The crease the number of visible gay and trans people is sometim treated as a cursy or a e for ncern by crics, but ’s not a surprise. It’s normal.
Contents:
DO ANCIENT ART OM POMPEII PROVE THE BIBLE SUPPORTS GAY “MARRIAGE”?
” The piec of explic artwork supposedly provi the ntext to show that the New Ttament is “nmng the abive and exploative sexual activy mon the world that Pl’s recipients lived ” rather than forbiddg “fahful gay relatnships” among Christians.
Let’s start wh his ma pot—the ia that an unrstandg of the sexual and even homosexual promiscuy and ab of the era show that Pl wasn’t nmng fahful, lovg gay relatnships, but was stead exclively nmng sexual ab. If Pl was ed only nmng promiscuo and abive gay relatnships, for example Romans 1 (the text Chalke referenc), why was he not more clear about that? Nowhere the text do Pl specify that those are the exact kd of gay relatnships—and the only kd of gay relatnships—he is referencg.
It’s worth notg that, if Chalke is right, Christians have misunrstood the text for 2, 000 years and now are properly terpretg what Pl meant when—and only when—the culture is urgg the church to accept gay “marriage” and homosexual behavr. It’s much more likely that Chalke and others who ndone homosexual behavr are readg their ias to the text and makg say what they want to say. It’s pretty difficult to argue that when God says, “You shall not lie wh a male as wh a woman; is an abomatn” (Levic 18:22) he actually means that only abive or promiscuo gay relatnships are an abomatn to him.