What the Bible says about Homosexuality and following Jesus

If you are familiar with X44 at all you know we don’t shy away from tough topics. You also know we aren’t overly concerned with any reasons for believing or following something other than what the Bible instructs. In theology there are “good” views and poor views. A good view shows that something lines up according to the textures of hermeneutics within the overall lens of scripture. A poor view means that something is a stretch or doesn’t really hold water when examined by itself or in the context of the rest of scripture. Sometimes we say you have to do a lot of theological gymnastics to make a view like that work, which isn’t a compliment.

In the case of looking at homosexuality there are many “poor” theological views. For instance, I hear a lot of people say things like, “if the Bible were written today in this culture, it would likely take a different stand on homosexuality.” That is a poor view. The Bible is timeless. I also hear that civilization has evolved or advanced and that homosexuality is a more advanced view of “loving everyone” especially in regard to what a finished or recreated heaven and earth looks like where there doesn’t seem to be a place for gender. As this statement has some considerational merit; it still represents a poor theological view because it stands in stark disagreement with other parts of scripture. I will address this view more in a moment. I also hear people say something like, “the Bible hardly addresses the subject.” That may or may not be true, but there are several statements on homosexuality that give us a clear course. Furthermore, theologically you can’t completely discount something because there isn’t a lot of it.

Sometimes you hear me use the term “minor view” within the context of theology. A minor view means most theologians believe something else, but there is a contingency of well thought scholars that believe the Bible teaches one of the less predominant views, doctrines, or ideas. I hold a few of these views. As an example, one of them is a view on hell called conditionalism over the much more commonly held view of Eternal Conscious Torment. However, it is important to point out that most theologians primary reason for holding a certain view is always because they believe either the Bible better defends the view, or that it fits better into the overall narrative of the Biblical message. In other words, a minor view is held because you think the actual scripture best supports the view. There isn’t another valid reason for holding a minor view. In this case the view that homosexuality is sin before the Lord is the predominant or major view of theologians and Christianity, it is difficult to find a “minor view” that agrees with scripture.

According to the overall story and message of the Bible, the Torah, and Jesus, let’s explore what the scripture actually teaches about following the Lord and homosexuality. In other words, we aren’t really addressing opinion, we are addressing what the Bible says.

The Bible doesn’t say nearly as much about the topic of Homosexuality as people want it to. I often say that wasn’t the primary intent of scripture, but it is some of the message for us. It does clearly address the topic. Gen. 19: 1-13Lev 18:2220:13; Rom. 1:26-271 Corinthians 6:9-10I Tim. 1:10 are the primary passages that prohibit homosexuality. But the rest of the Bible also speaks to the subject as Greg Boyd [1] puts it, “the entire biblical narrative presupposes that sex is supposed to take place between a man and a woman in the context of marriage (Gen. 2:23-24). The Biblical definition of “sin” is “missing the mark” (hamartia), and on the basis of this scriptural evidence, I have to regard homosexuality as “missing the mark” of God’s ideal. So yes, I regard homosexuality to be a sin.” I would encourage you to read Greg’s take on this subject as well which X44 would agree with. (See end note.)

Lastly (before I really dive in), I don’t know of any Theologians that I would typically say have good theological perspectives that take a different view on this subject. Even the more “liberal” or forward thinking possibly even “progressive” theologians that interpret the Bible for all that it is worth would largely agree with this article. There are small debates that I find interesting, such as the idea that “if in a recreated heaven and earth situation there is no gender shouldn’t we practice this kind of love here and now?” as I alluded to above. As I love this discussion, the blatant problem with that thought in particular (and many like it), is that the Bible clearly says that here and now that “act” would be sin in the eyes of God. I don’t see things being contrary to his word in Heaven. The other problem is that thought pattern falls off logically and theologically in terms of sexuality that is confined to earthly realms. We don’t know exactly what “love” looks like in the fulness of God’s plan and would be wrong theologically to assert “our plan or idea” as part of God’s. Consideration is one thing, forming a doctrine is another. We simply don’t have the writings (we don’t have the cards, we weren’t given that book, that isn’t the primary intent of those passages, and we don’t have the right to read anything into them) or the understanding to “see” what the recreated heavens will reveal in terms of love between each other. But if I have learned anything in my studies, it is that the thoughts of humanity are usually far from the thoughts of the Lord God Most High (אֵל עֶלְיוֹן). Usually, the way we think God should do things is a far Cry from His divine Will.

