Aspen2,
You didn’t address a crucial point put to you, that on judgement day it might be too late if people could have been told same sex relations are a barrier to the Kingdom and weren’t. Wouldnt that be more of a problem for those who failed to tell rather than those who were not told?
You are mixing the secular with the Kingdom. All people are God’s creation, whether they acknowledge God or not. Democracy however gives people the right to express their views. It is democracy that allows Christians to put their pov, which is of course that homosexual ‘unions’ are error.
In the UK we have a compromise, marriage and civil partnerships, granting the same secular rights but recognising the two are anatomically opposite. Sadly the intent to call them equally marriage shows many have lost the plot and reality.
Show me one homosexual that does not know that conservative Christian doctrine condemns homosexual behavior and I will be the first to tell them. God gives everyone the freedom to be redeemed or not. He also give homosexuals the freedom to behave in any manner they choose to behave.
None of the points you made were correct. I dealt with each incorrect point in turn.
According to whom? How can you make a judgment about this when you head is in the sand? I cannot force you to look at history - it is up to you.
This is incorrect. Of the 4 gospel writers Luke almost certainly never witnessed Jesus firsthand, according to Paul, he, Paul did ( Galatians 1) What Paul preached he recieved from the risen Lord and not from men. Mark was probably aided in his gospel by Peter, whose epistle afirms Paul's teaching.
So your point is incorrect, Paul's writing is as much 'channelling' Jesus as anything else in the NT.
Once again, Jesus never directly mentioned anything about homosexuality. Paul only mentioned in in a long list of other worldly practices to make a larger point - as a Christian we need to reject the ways of the world. Even if your point is correct - that Paul was merely writing Jesus's message to the world directly - and you are most certainly not correct - it is irrelevant because Paul was condemning all practices of the world - the sins themselves were not the point.
Unless you can produce a verse, which contains the words "Jesus told the crowd" or "Jesus told the disciples" that equal homosexual partnerships / marriages are sinful and will result in damnation, you are wasting your time.
Which is irrelvant as pointed out before unless your point is anything Jesus didn't mention is acceptable. So is imprisoning gays ok with you, Jesus never said it wasnt?
My point is that Jesus never addressed the subject of homosexuality - that is it. I've never claimed anything more. I've also stated that homosexuality is a sin.
Besides, by affirming God's creation purpose of man and woman in faithful union, and indeed offering only celibacy (Matthew 19) did Jesus not directly exclude homosexuality?
Only if He also excludes couples who are infertile or unable to have children for other reasons.
Then you deny God and His word, your assesment of the Roman and Greek cultural views is widely accepted as correct, I didnt say it was wrong, what I pointed out was all cultures in the Bible where it occured, Genesis 19, Leviticus 18 & 20, Rome, Greece, are addressed to show the error of men with men instead of women.
How am I denying God and His Word? Because I do not believe people who reject the Bible should be forced to comply with it? God allows it - is He denying His word too?
Its not spin, its what the Bible says as opposed to what you are claiming.
It is the literal, conservative interpretation of the verses. Another mistake literalists make is with
Matthew 19:24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
Jesus is not talking about a camel passing through a sewing needle - even though it looks like the Bible is saying it clearly. He is talking about a city gate into Jerusalem called 'the needle', where camels had to get down on their knees and crawl through the gate. Knowing what Jesus is actually talking about means the difference between damnation and possible salvation for rich people! It is reckless and anti-intellectual to claim that the Bible clearly states whatever the most literal interpretation might look like.
By definition to be a believer one has to believe, and by definition of Christian belief it is the Biblical testimony. Nor did I say you werent a Christian, I said your views arent. Dont falsey accuse me of spin when its you doing all the spin.
So the Bible saves? According to that erroneous definition, how can I be viewed as a Christian if my views are not Christians and I reject the teaching of Paul?
The fact is, I believe the entire Bible is inspired from God (except the end of Mark 16, and the story of the stoning of the women). Jesus is my savior - He has justified me and He is sanctifying my soul to one day love unconditionally as a citizen of Heaven. Doctrine is a hobby - loving God and neighbor is what we are called to do as Christians.