[#if authorProfileImage??]
    [#if authorProfileImage?is_hash]
        [#if authorProfileImage.alt??]
            ${authorProfileImage.alt}
        [/#if]
    [/#if]
[/#if]
Author Alan Shlemon
Published on 02/20/2017
Sexuality and Gender

Homosexuality and the Bible - Not That Kind of Homosexuality

Video from the Stand to Reason Quick-Reference App. To view all the videos and read the accompanying short text, download the app HERE.


Transcript

Now in the past, people who advanced pro-gay theology, used to make, well let’s just say, really bad arguments. Alright so, for example, they used to claim that David and Jonathan in the Old Testament were gay. Alright, Ruth and Naomi were lesbian lovers, and even Jesus and John were homosexual lovers. You know, it’s because the Bible says that John was a disciple whom Jesus loved. And in Isaiah 53, so they claim, it says that Jesus was cut off. Meaning that perhaps Jesus was a eunuch.

Now of course, if you look at the rest of what Isaiah 53 says about Jesus, it says, He was cut off from the land of the living. Which means, he was killed, not castrated. So nevertheless, these arguments were really really bad in the past. However, today people who advanced pro-gay theology are offering more sophisticated arguments. And here is the new case for pro-gay theology. Here’s their view in a nutshell. This is what they say.

The Bible does condemn homosexuality. The Bible does condemn homosexual sex acts. However, it condemns abusive, coercive or, exploitive types of homosexuality. For example, gang rape, or master-slave sodomy, or pederestry. Men who have sex with boys. But since modern-day homosexuals do not engage in those abusive or exploit of acts, therefore the biblical prohibitions, do not apply to them. Because after all, modern day homosexuals are engaged in loving consensual relationships not abusive exploitive ones. And that’s why what the Bible says, doesn’t apply to them today.

Now let me just offer two general responses to this approach that the Reformation Project takes. Before I give a specific detailed response to all their individual arguments. And the first thing to note is this the Reformation Project uses selective use of historical evidence. And here’s what I mean. They’ll take a biblical passage that seems to clearly teach that homosexual sex is sin. And they’ll find some ancient historical case of abusive forms of homosexual sex. And they’ll say the Bible is only referring to that abusive form of homosexual sex. Not homosexual conduct in and of itself. And that’s the way they try to get around the clear teaching of what Scripture is saying.

And the second point to recognize here, with regard to the Reformation Project’s approach, is that nowhere in Scripture, do we see the Bible making this distinction. That there are exploitive homosexual sex acts and not exploitive homosexual sex acts. And so for that reason then I’m going to argue that the Bible does not just limit itself to condemning just coercive or exploitive homosexual sex acts.