Bible Based Analogies Which Encourage Christians To Accept Homosexual Relationships

What Is An Analogy?

Analogies compare two different things, in order to point out similarities.

Applying Analogical Reasoning to Bible questions allows us to draw principled conclusions based on the general trajectory of God’s truth revealed in scripture.

We will examine nine uses of Analogical Reasoning for accepting homosexual relationships.

The first four uses illustrate how the church adapts to the surrounding culture over time.

We offer five additional uses of Biblical An@logy which strongly validate homosexual relationships.

As we study the Levitical Holiness Code, analogy is useful in two ways to resolve issues, about which, there is dispute among Christians.

According to Dr. Robert Gagnon, Anti-gay Author, as posted on his website:
"The proper purpose of engaging in analogical reasoning is to assess what categories best fit the issue in question through comparison-cases that share the greatest number of correspondences."

Two Reasons Why Biblical Analogy SUPPORTS Homosexual Relationships

1. The Holiness Code does not cover every circumstance humans face. An@logy guides our understanding based on how God dealt with similar historical situations. An@logy allows us to draw principled conclusions based on God’s response to comparable situations.

2. Based on precedents of custom and culture, Biblical An@logy reflects the consensus of centuries of judgments by God, through His prophets, to His people.

When the facts of other cases are similar to the case at issue today, Homosexual Relationships, application of the rule established in similar cases is justified.

When seeking to explain Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, pro-gay apologists typically use Biblical analogy to validate their position. These uses of Analogy reflect the situation of believers two and three millenia past as they confronted the culture of their time.

Scripture has not changed but the understanding of the church on these cultural issues has changed. Now we are dealing with the culture of our time.

Therefore, Biblical an@logy encourages us to conclude that the church should change her mind on the issue of homosexual relationships and accept saved homosexuals as fully as she accepts saved heterosexuals.

A Quick Review Of The Four Most Common Uses Of Biblical An@logy

1. The Analogy of Gentile Inclusion

This an@logy reasons that Jews did not include Gentiles in the household of faith until God pointed out to Peter in Acts 10, that Gentiles also had the gift of the Holy Spirit. Since the first century church changed her mind and accepted saved Gentiles as equal members in the body of Christ, this an@logy concludes that the twenty-first century church should change her mind and accept saved homosexuals as equal members in the body of Christ.

It is objected that Gentiles are specifically welcomed into Christian fellowship in the New Testament but practicing homosexuals are not.

Our chapter on Eunuchs in this book makes clear that God does welcome believing eunuchs-homosexuals into the body of Christ, as did the early church, while also specifically excluding eunuchs from the Adam and Eve marriage paradigm.

2. The Analogy of Slavery

This an@logy reasons that slavery was permitted in both Old and New Testaments yet, over time, the church came to regard slavery as abomination. Since the stance of the church toward slavery has changed, this an@logy concludes that the twenty-first century church should change her mind about treating saved homosexuals as second-class citizens and accord them their rightful place in the body of Christ.

It is objected that passages supporting slavery are culturally limited in their application, therefore the church was right to change her mind on slavery but would be wrong to change her mind on homosexuality.

Based on the historical and scriptural evidence presented in this book, for a culturally limited interpretation of the alleged antigay passages, a consistent hermeneutic requires the church to reexamine her unscriptural anti-homosexual position.

3. The Analogy of Women In Ministry

This an@logy reasons that women were regarded as property in Old Testament culture, Genesis 29:18-27, Ruth 4:10, and were less than equal to men in the New Testament cultural environment, I Corinthians 14:34.

Over time, the church came to place greater emphasis on Galatians 3:28.

In Christ Jesus “there is neither male nor female.”

The church now accords women more equal standing with men. Since the church changed her mind about women in church and ministry, this an@logy concludes that the church should change her mind about saved homosexuals in church and ministry.

It is objected that there are scriptural examples in both testaments, of women in ministry, which constitute a growing acceptance, over time, while the same situation does not exist for homosexuals.

This objection is answered by noting that the alleged anti-gay passages, understood in their cultural, doctrinal, historical and religious context, deal with pagan worship of the fertility goddess, not loving, same sex relationships.

Many Christians understand the words of Jesus in Matthew 19:1-12 as affirmation and acknowledgment that homosexuals are born homosexual.

Further, no scripture which mentions Sodom mentions homosexuality. Homosexuality was not the issue in scripture. Cultic sex worship of false gods was the issue.

Therefore the church should affirm homosexual relationships which are not pagan or cultic.

4. The Analogy of Divorce and Remarriage

This an@logy reasons that the views of the first century church regarding divorce and remarriage have changed to such an extent that divorced persons are now allowed, in many churches, to pastor or teach Sunday School and serve in other areas not open to them in previous centuries.

Since the twenty-first century church has changed the way she deals with divorced and remarried persons, this an@logy concludes that the church should also change the way she deals with homosexual persons of faith. Jesus and scripture are clearly against divorce and remarriage yet most of the modern church accepts divorce and remarriage.

It is objected that the church does not encourage serial divorce and remarriage whereas homosexual practice, even in a monogamous relationship, is regarded by traditionalists, as serial sin.

This objection is answered by noting that scripture regards remarriage by divorced individuals as sin, Matthew 19:1-12.

Here Is An Odd Rationalization From Nongay Christians, Which Is Defended By Dr. Robert Gagnon.

To view heterosexual re-marriage as a single sin, but each subsequent sexual act in the re-marriage, as not serial sin, is a novel twist from nongay Christians who then allege the opposite argument about homosexuals, that each individual sexual act in a monogamous homosexual relationship is serial sin.

As scriptural teaching against heterosexual rape does not prohibit loving, heterosexual relationships so scriptural injunctions against worship of the Canaanite fertility goddess, do not prohibit loving, same sex relationships as we know them today.

Conclusion: The church should affirm same sex relationships which are within the Biblical moral framework: monogamous, faithful, noncultic.

Click Here for Five additional Biblical Analogies for Gay Relationships.

Some of the information on this page is excerpted from the book Gay Christian 101 - Spiritual Self-Defense For Gay Christians, which can be ordered here.

Click here to examine the Gay Analogy of Amram and Jochebed, the parents of Aaron, Miriam and Moses, which convincingly validates Gay Relationships.

Click here to return to GayChristian101.com Homepage.