Before I start this, I want to give a heartfelt and awkwardly-long e-hug to all of my readers who have been hurt by your families because of the way you love. I am so sorry. That never should have happened. My heart breaks for you.

Now ... time to make some people mad as hell.

 I watched a video of a family's reaction when their son came out as gay to them. 

They kicked him out, disowned him, and told him the Bible said it was wrong & since they live by Jesus's word, he no longer had a place in their home. 

This escalated into a physical altercation and all sorts of sh*tty family relations ensued.

 Fam, Jesus would whip your ass for that. Straight up. No chaser. 

Anyone who is going to call themselves a Christian needs to know that. It's in your source material, folks. Read your syllabus. 

So there's a whole lot of chit-chat in the Old Testament about things like:

• • mixed fabrics
  • shellfish
  • incorrectly planting seeds
  • going to church if you're blind/have mobility issues/are Asian/or otherwise have a "defect"
  • NOT marrying your rapist
  • owning a mixed-breed dog 

It's a super long list of a lot of things we consider completely and totally normal. Interestingly, what's NOT on that list is homosexuality. 

"Uh, it says RIGHT THERE in Leviticus that man shall not lay with man..." 

I can hear you haters now.  And why is it never the verses about love and acceptance that people know where to find like that? Why is it only the verses that can be used to exclude people?

Don't answer that. We know why.

Get ready, several of y'all aren't gonna like me after this. 

LEVITICUS DOES NOT SAY THAT. Or at least, it DIDN'T until around the 1940's.

"THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO!" you screech at your screens... 

And yeah, but it wasn't written in ENGLISH and the translation that has you out here hating on gays was supposed to have you hating on pedophiles.

Specifically pederasts (adult men who engage in sexual or romantic relationships with young boys) but you know what, let's just go with pedophiles. 

Not homosexuals. Pedophiles.

Initially, the verse used the word "arsenokoitai" - a masculine greek noun. But to say it translates to "man" is like deciding "pendejo" does, too. Just because it's masculine. 

"Arsenokoitai" translates more accurately to "abuser" - and if you want to leave this at a Google translate level, I suppose you could still read that verse as:

"Abuser shall not lay with man..." 

But this is why cultural understanding matters. PARTICULARLY when you're dealing with cultures whose stories are anchored in time and place. Removing those stories from the cultural context means they can then be used as weapons rather than tools.

Read that again. Weapons rather than tools.

Wisdom is a tool, and your lack of it has been used as a weapon. Mostly against you. So let's disarm some folks, shall we?

In the time & place that this was written, ancient Greeks and ancient Hebrews were just starting to mix and mingle. That word specifically referred to Greek men who had a cultural norm of sexual relations with pre-pubescent boys. 

 The Greeks considered this to be a normal sort of "sexual mentorship." The Hebrews were very not okay with that.

We all know the laziest and most easily politicized version of anything is the one that's going to win. So in the 1940's we got stuck with .... well... *gestures in cacaface*

The verse, if I were to more accurately translate it, and then re-write it into an "Erica-ese" mini rant, it would read: 

"If you're a grown-ass person; we're not gonna be out here touching on little kids or me voy a meter un cocotaso. Consenting adult sex only. Why do I even have to tell you this? Leave the kids alone. Que pena."

But here's the kicker - even without that mistranslation, the Bible still says homophobia is a bad move! It's still a shit take, Christians!

Let's explore. 

So all those Old Testament rules & regulations were intended as a covenant between the Hebrews and God. 

But then Jesus hits the scene, as sent by God, to be the ultimate teacher and sacrifice. He - per the book you're taking all of this from and choosing to use as the governing text for your life - destroys that covenant. He then creates a new one, using himself as a one-time super-sacrifice that covers everyone who believes. 

That is why Christians no longer "need" to circumcise our children. That was a deal between Jacob and God. (Circumcision among Christians now is mostly based on flawed science and 'fashion' - but that's a topic we'll touch on another day. Put a pin in that.) 

It's also why we don't run around slaughtering lambs for anything other than deliciousness - if that's your thing. 

