From an exchange on W&T asking me to set out my position on homosexuality (in response to biblical arguments against it).  The asker is an evangelical with a traditional view of homosexuality and the bible which uses certain key texts, particularly in the Old Testament, to argue that it is condemned by God.  I responded:


I’d sum up my position by saying that I don’t think that a biblical case for homosexuality can be made. Neither can one be made against it, because a proper understanding of the books of the bible lead to the inescapable conclusion that the bible was not written to us today but to the Jewish people (largely) in an entirely different context, and the texts represent the views of the authors and the expectations of those readers. In other words, even if you can make the case that homosexuality is explicitly condemned in the bible (and many people think it is not), you still can’t convince me that because Moses thought it wrong, we should think it wrong.

The bible accepts many sexual practices that we condemn, and it condemns many sexual practices that we accept. The bible says brides who are discovered not to be virgins should be executed. (Deut 22) The bible demands we kill adulterers. (Duet 22) The bible condemns divorce. (Mark 10) The bible prohibits sex during a woman’s period. (Lev 18) The bible says that if a man dies before he has any kids, his wife should sleep around with all of his brothers until she gets pregnant. (Mark 12) The bible says that if two men are fighting and one of their wives grabs the genitals of her husband’s enemy, her hand should be cut off. (Duet 25)

Now it seems to me, OT, that if you want to use what the authors of the bible say (in writing to their audiences, largely the Jewish people in the Middle East thousands of years ago) against homosexual people today, then you need to be consistent and thorough in the execution of that theology. Do you accept that, in order to be consistent here, you should be implementing all of the above (only a small sample)?