[Mrs. Don-o]

Ah, but here's the paradox: there are numerous groups calling themselves Christian which have reasoned on the basis of the Bible that

1. two men involved in a "covenant (sexual) relationship" are not acting "lawlessly", since they interpret the Biblical prohibitions as being against rape and Canaanite/Greek cultic practices only, and not against marriage-like "covenants" for people of the same sex, and/or
2. that one is not saved by one's own righteousness. but simply by accepting Jesus Christ as one's personal Savior.

They arrive at conclusion #1 by interpreting Scriptures independently of what Church Fathers have taught through the centuries (this they reject as mere "tradition"); and they arrive at conclusion #2 by saying Sola Fide--- faith only, relying on God's superabundant clemency, and independent of "works" and personal "righteousness."

Mouse around to "Gay Christian" websites like this one (Link), and you will see a host of arguments for the moral OKness of "gay marriage," many of them based on the assertion that such Greek NT words as arsenokoitai and malakoi do not refer to all same-sex relations per se, but only to temple prostitution, servile pederasty and the like.

You may want to jump up, arms waving, to tell me that this is all balderdash, but I know very well that it's balderdash. But that's because I am convinced that the correct interpretation of Scripture is securely established by (1) Sacred Tradition (the writings of the earliest Fathers of the Church) and (2) Natural Law, as interpreted by (3) the formal teaching authority of the successors of the Apostles.

Even highly intelligent and very faithful pastors cannot refute the "gay theology" people convincingly on the basis of Scripture alone.

Why? Because they can't exclude other, ostensibly "scholarly" interpretations.

The "gay" advocates are adept at using "Sola Scriptura," "Sola Gratia," and "Sola Christus" and "Sola Fides" theology to reach the conclusions they want.

I would love to be proved wrong about this.

Can you, or anybody, steer me to a website, say, where the gay exegetes are refuted point by point, and without reliance on Natural Law, Sacred Tradition, Magisterial authority, or any resources other than the Bible itself?

[HarleyD]

Can you, or anybody, steer me to a website, say, where the gay exegetes are refuted point by point, and without reliance on Natural Law, Sacred Tradition, Magisterial authority, or any resources other than the Bible itself?

How many do you want? Here's one:

Homosexuality: A Biblical Analysis By: Brian Schwertley

[ReformationFan]

I’ve only read some of his work but Dr. Robert Gagnon’s work would probably be a good place to start:

http://www.robgagnon.net/Index.html

I would have this question for those who try to say Scripture condones homosexual activity: would the original audience the books of the Bible were initially written for have believed homosexual behavior was acceptable from these documents?

[JCBreckenridge]

The actual text is best rendered as “sodomite” and “catamite”, “pitchers and catchers”.