I haven't studied the passages in depth, but you'd certainly have some verses in Romans and 1 Corinthians to contend with. If you don't consider those books of the Bible as inspired, then it's very reasonable to support LGBT normality in the church as a Christian, but it's a trickier proposition if you do.
Again:
As far as Romans goes, the Bible makes it very clear that the sin there was lust. This is the sin - they were having homosexual relations not because of their sexuality, but because of their lust. Desire is the root of all our sin, as James makes clear repeatedly. As far as being unnatural, that’s also a phrase Paul uses for men with long hair - that most Christians say is a synonym for “unconvential.” Overall, though, I must note that the love in a marriage, gay or straight, is very different from (im)pure, unadulterated lust.
Let me quote Matthe Vines on 1 Corinthians 6:9-10,
“In this text, Paul uses two Greek words—malakoi and arsenokoitai—that likely refer to some forms of male same-sex behavior, but not the modern concept of homosexuality. The predominant forms of same-sex behavior in the ancient world were sex between masters and slaves, sex between adult men and adolescent boys, and prostitution. In all those cases, men used sex to express power, dominance and lustfulness, not self-giving love and mutuality. Committed same-sex unions between social equals represent very different values than the types of same-sex behavior Paul would have had in view in 1 Corinthians 6.”
The German word for homosexual there is “Kinderschänder” - literally, boy-molester. The NRSV, the most accurate version of the Bible according to many, uses the term “male prostitutes.”
That makes sense actually. Very good points.
