GAY TRUTH

Does the Creation account of Genesis 1 preclude homosexuality when it presents God ’s design for the creation of man and woman in the “image and likeness” of God? The Revisionist Answer The Creation account is concerned solely with reproduction—multiplying and filling the earth. The design of the creation of human beings does not inherently oppose homosexuality as an identity for some people. The Biblical Answer Genesis 1:26–30 testifies that man and woman were made complementarily for each other; together they were made for God and form the image of God. Only the couple, man and woman together, reflects the totality of this divine image. A homosexual couple mirrors only themselves, two males or two females who come together. Does the account of the purpose and plan for marriage in Genesis 2 exclude a homosexual relationship? The Revisionist Answer The purpose of the account of the making of a woman for man is to empower the reproduction and preservation of the sp

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

The Bible says nothing specifically about the homosexual condition (despite the rather misleading RSV translation of 1 Cor. 6:9), but its condemnations of homosexual conduct are explicit. The scope of these strictures must, however, be carefully determined. Too often they have been used as tools of a homophobic polemic which has claimed too much. The exegesis of the Sodom and Gibeah stories (Gn. 19:1–25; Jdg. 19:13–20:48) is a good case in point. We must resist D. S. Bailey’s widely-quoted claim that the sin God punished on these occasions was a breach of hospitality etiquette without sexual overtones (it fails to explain adequately both the double usage of the word ‘know’ (yāḏa‘) and the reason behind the substitutionary offer of Lot’s daughters and the Levite’s concubine); but neither account amounts to a wholesale condemnation of all homosexual acts. On both occasions the sin condemned was attempted homosexual rape, not a caring homosexual relationship between consenting part

Homosexual activists are pressuring the federal Liberal government for new demands.  These include, among others:  Apologizing to homosexuals who were convicted of the criminal offence of gross indecency for committing homosexual acts ;  Apologizing to homosexuals who were dismissed from the public service or discharged from the military because of their homosexual acts; and  Awarding compensation for the above reasons.  This would involve individual compensation and/or funding for programs or services.  Alleged discrimination towards homosexuals in Canada , however, can be clearly distinguished from the treatment shown other groups. There is a long list of discriminatory policies by previous governments, for which the Canadian government has since apologized.  For example, some groups were denied admission to Canada and even if a few were admitted, they were denied full citizenship rights.  To cite some examples:  The Chinese Head Tax of $5

The Western Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church consecrated a married lesbian bishop in a move that could split the denomination. Greater Northwest Episcopal Area Bishop Grant Hagiya claims the Holy Spirit led the move that the church bylaws expressly forbid - this fulfills the requirement of blasphemy "We understand there may be some political implications, but in our mind this was the best person. It was not a question of (sexual) orientation, it was a question of who was the best spiritual leader. The body spoke and said 'Yes, this is the one.' " Hagiya said . Yet the denomination's Book of Discipline cites "self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in The United Methodist Church." "The Wesleyan Covenant Association (a group of evangelical and conservative pastors) is meeting in Chicago in the fall to decide the future and if they'll form a brand-new