If a Christian is attracted to the same sex, what name should they give to their attractions? Is “gay” an acceptable word to use? Would “same-sex attracted” be better? Or is it best to use a different label—or say nothing at all?

In general, Christians take one of three major approaches to this question:

Approach 1: Whether Christians use the word “gay” to describe their attractions is a matter of personal context and conscience. “Gay” might be an unhelpful or unwise word in some settings, but there’s nothing intrinsically wrong or sinful about describing yourself as “gay.”

One prominent example of this approach comes from New Testament professor Wesley Hill, who explains his use of the phrase “celibate gay Christian” this way:

“Gay” in current parlance doesn’t necessarily refer to sexual behavior; it can just as easily refer to one’s sexual orientation and say nothing, one way or the other, about how one is choosing to express that orientation…. This is why, by the way, I rarely use the phrase “gay Christian” without adding another adjective: “celibate.” To call myself a “celibate gay Christian” specifies both my sexual orientation and the way I’m choosing to live it out.

Approach 2: Identifying as gay is never the best or wisest choice for a Christian. While some Christians might have understandable reasons for doing so, they should be gently guided away from this kind of language.

One prominent example of this approach comes from a 2020 report to the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) denomination, written by a committee that included widely known PCA pastors Tim Keller and Kevin DeYoung:

In view of the twin dangers of misunderstanding and syncretism, we believe it is generally unwise to use the language of gay Christian…. Noting the range of possible meanings of terms like gay and gay Christian, we would do well to seek understanding before imparting advice. In practical and plain terms, the issue of terminology is more likely a matter for shepherding in wisdom, and not in and of itself grounds for discipline. (p. 30)

Approach 3: Identifying as gay is not only unwise but sinful. People who describe themselves with this word must be called to repentance, and they may not be genuine Christians. 

Two prominent examples of this approach come from Rosaria Butterfield and Denny Burk. Butterfield argues in her book Five Lies of Our Anti-Christian Age that “homosexual sin… at the level of identity” occurs when Christians describe themselves as gay. Such self-identification, she says, “presents a false religion, a different religion from biblical Christianity” (pp. 66-67). Meanwhile, for Burk, “To embrace an identity that goes against God’s revealed purpose is by definition sinful.” While Burk doesn’t go as far as Butterfield in declaring that anyone who self-describes as gay participates in a false religion, he does assert that, “[i]nsofar as sexual orientation designates an identity… that identity too is a sinful fiction that contradicts God’s purposes for his creation.”¹“Is Homosexual Orientation Sinful?”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, vol. 58, no. 1 (2015), pp. 113-114.

If Approach 1 is correct, mishandling this conversation could damage the Church’s unity. On the other hand, if Approach 3 is correct, mishandling this conversation could damage the Church’s holiness. Indeed, according to Approach 3, wrong answers may spell the difference between eternal life and spiritual death.

Here at The Center, we’ve just released a new paper explaining why we believe Approach 1 is the most compelling answer to this question—because it faithfully represents the teaching of Scripture, the modern concept of “identity,” and the wide range of things people mean when they say “gay.” We encourage you to engage all the perspectives represented in this new paper, guided by the Holy Spirit, and reach your own conclusions.

References

• 1
  “Is Homosexual Orientation Sinful?”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, vol. 58, no. 1 (2015), pp. 113-114. ↩︎