Quote:I do not recall many of Jesus's famous sermons where he goes at homosexuals. Given his track record in the Bible, he would be more likely to welcome them into the flock than anything else. He does so with prostitutes and others that have been outcast or committed sins.
Quote:He welcomed people into his flock if they changed their ways and joined him. You horribly misrepresent his mingling with sinners that, instead of building a bridge for them to walk over and join, he was pardoning their behaviors to continue as they were. That's just not true.
Is that why he offered aid to sinners or outcasts with no "do this or else"? Seems to me, he did the right thing and then offered them something.
And no I am not, your position is that the people have a right to toss these people aside if they do not agree with them. That is not what Jesus would do. Nor is it what scripture even says.
All sins are forgiven through Jesus. And Jesus also made clear that the judge was God of people's sins. Very clear. So, if a person is judging somebody else's sins and sinful themselves than they are just as guilty in the first place.
I am sorry, but that is flat out what is stated. You do not have to like it.
Quote:It is in there but there are a number of things condemned that modern Christians do not pay much mind to, what makes homosexuality special then?
Quote:It's not. I grew up attending church and I can tell you, I've never heard a sermon devoted to homosexuality once. In fact, homosexuality was hardly mentioned as it was just assumed that everyone knew what the Bible's position was.
Quote:There's something you just don't get and I'll give you a perfect analogy. Any church will accept a drunkard into their fold, but if that drunkard is always coming to church with alcohol on his breath and saying there's nothing wrong with being a drunkard - it's his lifestyle choice - he will not remain a church member for long. If, on the other hand, he struggles with drunkenness but rejects it's okay and tries to refrain, the church wouldn't dismiss him but pray and work with him continuously.
Quote:You see, you act like homosexuality has some big X on its back but that's just not the case. You ignore other scenarios where a church would have a problem accepting an unrepentant member into its fold. It's just that these situations aren't as common/newsworthy.
Is that why religious conservatives so often demand the right to treat homosexuals different than other people? It seems like they are picked out, both by you and people in your mindset.
If what you are saying in the other parts is true, than why would Christians basically look for a right to treat gays differently? The whole point would be not to give up on somebody, not to toss them away when it becomes easiest for you.
Which is what this largely boils down to. Christians pointing this sort of thing are focusing on small sections of the Bible that are fairly unimportant in the general context. All the while ignoring similarly worded things that they find ridiculous.
So, like I said a ways up, they are being hypocritical and selective in their theology.
Hardly seems that Jesus would turn his knows up at gay people and treat them as less than people either. Particularly a characteristic that he apparently created to begin with.
Also keep in mind, people are determining absolute truth out of a book written at least second hand a long time after Jesus died and the writings are not consistent with one another in the first place. Even in major aspects of Jesus's life. Not a theological argument but one that makes the any individual messages less important than the overall theme of Jesus.
Forgiveness of God. Whatever the views of the writer would seep in and they do. There is also reason that certain books are considered cannon and not others. They supported the position of church leaders or those in power at the time.
Not really, Jesus was about accepting the person and helping them find God. If they were sinning, regardless of what it was, he posed a way out of it.
This could even be a mass murderer. Could kill hundreds over his life. So long as he sought forgiveness in the end than he would be good. So long as he really repents. Some Christian denominations require works but not others.
My response is clear. The Bible forbids numerous activities. And calls for the death penalty for some of them in modern interpretations. Why do conservative Christians only selectively read some things and not others, even when common language is used?
It is hypocritical. That is the long and short of it. They do mark an x on homosexuality. It is discussed in sermons and a key issue to the religious right that has disproportionate power. And it is what you hear many people discuss when they talk about faith.
One rarely hears much else. That could be because it is more hot button but there are six passages about homosexuality. Not even a term from that age. There are 3000 or more on poverty. There are hundreds about caring for widows.
Many of these same people would say it is up for a widow to take care of themselves. Hell, the Bible does a questionable job about even defining marriage in the first place.
In the US, they have the right to believe what they want, but that does not mean they are not hypocrites. And if they are inconsistent than they are using it as support for their preconceived notions in the first place.
You mock liberals for it all of the time. But ignore it for hypocrites that support your positions.