Considering there are ZERO passages that give any approval or indication that homosexuality is okay, I'm pretty sure we're reading the texts correctly.
Your argument is illogical. As others have said - the majority of things in existence are not approved of in the Bible, yet I don't see you avoiding the computer, cars, processed foods, airplanes, cell-phones, television, etc. Is Quantum Mechanics disapproved of because the Bible never mentions it? How about Chemistry? Should we avoid nylon or polyester clothing? Oh and who can forget medicine? I mean afterall, the Bible tells us demons cause diseases not viruses and bacteria. Studying Medicine must be disapproved of by God too.
You are being inconsistent. You disapprove of homosexuality, not because it's not mentioned in the Bible, but because you were taught that it's "icky" and that God condemns it.
The argument that the modern day definition of homosexuality didn't exist back then is a smoke screen and should be an offense to everyone who says that they are born homosexual.
Sexual orientation was not discovered until the late 19th century. "Homosexual" was invented in 1893. Therefore, it's impossible for there to be a "homosexual" reference in the Bible. There was no such thing. Any mention of homosexual in the English Bibles is clear evidence of translators projecting their modern day bias onto the ancient text.
We know that the 5 verses condemning specific types of same-sex behavior are vague at best. Take 1 Cor 6:9 for example. Modern day Bibles inserted the word homosexual as one of the offenses. And yet, for all of Christian history - that is the last 2000 years, that word has never even remotely been translated as homosexual. It's meant numerous things, most notably kidnappers, and from Martin Luther until about 50 years ago, masturbator. That was the universally accepted meaning of that word. So why is it that you all of sudden are right, and everyone for the past 2000 years is wrong for not translating correctly?
Romans is another example of conservatives misrepresenting scripture. They love to claim the target audience is homosexuals, and yet Paul says they exchanged natural relations. Well, for a person born attracted to members of the same sex, it is 100% natural to be attracted to the same-sex. So what exactly did they exchange? Not to mention, we know for a fact Paul was directing this at former Christians who returned to their Paganistic ways, and continued to practice sex rituals and idolatry. There is no evidence Paul directed that verse at all gay people for all time.
As for the Leviticus verses, I've already explained that in Hebrew, they don't condemn consentual relationships. It was a specific prohibition on the dominating behavior of certain men during pagan sex rituals. This is completely in context with the rest of the verses surrounding it, such as sacrificing children to Molech.
Not to mention, even if Leviticus did condemn it - you don't follow Leviticus, so why should anyone else? It's meaningless to Christians - therefore, stop using it as an argument.
And let's not forget that Jesus Christ himself, never mentioned it. If it were the "abomination" you make it out to be, surely he would have devoted at least a paragraph to gay people.
The conservative position on the gay debate is completely baseless. They take 4 or 5, poorly mistranslated verses, half of which don't even apply to Christians anymore, and condemn hundreds of millions of people to Hell with them. It's extremely disappointing that Jesus' words have gone completely ignored.