We all on the same page so far? Like, these are the established ground rules and givens? Good. Cause it's about to get real. 

When ya boy J-Chrizzle was here hanging out, he dropped a few knowledge bombs on people. Makes sense. If he destroyed the old covenant, we need the updated Terms of Service, right? Right. 

So ... what, exactly, did J-Chrizzle say about homosexuality? Hold on, let me look. 

Wait... turns out... nothing. Not a peep.

What, exactly, did he say about love? That is significantly longer than nothing.

"A new commandment I give you; love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another."  

But wait, there's more: 

"As you would wish for people to do for you, you do for them." 

If you're trying to be a 'perfect' Christian, Jesus has a really specific instruction for you: 

"If you want to be perfect, go sell your possessions and give the money to the poor." 

But here is my favorite part, the homie J.C. absolutely knew we were all going to end up with zero attention span, so he condensed it all down into one single rule. 

Christians only have ONE job: 

"All the commandments are summed up in this one single command: You must love others as yourself."

 Nowhere does it say to have children sent to camps to "pray they gay away." It doesn't say anything about disowning, attacking, or dehoming. It just says to love.

Jesus was kind of a dirty hippie that way.

So after 33 years spent drilling into people's minds that the only commandment is love - he hops up on the cross for sacrifice time. 

Fast forward a few thousand years to this shit - to people quoting Leviticus and the old covenants left and right in order to support their own personal feelings of dislike and discomfort. 

What you hateful Christians are saying is that you are still bound by the old laws. 

According to y'alls own source material, you are saying Jesus wasn't a valid and good enough sacrifice. You are looking at the God that YOU chose and going: 

"OK listen, I know you sent your son and this was the plan you put in place or whatever... but not good enough. You can't possibly have meant for this to include *them* as well." 

But let someone mention that divorce you got or that poly/cotton blend you're wearing, or that giant plate of crab legs from the buffet and suddenly your story is: 

"As a Christian I'm not living under law. Jesus died on the cross to cover me." 

But why just YOU, though? Why not that child you were given to love and care for who just happened to fall in love with someone of their gender?

 To be Christian is to agree to live by the teachings of Christ. So either you do, or you're not Christian. Like... that's how that goes. 

Ya dawg said love people, feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, clothe the poor, give the poor your money, don't be a judgy mcjudgypants, be loyal, be kind, encourage others, accept, and generally be a walking ball of love incarnate.

Or you can admit that you just don't want to because it's *haaaard*

Let's be honest for a hot second, though. Loving people who are different from you, think differently, and don't necessarily value what you value *is* kind of hard. 

Loving when you are hurt or saddened is tough. 

There are some emotions that are understandable from a parent who is shocked to learn something about their child - whatever that something is. 

I imagine a loving, but fearful, parent might wonder is their child is going to be able to find love and happiness. 

I can even understand initial (self-focused and un-informed) concerns about whether or not they will ever be grandparents, now. 

What I cannot understand is telling a child to leave the home or the family, attacking them, or deciding they are no longer worth loving just because they're gay. 

Jesus said love. That's Y'ALLS guy! 

Not love people you like. In fact, I'm pretty sure he specified to love your enemy. 

Not love only when you feel like it. 

Not love only if you understand it. 

He even went so far as to say "if you forget everything else, just remember to do the thing that is most loving." 

His teachings were, essentially, "when in doubt hug it out." 

SO 

If you're going to choose to wear the label of Christian, meaning a student of Christ or Christ-like, you had better be prepared to also be as Jesus was. 

According to YOUR source material he was a radical, liberal, rebellious, socialist, forward-thinking, free-loving, tree-hugging, whore-snuggling, scoundrel-trusting, risk-taking, self-sacrificing, table-flipping, temple-wrecking, homeless-sheltering, hungry-feeding, sick-helping, long-haired, sandal-wearing, counter-culture master of the snuggle-to-power-fist maneuver. 

Jesus said Christians needed to be that. So be that - or come to terms with the idea that you can call yourself whatever you want. It doesn't actually make you that thing. 

Sometimes I call myself not-that-short.