Is It Sinful for A Man to Be Tempted to Sodomize Another Man?

This morning, the following message may be offensive to some audiences. These audiences may include but are not limited to professing Christians who never read their Bible, sissies, sodomites, men with man buns, those who approve of men with man buns, man bun enablers, white knights for men with man buns, homemakers who have finished Netflix but don't know how to meal plan, and people who refer to their pets as fur babies.

Viewer discretion is advised.

People are tired of hearing nothing but doom and despair on the radio. ...found in Christ, therefore forfeit any hope of salvation, any hope of heaven.

The issue is that humanity is in sin and the wrath of almighty God is hanging over our head. They will hear his words, they will not act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment, when the fires of wrath come, they will be consumed and they will perish.

God wrapped himself in flesh, condescended and became a man, died on the cross for sin, was resurrected on the third day, has ascended to the right hand of the Father, where he sits now to make intercession for us.

Jesus is saying there is a group of people who will hear his words, they will act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment come in that final day, their house will stand.

Opening the Discussion on Temptation and Same-Sex Attraction

Welcome to Bible Bashed, where we aim to equip the saints for the works of ministry by answering the questions you're not allowed to ask. We're your hosts, Harrison Kerrig and Pastor Tim Mullett, and today we seek to answer the age-old question, is it sinful for a man to be tempted to sodomize another man?

Now, a little bit of pulling back of the curtain for you guys before we jump into the discussion on this episode. You guys are hearing this like a normal episode that would come out on a Monday like we've been doing for a while now, but the reality is we are actually recording this just a few days after last week's video that you guys heard.

And so we're kind of cranking them out right now, just a few days removed from the last one. So we spent a lot of today and yesterday trying to brainstorm a topic that we thought would be helpful, edifying for you guys as always.

And so I just think it's amusing to me to think we're recording this just a few days from each other, and you guys are hearing it like a week apart, basically. But the reason we're doing that is just because at our church, we've got an event going on on the night that we would normally record, so we're trying to get ahead of things so that there's not like a breakup in episodes for you guys.

But anyways, like I said, the topic question for today is, is it sinful for a man to be tempted to sodomize another man? And the reason we're talking about this is because whether you realize it or not, there's actually a movement within the church where a lot of people— what did you say before we started this episode?

It's called the same-sex attraction movement, right, Tim?

Yeah, the same-sex attracted Christian movement, or it's known as the celibate gay Christian movement.

The celibate gay Christian movement. And basically, if I understand you correctly—.

They like to pile up oxymorons together.

Basically, they think the act of sodomy is wrong, right?

I mean, on paper.

Right, right. I'm sure there's plenty of contradictions up in there when it gets practical.

Yeah, I mean, the funny thing about it is, on paper, they've said for the past few years that they think that sodomy is sinful, but then it's a position they haven't really been able to maintain, so a lot of the guys that have been involved in that kind of thing have come out and proud since the beginning of that movement, and so I think it's just a way of softening the consciences of Christians and preparing for the next step, so to speak.

But yeah, you might call them the celibate gay Christian movement, the same-sex attracted Christian movement, these are the kind of individuals who are advocating for lifelong committed celibate friendships between men, covenantal friendships, and that kind of thing.

On paper, they supposedly had believed that sodomy itself is wrong.

But they're typically not very firm on that belief, huh?

Yeah, so the idea is essentially you can't help being tempted to want to sodomize someone so long as you don't act on it, essentially, that's the point. It's not a sin to be tempted with homosexual desires towards sodomy or same-sex romantic relationships, it's just a sin to act on it, so to speak.

Okay, okay, so that's kind of like why we're talking about this, because there is this movement, I even hesitate to say within the church, because I don't want to communicate anything that would say...

You could say a movement among individuals who claim to be Christians, who are being broadly accepted as actually Christians by dupes in the evangelical world, or something like that.

People who are Christians, with the air quotes, the very deliberate air quotes around it.

Right, who are being acknowledged as such by naive and gullible people you should know better.

Right, but essentially the crux of the issue for them is they're saying, hey look, it's one thing to perform the act, right? But then just to have the desire, just to be tempted to do it, and not actually following through, that's not sinful, right?

Yep, that's what's essentially being argued.

External Temptation and Internal Temptation

Okay, well, our title question for today is, is it sinful for a man to be tempted to sodomize another man? So that's their take, Tim, that basically, no, the answer is no. What is your take on that question?

Yeah, it's a ridiculous question to think about. So the way you worded it, is it sinful to be tempted to want to sodomize another man? That's trying to bring to light some shameful things that are being smuggled under the door.

