Homosexuality According to Christ, Paul, and Early Christianity

                                                                      I. Introduction

To Augustine of Hippo, man's greatest temptation since the fall, was not the desire of murder, but the struggle against the sin of lust (which has often resulted in murder). Augustine, who long struggled with the lust of women in his youth, expressed penitence over his sin multiple times throughout his work, The Confessions, in which he prays to God through writing. Thus, while lust had once defined the bishop of Hippo, he had learned that the love of God was a greater pursuit than the satisfaction of lust.

Augustine believed that the will is most free when it is obedient to God. The renowned theologian actually believed that sin enslaves us from the Creator. He was aware of not only God's condemnation of sins, but the judgement, whether in this life or in the next, we all face from it. Certainly, the bishop of Hippo longed that his readers understand the seriousness of sin 

 There are many types of sins understood as lust in Scripture, but today, I would like to focus on the sin of homosexuality as it was understood in New Testament Christianity.  

In today's post, I would like to briefly write about the moral dangers of homosexuality in recent history, ad most importantly, as it is understood in Holy Scripture. 

                                              II. The Dangers of Homosexuality in Modern Society

There are only four sins mentioned in Scripture which cry out to God for vengeance. One of them is the sin of sodomy, which includes the sin of homosexuality (Genesis 18: 20-21). To say that all sin is equal, is either a denial of the authority of Scripture or more commonly, an ignorance of it. 

Harry Hay, an old man who wore a dress in a notable online picture, is sometimes, considered the founder of the modern homosexual movement, once said, ''Because if the parents and friends of gays are truly friends of gays, then they would know from their gay kids that the relationship with an older man is precisely what thirteen, fourteen, and fifteen year old kids need more than anything in the world.'' 

To cover up for the evils of his perverted community, Pete Buttigieg recently claimed that all gay people want to do is love and be free and that they don't mean harm to anyone. How can a gay person speak for everyone in the gay community? I don't claim to speak for everyone in the straight community? I acknowledge violent people in both (though especially in homosexuality). People like Mr. Buttigieg, however, portray all homosexuals as good people. This is just another way of the modern left victimizing all homosexuals, for even if they acknowledge any terror on their part, it is always the result of facing sexual discrimination by straight people. 

Contrary to the presentation of many in the mainstream media, gay men are not all sweet gentle men only trying to gain equality from all. Many homosexual men have partaken in some of the greatest atrocities in history. 

Homosexuals aren't victims. Many of the most vile criminals in history were homosexual including Nero of Rome (along with many Roman Emperors), Robespierre, and possibly even Hitler. It's often forgotten that many of the Roman Emperors who hated Christianity and persecuted the early Christians, were homosexual. Jeffrey Dahmer was also a mass murderer and molester of young boys. In the case of Hitler in particular, this has been confirmed not by right wing conspiracist, but even several historians. 

I will also add that bisexuality is just a form of homosexuality. Hitler had affairs with women, but he he also had affairs with men. 

In a recent book released, a German historian discusses how Hitler even sentenced several Nazi leaders to death in order that they not learn of his homosexuality. The book showcases eyewitness accounts of Hitler's partners as evidence of this thesis. One of his fellow soldiers, for instance, described Hitler, as a young man, having another man as his whore. This same historian who composed this work, after demonstrating various letters from German contemporaries describing Hitler with boys and men, concludes that Hitler never condemned homosexuality, only allowed homosexuals to die in the holocaust so as to hide his personal identity from becoming known*1. 

American series killer Jim Jones had affairs with both men and women. Like Hitler, he was no straight man, but now part of the so-called ''LGBTQ'' movement. 

A recent book published in Hong Kong also presents evidence Zhou, who brought China into Communism, despite being married to a woman, was actually a lifelong homosexual. 

Even besides violence, there are many other consequences that accompany homosexual activity. Scientifically, it has been proven that Lesbian women struggle with weight, and homosexual men die much higher proportionally of Aids than do heterosexual men. 

In an article written for the National Library of Medicine by K Freund in 1984, the author noted that proportionally there is a much greater difference between the molestation of children between homosexual and heterosexual men*2. Indeed, homosexual men are far more likely to rape or sexually abuse children than are straight men. 

