GAY TRUTH

  Objection Stated Paul is speaking solely of Jewish purity laws, and hence this is irrelevant in a modern, enlightened society . Biblical Response It needs to be acknowledged from the outset, and this illustrates the constant inconsistency found among the revisionist interpreters, that this is an admission that the Hebrew Scriptures do indeed condemn homosexual deeds and desires.  After all, if Paul’s condemnation of such sinfulness is drawn from Judaism, this is a tacit admission that Judaism opposed homosexuality. We have addressed the basic contention of the allegedly limited application of God’s moral laws in our discussion of the Leviticus passages. It seems sufficient at this point to note how such an objection completely misses Paul’s context as well as his argument. Paul surely did not embrace modern views of either God’s law or God’s revelation in the Jewish Scriptures. He would not have held to the concept that the revelation of God’s holy will in Scripture was some...

  Objection Stated The Apostle Paul did not know about “inversion” and mutuality, and hence this passage does not have relevance today. Biblical Response There are two things to be noted in response to this assertion—an assertion that is, truly, at the bottom of almost every argument on the part of revisionists. The first is the unspoken, but foundational, assumption that the Scriptures are limited in their capacity and hence authority to the knowledge and experience of the human authors by which they were delivered to us.  The second is more overt: Paul did not know about “inversion” or the allegedly “natural” occurrence of homosexuality. Let’s begin with the second objection. Paul came from Tarsus, a major city in the Roman Empire. He was well trained, a learned man, familiar with Roman and Greek culture. He was obviously widely read in the literature of the day as well.  Therefore, the assumption that he did not know of people who professed to be homosexual as their pr...

COLOGNE, Germany  — A petition has been launched protesting the sentencing of Fr. Dariusz Oko for his work exposing sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. On Friday, Fr. Oko, a Polish professor, and 90-year-old German professor Fr. Johannes Stöhr will go to trial in Cologne for their work exposing homosexual abuse in the Catholic Church. A petition has been launched to revoke the sentence.  In 2021, the Cologne District Court claimed that Fr. Oko’s article titled “On the need to curb homosexual cliques in the Church” constituted “incitement to hatred” against homosexuals. According to Polish magazine Wprost , the court demanded that Fr. Oko pay a fine of 4,800 euros or serve 120 days in jail. Fr. Johannes Stöhr, the editor-in-chief of  Theologisches , reportedly was charged as well. An expert on gays in the priesthood, Fr. Oko is a Polish priest and professor of theology at the John Paul II Pontifical University in Krakow. He wrote a work “about the need to limit homosexual c...

A Corinthian Changes April 18, a.d. 56 Gaius was troubled as he passed through the market gate into the city of Corinth. He could not help noticing the fertility symbols emblazoned on the gateposts and lintel. Such open sexuality had earned Corinth an infamous name. He was again facing intense desires. “No!” his thoughts shouted as he wrenched his gaze from the decoration, “God, deliver me.” John was coming through the crowded market. “Gaius, my brother,” John said in warm greeting. “Your public confession has encouraged me to live for Christ. I am on my way to pray with Stephanos. Do you wish to come?” “Yes, I really do,” Gaius responded with a silent prayer of thanks. How long would he struggle so? April 12 Gaius felt such relief! A weight of guilt was lifting from his shoulders. For the first time in his life he felt clean, forgiven—free. Brothers and sisters in Christ gathered around him. He had crowded into the small dwelling with forty or so worshipers that morning. Standing at t...

As we consider the significance of Romans 1 for contemporary ethics, one view is that Romans 1 identifies a temporary Jewish purity rule rather than a universal moral principle. When Countryman makes that suggestion, he errs in reading the literary context. In this context, the passage, with its “nature” terminology, can be interpreted only as an appeal to creation.  The words of verses 26–27 are on the level of universal moral principle. Unless the writer signals a change in meaning, context will not allow a limited purity rule to be sandwiched between universal moral standards in verses 24–28. The first and the third of three parallel passages clearly are universal and deal with sin, not impurity. Note Paul’s warning that “God abandoned them” in vv. 24, 26, and 28. God cannot consign the Gentiles to punishment for breaking a Jewish purity rule. The literary form of Romans 1:1–2 also demands identification of homosexuality as sin. When Paul says that “God abandoned them,” the the...

Paul uses conventional Greek terminology to express a Jewish-Christian worldview that “nature” and what is “natural” must correspond to what God has created and legislated. It cannot simply be equated with culture.72 While Paul on this occasion uses physis to refer to the creation order, he is borrowing conventional language to express a ktisis (“creation”) idea or worldview. He uses the word exchanged (v. 26) to point to a violation of creation when people make idols and “change” the glory of God into an image made from the Creation.  Also, he may use the term aschēmosynē (“indecent acts”) in Romans 1:27 as a subtle pointer to schēma, which is used by Paul only in Philippians 2:7. In Philippians 2:7, it describes the earthly “form, appearance, or essence” of Christ, suggesting that Christ is the only perfect person, the pattern for all humanity. Those who engage in same-gender sexual intercourse do not emulate Christ as our pattern or image, but rather make an idol from the creati...