When the Bible does not promote or condone, then what?

[micatala]

This thread is prompted by the often-made statement.

I have asked you to provide any evidence "from the Bible" (since you have offered that you are a priest), where sodomy/perderasty-homosexuality-Gay, is celebrated, supported, condoned, promoted, or preached as acceptable, anywhere in the New Testament

The implication is that, since the Bible nowhere promotes, condones, or 'celebrates' homosexuality, this is further indication it should be condemned.

Question for debate:

Is this a valid conclusion?

Are there other examples of behaviors, views, etc. that are not promoted, condoned, or celebrated in the Bible, but that Christians typically do not condemn?

[otseng]

Please avoid making comments about other posters. Please stay on the topic and do not discuss the character, the intentions, or the actions of others. Thanks.

[1John2_26]

Quote:

You do realize that that is hateful; if directed to people that do not believe in the Bible and/or the God of the Bible? How do you present to a fool, his or her foolishness, without insult?

Most fools are not stupid. And many may indeed be hiding evil behind foolishness, may they not?

It is not an easy task contending for the faith. Condoning what the Bible presents.


This is much like radical Islam - you aren't Christian enough for me so you deserve to burn in hell?

I just defend against lies. That is all. Read 1 John 2:26. The author of that letter was giving good advice. Comparing Muslims to Christians is not a sensible thing to do. Look at your newspapaer or CNN. Baptists don't shell neighborhoods for their religious perspectives.

How do you seek to save the lost? By throwing explosives into thier windows.

Truth hits like thunder. I present rebuttals to bogus anti-Christian diatribe. The Bibloe condones defeding against attacks. It isn't a pretty thing to take out the garbage when the bag is leaking out things that do not want to be thrown out.

I understand fully that some consider what I say hate speach - yet I come to them with compassion and try to convict them of the sin in their heart.

No matter how much suger you put on the words: "you are wrong," the taste is always bitter. I left the world of consuming bitter things long ago.

Christians have the right to hold to the truth, but the people that know they are being challenged by Christianity are no longer willing to be nice to Christians. As if they ever were.

I cannot save anyone...only Christ can do that - but when you attck someone I can promise you they WILL NOT be converted PERIOD!

Christ Jesus did not tell the disciples to try to save people that refuse to listen to the Gospel. My position is to protect believers from the bad guys. From those that are wrong. I am not an evangelist. It is far past time to show Christians we are being attacked by people that assert they are not attacking us. What else should we expect from liars? What does the Bible support us to do?

Ya know, Al Qaeda hates infadels too, but the they think they have to fight God's battles for Him (and I'm not getting into the is Allah the same as YHWH discussion) so they say convert or die..and I hazard to say your postings come off as very near that sentiment.

Allah, was a desert god before Mohammad was born. Yhwh was Israel's God before Mecca was conquered by the sword of Allah (Mohammad attacking the people of Mecca). Hiding from truth is not healthy.

Righteous indignation is one thing but bitterness affects your own soul.

Well said. Hold on a minute, I gotta finish singing along with this DC Talk tune.

OK. Righteous indignation is what is being aimed AT Christians by secularists (and the club). Your compass needs to be recalibrated.

Christians have not change the Gospel to include witchcraft. "Do what thou wilt," is not part of repentance, or can it bring forgiveness. Just AIDS and other unseemly consequences.

I would counsel you to realize that you are telling me it's a catch 22 - "if you believe you will believe, if you don't you won't end of story".....I choose to preach the gospel with a contrite heart, hoping to - with the use of the law - convict someone of their transgressions and touch their conscience so that they may realize their need.

I choose to "touch people's conscience" in another Gospel way. My contrite heart is not for the consumption of anti-Christ's. Not until I am called to do so. Right now I just stick with Biblical truth.

I am not a seeker sensitive "you have a God size hole in your heart", "only Jesus can make you happy" false convert - what blinds a person is their pride pure and simple.

Good point. That is why I stick with facts and Biblical textst uncorrupted. Keeps me away from pride and inventing my own religion. But I do give that right to anti-Christians.

I don't remember the Sower parable explaining the gospel must be beaten into anyone.

Ground does not get prepared for seeds without driving a hole in the soil. Tossing seeds around only gets a limited harvest. Re-read the parable.

Fact is, the precious gospel of Salvation through Christ shouldn't even be delivered to the haughty and prideful because the message of the cross is foolishness to those who aren't being saved . . .

The haughty? The prideful? Those are the people I contend against.

- only to those who will see themselves the way God sees them should receive the good news.

Not "should" but "will."

God Bless You

Only the God of Abraham, Isaac "and Jacob (Israel)" can do that. Just for the record. Jesus was quoted as claiming to be that God.
_________________

Prophecy in the news http://www.BIRSCO.com Though you choose not to believe in fire, will it not still burn. Proverbs 1:7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

What to do with the fools, when they are the leadership of your secular education system? Any suggestions?

[1John2_26]

1John2_26

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:

Quote:
How many people destined for hell?

None, hell does not exist, neither does heaven, you conciousness ends with your bodies death, there is no "pie in the sky, you'll get yours when you die, bye and bye"

And you are asking a Christian (a homosexual?) to join up with your opinions. Amazing. Typical of the club memebrs of homogenized diversity. But still, amazing to behold.