Yet the modern left continues to make homosexuals victims. Tragically, most people who historically became homosexual chose homosexuality as a result of some sort of sexual abuse they faced ads a child. Yet if homosexuality is not stopped, this domino affect will continue. We help neither homosexuals nor children who have faced faced sexual abuse, by promoting them believing in any sort of mental illness (and as will be discussed, sin itself is a mental illness). 

Historically, sins such as fornication and homosexuality were punishable in Puritan settlements and later, the thirteen colonials. Divorce was also punishable, though for this post, I will only focus on the topic of homosexuality. In the case of homosexuality, colonial Virginia executed homosexuals. While Thomas Jefferson later changed this law when he become governor of Virginia, he still allowed the legal castration of homosexuals, as homosexuality was against Virginia's laws. 

By supporting the suppression of homosexuality and divorce, colonial Americans, believed that they were protecting society from moral evils. Like the medievals long before them, many Americans understood that when Paul wrote in Romans 13, ''That the government does not carry the sword for no reason,'' as not only a permission for a country to punish those who committed murder through capital punishment, but also, any form of evil. Indeed, it was the traditional view of Christianity that if heresy or sin is not suppressed, it will continue to grow and spread as it brings more down the way of destruction. 

Many Americans, though, have been taught that Jesus would not support the punishment of those loving in sin. That's because such people have a misconstrued view of Jesus. They often quote Jesus and the woman caught in adultery in Matthew 8, and how Jesus didn't call fore her to be stoned as evidence that capital punishment shouldn't be used against those living in open sexual sin. But there are several problems with this interruption. 

First of all, Matthew 8, much like Mark 16, is lacking from many of the earliest Greek manuscripts of the Bible. Secondly, even if is true Scripture, Jesus's first coming was not to judge the world as His second one will be. Through His First coming, He came to preach to the Jews and save humanity through the Cross, as well as proclaim His kingship over the nations. Thirdly, unlike Paul in Romans in Romans 13, the case of Jesus in Matthew 8 does not concern His recognition or condemnation of what a government should be, but rather, His repudiation of anyone being hypocritical about sin. 

Paul never recanted any of the Old Testament practices of capital punishment for sin. While Christians are not bound by them, a government according to Romans 13, has the right at its discretion, to protect its people from its leaders perceive as necessary evils (so long as that government is not contradicting the Christian faith). 

And essentially all Christians had this interpretation of Scripture, with very few exceptions until the Enlightenment. Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox all believes that a government could hypothetically sentence a homosexual to death, not because the Jews did so in the Old Testament, but in light of Romans 13. 

But did Jesus not call upon us to love our enemies? Besides, would not executing homosexuals mean sending them to hell instead of preaching the gospel to them? 

First of all, God commands us to love everyone, even our enemies, as Christ first loved us. This means that the Christian has no room to hate anyone, including homosexuals. But God's command that we love our enemies, does not take away from the right of a government to protect its citizens from necessary evils. As Christians, we should always pray for the salvation of others' souls, but that does mean that God has disavowed capital punishment (which Christ never condemned and which Paul supported in Romans 13). 

Neither Christ nor the Apostles were in the position to tell Rome how to rule, as both recognized Rome as a lawful authority. This makes their situation a different one from the Hebrews in the Old Testament, as Old Testament laws and practices typically concerned a government, which recognized the teachings and laws of the Old Testament as those of God. Living in a first century Roman world, Paul did not have the authority to tell Rome who to execute, though he did recognize, that in future generations, Christians would recognize the authority of Romans 13 as it would pertain to Christian governments. 

Secondly, we have the moral obligation to preach to everyone the gospel. But again, this does not take away the right of the government to protect its people. And in the case of homosexuals being sentenced to death, not only did God allow this in the Old Testament without waiting for them to convert to the faith of the Hebrews, but protecting society from moral evils actually means that more people may be saved rather than allowing what is wicked to spread in a domino affect, with all the more people accepting sin and to head destruction themselves. Furthermore, in the case of pedophiles, it actually protects society and gives the offended a sense of justice by putting the offenders to death. 

