Would Jesus approve of homosexual marriage?
What was Jesus’ and the apostles’ attitude toward homosexuality?
The Revisionist Answer
Jesus did not condemn homosexuality, and neither should we.
The Biblical Answer
Jesus did not mention the word homosexuality, but He referred to Sodom and its destruction more frequently than did anyone else (Matt. 10:15; 11:23; Luke 17:26–37). In each context, Jesus assumes the divine judgment on Sodom, which He links to the Flood as an example of divine intervention. It becomes a portent of His own second coming. “Remember Lot’s wife,” he warns (Luke 17:32). He views the sin of Sodom as a serious matter.
Jesus also upheld the monogamous, permanent, heterosexual marriage as a universal norm. He linked the outward deed to the inner thought or motive (for example, Matthew 5). He cited the heart, the inner being, as the origin of evil deeds (for example, Matthew 15). He warns against annulling even the least commandment, which He came to fulfill, not destroy.
Jesus perhaps hints even at pederasty when He warns about causing little children to sin (Mark 9:42). It is more plausible than not to believe that Jesus would condemn homosexual behavior and thinking.
Four other references to Sodom occur in the New Testament (Rom. 9:29; 2 Peter 2:6–11; Jude 7; Rev. 11:8). Peter and Jude identify homosexuality as the sin of Sodom. The apostolic view surely echoes Jesus’ understanding.
Finally, homosexuality occurs implicitly in at least twenty-seven lists of vices or sins at various places in the New Testament.
These lists contain general, broad terms from earlier Jewish literature that refer to or encompass homosexual behavior, or they contain words often associated with homosexuality. Specific terms, such as abomination and dog, also build strong connections to Old Testament references to homosexuality. It is a fair observation that the New Testament continues the attitude toward homosexuality expressed in the Old Testament.
In the New Testament era, should not the ethic of love prevail, allowing for homosexual or gay living?
The Revisionist Answer
The Bible sets forth the liberating ethic of love as the chief principle of the Christian. Establishing such rules as forbidding homosexual relationships brings Christians under bondage and violates the ethic of love. If our ethic is love, should not freedom prevail in such questions? Isn’t it a question of respect for the stronger (homosexual) brother (Romans 14–15)? The church should accept into its membership and among its clergy, those who live in committed, homosexual arrangements (marriages).
The Biblical Answer
Our attempt to obey the second greatest commandment, to love our neighbor as ourselves (Levit. 19:8), cannot violate the first commandment, to love God with our total being (Deut. 6:5–9). A significant way to love God is to “be holy” (Levit. 19:2). Love motivates obedience to God’s commands (John 13:34, 35; 1 John 3:23; 2 John 6). Homosexuality violates any honest definition of purity and holiness. As with other sexual sins, it is not morally neutral, so it does not fall into the category of the “stronger” and “weaker brothers”.
The Revisionist Counter-argument
The voice of the community fashions our morality. Although the Bible can give us our theology, only the whole community acting together can decide which ethical standards should currently prevail.
The Biblical Counter-argument
As much as we might like to customize our morality around current fashion, ethical principles are based in the character of the unchanging God. Neither does God shape morality around majority vote. Would the Israelites have voted for the Ten Commandments? Many of them were violating the laws even as Moses received them on Mount Sinai. God made His will clear, though not many agreed with it.
