CREATED IN GOD'S IMAGE ?

The debate rages today as it has now for many years. The homosexual community insist on their "equal rights" under the law and battle in opposition to any discrimination against them. Many in the Christian community argue that homosexuality is a sin of choice by its perpetrators and deserves no special treatment.

A major point homosexuals make in this debate is that their sexual preference was inborn. They do not have a choice. Consequently, according to this assertion, homosexuality is not a sin committed by their own choice but rather a condition inherent in their creation. Since 'man' is created in the "image of God" (Genesis 1: 27), their argument goes, homosexuality cannot be a sin, despite what the Bible calls it (1 Corinthians 6: 9, one among other citations).

It seems that the primary argument I hear in response to the homosexual assertion that they were born with their sexual preference is to simply deny that they were born that way without much scientific corroboration. I suspect that the reason why this has been the primary  response to this particular argument is that to accept the possibility that someone can be born with homosexual tendencies would be tantamount to agreeing that such tendencies were therefore a part of "God's image."   Moreover, to accept this would create a contradiction in the Bible if it teaches that man is created in the image of God, but also identifying  a condition 'inherent' in this creation as a sin.

The rhetorical conumdrum in which the Christian apologists find themselves in this portion of the debate is caused by what I believe is a long standing misinterpretation of the Bible. Simply put, the Bible does not teach us that we were created in His image. It describes how Adam and Eve were created in His image, but it goes on further to say that the succeeding generations were born in the image of Adam. (Genesis 5: 3) Note how the arrival of Seth on the scene is described, "begot a son in his own likeness, after his image,..." (emphasis added). Also note that Seth was born in the image of Adam who has already undergone the 'fall' and lost his spiritual relationship with God.

The distinction between how Adam and Eve came to exist and how their offspring came about is very clear. The former were "created" but the latter were "born" (or begotten). Now I don't pretend to try and analyze all the practical differences, but there is a difference. I also do not try to deny that God does not maintain creation in a mysterious sense, including the birth of children, But how we are brought about is clearly different from how Adam and Eve came into existence. By being the subject of a direct creation of God, Adam and Eve were privileged to reflect (glorify) the otherwise physically, invisible Creator Who is Spirit.

The Apostle Paul recognizes this same difference in his inspired letters. He refers to those not "in Christ" as being "in Adam." (Romans 5: 12, 1 Corinthians 15: 22) In other words, through our spiritual birth whereby God's life (which is spiritual and eternal) is given to us, we become "new creations" (2 Corinthians 5: 17-22) and reflect (glorify) the image of God through Christ.

Despite what is popularly proclaimed by Christian preachers and laypersons alike, and for so long, the Bible does not establish that we are created in the image of God. We are born in the image of fallen mankind. It does not matter if we have a bent toward homosexuality or any other 'sin' from birth, it is still a sin inherent in our physical birth. Hence, homosexuals cannot justify their conduct by claiming God created them that way, in His image, anymore than I can claim that my bent toward selfishness or coveting is not sinful because I was born that way. After all, we are born in sin and in Adam.

Therefore the homosexual argument based on the long held belief among many theologians that we are created in God's image fails. It rests on a clear but erroneous interpretation of scripture. It is not necessary for the Christian apologist to absolutely deny that homosexuals are born that way to maintain that the lifestyle is a sin.

Our desire to be reconciled with God must begin with our first recognizing sin for what it is and our need for a new life in Christ. The Apostle Paul describes the progression of those with a "debased mind" as "not only do the same (practicing sins) but also approve of those who practice them." (Romans 1: 32) The attitude of the vocal, homosexual community is an example of this mindset. Sin is a matter of choice, but I cannot deny that it is a problem with which we were born.

Someone joked several years ago that the term 'Christian Lawyer' was an oxymoron. I love lawyer jokes and certainly can understand this joker's point given the public's opinion of lawyers in general. While lawyers hold a unique position in our society that subjects it to cynical jokes and criticism, I have found that my profession is no different than any other in terms of the type people you find practicing this old profession. There are good, bad and ugly lawyers.

Probably the one profession I found in my experience that is most similar to the legal profession though is that of ministers and preachers. Both professions involve a scholarly pursuit that are probably among the oldest of all fields of study. In our early, more rural society in America, the most educated in any community was the local pastor and, if there was one, the lawyer. That is why, traditonally, whether for good or bad, our pool of community leaders drew heavily on these two professions.

Another interesting parallel of these two professions is that much of their work involves using their considerable oratory to convince others to take a point of view or to act on matters the listener would not otherwise do. Many times a preacher's and a 'mouthpiece' (lawyer)'s success was judged by their success in this endeavor. Both are advocates. I use to muse that a trial lawyer that 'got right' with God would be compelled to preach the gospel, transferring his passion to speak from one topic to another.

So, I do not believe that the term 'Christian Lawyer' is an oxymoron at all, but merely a term identifying a disciple of Christ who happens to be a lawyer. There really are no Christian lawyers in the end, but Christians whose love for God constrains them as the Apostle Paul described to express his or her faith through his or her unique experiences and talents.

Over the past 20 years, I have been primarily involved in the practice of insurance defense. I have been one of those  trial lawyers retained by insurance companies to defend lawsuits of all types brought by the plaintiff trial lawyers. A young, Christian associate once inquired into the consistency of a lawyer professing to be a Christian to exhibit so little mercy on plaintiffs seeking damages. I explained that our job was to raise the law and hold plaintiffs 'feet to the fire' on strict legal standards when trying to prove their cases. This hard line, we hope, will not only protect our client from false or exaggerated claims, but might press the plaintiffs in a questionable claim to retreat and seek mercy, not the justice the law would mete out. In that sense, we operate like how the law in scripture is described. It drives us to the grace of Christ's gospel.

There's no oxymoron.

I hope through the use of this blog, we can share issues and questions that come about in everyday life from a Christian perspective, not necessarily from a lawyer's. I call this blog the Christian Lawyer to identify my self and at times, along with others who may participate, act as a counselor you might want to consult for advice from time to time. I may not always be right, but I think  I or others can provide a unique perspective. May God bless this effort.