Perhaps the most quoted verse in this arena is Leviticus 18:22. American and other prevalent worldly culture would have us believe in the right to “love” whomever you wish. Often if you don’t view “love” in this “open” sense you are considered archaic or bigoted and repressive by those that do. However, when reading this verse in Leviticus it is difficult to argue anything other than that the cultural/Biblical view of the early Biblical authors clearly forbid homosexuality and the practice is described as an abomination. The Hebrew word used for abomination is the word to’evah and is best translated “a thing of horror.” The context is that if you are practicing this act, you become abhorrent to God and righteousness. I think it is important to break this down. To be clear, homosexuality isn’t condemned in this passage or others because it is harmful to the body (although that may be true), or because it is self-absorbed (and therefore contrary to scripture and also true), or because it is violent (which might also have a case in scripture); but in determining the exact forbiddance here textually it is prohibited as Feinstein notes because “is at its core an appeal to the emotions.”[2] At first this seems too simple and watered down. But think about it for a moment, that is often the simple beauty of the scripture. The idea of homosexuality in Leviticus causes an emotional reaction of horror because it is so counter cultural to the Yahweh covenant governing pure undefiled relationships. It is exactly opposite of what God has designed you for. Today homosexuality is no longer abhorrent. It is just “another choice,” there is no emotional disturbance. We aren’t Israel. We are Babylon and in Babylon lots of things no longer make us sick.

If you are interested in my in depth take on this passage, I would have to say I land very closely to my old friend (RIP-SHALOM) from UW Madison where we studied Hebrew together, Michael Heiser. You can follow his discussion here. [3]

To be completely unbiased, if the passages in the OT were the only passages that condemned homosexuality I might be on the fence on the subject. The reason I say this is because parts of the Torah I believe are still “best practice” or God’s “ideals” for us as Christ followers, but not everything in the “law” can or is likely intended to be followed under the new covenant. How do you know or choose? That question has taken me a lifetime to personally analyze and enact in our family. The fact that Jesus fully kept the law, and we are to “follow” Jesus continues to make this a personal challenge to everyone. Most people aren’t going to question that the New Testament confirms what the Old Testament says about Homosexuality. Perhaps the only “angle” contrary would be those that interpret the stance of Paul to be anti-homosexual conveying his personal beliefs but not being indicative of the rest of the New Testament. To most Christians this view would be heretical, but possibly a consideration to those with that “open” of a theology. This leaves you asking the question, “what did Jesus Himself conclude about Homosexuality?” To be clear Jesus maintained Torah law but not Rabbinical law, in other words it seemed Jesus aligned with Levitical law in my opinion. But I will come back to this as well.

Arsenokoitai is the Greek word most frequently translated as homosexuality. It is a bit vague, but not as vague as some modern-day articles would have you think. Sometimes it takes on a more word for word translation of “abusers of themselves with mankind” or “them that defile themselves with mankind”.  One of the million dollar questions is why do translators choose to translate the way they do? There are a lot of “not so great” translations that are based on the cultural norms or political lean of the 16th or 17th centuries which marks the basis of most of our translations, or perhaps we could discuss a word for word vs contextual thought pattern of interpretation. This is a great discussion that will come into play here, but most of that conversation I will leave for a different article or the long anticipated X44 YouTube series on inerrancy so many of you are waiting for us to do after we complete the seemingly never-ending church series! But at any rate, this Greek word is a case where I think we can dive in and do better in terms of translation, as I said above, we actually have a very clear path linguistically to follow.

