If homosexuality is a sin, why doesn’t Jesus explicitly condemn it? I. Overview of the Question Why does Jesus never explicitly mention or condemn homosexuality in the Gospels, and how should that omission be understood in light of the broader biblical teaching? This entry will explore relevant passages, contextual background, and the consistency of Scriptural perspectives, aiming to demonstrate how Jesus’ silence on specific words can still align with a traditional reading that homosexual acts fall outside the boundaries of biblical sexual ethics. II. Jesus’ Teachings on Sexual Morality A. Emphasis on the Heart and Intent Jesus’ recorded words often focus on the heart behind actions (e.g., “out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks,” Matthew 12:34). His teachings on moral and ethical behavior frequently address core principles rather than listing every specific violation. • Matthew 5:28: “But I tell you that whoever looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” This underscores the principle that Jesus highlights the underlying desire that leads to sin, not merely the physical act. B. Call to Sexual Purity Though Jesus does not list every possible form of sexual activity contrary to God’s design, He unmistakably upholds purity: • Mark 7:21–23: “For from within the hearts of men come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery…” Here, Jesus uses the term “sexual immorality” (Greek: porneia), a broad category recognized by Jewish audiences as encompassing all sexual conduct outside of the male-female marital union. III. Jesus’ Affirmation of the Old Testament Moral Law A. Law Fulfilled, Not Abolished Jesus explicitly states He comes not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it: • Matthew 5:17–18: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” Such a statement indicates Jesus affirms the moral teachings contained in the Old Testament. The Mosaic Law prohibits same-sex relations (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13), and Jesus’ endorsement of the moral law undergirds its relevance. B. Consistency with the Holiness Code Many scholars note that the “sexual immorality” Jesus condemns would be understood by first-century Jewish listeners to include prohibitions laid out in the Torah’s Holiness Code (Leviticus 18–20). Geologically and archaeologically, evidence for the customs and practices of ancient Israel reveals the deep-rooted significance of these laws within the covenant community’s moral ethos. IV. Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Creation A. Defining Marriage as Male-Female In a direct reference to humanity’s creation, Jesus describes marriage exclusively as a union between a man and a woman: • Matthew 19:4–5: “Haven’t you read,” He replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’?” This quotation from Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 anchors sexual relations in the context of a male-female, lifelong union. By upholding Genesis’ design for marriage, Jesus implicitly limits sexual expression to that framework. B. Indirect Refutation of Other Arrangements Jesus’ consistent vision of marriage and sexuality—one man and one woman in a covenant relationship—speaks against any sexual conduct outside that design. Although He does not mention homosexuality by name, He also does not mention a host of other forms of sexual relations that fall outside of the Genesis model. In Jesus’ teachings, there is no room for additional categories of sexual union. V. The Early Church’s Clarification A. Paul’s Explicit Statements After Jesus’ ascension, the apostles clarified His teachings, including matters of sexual morality. The apostle Paul affirms that same-sex practices are inconsistent with Christian holiness: • Romans 1:26–27: “…Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and burned with lust for one another…” • 1 Corinthians 6:9–10: “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral… nor men who submit to or perform homosexual acts… will inherit the kingdom of God.” These passages highlight how the early Church, to which Jesus entrusted His message, understood the boundaries of sexual immorality. B. Confirmation and Continuity The early believers’ stance indicates they saw no contradiction between Jesus’ moral framework and the Old Testament prohibitions. The New Testament church continued—and even emphasized—the call to reject any sexual behavior that fell outside male-female marriage. Their understanding supports the argument that Jesus, in upholding the Law’s moral provisions, inherently included prohibitions on same-sex activity. VI. Addressing the Objection: “Why No Direct Condemnation from Jesus?” A. Argument from Silence The Gospels do not record Jesus naming every single prohibited behavior. He also never addresses incest, bestiality, or other specific infractions within traditional Jewish moral codes. His silence on a particular act does not indicate endorsement of it. Similarly, extra-biblical Jewish writings (e.g., the Dead Sea Scrolls) and relevant historical records reveal that first-century Jewish culture recognized certain sexual sins as settled moral issues. Because it was widely agreed upon within that context, Jesus had no apparent reason to single them out with explicit condemnation. B. Upholding the Overarching Principle Jesus champions the overarching principle of fidelity to God’s design and purity of heart. This principle, by its nature, excludes all sexual relationships not grounded in the male-female marital covenant. Hence, under that holistic standard, same-sex acts would be deemed inconsistent with Jesus’ teaching—despite not being named verbatim. VII. Broader Scriptural Harmony A. Unity of Scripture From the creation account in Genesis to the moral teachings in Leviticus, the consistent message affirms that God’s intention for sexual relationships is one man and one woman in a covenant bond. Jesus’ words on marriage reinforce this context, and the rest of the New Testament reaffirms the same standard. The Christian canon, supported by thorough manuscript evidence and historical continuity, presents a unified witness. B. Pastoral Implications and Compassion Throughout Scripture, there is also a recognizable call to love one’s neighbor. The biblical position that homosexual acts are outside God’s moral design does not negate the command to treat every individual with dignity and kindness (cf. Matthew 5:44: “…love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you…”). Thus, believers are urged to respond with grace and truth, embodying both Jesus’ concern for holiness and His compassion for people. VIII. Conclusion Jesus does not explicitly name every possible sexual sin, including homosexuality, in the Gospel accounts. However, He continually upholds the Old Testament moral law, uses the broad term “sexual immorality,” and reaffirms marriage as exclusively the union of a man and a woman. His silence on a specific word does not signal acceptance; it fits the broader pattern of focusing on foundational principles rather than enumerating every violation. Through the early Church writings—especially Paul’s letters—we find a clear continuation of this perspective that same-sex acts lie outside the boundaries of biblical holiness. When the entire scriptural witness is taken into account, a coherent message emerges: while Jesus does not mention homosexuality by name, He endorses the creation design for sexual unions, which does not include same-sex relationships. “Truth, then, continues in love,” as believers hold to traditional biblical teachings and simultaneously exhibit compassion for all. |
    |