel, Ram, and Chelubai.
(10)  Ram fathered Amminadab, and Amminadab fathered Nahshon, prince of the sons of Judah.
(11)  Nahshon fathered Salmon, Salmon fathered Boaz,
(12)  Boaz fathered Obed, Obed fathered Jesse.
(15)  Ozem the sixth, David the seventh.
Matthew 1:3-6
(3)  and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram,
(4)  and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon,
(5)  and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse,
(6)  and Jesse the father of David the king.
The Biblical record of the line from Judah (Perez’s Father) to David is consistent across the Scriptures. No proof of any gaps.
Here is the genealogy from Solomon to the Exile in Babylon. It is a little trickier. Why? Matthew’s list leaves out numerous people men that the writer of I Chronicles puts in. Here are the two genealogies side by side with ones Matthew leaves out in red.
Matthew 1:7-11
Solomon
Rehoboam,
Abijah
Asaph,
Jehoshaphat
Joram
Uzziah
Jotham
Ahaz
Hezekiah,
Manasseh
Amos
Josiah,
Jechoniah
 and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.
I Chronicles 3:10-17
Solomon
Rehoboam,
Abijah
Asa
Jehoshaphat
Joram
Ahaziah
Joash
Amaziah
Azariah=Uzziah
Jotham
Ahaz
Hezekiah
Manasseh
Amon
Josiah
Jehoiakim,
Jeconiah
Shealtiel

A couple of comments need to be made about this.
First, the problem here is not a gap in the Old Testament genealogy, but rather in Matthew. We have no proof from the Old Testament that there are gaps in the genealogical record. It would have been more convenient for those who believe in large gaps in the genealogies if Matthew had included people that I Chronicles left out. That would prove that there are gaps. But he didn’t. Therefore I am not sure how this helps their case. How does the fact that Matthew left certain men out of his genealogical record help prove that Adam was born 20,000 years ago?

Second, Matthew is squeezing the genealogical record into 14 generations (Matthew 1:17). He purposely chose to leave certain men out, men who are in II Kings and who are in the list in I Chronicles to make a balanced picture of 14-14-14. Why Matthew did this is hotly debated, but that he did it is beyond question. So Matthew was not ignorant nor was he missing some information. He got his list from II Kings and/or I Chronicles. He made a decision to leave some men out.

Third, proof that Matthew left men out is not proof that other writers did. It must be proven that I Chronicles or Genesis 5 have large gaps. This has not been proven.

Finally, given the time frame (late Israelite history) of this genealogy there is not room for large gaps anyway. Again the entire timeline from Abraham to the exile is only 1500 years.  How can we find thousands of more years in there? We can’t.

So again, we come to the same conclusion as we did in our other blog posts.  There are no examples in the Bible of large gaps in the genealogies. The examples of Cainan in Luke and Matthew’s genealogy are weak. There are very plausible explanations for why it was done this way that do not include inserting thousands of years into the genealogies.

The Lines of Japheth and Ham

Earlier I pointed out how the Bible supports the idea that Adam was created around 6,000 years by looking at the genealogy from Adam to Noah and then from Shem to Abram.

I wanted to bring in two more genealogies. These are not as important biblically because the Bible is focused on the line that leads to Christ, that is Shem’s line. But they still prove my point that the genealogical records in the Bible do not support thousand year gaps in the genealogical record. 

The Line of Japheth
Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. From these three sons and their wives the entire earth was repopulated following the flood. Here are the places where we see Japheth’s line mentioned in the Scripture

Genesis 10:2-4 (Japheth’s line)
(2)  The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras.
(3)  The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.
(4)  The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim.
I Chron. 1:5-7 (Japheth’s Line)
(5)  The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras.
(6)  The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.
(7)  The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Rodanim.


These are exactly the same word for word.  Japheth, Gomer, or Javan are not mentioned in any other passages. Now I understand this is only three generations, Japheth, his sons, and his grandsons. But the point still stands. There is no evidence of gaps in the genealogy of these men. I Chronicles written hundreds of years after Moses gives us the same list as Genesis does. 

Here are the two places Ham’s line is mentioned. I highlighted the corresponding questions in the same color to make them easier to read. I also took out the extended section about Nimrod in Genesis 10:9-12. 

Gen 10:6-8, 13-18 (Ham’s Line)
(6)  The sons of Ham: Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan.
(7)  The sons of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and Sabteca. The sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan.
(8)  Cush fathered Nimrod; he was the first on earth to be a mighty man.
(13)  Egypt fathered Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim,
(14)  Pathrusim, Casluhim (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorim.
(15)  Canaan fathered Sidon his firstborn and Heth,
(16)  and the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites,
(17)  the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites,
(18)  the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites..
1Chron. 1:8-16 Ham’s Line
(8)  The sons of Ham: Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan.
(9)  The sons of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabta, Raama, and Sabteca. The sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan.
(10)  Cush fathered Nimrod. He was the first on earth to be a mighty man.
(11)  Egypt fathered Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim,
(12)  Pathrusim, Casluhim (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorim.
(13)  Canaan fathered Sidon his firstborn and Heth,
(14)  and the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites,
(15)  the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites,
(16)  the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites.
This is a similar situation to Japheth’s line. It goes from father, to son, to grandsons. There are no further mentions of Cush, Egypt, or Canaan as men in the Old Testament to compare this genealogy to. This one is also more complicated because tribes are listed not just men. But there is no proof in either list of gaps in the genealogy.