Why we do this ...

Again, the opposition terms us as mean-spiritited fundamentalists who hate homosexuals, but we must insist that it is precisely because of love and because of the gospel that we fight this point: Scripture interprets itself. Scripture often has a plain reading: it means just what it says. When it doesn't, knowing what the totality of Scripture says will point to how a passage should be understood. We are not free to say, "Oh, this is just too hard" or "they were primitive people" or "man wrote it, not God" when we do not like what it says.

Here is a section from a piece that I hope everyone will read carefully. We should all have a thougtful, nonreactive

2.3 Jesus and homosexuality

"Thirdly, we hear it said that Jesus made no reference to homosexuals or homosexuality – although that is questionable in light of the fact that he seems to have commended two and only two possible ways of life for his followers: lifelong heterosexual marriage, or consecrated celibate singleness (Matthew 19: 10 – 12). “While some are incapable of marriage because they were born so … There are others who have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let those accept who can”.

It is always dangerous to argue from silence but we must surely say that the reason why much of Jesus’ teaching is preserved in the Gospels at all is because it was striking or novel, and aroused controversy. If Jesus had wanted to say something as novel and challenging about homosexuals as he did about women, we should certainly expect to find some trace of that in the records. The fact that there appears to be none would suggest either that the matter was not of great interest to him, or that he was entirely comfortable with the moral stance inherited from his ancestors.

On the evidence, the least probable scenario is that our Lord Jesus Christ would have legitimised homosexual conduct."

Read the whole thoughtful piece