Bestiality, Homosexuality, and Dr. Ben Carson’s Comments (videos)

Ben Carson

Dr. Ben Carson. Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery, John Hopkins Hospital — Baltimore, MD. Bestselling author. Presidential Medal of Freedom. Photo: Uploaded to Wikipedia by Senator2029. In the Public Domain.

This article looks at the very serious and sensitive issue of homosexuality from a Christian perspective. The writer believes the Word of God is true that homosexuality is sin. And that the practice of a homosexual lifestyle is open defiance against the God of our Creation. The writer also believes the Word of God sets a standard that we love all mankind, even as God loves us. That love extends to homosexuals. Further, that God hates homosexuality and all sin, but loves homosexuals and all sinner; and God desires to bring sinners into a life that is pleasing to him. Finally, the writer believes God calls us to speak to the sin question out of our love for ourselves, for others, and for the Lord. It is in this spirit that the article below is made available to you, the reader.

Kenneth D. Price


Tragic consequences have long since been the history of Christendom and, particularly, those who uphold the tenets of faith. 

Dr. Ben Carson, director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital, now finds himself embroiled in the kind of character assassination that awaits Christians who have the audacity to express core values of the faith as captured in the Biblical text. 


The Controversy…

Recently, Dr. Carson appeared on Fox News’ Hannity and made the following comments: 

Marriage is between a man and a woman. No group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn’t matter what they are. They don’t get to change the definition. So, it’s not something against gays. It’s against anybody who wants to come along and change the fundamental definitions of pillars of society. It has significant ramifications.


Persecution Apologies…

Well, as you might expect that did not go over well with the gay agenda community. Immediately, LGBT medical students demanded Dr. Carson be replaced as the speaker for the upcoming commencement. Criticisms erupted within liberal media circle: How dare Dr. Carson equate homosexuality with bestiality“, critics asked.

The gay agenda community pounced on Dr. Carson with such force that he walked back his comments on CNN’s Situation Room:

“As a Christian, we have a duty to love everyone and to love them as themselves. And so I love gay people, I love straight people. So, this was really, I think, on my behalf somewhat insensitive and I certainly apologize if I offended anyone because I was not in any way comparing gays with people who engage in bestiality or sexual child abuse.”

In a written statement, Carson apologized to John Hopkins University: 

“I am sorry for any embarrassment this has caused. But what really saddens me is that my poorly chosen words caused pain for some members of our community and for that I offer a most sincere and heartfelt apology. Although I do believe marriage is between a man and a woman, there are much less offensive ways to make that point.”

This series of events demonstrates the attack on religious freedom that is gradually leading America into a period of utter darkness. The persecution of Christians is underway. And this illustrates the intensity of commitment necessary to remain authentic to the faith. Dr. Carson has much at-stake. No one can argue that. And Christians will increasingly find themselves in stormy waters with such topics. Ironically, the very groups that desire a perversion of marriage are commonly responsible for religious persecution of Christians who oppose the perversion. Finally, this episode illustrates the enormous challenge our nation faces, finding people to come to the world of politics with a sense of uncompromising values. The nature of politics is such that pressures often result in public figures backing away from positions, even when those positions emerge out of their deepest faith convictions.

Dr. Carson’s mentions of homosexuality and bestiality as perversions of sex/marriage is in-essence true from a theological perspective. While they are different conceptually, these practices fall under the category of perversions, nonetheless. After all, Alzheimer’s disease and Lou Gehrig’s disease (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis), though different pathologically, are essentially neurological malfunctions. The Packers and the 49ers are different teams, but both play in the NFL. Jesse Owens Recreation Center and Morrill Tower have different functions, but they are both campus structures at The Ohio State University. Homicide takes another’s life, while suicide takes one’s own; but they share a murderous core. And according to the Word of God, human sexual activity that does not involve man and woman is unnatural; whether man-man, woman-woman, man-beast, or woman-beast.

For much of our history, Americans understood this as a divine truth. Those times now seemingly gone, and anyone who remembers them will face the fury of a growing godlessness cast as social enlightenment. Ultimately, regression is as much a reality as progression. Some changes are the former, and not the latter.



18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. 24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 


26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

Romans 1: 18-32 



Nature vs. Nurture …

Aside from our nation’s historical view of homosexuality, the Apostle Paul’s describes such activity as unnatural.  In doing so, the Scriptures reveal an answer to one of the most hotly-contested questions on this subject. Namely, are persons born homosexual?

