What Jesus said about homosexuality -- Part 2

In my previous essay I tried to show how two of Jesus' teachings bear on the issue of whether He condones homosexual behavior. These were words directly from His mouth that deal with our question indirectly. In this article I plan to discuss an indirect way He addressed the direct issue, as well as a direct way He dealt with the matter directly. Yes, Jesus had a surprising amount to say about homosexuality.

It must have seemed like a good idea at the time: to print the "Words of Christ in Red." But this marketing gimmick may help fuel the notion that the sayings of Jesus are somehow "more inspired" than the rest of the Bible. That isn't possible. Paul wrote, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (2 Tim. 3:16, NASB, emphasis mine) Peter classed Paul's writings among "the rest of the Scriptures." (2 Peter 3:15,16) The New Testament Apostles and the Old Testament prophets agree that every word of the Bible, as originally penned, is exactly as God wants it to be.

The Apostles had plenty to say about same-sex sex, and none of it positive — for example, in Romans 1:18-32, 1 Cor. 6:9-11, 1 Tim. 1:9-11, and 2 Peter 2:6-10. So when people say, "Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality..." they're insinuating that there's some kind of feud between Christ and His hand-picked spokesmen. Not only is there no evidence for that, it's ludicrous on its face. Virtually everything we know about Jesus comes from the Apostles. If they misrepresented His views in their letters, then we can't trust their reports of what He said in the gospels. On the other hand, if you accept "Blessed are the meek" as an authentic sentiment of Jesus, then Romans 1 and all the other scriptures against homosexual behavior are also accurate representations of His thoughts.

Jesus explained in advance how this would work. At the Last Supper, alone with His disciples, He said:

"When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, He will bear witness of Me, and you will bear witness also, because you have been with Me from the beginning. ... I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when He, the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." (John 15:26, 27... 16:12,13)

Just as the Son spoke for the Father by the Spirit (John 8:26-29, John 12:49-50, John 14:10), the Apostles spoke for Jesus by the same Spirit. If you believe in Jesus, you have staked your eternal soul on the veracity of what the Apostles wrote. To believe in Christ is to believe the Apostles; or, to put it the other way around, to disbelieve them is to disbelieve in Him. There is no rift between Jesus and Paul, or Jesus and Peter, or Jesus and John. The black letters are just as much the thoughts and intentions of Christ as the red letters.

But the excuser of homosexual sin doesn't just have to invent a war between Jesus and His designated agents. He also must pretend that there's contention within the Godhead. The Son uproots the works of the Father.

In fact it was the Gnostics, not the Christians, who taught that Christ was sent to demolish the ways of the inferior Hebrew god (the "Demiurge") and establish the worship of a better, nicer god. Now, if you get your information about Christianity from the "History" channel, you may be under the impression that the Gnostics were a sect of Christians. You may also believe that the pyramids were built by space aliens. Gnostics were pagans. People who say that Jesus repealed the moral law given at Sinai, are ignorantly parroting the dogma of a long-dead cult.

Christians believe that the Son of God did not begin to exist when He "became flesh and dwelt among us." Rather, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (John 1:1-3 — See also Colossians 1:15-17) Though we can distinguish the Son from the Father as Persons, they aren't separate Gods, or separate parts of God. They are perfectly unified, along with the Spirit. Whatever God the Father said in the Old Testament — including what He said against same-sex sex — was said by the Son, and the Spirit as well. The holy prophets were moved by "the Spirit of Christ." (1 Peter 1:11) So the command in Leviticus 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination," came from the Word, the Logos, the Christ — just as surely as the command, "Let there be light," and the command, "Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more."

It's easy to see, in just the four quick points I've given, that Jesus did say something about homosexual behavior. He said it in the Old Testament, and in the New. He said it directly, by His own mouth; and indirectly, through others. He spoke about it generally, under the umbrella of all OT sins; and he talked about it very specifically, describing the activity. It just isn't honest to say that Christ was silent on this subject.

There’s no record of Jesus condemning rape...or child abuse...or stealing....or....murder....or any number of ethical points.

Jesus was though, acknowledged in his lifetime as an orthodox Jew, even a Rabbi (which was an informal, but very honoring, designation meaning, simply, “Teacher.”) He had a lot of enemies among the religious establishment of His day—and they (falsely) accused him of blasphemy—which is the legal reason they pushed Governor Pilate for his crucifixion. However, then or later...He was NEVER accused of varying from the sexual morality of the Jewish scriptures...in fact Jesus made that morality more strict.

Lust was named by Jesus as a form of adultery...(a VERY serious, death-penalty offense in Jewish law). (Matt. 5:27)

Hatred was named by Jesus as a form of murder (also, obviously, a capitol offense, in Jewish law).(Matt. 5:21-25)

Easy divorce (common among 1st C. Jews, and Gentiles) was also condemned (so much so that many have thought all divorce was condemned...which would contradict the Old Testament law) by Jesus.

In the process, he looked back to the ideal marriage—that of Adam and Eve (before the Fall)(Matt. 5:31-32; 19:3-6). This alone....that “Adam was made for Eve, not for Steve!” as some country preachers’ common-sense analysis puts it, proves Jesus did not approve of homosexual pairing.

The author’s premise above though is simple: If you are a Christian, you accept Jesus as God, and, you accept God as having inspired the whole Bible. The Bible, Old Testament and New Testament, clearly condemns any sort of homosexual behavior. Therefore God condemns it....therefore Jesus condemns it.

