Tillman, your argument reads like a theological smoothie… blended feelings, half-truths, and a dash of suspicion about the integrity of Scripture… but no meat. Let’s get something straight: the Bible doesn’t need your cultural filter or modern discomfort to validate what it calls sin.
You said, “Scripture doesn’t support that”… but which Scripture are you actually reading? Because the real one… the one breathed out by God and preserved through fire and blood… doesn’t dodge this issue. It names it. Repeatedly.
Genesis 19 isn’t about bad manners. It’s about sin so severe the outcry reached heaven. Jude 1:7 spells it out in case Sodom apologists try to rebrand it again: “…they indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire.” That’s not about hospitality, it’s about deviation from God’s design.
Leviticus 18:22 says it plainly. Romans 1 shouts it louder. First Corinthians 6:9–10 doesn’t flinch. And let’s not pretend Paul was just tossing in a few vague terms for dramatic effect. The Greek in Romans 1 describes male-with-male sexual acts with surgical clarity. You don’t need a seminary degree to understand it… you just need to stop trying to rewrite it.
Now let’s talk about your theory that these verses were “added in.” That’s not exegesis… that’s conspiracy. The same canon that tells you Jesus rose from the grave is the one you’re side-eyeing like someone planted a landmine in Leviticus. If you’re going to yank out the parts you don’t like, don’t stop at the clobber verses. Be honest and toss the cross while you’re at it, because that’s the same Word.
You brought up Philemon and Roman slave laws like it’s some kind of loophole for sin. That’s called eisegesis—reading your assumptions into the text instead of pulling God’s truth out of it. Paul sent Onesimus back as a brother, not a boy toy. And Ephesians 6? That’s not a moral endorsement of Roman abuse, it’s a call for Christlike character inside broken systems. You don’t get to hang an entire sexual ethic on what Paul didn’t say while ignoring what he explicitly said elsewhere.
And the logic that “if homosexuality was such a big deal, it’d be mentioned more”? That’s not biblical reasoning, that’s courtroom deflection. How many times does God have to say something before it’s holy? One verse is enough to split seas and shake nations. You think God whispers when He’s serious? Go ask Ananias and Sapphira what happens when God speaks once and expects obedience.
Look, nobody’s questioning the worth or dignity of people caught in sin. We’re all born broken. But affirming sin to avoid offense isn’t love… it’s betrayal. Real love tells the truth even when it costs. Jesus dined with sinners… but He didn’t affirm their sin. He said, “Go and sin no more.”
You want unconditional love? It’s at the cross. You want unrepentant sin blessed? You’ll have to look somewhere else. The Holy Spirit convicts, He doesn’t coddle. And the Gospel doesn’t blur the lines… it draws them in blood.
You say it’s easy to let cultural bias creep in… you’re right. That’s why we anchor to Scripture and not sentiment.
So let me ask it straight: If Scripture is God-breathed, who gave you the authority to hold the highlighter?
—Sincere Seeker. Stay grounded. Stay sharp. Stay in the Word.