The history of this assertion is interesting in-and-of itself. Worthy of a dedicated article. But for Christians, we need not be drawn into a false depiction of sin as some natural origin, ordained by God. The Lord is not a house divided on this or any other issue. God does not instill something in man as a part of his very nature, while inspiring Biblical writers to refer to such inclinations as unnatural. It would be the cruelest of predicaments and unjust in it’s core. 

Dr. Umar Johnson Discusses Homosexuality

Such a creative contradiction is tantamount to creating the sun for the purposes of photosynthesis, but withholding from the sun its ability to emit rays. The Scriptures are clear that sex between persons of the same gender abandons that element of our nature.

While the gay agenda advances a nature narrative, having researched the history of studies that make this claim, they are filled with irregularities and promoted by gay advocates. And scientist who are not particularly wedded to the Christian faith are openly rejecting the nature narrative, including some who turn to psychological disorder as the root cause of homosexual behavior; the prevailing explanation for much of our country’s history..


What About Nature…

In verse 26, the Apostle refer to homosexuality as an activity, “….which is against nature“? Scriptures render several uses of the English word “nature”. Two are of particular interest in further consideration of the issue of homosexuality.

Morphe in Philippians 2:6 refers to form or shape from which we derive the word morph — defined as shape, structure, or form. And for those, like me, who enjoy playing with morphing software, these packages change the form of an image into another. This rendering of nature (morphe) deals with the outward expression or appearance. It is nature from a physical perspective. Females of humankind are equipped with a morphe or form that includes breasts and a vaginal area. Males of humankind are equipped with a morphe or form that includes a penis. Again, the respective natures of females or males in this sense deals with the bodily structure.

We find that in Mark 16:12, the writer describes Jesus’ post-resurrection appearance to two disciples, After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.”  Luke 24: 13-31 adds details that the encounter occurred on the road to Emmaus. And that the disciples conducted a lengthy conversation with the Lord; that conversation centering around the prophet they knew as Jesus and the recent crucifixion events. Luke writes that Jesus’ appearance was so different in form that the disciples did not realize the person with whom they were talking was Jesus. His identity was concealed until the men reached the disciples’ destination and as the men sat down to break bread (verse 31). As such, the nature (morphe) of Mark 16:12, is external. In Philippians 2:6, this same form or nature is external in a sense that Jesus is The Word (John 1:1) or the expression of the Will of God, wrapped in human flesh.

Having looked at the outward sense of nature (morphe), we can return to Romans 1: 26. Here, the word nature is transliterated phusis. This aspect of nature (phusis) is connected to the Greek word physis, from which we derive the word physics. As such, the discussion of nature in Romans 1:26 deals with the essence of a thing and what is produced out of this essence. For instance, we can say that it is natural for the sun to give off rays because of what we understand to be the nature of the run. We would not, however, expect a stone to produce milk as it is not the nature or phusis of a rock to do so.

Paul is saying that God so constructed man that his natural inclination are to be sexually involved with woman. And that God likewise constructed woman that her natural inclination is to be with man. Consequently, any derivation from God’s design is not natural, and thus, cannot be attributed to the giver of life in what we refer to as “birth”.

For Christians, Paul answers the question that society is posing as a distraction from God’s design: “Are homosexuals born this way or does homosexuality come through one’s development.” The Scriptures are clear that man’s nature (phusis) is to pursue sexual involvement with the opposite gender. And no one, not Rev. Al Sharpton and certainly not President Obama, can alter God’s design. Any allusion to some prayerful consideration that leads one to believe homosexuals are born that way is heresy and opposes Biblical teachings.


The Deception …

America’s culture of homosexuality is following the way of myriad deceptions that have plagued mankind since Adam’s fall in the Garden of Eden. Satan fooled Eve suggesting that she and Adam would be as gods. [Genesis 3:5] Example after example of spiritual wars between good and evil show the battleground to be razor thin. Satan, in Luke chapter 2, attempted to deceive Jesus during the 40 days of testing in the wilderness: 

9. And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple,
and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence: 
10 For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee:

The work of the antichrist makes use of deception: “For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.” [2 John 1:7] 

Great contrasts readily reveal what closely-defined substitutes for God’s Will often hide. Hence, when theologian C.S.Lewis speaks of evil, he does not cast it as an ominous thing, but a perversion of good. A close proximity, but evil nonetheless. Hence, the Scriptures warn: “There is a way which seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” [Proverbs 14:12]

Any magician or master in Three Card Monte understands the power of deception.

