What Jesus Expressed Concerning Gay Individuals
This write-up is a component of the "What Did Jesus Instruct?" series.
Does Silence Imply Endorsement?
In a 2012 article published by Slate online, Will Oremus presented a thought-provoking query: Was Jesus a homophobe?1
The article was prompted by a news report concerning a gay adolescent in Ohio who brought a lawsuit against his high school after school authorities forbade him from wearing a shirt bearing the statement, 'Jesus Is Not a Homophobe.'
Oremus's primary concern wasn't the legal dimensions of the narrative, but rather the veracity of the assertion emblazoned on the garment. Oremus insinuates that Jesus's views on homosexuality were less rigid than Paul's. He notes,
Although it's sensible to assume that Jesus and his fellow Jewish contemporaries in first-century Palestine would have disapproved of gay sexual activity, there is no proof of his having ever discussed homosexuality, much less voicing specific detestation of it. . . . Never in the Bible does Jesus Himself offer an outright condemnation of homosexuality.
Oremus appears to insinuate that, since Jesus never explicitly mentioned homosexuality, he probably wasn't particularly concerned by it.
There are at least two factors that should make us question this viewpoint.
Get a free copy of the ebook ‘What Does the Bible Really Teach about Homosexuality?' (by sharing some information!)
Take a brief, one-minute survey to join our mailing list and receive a complimentary ebook in the format of your choice. Read on your device of preference, which includes smartphones, tablets, laptops, and desktop computers.
Two Problems to Consider
First, numerous ethical dilemmas exist that Jesus never explicitly addressed. That observation, however, certainly doesn't indicate that his moral outlook is irrelevant to those issues.
Jesus never made a direct comment on abortion, same-sex unions, or child abuse. Yet, it would be an implausible claim to deduce from that fact that Jesus's teachings hold no bearing on our moral assessment of those issues.
Second, Jesus did discuss, in specific terms, sexual immorality in general and the nature of marriage. He denounced the former (e.g., Matt. 5:28; 15:19) and defined the latter in accordance with Genesis 2:24: 'For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh' (Matt. 19:5 AT; par. Mark 10:7-8).
Jesus affirmed the covenanted union of one man and one woman as the only conventional expression of human sexuality. To suggest that these words from Jesus have no relevance to the subject of homosexuality is incredible. They absolutely do.
Jesus affirmed the covenanted union of one man and one woman as the only conventional expression of human sexuality.
Jesus versus Paul
Hence, Oremus has misinterpreted the relevance of Jesus's teachings to the homosexual question. Nevertheless, he proceeds to compare Jesus's perspective with that of the apostle Paul. He writes:
Even if Jesus regarded homosexuality as a sin, he had a predisposition for reaching out to sinners rather than ostracizing them. . . . However, not all of Jesus' followers held such a compassionate viewpoint. In Romans 1, Paul condemned gay sex as unnatural—a grievous example of pagan degeneracy—and stated it would incur the wrath of God.
Here is another rendition of the hermeneutical argument, which is very popular today—the belief that Jesus and Paul are fundamentally at odds over a variety of ethical issues.
On the one hand is Jesus: peace-loving, enemy-forgiving, egalitarian, and inclusive toward homosexuals.
On the other hand is Paul: war-loving, death penalty-supporting, patriarchal, and exclusionary with regard to homosexuals.
While Jesus was all about love and tolerance, Paul was focused on 'wrath' and intolerance. So the slogan from the T-shirt seems to be validated. Despite the concerns of individuals like Paul, Jesus was not a homophobe.
What Is the Meaning of Sex?
Denny Burk
Sex was created by God for his glory. With clarity and compassion, this book sets forth the Bible’s teaching on sexuality from a complementarian perspective, dealing with controversial issues such as homosexuality and polygamy.
A Misguided Conflict
Those who stage hermeneutical cage matches between Paul and Jesus are enacting a contest that neither Jesus nor Paul would ever have tolerated. The approach often tends to undermine the New Testament's claim to be a normative basis for ethics by rendering the black letters subservient to the red letters.
In the end, this argument is not about the color of letters but about the character of Scripture. Those who seek to establish biblical authority in the long run will avoid the cage-match approach. And those who truly want to be red-letter Christians will heed the words of Paul and the other apostolic authors of Scripture as the very words of Christ.
This article is adapted from What Is the Meaning of Sex? by Denny Burk.
Notes:
1. Will Oremus, 'Wait, Was Jesus a Homophobe?'Slate, April 9, 2012,
Denny Burk (PhD, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is professor of biblical studies at Boyce College, the undergraduate arm of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as associate pastor at Kenwood Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky. Burk edits The Journal for Biblical Manhood & Womanhood and speaks and writes extensively about gender and sexuality. He keeps a popular blog at DennyBurk.com.