Homosexual orientation and behavior are forbidden by the Bible

English: Lot and his daughters flee Sodom, as ...
English: Lot and his daughters flee Sodom, as in Genesis 19:17, illustration from "Sunrays" published 1908 by the Providence Lithograph Company (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The witnesses of the Old Testament and ancient Jewish society have implications for a view of homosexual orientation and behavior that can be described as biblical:

1.      Homosexuality violates the creation order and patterns for male and female roles and for marriage (Genesis 1–2). It arises from the same internal rebellion as did the Fall recorded in Genesis 3.

2.      Homosexual rape is the only sin described in the events surrounding the fall of Sodom as a special judgment of God (Genesis 19).
          
3.      That homosexual rape was the sin of Sodom is the only interpretation that fits the larger literary context and structure of the narrative about the covenant God made with Abraham.
          
4.      Homosexuality is the sin of the incident at Gibeah (Judges 19–20).
          
5.      Homosexuality is ritualistic or cultic sin, usually between two males, practiced among the pagans and condemned in the books of Deuteronomy and Kings and throughout the history of Israel.
          
6.      The LXX is even more clear than the Hebrew text in identifying homosexuality as the sin of Sodom and the sin condemned in Deuteronomy, Kings, and the history of Israel.
          
7.      Leviticus 18 and 20 condemn homosexuality, whether consensual or as rape. The contexts of chapters 18–20 are universal and transtemporal in nature. They apply to all peoples and for all times. If the exhortation to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Levit. 19:18) is universally true, so is the prohibition of homosexuality.
          
8.      The prophets, particularly Ezekiel (16:50), identify homosexuality as the sin of Sodom.
          
9.      Jewish tradition expressed in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, the LXX, the Mishnah, and the writings of Philo and Josephus condemns homosexuality.
          
10.      Jewish sources do not distinguish between homosexual acts that are ritually impure and homosexual acts that are morally wrong.
          
11.      Sodom and sodomy become symbolic of all sorts of sexual perversion, violence, and pride that violate heterosexual marriage.
          
12.      As sin, homosexuality comes under the condemnation of God, whether it is in the form of rape and violence (Genesis 19 and Judges 19–20) or as consenting behavior among adults (Leviticus 18, 20).
          13.      Scripture regularly associates pride and arrogance with homosexuality (Isa. 1:2–17; 3:8–10; Ezek. 16:48–49; Zeph. 2:9; 2 Peter 2:8–10; Jude 7–8).
          
14.      Homosexual orientation is not discussed in Scripture, but prohibitions are broad enough to cover the lustful inclination as well as the act.
          
15.      The interpretive process of the revisionist approach is seriously flawed. First, it uses ideas of sexology belonging to the modern worldview to correct the text and its worldview and so usurps the historical meaning. Second, it fails to appreciate the layers of meaning of the term Sodom. There is the essential, universal reality of “Sodom” (including pride) and the various existential realities or particularizations of the word in various historical settings (including various sexual activities). There is a universal meaning to Sodom, as well as a particular historical meaning.
          
16.      Revisionist interpretations of the Old Testament fail to dislodge the traditional view. The Old Testament stands as a valid source for contemporary understanding of the biblical view about homosexuality. This is an important point that has far-reaching implications for the interpretation of the New Testament, for public morality, and for law.
          
17.      Revisionist interpreters of the story of Sodom would have us forget Lot’s wife. But Jesus told us, “Remember Lot’s wife.” She is a chilling reminder of the moral collapse of a society gone mad in perversion.

In light of all evidence, the universal condemnation of homosexuality in the Old Testament seems unassailable. This witness is foundational and should be determinative to convince the Christian who accepts both Testaments as authoritative. Yet there is more, for both the Christian and the non-Christian.


De Young, J. B. (2000). Homosexuality: Contemporary Claims Examined in Light of the Bible and Other Ancient Literature and Law (pp. 60–62). Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications.

Popular posts from this blog

Ontario Catholic school board to vote on flying gay ‘pride flag’ at all board-run schools

Christian baker must make ‘wedding’ bakes for gay couples, court rules

Australia: Gay Hate tribunals are coming