In verse 26, Paul talks about same-gender sexual behavior as “against” nature. The word “against” in the Greek transliteration is para, or beside. From it, we construct many words to describe things that are close proximity to a base thing. For instance, a paralegal, approximates legal practice. A paramedic works beside a medic. And a paragraph is a grouping of words next to one another.

So it is with homosexuality that it approximates sexuality designed by God. And yet, is it not God’s design. And this brings us to a misunderstanding of Dr. Carson’s accurate assessment. That is this. Bestiality is a gross contrast to or polar opposite to what God intended in human sexuality. It is this grossness that sickens us. This grossness conjures up disdain for those who would engage in sex with an animal. Bestiality is most certainly unnatural. But it is so distant from our nature we need not convince ourselves of horrid perversions of a human engaging in a sexual act with an animal. 

The against (or para) speaks of something that while unnatural, is presented as close to that which is natural. And this is the evolution of the homosexual movement. That is, while some might be offended by the most lewd acts of homosexuality, our society has reshaped this behavior into normal, loving relationships between people of the same-sex. It is deception. Unnatural. Against (or para) nature. A deception of what is the essence of man and woman.

A parallel to this might be understood by looking at the history of racism in America. The days of chattel slavery are gone. The days of black codes are gone. Jim Crow is dead. The Ku Klux Klan and White Citizens Council have largely been neutralized. These were blatant, overt, and thus prima facie elements in our nation’s troubled history of race relations. The more insidious aspects of racism are para in-nature. Disguised by societal elements that are acceptable and just. Easily hidden. More difficult to perceive. For instance, the ending of Affirmative Action is considered “race neutral” or pursuit of a Ronald Reagan’s “color blind” society. Sounds good. Sounds worthy of our efforts. But this was inherently racist, cutting the legs off of efforts to finally address historic and systematic oppression of people of color. And with that achieved, we now see results such as black businesses winning only one percent of public contracts in states like Ohio. Racism of this nature is ineffective in the Ku Klux Klan sense, but tremendously effective when cast against something called individual responsibility or color blind politics.

Similar observations can be made of other societal ills. Abortion is no longer viewed as murder, but a                reproductive right. It is unnatural for a woman to murder her child. But cast against the notion of a “right”, this act becomes para nature. Jim Crow lasted for decades as n system that violates every premise of a civilized society. And yet, it’s life blood was to cast this terrible system against (para) something deemed honorable — states “rights”. And now, homosexual marriages is being cast against a more palatable concept — civil rights.

Deception and this word against (para) have and continue to be partners in some of the worse episodes in human history. And Paul tells us that the idea of a man being sexually involved with another man, or a woman sexually involved with a woman, is para nature. A perversion of nature. While presenting itself as natural (i.e., one’s essence from birth), is deceptively beside or against nature.

Response to Gay Agenda Advocates … 

Liberal voices will continue to dog Dr. Carson. To these same liberal voices we might ask, “Dr. Carson established a foundation that has extended over 5,000 college scholarships. Exactly how many have you funded?”  

The point being, Dr. Carson’s life has personified the social investment about which liberals pontificate. He has nothing to prove to liberals that are more concerned with legitimizing godlessness though they ironically seek to quiet free speech that opposes the gay agenda. Dr. Carson’s right to bring a God perspective into the public discourse is his exercise of free speech rights.

Protests that distract us from Dr. Carson’s message would do well to answer these questions:

1) Does not the Holy Bible call homosexuality a sin and describe it as “unnatural”?
2) Is Dr. Ben Carson an expressed follower of Jesus Christ and the Scriptures?
3) If 1 and 2 are “Yes”, is not Dr. Carson simply reflecting specific tenets of the Christian faith?
4) Does the Bible teach Christians to hold to faith teachings in one setting and abandon them in another?
5) And does the First Amendment provide space for Christian free speech on this and other issues? 

Irrespective of one’s support of homosexuality, the above forms the essential lens through we must assess Dr. Carson’s comments. Dr. Carson, says of himself that he is first a Christian. Not a Republican or Democrat. Not an African American. Not even a highly-decorated physician. He is first a Christian. Hence, beyond the charged rhetoric that seeks to shadow the Christian perspective Dr. Carson brings to this issue, a serious consideration of his comments cannot be given without the faith tenets upon which his words stand.



Dr.Carson Post-Hannity Reflections



The following two tabs change content below.