GAY TRUTH

It is ironic that the proponents of homosexuality so often point to ancient Greece as their paradigm because of its high state of culture and its partial acceptance of homosexuality or, more accurately, pederasty. Though some ancient Greeks did write paeans to homosexual love, it did not occur to any of them to propose homosexual relationships as the basis for marriage in their societies. The only homosexual relationship that was accepted was between an adult male and a male adolescent. This relationship was to be temporary, as the youth was expected to get married and start a family as soon as he reached maturity. The idea that someone was a “homosexual” for life or had this feature as a permanent identity would have struck them as more than odd. In other words, “homosexuality”, for which a word in Greek did not exist at the time (or in any other language until the late 19th century), was purely transitory. It appears that many of these mentoring relationships in ancient Gree

Image via Wikipedia Author Elodie Ballantine Emig Romans 1:26,27 is perhaps the most difficult passage in the Bible for pro-gay, revisionist theologians.  Not only does it appear to condemn male homosexuality, but lesbianism as well. So too, revisionists cannot dismiss it as being part of the Old Testament Law, subsequently fulfilled in Christ. Nor can they write it off as part of a “vice list” which Paul may have borrowed and with which he may not have been in entire agreement.  Taken at face value, in Romans 1 we find Paul’s pronouncement that homosexuality is both shameful and unnatural. Before we examine the revisionist reactions to and interactions with the passage, however, we must turn to introductory matters. It is useful to know that Paul had not planted the church in Rome. Although he knew some of the Roman Christians (see chapter 16), he did not have the intimate relationship with them that he had with the recipients of his other letters.  Romans is the least occasional of

Image by Getty Images via @daylife Homosexualist Irish presidential hopeful David Norris is fighting to maintain his candidacy amidst even more revelations that he supports “classical pedophilia ” and opposes any law specifying an age of consent for sex . On its front page yesterday, the Irish Daily Mail ran the headline, “I don’t believe in an age of consent,” and said that Norris had given an interview last year in which he said (in the words of the paper) that “prostitution and all drugs should be legalised,” and “he was pro-abortion and advocated pederasty.” “And in the shockingly frank interview that raises serious questions about his suitability for the presidency,” the paper continues, “he said: I don’t believe in an age of consent.” Norris has responded in a letter, asking his supporters not to judge him according to “a couple of sensationalist headlines,” and saying that he abhors child abuse and that all perpetrators should face “the full rigours of the law.” In the l