The Gay Christian Question: Let the Bible Speak!

#GayChristian
This young man is going to talk about his intensive Bible study of Homosexuality. If one is to be a professing Christian, this would be a good idea. I want to dive into his findings and weigh them against scripture. I want to be plain, I have no axe to grind with gays or the LGBTQ community. But I do struggle to understand why they would want to be part of a religion that has the Bible as its foundation. I will present his argument and the scriptures he uses to back them up. His video has 1.2M views. My entire channel has 37000 views. So I am the David against this Goliath. So buckle up, this could be a bumpy ride.

15-22 The following study changed his mind, his parents minds as well as other Christians in his life. This should be good.

24-52 He mentions six passages, of which the most famous is Sodom and Gomorah. I found 25 passages, and then quit looking. I’ll touch on a couple of the most important later.

51-1:09 Ezekiel explains Sodoms sin, but notice he stopped reading right before it mentioned the “detestable” things the Sodomites were doing. We’ll touch on one of the things God considers “detestable” shortly.

Lev. 18-22 He quotes Leviticus and talks about how this is the old law. (Regardless of whether one believes old testament law is binding or not, to describe sex between members of the same sex as and abomination or detestable tells a story in itself) Two chapters later, the Bible reads

Leviticus 20:13

13 “ ‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. (again, this is repeated. Detestable is bad no matter how you look at it) Once again, homosexual acts are cast in a horrible light. I didn’t search any more OT verses, as we will put them on the shelf just for the purpose of not beating a dead horse.

1:17-1:37 To compare gay sex to eating rabbits or pork is kind of setting up a straw man. It’s just not a very convincing argument. I’m still thinking words like abomination and detestable are more problematic to the narrative than bringing up dietary law is helpful.

1:37-1:59 Romans 1:24-27

This video is supposed to be a Biblical argument for gay Christians. Let’s consider his scripture here in context. Vs. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. First of all, the idea was to put them to shame in a physical sense. So why not let the men burn with lust after women? Because that would not put them to shame in the same sense. (even if we accept the argument that this isn’t a committed situation, if mentions abandoning “natural” relations with women for unnatural relations with men. Natural can’t be explained as a social construct, it is what it is.) The word shameful is also used. Straight sex is never described as being a shameful act. While it would be sinful if God let the men commit sexual acts with women, it wouldn’t be shameful in the same sense.

1:59-2:13 While we may get milage out of this argument for a moment, the contention that committed relationships would change the narrative will give way to scriptures not yet mentioned momentarily.