GAY TRUTH

“I am writing to tell you that I am gay and I am a Christian.” That was the opening line of the letter Richard Grenell , a former United Nations official, sent his evangelical parents when he decided to come out in 1999. President Trump reportedly plans to nominate Grenell to be his ambassador to NATO , a position that would make Grenell the highest-ranking gay man in the new administration, and arguably the most visible gay in America .  Converted at a young age, he spent his summers at religious youth camps and traveling to foreign countries on mission trips to evangelize non-Christians. While his devout parents moved back and forth from California to Michigan, the church remained the constant in his life. Attending multiple services each week was mandatory, but no one needed to twist young Grenell’s arm.  “Growing up in church, I think I recognized the need for God and that Jesus died for my sins. So I wanted to forge a path toward living a Christian life and learning

We must view the present-day controversy over homosexuality as evidence that some have rejected the authority of the Word of God : even some in the church. It is possible for the “law to be lost” among those who claim to be followers of God, and there is indeed a “famine in the land … a famine for hearing the words of the LORD” (see Ezekiel 7:26 and Amos 8:11–12).  Many in the contemporary church have been drinking from the well of relativism rather than consuming the absolute truth of God’s Word. This is precisely what society at large has done in previous generations; they have denied the existence of that which is absolute, invariant, and universal. They have denied God’s Word, and, as a result, call that which is evil good and good evil. This error has crept into the church, and she has embraced this re-tooled idol (Ezekiel 33:17–20).  In truth, Christianity stands against relativism . Christianity is grounded upon the basis of antithesis: God is distinct from His crea

In past decades homosexuals were ashamed to “go public.” Historically, theologians were not required to address this topic, as it was commonly understood to be a violation of God’s law . Francis Turretin, a theologian of the seventeenth century, simply referred to homosexuality as “the sin against nature.”  Previously, homosexuals rarely tried to go to the Bible to obtain approval for their behavior and appetites—they knew it was not to be found. Lately, since public opinion has turned slightly in their favor, the shame has diminished to the point where the Bible is being pursued as an ally, as a moral reference point to bolster their position. After all, if the Bible can be summoned to the homosexuals’ defense, they may have a case. So in the midst of this present debate, adherents to both sides of the same-sex controversy claim the authority of the Bible in their defense. Both sides claim that the Bible is clear. Both sides claim to have moral justification for their position

As noted above, however, this clamor for the acceptability of homosexuality, which is heard even in the church, is not without a stated authoritative base. The people making this claim appeal to the Bible and assert that a homosexual lifestyle is perfectly compatible with its teaching. The same-sex controversy is, at its core, a controversy over the authority and interpretation of the Bible. Throughout the history of the church, and revealed in the historical understanding of Scripture,5 homosexuality has been seen as contrary to the morality set forth in the pages of the Bible. Today, however, we are being told that the moral opposition to homosexuality, based in and upon Scripture, is actually a rather recent phenomenon. We are being “informed” that the Bible nowhere condemns homosexuality as it is predominantly known and practiced today and that, as a matter of fact, a lifestyle of committed homosexuality is consistent with biblical morality. Ironically, this makes for a remar

More than one million Mexicans across 122 cities marched in support of marriage and the natural family on Saturday in response to President Enrique Peña Nieto’s moves to enshrine same-sex “marriage” in the nation’s Constitution. The pro-family activist group   Frente Nacional Por La Familia   (“National Front for the Family”) organized the protests. There were an estimated 275,000 marchers in Guadalajara and 100,000 in Querétaro. Some other cities’ protests reached nearly 100,000. Frente Nacional Por La Familia   warns   that Peña Nieto’s proposed reforms would allow same-sex adoption and lead to the collapse of parental rights related to sex change surgery on children and school curricula promoting homosexuality, transgenderism, and sexual activity. The demonstrators carried pink and blue balloons and signs depicting families. A spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Mexico City recently said the government’s mission to impose same-sex “marriage” has led to the   greatest c

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is expected to reveal details of the planned plebiscite to his party room on Tuesday. He's likely to come under pressure from churches if those plans don't include public funding for the 'no' and 'yes' cases. One of the country's most senior Anglican leaders, Archbishop of Sydney Glenn Davies, says Mr Turnbull promised him in February taxpayer money would be forthcoming, News Corp reports. The prime minister's office has rejected that interpretation of the conversation, saying he only indicated that if there were public funding, it would be given equally. A month later, Archbishop Davies reportedly met with Attorney-General George Brandis, who asked how much money would be appropriate. It could be more than $10 million for each side, on top of the estimated $160 million cost of running the national vote. Senator Brandis said on Sunday there had been a very thorough process of consultation with all sides. 'What those

Changing the Marriage Act will not expand marriage it will undermine marriage and family, foundations of our good society. The following list is a far from exhaustive list of some reasons to defend marriage and family and some of the myriad consequences of changing the Marriage Act: Same-sex “Marriage” is not Marriage. The union between two men or two women denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage.  It denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children. Two entirely different things cannot be considered the same thing. Same-sex "Marriage" goes Against Human Nature Same-sex “Marriage" Always Denies a Child Either a Father or a Mother SS “marriage” intentionally makes children orphans. SS “marriage” confuses children and promotes homosexual behavior to them. Both Mums and Dads matte

What is the nature of marriage and what are the consequences for redefining it? Marriage is based on: the truth that men and women are physically and emotionally complementary, the biological fact that reproduction depends on a man and a woman, and the reality that children need both a mother and a father. Redefining marriage does not simply expand the existing understanding of marriage; it rejects these truths. It will legally discriminate against those who hold the traditional view of marriage, that marriage is only between a man and a woman, and potentially will outlaw the legitimate view of millions of people that homosexual sex acts are unnatural, unhealthy and immoral. Laws teach. A law which promotes and protects something (homosexual sex) which billions of people around the world have always considered to be physically and mentally harmful will cause social havoc, division and confusion. It will restrict freedom of speech and religion. It will effectively silence and