For a Bible "scholar," this self loathing gay man seems remarkably ignorant of Biblical scholarship. He hangs his entire thesis around Jesus equating looking on a woman with lust as morally equivalent to adulatory, but he completely ignores the context of Jesus's statement, which was rather obviously made to dispute the legalism of Jewish religious authorities. He also ignores the meaning of the word "lust," which Jesus could not have meant in the way modern English speakers use it. Entire books have been written in the Christian world, and in the Talmudic tradition, and the meaning of lust (as Jesus would have used the word) is examined in great detail.

Practically nobody thinks the word meant what this self-hating gay man says it meant.