“God gave them over to shameful lusts.  Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.  In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.  Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion” [Romans 1:26-27].

“Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God?  Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders” [First Corinthians 6: 9].

After these direct references in the New Testament, Christians who seek to disconfirm homosexual behavior turn to First Timothy 1: 8-11 where the condemnation is less direct.  First Timothy refers to the law being righteous for those who are Godly and not for those who are ungodly.  The word “pervert” is used in the NIV, not homosexual.

One can see the concern among Christians about these passages, especially the first two.  It seems like Paul is attacking homosexuality.  Peter Gomes, in his Chapter entitled “The Bible and Homosexuality,” * shrugs off the references in the Old Testament as an effort to promote heterosexuality so human society can be promoted [Genesis].  Sodom and Gomorrah did not have a “homosexual problem” just because some citizens lusted after male angels and Levitical prohibitions against homosexuality were more about keeping Jewish culture pure against encroaching cultures than anything else.**

But Christians are people of the New Testament.  How can we shrug off New Testament words as only applying to Jews?  They apply to us.  How can we act like this condemnation does not exist when it clearly does?  How can we say that cultural acceptance of homosexuality makes these passages of Scripture irrelevant?

For Peter Gomes it is all about context. 

Romans seems to be the most non-confirming indictment of homosexuality.  I quoted Romans above but if you turn to Romans 1: 26-27 you will see that I left out the words “Because of this” at the beginning of the quote.  Many times one can alter the context of Scripture and that can make a big difference.  Gomes writes that Paul is not talking about homosexuality as much as he is the fallen nature of mankind.  This fallen nature has caused both Gentile and Jew to suppress the truth about how wicked they are.  The focus is on wickedness in general, not homosexuality.  It is “because of this” that man has turned from honoring God.  It is “because of this” that man has become a worshipper of self, caught up in his own ego.  Gomes calls this a “golden calf moment” [O.T.].  “We become what we worship” is what Paul is really saying as man has turned from worshipping God to worshipping self.  When man begins to follow the lusts of his heart, he loses perspective.  The truth of God is exchanged for a lie and man begins to serve the creature rather than the Creator. 

The specific “ways” this loss of perspective manifests itself in human behavior needs to be addressed because that’s where sexual practices come into play.  Paul has a long list of wicked examples in Romans 1: 29-31 from covetousness to ruthlessness.  This is the context in which he inserts homosexuality.  Gomes says he mentions this sexual “sin” and never brings up the subject again.  It is just one sign of the consequences of man’s fallen state.

What makes this particular “sexual sin” so significant in today’s context?  Gomes says this is a reflection of the non-confirming attitude society has toward homosexuality since the Nineteenth Century.  It should not be considered that significant; it is one of many behaviors that Christians should not have that would make them unfit for heaven. 

Gomes still has not dealt directly with the sinful nature of homosexuality.  Is it a grievous sin?  Will this kind of behavior condemn a person to hell?  In today’s context, is it an activity that some feel can disqualify someone from preaching God’s word.    It is an activity that can keep someone from being married in same-sex union within the church .  Gomes seems to be saying that the New Testament passages condemning homosexuality are not unique;  that they are just one of many sins that man can commit. 

Gomes goes further in his discussion by saying that the New Testament has very little to say about homosexuality; the silence on this subject “speaks volumes.”  I have already discussed that idea in other posts.  This is arguing from silence.  Jesus did not have anything to say about people who were homosexuals; he had more important things to discuss.  Since Jesus did not address it, it must be of little importance.  Maybe it is ok.  Gomes cites Jeffrey S. Siker from Theology Today who writes “Thus the Bible has relatively little to say that directly informs us about how to address the issue of homosexual Christians today.  The Bible certainly does not positively condone homosexuality as a legitimate expression of human sexuality, but neither does it expressly exclude loving monogamous homosexual adult Christian relationships from being within the realm of God’s intentions for humanity” [Gomes, 160].   Attitude toward homosexuality is the problem that is most important cites Gomes; he calls this attitude “doctrinaire prejudice.”  Instead of focusing on Scripture, people with prejudice against homosexuality make a value-judgement that homosexuality is sinful and they find support within Scripture that is not that strong, some would say not strong at all.

Gomes writes that homosexuality is the “last front” in the battle for the Bible.  Will an attitude of inerrant Scripture fueled by conservatism prevail or will an attitude of loving acceptance fueled by cultural change prevail?  “Biblical writers never contemplated a form of homosexuality in which loving, monogamous and faithful person sought to live out the implications of the gospel with as much fidelity to it as any heterosexual believer” [Gomes, 162].  How did they understand this form of sexual behavior?  They viewed it as prostitution, pederasty, lasciviousness and exploitation.  Were these practices common among homosexuals?  Of course maybe they were, but do those practices define homosexuality today? 

Where is the problem of homosexuality?  For Peter Gomes, the problem is not the Bible.  The problem is how non-confirming Christians bring a negative attitude toward the Bible.

“The problem…is not the Bible, it is the Christians who read it” [Gomes, 162]. 

*From Peter Gomes’ The Good Book, Chapter 8.

** “Much Ado About Nothing”  May 15, 2024,  St. John Studies.