Can a Christian be Gay or Lesbian? What does the Bible say?

Does God condemn the gay or lesbian lifestyle? Is it a sin to be gay or lesbian? This question is one of importance and should be diligently researched before making any conclusions.

Join me, as we go through each and every scripture that mentions homosexuality and consider the truest meanings of each word within the scriptural context (i.e. ~ Greek and Hebrew definitions, to avoid error):

1. There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. - Deuteronomy 23:17-18 - Well, interestingly on this passage, the Hebrew term for "whore" actually refers directly to a "female temple prostitute" and the term "sodomite" here actually refers to a "male temple prostitute". See for yourself: #06945 qadesh, #06948 kedeshah, or just click on the verse reference and click on the Hebrew numbers there. So, technically speaking, this can not be used to condemn standard gay and lesbian activity. Related Scriptures: ( 1 Kings 14:22-24, 15:22, 22:46, and 2 Kings 23:7)
   
   
2. 19:4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, [even] the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: 19:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where [are] the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them. 19:6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, 19:7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. 19:8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as [is] good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. 19:9 And they said, Stand back. And they said [again], This one [fellow] came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, [even] Lot, and came near to break the door. 19:10 But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. 19:11 And they smote the men that [were] at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door. - Genesis 19:4-11 - First thing to note, is that these men wanted to "forcefully rape" visitors to their city. Now, it is obvious, that it would be gay sex, however, homosexuals generally do not gang rape visitors (not from my experience). So, to say they were smote because of gay activity is not made entirely clear in the passage, as it could be rather because they were trying to gang rape people. So, to say they were smote because they were gay seems to be overstepping what the passage actually states. So, I do not believe this passage should be used to condemn or prove God was against gay activity. Also, if you look at Ezekiel 16:49-50, it states that Sodom's sins were pride, fullness of bread and abundance of idleness and forgetting the poor. So, no direct correlation, to "standard" gay activity as being the main reason for the punishment, but there is potentially some allusion to it. Something to also consider is the warning here about pride, abundance of idless and fullness of bread, which seems to describe more Westernized countries and could illude to how homosexuality is so accepted in America, etc. (Judges 19:22, Jude 6-7; 2 Peter 2:4, 6-8.)
   
   
3. 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination. 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them. - Leviticus 18:22, 20:13 - With reference to this passage, it actually defines a common homosexual activity of men having sex with other men. And there are no controversial words here, as they are simple terms. So, I believe the passage is entirely clear. Now, some from the gay community argue that this passage only applies to that time period, to distance themselves from the culture around them, etc. However, the fact is, the only time gay sexual activity is mentioned in the scriptures, it is condemned. Therefore, you can not make an argument stating God is pro-gay activity. It should be pointed out, here, that only men lying with men is mentioned. It does not mention women lying with women. I believe this is because men are the head of families and to have two family heads having sex together is to put one man as the head, while the other man as a woman, contradicting God's design. Assuming God is logical in his method of writing, we can see in Leviticus 18, that "men lying with beast" and "women lying with beast" are both sins.
   
   How can this passage prove without a shadow of a doubt that gay sex between men is a sin? Here is how: If God was "OK" with men having sex, he would have made another passage somewhere in scripture indicating that he was OK with it. Why would this be necessary? God is consistant and because the only argument gays have on this passage is that it is a localized situation, where the Israelites were prohibited, but today, it is not the case. The only problem with this argument is that God would need to actually say something somewhere to make this clear or to illude to the idea that it is "OK" in other cultures, time frames, situations, etc. Since he never does this, we can only conclude that he thinks this for all times and all situations, as the Old Testament is the foundation of morals for the New Testament.. Hence, we can only build on the foundation given to us. And I would assume God would give us his entire revelation on this topic to avoid confusion. So, we have to conclude this is God's general opinion.
   
   
4. 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind. 1:10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; - 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10 - On this one, the term "effeminate" or mal-ak-os' 3120 means either a male prostitute, or a boy slave used for gay sex, or a male who submits himself to unnatural lewdness. So, to me, this one is a little difficult to know if it is refering to all gay men. It could be refering to all gay men (who put their desire above God) or it could be little less broad (male prostitutes?)..
   
   
5. 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. - Romans 1:26-27 - It is quite clear in this passage, that men with men is unseemly and an error. We also know from Leviticus 18:22 that God has an Old Testament commandment against gay sex, so it is clear that gay activity among men is explicitly condemned. Now, on this passage, many assume it is also refering to two women having sex. However, seeing this is the only passage that may relate out of 33,000+ verses within the Bible and seeing it is not direct or clear as to what is meant by "against nature", we can not assume it is talking about two women having sexual relations (although, it is possible). The reason I state this is because there is more than one potential type of "against nature" activity. For instance, a woman lying with a beast would be "against nature". And this activity is one that is mentioned within the Old Testament. So, to "assume" it is refering to lesbian activity is to conclude without proof and seeing that Jesus did not make any new morality, we should see an example in the Old Testament condemning, women with women. NOW, if it had said in the Old Testament, woman can not lie with woman, I would have to agree with you, that likely, "against nature" would be refering to women having sex. However, the fact remains, it is never mentioned anywhere in the Old Testament or any other verse for that matter.. So one "vague" verse out of 33,000 is definitely not enough to condemn any woman who ever had sex with another women. However, the fact is, the lesbianism is sinful and a form of rebellion against God. As, it is made ultimately clear that the "lifestyle" of woman with woman (without a man) would be against God's design for marriage or committed relationships, as designed in Genesis. As there is no basis for believing that God designed such a marriage or relationship model (and even nature's design argues against it). The only marriage design in the Bible is either one man and one woman (God's ideal) or one man and more than one woman (polygamy). So, I don't believe you can condemn two women who have had sex together as nowhere in the Bible is it clearly condemned. However, for two women to marry, that is confusion, because marriage is only designed for between opposite sexes. So, such lesbian type relationships are confusion and rebellion against God's design and should be avoided. But for two women to have sex, there is no basis in condemning this and I am not in the business of putting words in God's mouth or judging people incorrectly. Since God is smarter than you or I and would know that such a topic would be relevant today, I am sure he would have made it clearly obvious, if it was a sin.
   