Under the New Testament, governments are not bound to sentence disobedient children, fornicators, or Sodomites to death, though they are permitted by God to do so. They are also permitted to put some to death, but not others, at the discretion of the leaders, as described by Paul in Romans 13. When professing Christians misquote Jesus and the Apostles and then conclude that Christians of the first nineteen hundred years were wrong to make homosexuality a crime, many of them have no idea of their theological ignorance. 

Many Americans have misunderstood the founding fathers on the issues of religion. While I would rather address, this specific topic in a later post, it should be noted that while America never had a state federal church, many states within the Northeast recognized the Congregational Churches as their state church. Likewise, Virginia recognized the Anglican Church as the state church of his state. But regardless on whether or not one supports a state church (which the early Baptists of America rejected), many Americans still believed morals of right and wrong should be based on the Bible. That's why the Ten Commandments was in the courtroom until the 1980s. Even though many Americans differed from each other on theology (New England was largely Congregational and Presbyterian, Virginia was Anglican, Maryland was Catholic, and Rhode Island was Baptist), they recognized the importance of moral laws which prohibit divorce and homosexuality, among many other actions. It was not even until the early 1900s that American law started certifying marriage certificates. Historically, most Americans wed one another through their local Church, not the government. 

Not all Americans were even Christians. Yet both the Jews and the Muslims, who also lived in colonial America, would have recognized the morals of the Ten Commandments, among other morals mentioned in the Bible. 

Now, to return to the topic of homosexuality, before 1960, homosexuality was illegal in Britain and in all the states of the United States. However, it gained wide acceptance at the state level, during the 1990s before Lawrence vs. Texas, a supreme court decision, forced the legality of homosexuality on states, such as Texas, which previously objected against it. Then, 2015, Obergefell vs. Hodges, forced many southern and western states to accept homosexual marriage. Indeed, through one sin after another, American society embraced the sin of homosexuality until it became more and more accepted in Western culture. 

With all that said, let us now examine homosexuality in light of the Old Testament, the New Testament, an Church History. 

                                                III. Homosexuality in the Old Testament 

Homosexuality was condemned in many places in Scripture. When Paul condemned homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6 (as I will discuss soon), many liberal theologians resort to claiming that Paul was only condemning male position, but this is disproven in Leviticus 18: 22, which says that a man shall not lie with a male as a man does with a woman. If one concludes that 1 Corinthians 6 is simply about male prostitution, then one must conclude that Leviticus 18: 22 allows for female prostitution, but this cannot be as Scripture condemns the prostitution of women elsewhere (Joshua 2: 1). Leviticus 20: 13, likewise, called for men practicing homosexuality to be put to death. 

In Genesis 19, God destroyed the city of Sodom for its rapid homosexuality. The city's men are described in the chapter as having no sexual control over themselves, but instead, ravage like animals. This is the only case in Scripture of God destroying an entire city for its sin. 

In general, the Old Testament condemned homosexuality on numerous occasions. But what about the New Testament? 

                                               IV. Homosexuality in the New Testament

While most will not argue that the Old Testament condemns homosexuality, modern theological liberals wish to twist Scripture like the heretical Gnostics of old. They especially do this with the words of Christ. 

Many liberals today claim that Paul did not condemn homosexuality. Others claim that he did, but resort to claiming that Jesus never did. 

Actually, Jesus did condemn homosexuality. In Matthew 10: 14-15, he warned that Hell would would be worst for the Pharisees than for those of Sodom, showing that He also recognized homosexuality as sinful. 

Likewise, Jesus said to the original Apostles that those who rejected them, also reject Him (Luke 10: 16). Thus, He recognized the apostles as having the right to lead the church, as the Holy Spirit prevented it from falling into any theological or moral error (Matthew 16).

Peter the Apostle, who was given the Keys of the Kingdom in Matthew 16, recognized the authority of Paul's writings as equal Scripture, also showing that Paul's words are no less inspired by God than those of Jesus, Matthew, Mark, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, or James. 