And so it's one of those things where I think Christians, largely because individuals are, the world itself is trying to cram down our throat this idea that gays are essentially normal people, just like everyone else, despite all the gay pride parades and the evidence of our eyes to the contrary.

You mean you're not holding parades about your pride in being a heterosexual man?

Yeah, I'm not doing the BDS, dressing in the BDSM stuff.

Doing story reading time at the library.

Yeah, asking kids to put money in my underwear, that kind of stuff. But despite all that, individuals are trying to normalize the idea that sodomites are just the same as everyone else. And a lot of Christians basically believe it, and that's the play that progressive Christians are running on us too.

So when you word it like that, you're bringing attention to the fact that what we're actually talking about, we're talking about anal sex, that's what we're talking about. We're talking about something that's gross and disgusting, that you're trying to wrap in the language of euphemisms to hide.

If you try to answer that question, part of what's difficult is that as the Bible speaks about the nature of temptation, there are different types of temptation. So part of me wants to say, no, it's not a sin, surprisingly.

No, it may not be a sin to be tempted to sodomize another man. But then in the obvious sense of the expression, yeah, it absolutely obviously is. And anyone who thinks it's not is crazy. So what I mean is that there are different types of temptations in the Bible.

Part of what's happening with the SSA movement in general, and those who are being influenced by that, so you can broaden out this discussion just to a discussion about temptation in general. And that's part of what we'll do today is just try to talk about what is temptation in general.

But there are different types of temptation, and every type of temptation is being essentially put in the same category, and individuals are refusing to make just basic Biblical distinctions. So meaning, if a and you've had sodomites who have essentially tried to proposition you before.

Oh, yeah. It was really uncomfortable. I hated it.

Yeah. You told me this awkward story of a man rubbing his finger on your ear just to gross everyone out, right?

Yeah.

But that was essentially tantamount to an offer. And the issue is, were you being tempted by that offer? Well, no and yes, right? Meaning, you might not want to say yes in any sense because it's so gross to imagine and think about.

Because people's minds immediately jump to like a, oh.

Yeah. You were tempted, huh? No, but the issue is, in the Bible there's external temptations and there's internal temptations. And so you have to talk about what kind of temptation you're talking about.

So there are and I've been propositioned by sodomites in my life over the course of the years I've been alive. And they're presenting me with an offer. So temptation can mean nothing more than an offer that's being presented to you.

And they're presenting you an offer that you detest and can't stand. And the entirety of your being in terms of mentally, emotionally, physically literally recoils at the thought of that offer, right?

Mm-hmm.

So that's a temptation towards sin, meaning it's an offer towards sin. But then it's not an internal it's not a temptation that's arising from your own heart. It's just a purely external temptation, right?

Right.

And so there's a category for that. There's a variety of things that individuals could present me with external offers towards.

Hopefully not eternal.

Yeah, not eternal. Which I would recoil at, right?

Yeah.

So, hey, you want to go rob a bank with me? It's like, no, are you dumb? I mean, was I tempted? Yes, I was tempted and I was given an offer. But it's not something that I really have any interest in doing whatsoever.

So as you think about the categories of temptation, there's external temptation and then there's internal temptation. And that's part of what James is talking about when James says that each person is tempted when he's lured and enticed by his own desires.

So there's a kind of temptation that comes from without, meaning an offer presented towards evil. And then there's a type of temptation that's coming from within, meaning like my own sinful flesh, my own sinful heart is being pulled towards that offer.

So it's not just like an offer that the entirety of my being is recoiling at. It's an offer that my heart wants and I'm struggling to resist, right? Does that make sense? So is it a sin, like if you're trying to say, is it a sin to be tempted to sodomize another man?

If you're talking about an external offer, no. If you're talking about an internal pull that's coming from a sinful heart, obviously, right? Obviously, that would be sinful for me to be pulled towards sin.

So it depends on what we're saying. But then what the SSA movement essentially is doing is they are refusing to make that basic distinction. And then they're treating all temptation as if it's just some purely neutral thing, meaning it's just as if it were just some kind of external offer or something like that.

They're not even working within those categories. They're just treating it all as if it's just completely like it's not a sin to be tempted so long as you don't act on it kind of thing. And that just is a grossly naive view of how sin and temptation actually works.

So I don't even know how you get there in your mind where that kind of thing makes sense to you. It's almost as if you've totally surrendered all personal responsibility for everything that happens in your brain at that point.

As if the Bible had nothing to say about sinful desires or lust or anything else. It's just like how do you get there to where you've erased the concept of lust, you've erased the concept of internal sinful desires, and now it's just all about good behavior and bad behavior.