   Regarding the mention of men with men, some gays state it is refering to male temple prostitution. Ironically, I can see how they come to this conclusion. As it would then flow better with what is being said in the passage (as it seems to be describing someone who worships false gods and uses gay sex and seems more logical than thinking it is refering to just standard homosexuals). On the other hand, it could be refering to forsaking God, being a person who is more interested in this life (creature, more than creator), but this seems not to fit perfect with the flow. However, the fact remains, it states that gay sex is "unseemly" and that it is "in error" (all homosexual relations). So, even if you want to say this is talking about just male temple prostitutes, the fact remains that there is not one pro-male homosexual verse in the whole Bible. And seeing God is not the author of confusion, we would have to conclude what he did mention was not some isolated cultural situation, when he did state he was against men having sex with men in the Old Testament. So, I believe the fact that there is no positive gay verses in the Bible, it proves the common homosexual argument to be in error.
   
   
6. 18:1 And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul. 18:2 And Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his father's house. 18:3 Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul. 18:4 And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that [was] upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle. 20:3 And David sware moreover, and said, Thy father certainly knoweth that I have found grace in thine eyes; and he saith, Let not Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved: but truly [as] the LORD liveth, and [as] thy soul liveth, [there is] but a step between me and death. 20:4 Then said Jonathan unto David, Whatsoever thy soul desireth, I will even do [it] for thee. 20:41 [And] as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of [a place] toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded. 1:25 How are the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! O Jonathan, [thou wast] slain in thine high places. 1:26 I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women. - 1 Samuel 18:1-4; 20:3-4, 20:41 and 2 Samuel 1:25-26 - Now, I would say these scriptures are perplexing, atleast a little. If you look at the passages as face value, particularly 20:41, you would think its possible you are reading about two gay men who are in love. As I like to read the Bible unbiased, without allowing my doctrine to paint the passage. But, for you who are gay, I would like to ask you something. Is it possible for two men to love each other without being gay? In real life, you see platonic relationships between men and women, where they deeply love each other, yet they are not boyfriend/girlfriend and they are not having sex. So, theoretically, is it possible two men could love each other, without being sexual? So, with these passages, I can not assume they are gay. Rather, since gay activity appears to be all banned throughout the Bible, I would have to conclude it was a platonic relationship. This is my logical progression on these passages. So, to assume they were gay because they kissed (which I believe was a custom at the time) I do not believe is good enough. If God honestly had no problem with gay sex, he would have not made it so misleading throughout the passages above. So, I believe we need to take it at face value. God condemns gay sex. He may honor love between men, but not sexual relations between men. As, it is quite obvious, David hear loved Jonathan more than a woman. But, that does not mean, he had sexual relations.. Also, taking logic here, if a man has sex with a bunch of women, do we assume he "loves" them? Or is he more just a man going around screwing women? So, having sex, does not infer love. Sex can often be a way to avoid love. Can be a "fix" to attempt to fill a void you have in your life.
   
   
7. 19:10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with [his] wife, it is not good to marry. 19:11 But he said unto them, All [men] cannot receive this saying, save [they] to whom it is given. 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from [their] mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive [it], let him receive [it]. - Romans 1:26-27 - With this scripture here, many gays try to say that a "eunuch" that was "born from mother's womb" are what we would today call "homosexuals". A eunuch according to the greek is one who abstains from marriage, or one who is castrated, or one who serves to protect women in harems, etc.. And the one definition from the greek that homosexuals are refering to is "1c) one naturally incapacitated". So the debate is, are they born without a penis/testicles, or is it refering to them born naturally disposed to not want women (hence wanting men).. I think this one also seems to be a stretch, but atleast, we should put it up for debate here. To me, even if it did not mean a man born without a penis/testicles, it could instead mean a man who just doesn't want to get married to a woman.. Has no desire for women or marriage.. Does this mean that they are gay? The assumption then is, if they do not want to marry a woman, they would want a man. What if they wanted neither? So, I guess, here we are again, in a place that does not give any real substance of evidence. I see the platform of ideas from which they are thinking. As if Jesus was here saying, hey, some are born gay, and this would mean he doesn't have a problem with gays. But, even if you can somehow make some sort of platform on which Jesus was neutral on gays, the problem remains. The foundation of scripture for morals is the Old Testament and in the Old Testament, it makes it very clear, gay sex is a sin. And since this never is countered and God says "I change not", we would have to conclude he is still against gay sex, as even Paul mentions it atleast as an "error" and something "unseemly".