Most Greek words can be easily rendered by breaking down the word itself. Greek works like building blocks of smaller parts of words to create a larger word that encompasses all of the thoughts of the smaller parts. This word comes from arsen (a Greek word for “male”) and koite (“to lay down for rest or sleep, but figuratively, the marriage bed or marriage itself”).  I hate to point this out, but we get the word “coitus” from this Greek root which leaves no room for interpretation that this is anything other than inferring sexual intercourse. I will also note that within 2nd temple period extra Biblical source we don’t have to search very hard to find the same renderings. When this was written, homosexuality was rampant in Rome. 13 of the 14 Roman Emperors were homosexuals. This verse is clearly saying that those who practice the act of homosexuality will not inherit the kingdom of God and are deceived as the practice is evil. This culture norm within the earthly empire was completely opposite to the kingdom of Jesus. Furthermore, the implication is that if you choose to follow Jesus you must leave this act behind, it has no place within the sacred undefiled temple of the Lord which is now, under the New Covenant your very body and being. You are a representation or ambassador of this Jesus kingdom and can’t serve two masters. Your commission and very purposeful design is to represent. And in case you are wondering if there is any chance this is just a singular text or idea that could simply be the thought of Paul personally, or mis-represented over the years in translation or scribed error, Romans 1:27-29 reiterates nearly the exact idea using the same and slightly different words which is a common Biblical way of making sure we received the correct message. Whether you put Paul as the author of Romans or not, the authors knew that God condemned homosexual intercourse from the time of Abraham and the New Testament writings are in alignment with those thoughts hundreds/thousands of years later. God didn’t change His stance on this, and He isn’t going to.

To be clear this isn’t an argument over habit, or genetics; it likely is connected to the fallen world but God isn’t overly concerned with how it came to be, as much as He is concerned about the Exodus of it and deliverance back into the reclaiming of your original undefiled design to be holy and pure before the Lord. We may enjoy and be used to practicing sin in our former ways, but once you make an allegiant decision to follow the Lord you are making a decision to abide by what God says is holy and take steps towards being a completely “remade” and “renewed” person putting away the desires and activities of the world and becoming like Jesus. In this regard Homosexuality should be treated like any other sin (and in some cases a sexual sin against your body specifically) – we are called to completely stop and pray that God remove it from our remaining “human” being as we are transformed into the process of becoming a “spiritual” being preparing for eternity in a new Heaven and Earth. Perhaps everyone still sins each and every day, but hopefully not willfully. A healthy Christian makes a decision based on Jesus in their life to not continue to give in to the sin of the world. It is one thing to occasionally fall into sin, it is another to willfully continue to live and walk in that sin. The Bible says we are to cut such things out of our lives and be agents of helping other like-minded believers to do the same. This is a major tenet of discipleship.

In this sense, homosexual acts should be considered similar to other sinful acts. The only consideration to which the Bible places some sins differently than others is in terms of sexual sins to be against your body which is the Temple of the Holy Spirit. By this, scripture seems to imply that sexual sins carry more implications of recovery and/or repercussions than others might. Homosexuality sins may or may not be in this nature. Not every homosexual sin is sexual. When someone first makes a decision to follow Jesus they only “begin” the journey to be delivered. This is the road to sanctification and isn’t completed until the recreated heavens and earth are established fulfilling our design to partner with the Lord. Some on this earth will get closer than others and your path is between you and the Lord and frankly no one else. But we are indeed moved and called by scripture to give up the former passions of our earthly desires and be transformed into the new remade purpose that God has for us. To be frank a mature believer should be living nearly completely redeemed. As we will never live without the effect of sin while we are in this world, God is calling us to live in freedom and redemption separated from sin and indwelled with the Spirit.

Personally, as I affirm above, I don’t think there is. I could go through all of the scriptures I mention at the beginning of the article (and in a video I would), but I think the Bible is pretty clear in this area. However, I would recommend Two Views on Homosexuality, the Bible, and the Church (ed. Preston Sprinkle). The problem of any other view is that it is going to have to render the clear portions of scripture a different way. This is what I started the topic as saying requires some theological gymnastics that most Christians scriptural interpreters aren’t comfortable with.