And it's like, I don't get that, right?

Right.

Oh, yeah.

Jesus, the Devil, and James on Temptation

So you're saying temptation is simply like an offer.

An offer, yeah.

It's an offer. And in this context, it would be an offer to sin, right? And then you're saying there's essentially two different categories of temptation. The first one being an external temptation. And that would be something like, yeah, when I'm trying to share the gospel with a guy and I'm telling him to repent of his being attracted to other men, and then he makes a move on me during that.

That would be like an external offer, right?

The offer or the invitation is coming from the outside purely.

Right.

And there's nothing in you that there's not an inward pull towards it.

Right.

There's no like, oh, I'd kind of like to see where that goes kind of thing. It's just like, no, the entirety of your being is like, no, right? And you can imagine any number of scenarios just like that.

I mean, just to give you a silly example, I'm not like a big fan of heights. When me and my brother went to the Grand Canyon to visit, I stood behind him on the rail and looked the other way and kind of held onto his shirt because I don't like heights.

But if someone were to say, hey, you want to go skydiving or something like that, that would be an offer, right? That I would, no.

You would reject immediately.

Yeah.

There's nothing in me that would ever want to do that. Like at all, ever, you know, like nothing, like zero, like no pull whatsoever. Go have fun. You know, uh, I'm good, man. You know, so, but that, so an external temptation is, is like something that's pure.

Like you can be both at the same time though.

Right.

Yeah.

Meaning you can have an external and an internal.

Right.

Like pull.

So the, there's an external offer and an internal, like your heart is. Desiring it. Inviting you to do the same thing.

Right.

And then you're conflicted. So you have like part of you wants to do it. Part of you doesn't. There's, there's a pull coming from inside or an invitation from the inside and an invitation from the outside.

So the, the, the one from the outside is not, it's neither here nor there, if that makes sense.

Right.

Now, I think like from a logical perspective, that makes a lot of sense. You know, like you have this, the two categories of external and then internal temptation, external being, you know, um, being like neutral.

Right.

Uh, in terms of like your own guilt, but then, uh, internal being the one that has like a moral, a negative moral consequence, meaning you're, it's a sin. Um, now, so like I said, that makes sense from like a logical perspective.

Do we see these two categories in scriptures and the scriptures?

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

What are, what are some examples?

Let me, let me clarify like first.

Um.

Okay.

So I think the external one is largely neutral, but I wouldn't want to say it's always neutral.

Always.

Meaning, meaning, meaning. Like, um, there are times where you're presented with offers that are only coming because you put yourself in a horrible situation.

Um, so, so like the, you know, the foolish man that, um, I think Solomon, you know, sees going down to where he knows like the promiscuous women will be basically.

Yeah.

And if you're doing that, then like the issue is, you know, it's, it's probably a little more complicated than like you, I think there's something in you that's wanting to put yourself in a place where you're going to, you might get that external offer.

Right.

Yeah.

And then you can, like, there is kind of a plausible deniability in the sense that you can say, well, I didn't know that that would happen, even though you did. And you're just trying to lie about it.

Does that make sense?

Yeah.

So in that kind of moment, you might have an internal pole to put yourself in a situation where you get an internal and external offer that, you know, on paper, you're saying you don't want, but then you kind of wanted to, you did, there was part of you that wanted to get the offer.

Does that make sense?

Yeah.

Even if you're nervous to act on it kind of thing. So, but, but largely, you know, for the most part, external is external and that makes sense versus internal. But then you're asking like, well, that's logically that makes sense.

Is that biblically?

Do we, do we see both categories biblically?

Yeah, sure. I mean, I, I, like the only way you come up with those kinds of categories is you're trying to make sense of a variety of different kinds of passages in the way that they actually work. So, you know, the Bible says that Jesus was tempted in all ways, like us, except without sin.

And if you think about the nature of Jesus's temptations from the devil, like you have to ask, well, like Jesus was tempted with respect to bodily weakness, like meaning that he is an individual who has, like he's put on, he's, you know, he's God who's put on human flesh and dwelt among us.

And, you know, the God man did suffer hunger. He did suffer from sickness. You know, he did suffer from, you know, being cold and, you know, uh, hot and tired and all that. So he, with respect to bodily weakness, he was tested in all the ways that were tested.

And then when you look at his, like, temptation by the devil, the devil is certainly presenting offers to, like the Bible says he, he went into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.

Right?

Right.

And so Jesus is certainly, like, being, he's in a situation where the devil is presenting him with offers to sin.

Okay?

