This post is deeply misleading.
The Bible is not concerned about "pedophilia" as a concept. Mary was perhaps age 12 when she got pregnant, and in context that may have been when sexual experience, childbearing, etc., began for the average person. The Bible doesn't lay down a rule about the ideal age for sexual experience.
There is no argument that the affront of "arsenokoitai" is a violation of an age of consent or a reference to "pedophilia."
You made all of that up.
You say the Jennings/Liews idea of the Centurion and his "boy" being lovers hasn't "garnered much traction." This is laughably false. A once radical idea is now discussed in many scholarly papers and distributed to the average Christian readers. I'm unsure how much more successful it could've been.
You offer a (broken) link to Saddington, a homophobic paper that is a distant memory. Three later papers favor queer readings:
https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/28252/koepnick.pdf?sequence=1
https://www.academia.edu/26071695/The_Centurions_Servant_in_Jesus_Gospels_a_Queer_Love_Story
In the end, we learn that Jesus was surprised by a demonstration of love by a Centurion. That is the key term, not whether Jesus reads the men as having been sexual. He declines to investigate and put them on trial to probe their intimacies, perhaps to Christian dismay.
Are you claiming, by the way, that the Centurion is subject to Jewish law?—or that Jesus read Lev 18:22 in the Christian way?
You might look into the literature on that one.
