GAY TRUTH

To answer this question we go back to the  Reformation . One of the great affirmations about Scripture made by the Reformers is what is known as the perspicuity of Scripture , which is another way of talking about the clarity of Scripture . Scripture continually speaks in such a manner that clarifies issues, not obscures them. The reality in a sinful world is that our understanding is often unclear even where Scripture is clear. The Reformers pointed to the clarity of Scripture in order to affirm that any Christian who opened the Bible heard the word of God and faced the decision to obey or disobey. That was true when the church received the New Testament and when the Reformers asserted the principle, and it remains true now. If people who affirm the truthfulness of Scripture cannot come to a consensus on the issue of homosexual marriage , same sex unions, same love - the problem is not in Scripture-it is in a failure to rightly understand and obey it. Related articles ...

We can " agree to disagree " in the sense that the issue is likely destined to be one of lasting disagreement. If we are committed to Scripture, human flourishing , the gospel, and love of neighbor, however, then an issue of this magnitude compels us to plead with and attempt to persuade those who will face the eternal wrath of God if they do not abandon their sin for Jesus .  Our greatest responsibility is to point sinners to the cross of Christ and the promise of salvation for all who believe. Those with common sense on both sides of the issue reject the suggestion that there can be a third way or that some kind of neutral ground can be reached. There are many issues- same-sex marriage and homosexuality central among them-on which the answer eventually must be a yes or no. Every single church must eventually accept or reject the legitimacy of same-sex marriage. Every congregation, Christian institution, and religious organization will eventually have to make a d...

It is deeply unjust to take away the human rights of the majority to enjoy their cherished, cultural and religious institution of exclusive heterosexual marriage , simply so that homosexual elites can marry instead of enjoying substantially the same legal rights as partners in a homosexual civil union. Forcing such change without a referendum is deeply undemocratic. Vilifying those who oppose this as bigots or homophobes is unfair and divisive. But the affirmative action elite are not democrats. They can only be defeated by demolishing their fake arguments about discrimination. It is hypocrisy for homosexuals to argue that denying them marriage makes them victims of inequality when they themselves demand inequality when requesting affirmative action, or exclusively homosexual services, as they do. Civil union legislation acknowledges homosexual identity by providing an exclusive cultural institution for homosexual while leaving heterosexuals with their own, making both groups e...