Has the Bible Been Altered to Condemn Y@G Behavior? A Historical and Theological Response

Has the Bible Been Altered to Condemn Y@G Behavior? A Historical and Theological Response

In our cultural moment, it's common to hear that the Bible has been tampered with—especially in its moral teachings. One of the most debated claims is that verses condemning Y@G behavior were added later or misinterpreted by modern translators. While it's good to challenge assumptions and seek truth, we must also consider what history, Scripture, and theological consistency reveal.

1. Silence Isn’t Support: The Pre-70 AD Jewish Context

Some point out that there are no recorded Y@G marriages, public unions, or executions for Y@G behavior in Jewish history before 70 AD. While this silence is noteworthy, it does not prove that Y@G was culturally accepted or biblically permissible. Quite the opposite: the absence of such records likely reflects that Y@G acts were so universally condemned within Israelite society that they never reached normalization.

Jewish law—prior to 70 AD—operated under deep communal accountability. If Y@G unions had become prevalent, we would expect some mention in Rabbinic literature or recorded Roman-Jewish conflict. Yet what we find is silence, which supports the assumption that these relationships were not occurring openly and were seen as incompatible with Torah-based life.

2. The Bible Has Not Been Altered to Condemn Y@G

There is no credible historical evidence that verses like Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26–27, or 1 Corinthians 6:9 were late additions or mistranslations aimed at marginalizing people. Even non-Christian historians recognize that these texts reflect the worldview of their time: one rooted in a male–female creation order and a covenant ethic that sees sex as tied to life, fruitfulness, and covenantal union.

Accusations that translators intentionally corrupted the text to condemn modern Y@G are mostly based on speculative readings or anachronistic assumptions. The Hebrew and Greek words used in these passages (e.g., toevah, arsenokoitai) are rooted in consistent Old Testament and Second Temple Jewish thought.

3. Creation Still Matters: Adam, Eve, and the Mandate

Adam and Eve were the first covenant model of human sexuality: male and female, made to become "one flesh" and to "be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 1:28; 2:24). This isn't just a biological reality—it’s a spiritual framework. Critics sometimes raise troubling counterexamples like incest or polygamy in early Genesis. But Scripture gives us a trajectory. 

Adam and Eve did not:

Engage in bestiality.

Endorse incestuous relations between parents and children.

Depart from the male–female design.

The command to be fruitful wasn't a temporary survival mechanism; it was the moral framework for how human sexuality was meant to serve covenant life, not personal indulgence.

4. What Full Preterism and New Covenant Ethics Reveal

The old covenant system ended in 70 AD, and with it, the sacrificial system and legal condemnation under the Torah. But this does not mean moral chaos. Grace doesn’t erase design. The new covenant renews us inwardly (Ephesians 4:22–24), enabling believers to reflect God's original intentions through the Spirit—not just avoiding sin, but embodying the goodness of what was always true in creation.

The New Testament never gives believers license to remake morality based on cultural winds. Rather, Paul consistently affirms that certain desires must be brought under the Lordship of Christ—not because of legalism, but because they reflect an old self disconnected from God's design.

Conclusion

The claim that Y@G is condemned only because of altered or misunderstood Scripture doesn’t hold up under close scrutiny. Neither the cultural silence before 70 AD nor the structure of the biblical canon suggests acceptance of Y@G unions. On the contrary, from Genesis to Paul, the consistent testimony is that God designed sex for covenantal, fruitful union between male and female—a pattern that finds fulfillment not just in reproduction, but in spiritual symbolism and new creation. The old covenant may be fulfilled, but the new humanity still walks in alignment with God’s created intent—not because we are under law, but because we are under grace.