Those who reject Peter or Paul, also reject Christ. Finally, since Jesus said that He did not come to end the law, but rather, full fill it (Matthew 5: 17), since Christ never rescinded Leviticus 18, we should conclude that Jesus, the Son of God, agreed with the laws that God had ordained in the Old Testament. Had He thought otherwise, He could have said so. Homosexuality was embraced by the Roman world, though not the Jewish one, and Jesus condemned the hypocrisies of the Jews on many occasions. 

In both 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11 and Romans 1, Paul explicitly condemn homosexuality, whether action, or in desire. 

Outside the words of Christ, there are other passages in scripture that clearly condemn homosexuality. In Romans 1, Paul talks about the depravity of humanity as men lust for one another and women lust for those of their sex. Even outside of Paul's writings, Jude 1: 7 refers to homosexual acts as unnatural desires. Indeed, scripture portrays homosexuality as abnormal and evil (whether acted on or desired).

Some have tried to defend aspects of, though, claiming that one can identify as gay, having romantic thoughts of the same sex, and be attracted to one's sex without sinning. Let me respond to each of three claims one by one. 

1. Christians cannot identify as sin. To do so, would be to identify with our sinful nature outside of our Savior living in us. While we are still tarnished with sin, even the believer struggling with either the lust of women or the lust of men, has no right to identify with their sin. As Paul says in 2 Corinthians 5: 17, if we are following Christ, then our old selves has passed away, in light of the Holy Spirit changing us, as we conform to the image of Christ (Ephesians 1). 

2. Romans 1 condemns any notion that simply having ''romantic'' thoughts of the same sex is acceptable. In fact, this itself is still a sin and contrary to God's design. In essence, the sin of homosexuality is more than acting on it, but also, the desire of it. 

3. As far as being attracted to one's sex over the opposite sex, such an inclination is a result of sin, and a sin in itself. The person struggling with this should seek council from Christian pastors who hold to the authority of Scripture. While pastors and priests are not perfect, Christians should feel security to go to their leaders for spiritual guidance. When those leaders contradict the Scripture, however, the Christian should obey Scripture. 

                                                 V. Homosexuality in Church History

For nineteen hundred years of church history, Christians of all traditions condemned homosexuality. Pope Pius V (sixteenth century) actually called for homosexual priests to be sentenced to death. Why he did he believe this? Because the pope saw himself as holding the Keys of the Kingdom (Matthew 16), and that he he had the moral obligation to protect his sheep from the ways of evil. The pope, like those who proclaimed him ''Antichrist'' in the Protestant Churches, alike all agreed that as evil as murder is, how much more evil is he who brings others souls to the way of destruction. If the evil man is not stopped, more and more will head to hell. In response, Christians of the past responded in action, not our of vengeance, but to defend the flock, and to preserve the Holy Christian Faith from infidels, heretics, heathens, and those who are corrupt. To do nothing, would be to let evil reign. 

Yet many professing Christians of today think that they more about God than the early Christians, the medieval theologians, and the Protestant Reformers. Today's culture is the most Biblically illiterate that its ever been in church history, yet somehow, many Americans are confident that they will go to Heaven when they die and though most of them know nothing about Scripture, they can dogmatically tell others what they think Jesus would believe and say. 

Saint Jerome said that ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. Tragically, it is an ignorance of Scripture and church history which had led to wide acceptance of homosexuality in the Western world, the once great, now fallen Christendom. 

Outside of Scripture, the church (Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, and Protestants) condemned homosexuality for two thousand years. To say that morals have changed now would mean that truth changes to the dictates of culture (which would also imply that the Nazis had the right to commit genocide towards those that they oppressed). 

Truth matters, however. It does not change with time or from one person to the next. Because homosexuality was sinful in first century Early Christianity, then it remains, and always will be sinful. 

Likewise, even if Scripture never explicitly condemned homosexuality, we we know that is sinful because it seeks the pleasure of sexual activity outside the marriage bed of husband and wife for each other alone (Ephesians 5). God has given people the choice to stay single or to pursue marriage to the opposite sex, both of which, exclude option of becoming homosexual. 