And so the word in that passage is clearly being used in, at the, you know, it could mean more, but at the very least it, like the primary sense of it is the external offer, right? And Proverbs says, like, my son, if sinners entice you, right, do not consent.

So like this idea of being enticed or tempted in the Bible, it, there are plenty of examples that are talking about an external offer. Does that make sense?

Yeah.

Yeah.

So you don't have to, like, now, now, um, like that's just like, those are scenarios where the word itself is being used as an offer from the outside.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah.

Right.

But then when you get to James, James says, let no one, you know, when he is being tempted, say he's being tempted by God. For God can't be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one. But each one is tempted when he's lured, essentially, and enticed by his own desires.

And so, uh, that kind of temptation is, like, the only way to describe that is an internal temptation. It's a temptation that comes from the desires.

Right.

You can't, yeah, you can't say, like, if you use, if you read temptation in that passage the same way as the other one, then essentially the Bible is contradicting itself at that point.

Right?

Because you have one that's saying he was tempted in every way and Jesus is God. Uh, and then in the other passage, it's saying God is never tempted.

Right?

Yeah.

I mean, um, yeah, I think, you know, essentially the contradiction would involve, like, if you think that Jesus, um, like, so it's like a contradiction. If you, you have to harmonize a variety of passages, meaning, so like, meaning like, okay, when Jesus went out into wilderness to be tempted by the devil, like that on the surface, it reads external temptation.

Right?

Yeah.

And then, like, when you read the narrative itself, you know, Satan says, like, you know, all the nations of the earth I'll give to you if you bow down and worship me. And, you know, Jesus's response is, like, um, you know, essentially to say, you know, um, uh, like, I'm, I'm trying to think through which response he had to which temptation, you know, but, uh, you know, it's written you should not put the Lord in God your test.

He says that when, uh, he asked him to throw him off the temple or throw himself off the temple because the, you know, angels will bury you up. And, uh, and then, you know, when, like, he tempts him with the food, you know, he says, man shall not live by bread alone.

I can't remember the other one off my head, but essentially Jesus, he doesn't sound like he's being pulled from the inside in those.

Right?

Mm-hmm.

But if temptation always meant that, then you could read it in, so to speak, to say, well, I guess he was tempted, like, because that's what tempted means. But then you do, you know, where, where that would be a contradiction would be like, the Bible tells us in Colossians 3, 5 to put to death what is earthly in you.

And what's earthly in you is, you know, sexual immorality and then evil desire even.

Okay.

So like, like there are desires that are evil. The Bible tells us to hate the evil and love the good.

Right?

Mm-hmm.

Like there are passages which say that desires can be sinful. And so if Jesus, if, if his temptation inherently meant he desired all the evil, then he's, he's violating his own character at that point.

And so at that point it becomes a contradiction. But then there's other passages too, you know, like my son of sinners entice you, do not consent. Like that's like in, like there's nothing intrinsic to being enticed that is like meet like an internal pull from the inside.

You can just have individuals trying to pressure you to do something. And you can either want to do it and resist or you not want to do it and tell them to get, you know, go away kind of thing. So I don't know if that makes sense.

Yeah. Yeah.

Desire, Sin, and James 1

No, no, that makes, that makes sense. I guess the question then becomes, well, thinking about that passage in James specifically, you know, I, I know I've talked to a lot of people who aren't even necessarily, you know, they, they think that temptation and internal temptation is not a sin.

Only, only the action is a sin.

Right.

Or I think I might've met some people too who, who they have a variation of that where they essentially say, you know, if you, if you dwell on it for too long, it becomes a sin, whatever that means. I've never, no one's ever been able to give me like the, you know, what is it like five minutes or is it like, is it like per thought?

This isn't, this isn't a discussion that's unique to the SSA movement. It's also kind of a, there's a lot of platitudes that are thrown out related to just what you might describe as heterosexual lust in order to help people feel better about.

Right.

Like the presence of remnant lust in their own heart and part of it is like an effort to redefine like the nature of lust itself.

Right.

In order to, you know, not make people feel so bad about themselves, but yeah, I understand where you're going.

Yeah.

And oftentimes they go to that.

So like if you picture the woman naked in your brain, you know, and you think about it for a few minutes, you know, just, you know, if, if, if at that point you say, you know, get that thought out of my brain, you did an okay job, right?

Right.

Yeah, like, like if it's a, you know, like you have the brief fleeting moment of like the thought that, you know, you shouldn't have, even though, even though you're telling yourself that it's okay to have that thought, you know, it's okay to have that thought, you know, you shouldn't have, you know, you shouldn't have it.

And so like you try and get it away really quick. Well, then they, they would just say, well, no, that, that wasn't sinful because I got it away. You know, if I wanted it, I wouldn't have gotten it away.