In my mind, you are left with three options:

1. Repent and repair (reparative therapy) -Pray that Jesus truly Heals you and gives you freedom from Sin. This is what I truly believe is offered to us. Reparative therapy isn’t always good. It has been unfortunately the source of much trauma and abuse in the church and continues to be a catalyst used often for more harm than good. However, Jesus is the master healer. If all things point to Jesus in terms of healing and reparative therapy, you have the right idea.


2. Accept and refrain (celibacy) -Eventually all things will be made new, but until God does that work in you, you respectfully refrain. I have some room for this view, in a way, isn’t this what we are called to do largely anyway? Abstinence is often the best policy to start the healing process. It seems to be part of the step to attain total healing. This is a large part of what it means to live in humble devotion. However, there are other considerations, celibacy is a contranym in scripture. Is it a blessing or a curse? Thats is up to you and Jesus. It can go either way.


3. Accept and affirm what you want to believe (i.e. the Bible gets it wrong): for those who are genuinely gay, something Paul does not believe in, Paul’s teachings (and the Torah) do not apply. I don’t even consider this a “poor theological view”, it is not even a “theological view” in my opinion. To take this view you are saying you simply do not believe the Bible is timeless or still true today. Most Christians logically and theologically can’t or perhaps shouldn’t allow themselves to get here. I typically call this “building your theology on anything” and it isn’t Biblical. -I don’t care that it’s wrong. I don’t care what God says. I’m going to “do that thing THEOLOGY.” Perhaps as I earlier alluded to, some are ok with throwing out Paul’s theology and simply removing Him from the authority of scripture. I can’t do that personally (or hermeneutically) whether I “like” his demeaner or not. To continue to live in what the Bible describes as “sin” would not appear to most devout followers to be a “Biblical” choice.

I believe the “Christianese” 21st century plan of loving the sinner but not the sin hasn’t been lived out very well by the church. The church in general has identified what the Bible says about loving others but hasn’t fulfilled it through love in action. Brian Zahnd would say, ” The church is being challenged to act like Jesus. Held accountable for not sounding like Jesus. And losing a generation who wants to follow Jesus.” The image of this article sort of conveys much that I dislike about our Christian culture. We say we love them and eagerly desire to show them God’s love to restore them to a better view and true understanding of Biblical love, but our actions typically are far from conveying that heart. We need to do better. I can’t stand to be in the midst of most anti-homosexual “Christian” circles. They make me sick to my stomach, their anti-love of Jesus sentiment abhors me in a Levitical way. The un-Godly pronouncement over the LGBTQ community by Christians is often as bad as the homosexual sin itself. Treating others this way is counter to what Jesus taught.

It should go without needing to be said that if you are a faithful follower of Jesus and one that seeks to disciple (and we all should), then part of your calling is to lovingly reveal the truth of the scripture to those that may not see. Be the hands and feet of Jesus and shepherd people to the understanding of the scriptures and guide them to truth in Jesus.

Let me say to those of you who struggle with Homosexuality that I love you and so does Jesus. I don’t despise you, and I certainly do not think you are a terrible person or can’t be reconciled to the Love of God. This is not a difficult statement for me or hard for me to empathize with or imagine; in fact, so much that many around me might actually think I am “ok” with homosexuality or wonder if I think it is sin at all. To be honest when other Christians ridicule me for my “acceptance” of the LGBTQ cultures I count it as gain before the Lord. Jesus would have met them at the well, at the table, and at the mountain and so will I. Trust me, my kids know the Bible says homosexuality is sin, but also know how Jesus interreacted with the sinner. You can’t pick and choose what you like about Jesus, your just called to be a representative or physical manifestation of Him to everyone that you interact with. Too many Christians don’t look much like Jesus, but I pray that I and my family do.

