The argument from silence is well known to be a fallacious one. It is illogical to say "this person never said anything about this topic, therefore they had this view". Yet, on a regular basis, many Christians argue that if Jesus never spoke on a specific topic, it's because He held their view on it.
Nowhere is this more prominent than the issue of homosexuality. You will search in vain for Jesus making any direct comment on homosexuality. You can find many indirect comments, and we'll get on to those in a moment, but you will never read Jesus saying, with His human lips, "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." Jesus also never said "Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." Jesus certainly didn't say "...For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due." These are all in His scriptures (Leviticus 18:22, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Romans 1:26-27), but if He ever said them with His human mouth, it wasn't recorded in Scripture.
So, that totally means Jesus was ok with homosexuality, right? Or at least He didn't care. Especially since He lived in a culture rife with homosexuality. Those Greeks and Romans really weren't known for their sexual purity, so Jesus' silence is effectively consent, right?
But actually, no. Not only would that be a daft argument if Jesus never said anything that could so much as hint at His views on homosexuality, but Jesus actually did say many things that hint on His views on homosexuality. Specifically, as I've already alluded to myself, He repeatedly affirmed the Scriptures. That includes both Old and New Testaments.
I suppose it goes without saying that, as a Jew, and indeed as the perfect Jew, Jesus absolutely affirmed the Jewish Scriptures. In fact, He particularly affirmed Moses, saying "Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you—Moses, in whom you trust. For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”" (John 5:45-47).
So here we have Jesus, first of all, saying these people affirmed Moses, and so it is he who would accuse them before the Father. What He wrote in these books, from the greatest to the least, these Jews would be judged by. Jesus then follows it up with "But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”" If you do not believe Leviticus 18:22 (and 20:13 after that), how will you believe Jesus? It seems here that it doesn't matter what Jesus says, you simply cannot believe Him if you do not believe Moses.
But if you believe Jesus affirmed homosexuality, how are you believing Moses, the Jewish prophet who, inspired by the Jewish God, condemned homosexuality as an abomination, and under a Jewish Theocracy, condemned homosexuals to death? If you believe homosexuality is ok, you aren't believing Moses or Jesus. You're not believing Moses, who said homosexuality is not ok, and you're not believing Jesus, who said if you don't believe Moses, you won't believe Jesus.
But the fact is, Jesus was talking to people who believed Moses, at least in part. They were notorious for rejecting the bits of his law they didn't like, but Jesus did affirm "they sit in Moses' seat" (Matthew 23:2), telling His followers "Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do..." (Matthew 23:3b). So what were the Pharisees telling Jesus' followers to observe? Once again, Leviticus 18:22: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." This just wasn't alien to their culture. The Jews weren't asking whether it's ok for gay people to serve as pastors. They weren't debating gay "marriage". They didn't wonder if gay people should be able to adopt. To them, it was simple: "If you're gay in this land, the only reason we're not stoning you to death is because the Romans won't let us."
In fact, this is the exact trap they laid for Jesus in John 8:2-12 with the woman caught in adultery. If Jesus said she should be stoned, they'd have handed Him over to the Romans for advocating treason. If He said she shouldn't be stoned, He'd be going against Moses. How did Jesus get out of it? Of course, by pointing out that every single one of them had gone against Moses in one way or another, so they didn't have a leg to stand on. In other words, once again, He appealed to Moses.
But why wouldn't He say anything about the scores of Gentile sinners who, no doubt, were doing some very unsavory things? Put simply, because that wasn't His purpose on Earth. In Matthew 15:21-28 (with the same account being found in Mark 7:24-30), we read "Then Jesus went out from there and departed to the region of Tyre and Sidon. And behold, a woman of Canaan came from that region and cried out to Him, saying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David! My daughter is severely demon-possessed.” But He answered her not a word. And His disciples came and urged Him, saying, “Send her away, for she cries out after us.” But He answered and said, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Then she came and worshiped Him, saying, “Lord, help me!” But He answered and said, “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.” And she said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.” Then Jesus answered and said to her, “O woman, great is your faith! Let it be to you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour."
So here we see that while Jesus did help Gentiles, He rarely deviated from His primary ministry, to the Jews, who, again, were very much anti-gay. In fact, one could legitimately call their philosophy homophobic, because at this time, the future union of Jew and Gentile had only been partially revealed. In their mind, once again, homosexuality carried with it a legitimate death penalty (and it did, God had commanded this in His law). If Jesus had intended to overturn this view, rest assured He would have done it.