There is no way to honestly get around it.

The Christian scriptures (the New Testament—as well as accepting the Old Testament) were all completed in the 1st Century. Various interpretations were hammered out and agreed upon primarily in the 2nd and 3rd centuries...with the loose ends (as it were) tied up in the 4th Century.

Roman Emporor Constantine came to accept Christianity in the early 4th Century—with the Church not becoming the official, “state sponsored” religion until AD 391, under Theodosius I, well AFTER Constantine’s death in AD 337.

Therefore it is entirely inaccurate to say Christianity was a “state created” religion, “created by a pagan emporer”...as it’s essentials (as found in say the Apostles or Nicene Creeds) were agreed upon LONG before (decades, if not hundreds, of years) it became adopted by Rome as their official religion.

To say Jesus was not a Christian is a bit like saying Washington was not born an US Citizen—pretty silly on its face.

I think its fair to conclude that, before the coming of Jesus, and...possibly, even now....THOSE WHO’VE NEVER HEARD OF JESUS (like Abraham), IF they really call on God, and trust in His mercy, not their own good works.....will be saved—by the mercy of God in Jesus Christ.

Today, however, anyone who hears the Good News of Jesus—and rejects it—cannot possibly be saved.

This means of course the preaching of the gospel puts people under a different standard...but it also means they are more likely to accept Him, and be saved.

‘That said, when supporting all scriptures don’t you usually get the “stoning is allowed” and encouraged, argument? How do you form your response.’

Probably a similar response to what the men who drafted the Westminster Confession of Faith said in Chapter XIX. The Law of God, Sections 3-5:

“3. Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel, as a church under age, ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, His graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits; and partly, holding forth divers instructions of moral duties. All which ceremonial laws are now abrogated, under the new testament.

“4. To them also, as a body politic, He gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the state of that people; not obliging any other now, further than the general equity thereof may require.

“5. The moral law doth for ever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof; and that, not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator, who gave it. Neither doth Christ, in the Gospel, any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation.”

http://www.pcanet.org/general/cof_chapxvi-xx.htm#chapxix

Bottom line is that Christians, for a very long time (from the earliest centuries, I believe), have divided the commands/law of the Old Testament into 3 general parts:

1) Civil laws--written for the ancient theocracy of Israel--which ceased to exist as an independent entity with the Babylonian conquest/captivity in 587 BC. After that time, Jews never were able to fully apply the laws written for the nation--since it didn't exist as it did before. Christians have never seen the civil laws (stoning penalties, exile, rules of war, and kings, etc.) as applying to us--since the Church never isn't, and never was, a political, theocratic government--as ancient Israel was.

2) Ceremonial laws--written for the religion of the Jews before Jesus--including laws demanding animal sacrifice, and blood purification, religious feast days, and, importantly, Kosher dietary regulations. All of this, the New Testament teaches in various places....was FULFILLED in Jesus, since his death was the ultimate sacrifice, that all the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were symbols of. The New Testament book of Acts shows too how the abrogation of the religious dietary (Kosher) laws--importantly opened the door to admitting Gentile believers in Jesus. No longer were the people of God called to separate themselves from others in how they ate--except in simple thankfulness to God for all food....since Jesus "declared all foods clean." (Mark 7:19) This is backed up by the vision Peter received in Acts 10 to go ahead and eat "unclean" foods....in reaching out the the Gentiles. Since the 1st Century, Christians have not worried about keeping Kosher...

3) Moral laws: Personal moral, behavioral & sexual laws, are seen in the Old Testament and New Testament as timeless creation-based rules of living. These are most clearly outlined in the 10 Commandments (Exodus 20), and summarized by Jesus as loving God and loving your neighbor. It's important to note the Hebrew way of thinking too...in that it saw laws as expansive, and non-technical...and almost introductory. Therfore when "adultery" is forbidden, ALL forms of sexual immorality--whether technically sleeping with another man's wife is done or not--are forbidden. Leviticus 18 gives the exhaustive, detailed list of sexual sins (which includes homosexuality, bestiality, and incest)...but all of this is seen as built on the adultery proscription of the 10 Commandments.

Christianity teaches that obeying moral laws (such as say, observant Mormons, Hindus, or Muslims do) does NOT save us, rather Jesus does...but, once we accept and believe on Jesus, we are given the Holy Spirit to empower us to love God and love our neighbor...so we will, almost automatically...obey those moral laws--as they are still binding on us. Someone who is NOT obeying God's moral laws...should really question themselves as to whether they truly accept and love Jesus...

“Christianity teaches that obeying moral laws (such as say, observant Mormons, Hindus, or Muslims do) does NOT save us, rather Jesus does...but, once we accept and believe on Jesus, we are given the Holy Spirit to empower us to love God and love our neighbor...so we will, almost automatically...obey those moral laws—as they are still binding on us. Someone who is NOT obeying God’s moral laws...should really question themselves as to whether they truly accept and love Jesus..”

Indeed. I have a cousin who claims he’s a Christian but he’s very loose and liberal on the homosexual issue. Of course, I can’t judge anyone’s heart but I think I need to ask him if he’s actually read Jesus’ teachings on marriage and sex in the Bible. Also if he’s a sexual liberal/libertarian, why would he want to be a Christian?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.