                                  VI. A Comparison of Abortion vs. Homosexuality

As the 2024 presidential election begins, one may find that Republicans generally campaign on issues like immigration and inflation. Occasionally, abortion will also be brought up, but generally not homosexuality. 

In general, it is more politically correct to speak against abortion than it is politically correct to speak against pedophilias, especially when pedophile when associated with homosexuality. 

In many ways, when homosexuality turns into pedophile (as it so often does), it is actually more catastrophic on society, and more an offense against God, than the sin of abortion. 

Ultimately, homosexuality, in many ways, poses a great threat to America society now than even abortion. With ''drag queens'' in public schools, with films promoting ''gayness'' and illicit, crude, and wicked homosexual marches across the country, Christians should feel all the more need to call out sin and hold fast to Christ. 

Not every gay person is raping children, but the high proportion of sexual abuse from homosexual men should concern Christian families (especially as drag queens enter public schools). Indeed, recently, drag queens exclaimed in New York City, ''We are coming for your children next.'' 

Through the molestation of children by homosexuals, it allows the high chance of more young people head to the ways of destruction. Ultimately, homosexuality impacts more souls than does abortion. It is arguably the greatest evil of our time. 

During LGBTQ marches every year, gay men in the parades will march naked. Why is this? Because of perversion. They have given themselves over to unnatural desires, as Paul notes in Romans 1. And all of this, along with drag queens in public schools has taken place, because of the silence of many American churches to call out sin. 

While it is true that many American churches have been hypocritical on their acceptance of divorced and ''remarried'' persons, but not homosexuals, it should also be noted, that unlike divorced straight people, homosexuals have made their LGBTQ lifestyle, their whole identity. Also as much as God hates divorce, homosexuality has taken sin to another level of depravity. Furthermore, while American culture has learned to embrace divorce, divorced straight people are not typically seen as victims, unlike homosexuals, who have used their victimization to their advantage in any given circumstance. 

                                                             VII. Conclusion

It is not not loving to leave a homosexual to go the way of destruction. Actually, it is loving to show the sinner the error of their ways with the desire to evangelize them into the Christian heavenly family of God. 

It is not loving to let a murderer loose. Rather, we should hope to restore Him to God, even as we recognize his previous action brings lawful consequences on his life. 

Praying for a person and now claiming that they should not be free to do whatever they are want, are not necessarily opposed to one another. The Christian should always pray for the unbeliever's soul, but in light of Romans 13, capital punishment must exist to protect society. 

God does not discriminate against the repentant. We suffer from our past and current sins by disobeying God, but the Father invites all to His Table, whether straight or gay, so long as all repent of their sins, no longer identify themselves with unnatural desires, and hold fast to Christ. The gay men who turns to God, has ceased becoming a gay man as he has given up his sinful desires for the love of the Creator. Should he struggle with this sin again in the future, he must continue to repent of it. There are many Christians, who would be more willing to council homosexuals wishing to not only end their desire, but to trust in Christ. 

In conclusion, in order for society to return to God, Christians must call out all sins, whether it be murder, fornication, homosexuality, divorce, ''remarriage,'' lying, theft, gossip, gluttony, drunkenness, taking anything before God, lust, coveting, self-righteousness, legalism, worldliness, a lack of reverence towards holiness, fornication, worshipping images, interpreting Scripture to fit our lifestyle, etc, etc. 

Unfortunately, many on the political right along with many modern ''conservative'' churches may claim that they are opposed to homosexual acts, but speak hardly ever against the sin in general. Likewise, I remember a Republican politician telling me that he signed a petition at the University of TN for transgenders to be able to go to whatever restroom of their choice. Behind the scenes, this same politician told me that he shouldn't have done this, but defended it by saying that its just one of those things that had to be done. In other words, he was conforming his faith for the dictates of moral evils. 

Scripture says that if any man knows the good he should do but does not do it he sins (James 4: 17). It is not just a sin to practice homosexuality. Indeed, it also a sin to either support it or accept it. God calls us to hate all sin, though homosexuality has become widely accepted in modern society. 

*1-https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/07/books.booksnews

*2-https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6512871/