In fact, Jesus tackled a lot of Jewish problems during His ministry. The Jews had a lot of traditions that conflicted with Scripture, and Jesus would frequently debate them on it. Interestingly, one of them factors in to this very discussion. In Matthew 19:3-9 and Mark 10:2-9, the Pharisees ask Jesus "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?" This was a debate the Jews were having between themselves, with some suggesting yes, you can just divorce your wives for any reason, but others, of course, saying no, that's not lawful. So Jesus takes them to... Moses! But this time, He not only affirms what Moses wrote about marriage (i.e. "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." and "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.", as we find in Genesis 1:27 and 2:24), but also gives us insight into why Moses allowed divorce: "He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so." (Matthew 19:8).
So, we have two Jewish problems here. First, they're not obeying the law of Moses, because they're loosening divorce laws. Second, the only reason Moses gave them these divorce laws in the first place is because they're a naturally stubborn people. So what does He do? He calls them back to before Moses himself! He says hey, when I invented marriage, it was one man and one woman for life, so if your wife isn't sexually immoral, you better stick with her, or you're an adulterer.
Jesus tightened the law. He affirmed it, He never once praised the Jews for departing from it, not even by "the traditions of the elders", but He did make some adjustments. "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2:27). "...whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." (Matthew 5:28). As we've just seen, "Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate." (Mark 10:5-9).
So why is Jesus silent on homosexuality? The Jews weren't asking that question, so He didn't have to answer them. The Gentiles weren't His primary focus, so He didn't need to address them. Why did Moses give the law against homosexuality? Well, using Jesus' logic that "But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’", it seems Moses condemned homosexuality for the same reason as Jesus condemns divorce. And you can't even use your spouse's sexual immorality as an excuse to engage in homosexuality, because what would that even achieve?
So we see that even if we completely omit the New Testament, we have enough information to say that Jesus' silence on homosexuality, first of all, isn't even silence. If we go by what Jesus said about the Old Testament, and specifically by His other explicit views on human sexuality, we can say with certainty that Jesus views homosexuality as one of the many sins for which He had to die.
But we do not have to omit the New Testament, and in fact it would be foolish, not to mention sinful, to do so. First, this is what Jesus promises about the Holy Spirit when He comes to the Apostles: "“I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you." (John 16:12-15).
What we see, then, is that the Bible is a gift given to us by the entirety of the Godhead. The Father gives to the Son, and the Son gives to the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit, not speaking on His own authority, takes of what is the Son's, and declares it to the Apostles! So now, we have an affirmation from the mouth of the Son of God that whatever the Holy Spirit gives the Apostles is Jesus' own word. That would include 1 John 4:6: "We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error."
It also includes Peter's affirmation that Paul's wisdom is given to him, and that his epistles are Scripture which, if ignored or twisted, result in destruction (2 Peter 3:15-16). But it is Paul who gives, by far, the strongest affirmation that Scripture is inspired by God: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Verse 17 alone is a strong affirmation that Scripture is reliable. It makes the man of God complete and thoroughly equipped for every good work. Sexual purity counts as a good work, does it not? But verse 16 is utterly devastating to anyone who would try to dismiss Paul just because he is not Jesus: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God..." (Emphasis added). The word used here is actually "theopneustos" (θεόπνευστος), which literally means "God breathed".
So Jesus affirms the Scriptures, with a heavy emphasis on Moses, and also promises to send the Holy Spirit to both remind His Apostles what He's already told them and guide them into all truth, the Apostles affirm that Paul has that same anointing, and Paul affirms all of this by telling us God Himself breathes out the Scriptures. These Scriptures indisputably teach us that homosexuality is a sin, that marriage is between one man and one woman for life, that this is a pattern laid down by the first human couple, that all deviations from this pattern in the law of Moses (which condemns homosexuality as a sin and prescribed the death penalty for it) were themselves due to the fact the Jews were hard hearted against God, and that only by repenting of homosexuality and confessing Christ as the risen Lord can anyone who has ever practiced or approved of homosexuality be saved. "But Jesus never said anything about homosexuality...". Yes, actually, He did. In four simple words, Jesus utterly condemned homosexuality, and all other forms of sexual immorality: "Scripture cannot be broken". (John 10:35).
So, when God, through Moses, tells us "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." (Leviticus 18:22)? This cannot be broken. When God, through Paul, tells us "Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)? This cannot be broken. When God, through Paul, tells us "...For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due." (Romans 1:26-27)? This. Scripture. Cannot. Be. Broken.
And it's as if Jesus said so Himself.
No matter which way you cut the cake, you are not a Christian if the Christ you follow is not the real, historical Jesus. Of course there is a margin for error. There has to be, we're all sinners, we're all prone to make mistakes, so we can't just run around saying "you're not Christian because you believe this error", or "you're not Christian because you commit this sin". But if you are so firmly opposed to Christ that you want to cut Him out of the Godhead and paste Him onto your sin, like some glorified sock puppet, you are "following" a Jesus who never said a word about homosexuality because he never existed! You may as well follow the Little Gingerbread Man, because you'll catch him before you find a single reason to believe Jesus was a Liberal who conveniently believes everything our culture does.