Right.

And often, I mean, I've had that, I've had that kind of conversation so many times with a lot of people. And, and what is always brought up is that passage in James, right?

Yeah.

Because it seems like if you, if you just reading it at surface, you know, if you're just like, read it at a glance, it does seem like James has different categories for desire, temptation and sin. You get what I'm saying?

It, well, I know what you're saying, but.

You don't think I said it carefully enough?

No, you did. It's just it. I disagree with the premise.

Okay.

But I understand what you're like, what you're saying is the text says like then desire when it conceives, it gives birth to sin.

Right.

Sin when it's fully formed brings forth death.

Right.

Right.

And they, so they, when I talk to these people, they're telling me, hey, see, look, there's different categories.

Well, it's a different step process.

Yeah.

It's the way they're saying it. But yeah, the only thing I'm objecting to is I don't think that the natural reading of the text is what they're saying. Like what, like the natural reading of the text is different than what they're saying.

They just miss, like, it's just a pervasive confusion about the nature of language at that point.

Okay.

Yeah.

If that makes sense. Like, meaning like the straightforward reading of the passage is not saying, okay, there's like a neutral desire that is going to grow and grow and grow at some point and give birth to sin.

Right.

So that's what they're saying. They're saying, like, you can't help the desire. Desire is neutral. It's like, but then once it grows to a certain point, it gives birth to sin. Like, that's not actually what it's saying.

Okay.

That's just the common misunderstanding of what's being said. So, like, if you look at the passage, like it's saying desire when it's conceived gives birth to sin. So notice the timetable. Like, so think about the timetable there.

Like when the desire is conceived, it says it gives birth to sin. Meaning, like, all that's collapsed into one event. Do you understand what I'm saying?

Okay.

Probably not.

Meaning, like, the way that you read that passage is basically once the desire is conceived, it's giving birth to sin.

Once it enters into your mind.

It's giving birth to sin.

Right.

Yeah.

So you have to ask when is it conceived? When is the desire conceived?

Right.

Okay.

So you think about the normal birth metaphor. The normal birth metaphor is, like, you know, there's a, well.

Go on.

We're doing a birds to the bees lesson here, you know.

Yeah.

Yeah, like.

Should have put a TVMA rating on this episode.

Think about the normal, you know, when a man's sperm and a woman's egg, you know, come together and are fertilized. That's what you call conception, right?

Right.

So the normal process is, like, after conception, you have, like, this fertilized egg essentially implanting in a uterus, and then over the course of nine months, it grows and grows and grows and gives birth to sin, right?

Or it gives birth to a baby. Yeah, a baby. A sinful baby. A sinful baby.

All right.

Good save. Good save.

Yep.

The issue is that, like, that process is a long process. But then what this passage is actually saying is it's saying when the desire is conceived, you know, when desire is conceived, it gives birth to sin, meaning it's collapsing the whole birthing process into, like.

The single event.

A single event. And that's the most straightforward way to actually read it. Do you get what I'm saying?

Uh-huh.

Like, that's not, you know, trying to save a position. That's just what it's saying, okay?

Okay.

When the desire is conceived, it gives birth to sin. And then when sin is fully grown, it brings forth death, right?

Right.

So it's taking the growth part and not putting it, like, pre-birth. It's putting it post-birth.

Mm-hmm.

Does that make sense?

Mm-hmm.

So, desire conceives immediately brings When desire is conceived, it brings forth sin, right? Sin, when it's fully grown, brings forth death, essentially.

Mm-hmm.

So, it's just, it's taking the birth metaphor and modifying it in that way. But, like, if you leave that

And I guess extra I don't mean to cut you off, but I want to say this before you move on. I guess the extra proof that that's the way to read it is when you think about, like So, think about Adam and Eve and their sin, right?

It's not like

Uh-huh.

It's not like they sin and then, you know, the first time they face death is when their lives end, literally, right?

Right.

The first time they face death is immediately afterwards when God curses them, right?

Right.

Which is why God said, the day you eat of that tree, or the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, you will surely die. So, he's saying that day, right?

Right.

So, that's like a so, James is confirming that aspect of it, like, the moment you sin, you face death, right? And, you know, that's not to get into, like, original sin and whatnot, but you see a consistency there.

So, if that's the way that you read one half of the statement, then you should probably I mean, you should probably read the other half of the statement that way as well, right? When I'm talking about James, you know, the one half of the statement is death immediately comes when you sin, even though he's like you're saying, he's using, like, a lifelong example as a metaphor, but he's compressing it down into essentially one single event, right?