Theologically Jesus “perfected” or gave clarity of the Father to the World. So, what does Jesus say here? Jesus made no explicit statement about Homosexuality. In one regard we think He should have, but we don’t get to decide what we are given. Jesus never said anything explicit about abortion, same-sex marriage, or child molestation. But it would be an incredible claim to conclude from that fact that Jesus’s teaching is irrelevant to our ethical assessment of those issues. The lens of the Bible and Jesus’ message are coherent and in unison. Jesus kept all of the Torah (this is different than rabbinical, man-made law) and asked that we live by his example.

Jesus did speak explicitly about many things such as sexual immorality and the nature of marriage. He denounced the former (e.g., Matt. 5:28; 15:19) and defined the latter according to Genesis 2:24: “For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh” (Matt. 19:5Mark 10:7–8). Jesus affirmed the covenant.

Some might say that Paul’s teaching applied only to his culture and has little bearing on ours today. One of the first textures of any hermeneutical approach is to first determine the message to the intended audience and how they would have interpreted that message within their culture. Then you decide how and if you can apply it to your personal situation. The “mistake” too many people commit is to attempt to “throw away” or “write off” anything they don’t like on the basis of culture. Theologically and hermeneutically these conversations walk on this ice. Are you throwing away inerrancy and inspiration? It’s true I would likely define inerrancy and inspiration differently than most evangelical Christians would (that series of films on x44 is coming soon); but make no mistake, proper Biblical interpretation doesn’t disregard major thematic messages that are reiterated throughout scripture. A good Theology is working through a consistent agreement within the lens of the Bible.

Jesus and Paul aren’t in a “cage match” or at odds over ethics. To split them is to split the Torah and the message of God to His people. The OT can’t be severed from the New. If you view Jesus as peace-loving, enemy-forgiving, egalitarian, and inclusive with regard to homosexuals and align Paul as war-loving, death penalty–supporting, patriarchal, and exclusionary with regard to homosexuals (these are terrible Pauline views imo) you have some deep-rooted theological issues that I would propose can’t work together under a proper view of the complete word of God. Your theological lens is a mess. I would encourage you to dive deeper to reconcile your thoughts. Dr. Matt and I have gone to a great deal of Research through the Expedition 44 Youtube Channel to show others a better view. I would caution anyone to throw out the black letters of the Bible and/or even position them as subservient to the red letters. They all point to Jesus.

My big question to a Christian struggling with LGBTQ temptation is, “Are you divinely interested in what God’s word says?” You might not accept how Christians in general act today (I don’t either), but are you willing to place your “trust-faith” in Jesus and what He asks of you? Are you interested in what God desires for you and entering into the covenant commitment that He asks of those who follow Him as Disciples?

We all sin and we are all broken as a result of broken relationship with the Lord and the mucked up world. You have been given the chance to be redeemed, to be delivered. Set your face to say, “My heart and core is broken, I wish I weren’t. I can choose to turn my brokenness into sin and live in redemption and freedom in the power of Jesus.” You can choose to live as the Bible asks you and to be consecrated before the Lord. Find a tribe, a community that will walk with you. Find a mentor, be a mentor, seek accountability, get transparent before the Lord and those in covenant with you. Find a church that has a loving scriptural support-based view for sin and be immersed. You can make the commitment, declare the overcoming power of Jesus over your sin, and declare freedom and victory as you are devoted to move into the calling that God has for you.

Dr. Will Ryan

Special thanks to those that contributed to this article in a thought tank: Dr. Matt Mouzakis of X44, Nick Tenhagen, Dr. Phil Molitor, Pastor Steve Thorngate, and Josh Ruud. Please note that they do not necessarily share the view of the author and represent a very diverse mix of theological backgrounds.

[1] https://reknew.org/2008/01/is-homosexuality-a-sin/

[2] Eve Levavi Feinstein, Sexual Pollution in the Hebrew Bible, p. 113.

[3] https://nakedbiblepodcast.com/podcast/naked-bible-79-leviticus-17-18/

[4] https://www.thomascreedy.co.uk/n-t-wright-on-homosexuality-and-christian-faith/

Comments are closed.