Mel does not necessarily agree with me about all things(that's the trouble with lumping), but we do hold simular views of what Jesus taught about the way we should treat others(including the poisonous things we say about them).

Do what thou wilt? Or: "Go and sin no more?" Houston we have a problem.

I lump those together that have no lines seperating them. You know very well the allies gathering against the Christian body of believers. I have posted so many different anti-Christian groups as to have the right to lump them all together.

Also working together with anti-Christians is not condoned in the Bible. Unequally yoked is the term used. It is good advice. How many children would not be molested by religious leaders if good Christians put that advice into practice?

Light cannot share in darkness. It can only lead those in darkness out of it. Allowing darkness to claim it is light can only weaken the brightness of the beacon calling those in darkness to a better eternal destiny.

Remember, Pascal's wager is a bit offensive to Gospel advice. You either are, or you are not, "with" Christ.

Let's see a few quotes that fits that assertion shall we?

And wide is the clubmembership of anti-Christians. Usama Bin Laden and Richard Dawkins. Like blood brothers opposing Bible-believers. I can't wait 'til they faceoff. I'm betting the house Dawkin's won't be so loud.

But anyway, back to what the Bible "does" condone.

Matthew 7

1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

6"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

7"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.

9"Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone?

10Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

13"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.

14But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

15"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.

18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.

19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

24"Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.

25The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock.

26But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand.

27The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash."

28When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, 29because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law.

If you speak to or of others as you would to Jesus himself, then you can claim to be a Christian and have a chance of being believed.

Please, for the sake of your eternal sould and spirit, accept Christ Jesus as you Lord and Savior. He is God who created you.

Why is it, I feel my pearls will get smashed into the mud? Yet, I have never ceased in presenting the ONLY way to God, the way it is presented in the Gospel. I just do it in a way that Anti-Christians thought they silenced long ago with the immorality inherent in the ambiguity and senseless relativism as the only truth on earth. I am commited to oppose those kind of people. I see know difference in them and Al Queada. They both mean to rid the world of Christians.

Jesus left us with a Gospel so effective, as to live like a being a light itslef. How do you finally get around to telling a person they must change because they are wrong on what they are doing and what they believe? And that message comes with allowing people to reject it and live out their lives in that condition.

Quote:
I should cut and past but here we go: Atheists, secularists, humanists, liberals, progressives, gays, lesbains, universalists, agnostics, neo-liberal theologians, Democrats . . . et al. (For obvious reasons.)

I'm not getting you, Al.

Obviously Grumpy/Cathar1950/Melikio, that is not a truthful position for you to present. C'mon man, keep the gloves off. I am a big boy and have shown I can take what you dish out. Let us stand in our opposing camps. You are smart enough to know I make sense in connecting all of those kinds of people as being one entity.

What should be(or is)obvious about all the fine, moral people in all the good groups you've listed above???(about half the country, from a rough estimate)

Fine moral gruops? I disagree. See how easy that was?

Abortion is horror unimagined by only those that will not look at what and who is being terminated. Marriage is only a man and a woman. Always has been. family is husband-wife-children. Homosexuality is obviously a mental disorder. Using human embryo's as medicine is is just about completely satanic (evil theory put into reality). Farming unborn human beings for products. Taking large sums money by force of law, from honest people to pay for everyone and everything else . . ..

Soylent Green IS PEOPLE! 1984.

Art imitating satanism.

I'm betting I hit on things that all of your cliubmembers agree on.

The Bible does not condone joining the enemies of God.

Grumpy, we can stay in our camps and live out our lives in peace.

And let's face it; when the winds come and the disasters happen, you'd better hope there are still Christians around to feed, clothe and shelter the victims in Churches not taxed out of existence.

We saw with Katrina, what the secular (government) reponse was. Nothing.

Well, the Kristal Champagne that was purchased with tax funded vouchers, I guess "was" something.

The Bible does not condone or support the worshippers of God to be involved with the other peoples and their ways. How many Kings of Israel as reported; followed after the destestable practices of those surrounding the people of God?

Now, I see more clearly every single day, why the need to define those who are, and those who are not, followers of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and "Jacob."

("Jacob" was re-named "Israel." By God. Just for the "Biblical" record.)

[melikio]

Do what thou wilt? Or: "Go and sin no more?" Houston we have a problem.

1John: When are YOU going to STOP SINNING? (Answer that, mean it... and most importantly PROVE that you are and will be as "compliant" as you let on; perhaps then, you may have the impact upon others that you imagine you do, by throwing your "religion" around).

A clear view of the root cause of many "religious" arguments, stems from the reality that the Bible is NOT interpreted, revered or followed in the same way by ALL human beings. The same could be said for Islam, Judaism or other religions.

The problem is not the "labels" we employ, it is the manner in which the various labels and/or religious "devices" are applied to the lives of those who receive and distribute those things they accept as "truth".

Clearly, the dividing line between reasonably enough and too far, can be practically dilineated by regading the point at which certain individuals are poised to control others, AND the degree to which such "controllers" actually act to affect others.

We already know that the "Bible" as a document defining right/wrong, isn't as "absolute" as some desire for others to believe. And thoat doesn't mean it's an evil book or something to be avoided, but I am addressing the reality that not ALL who use the "Bible" or any other religious or philosophical texts, are necessarily people who can or should be believed or trusted. I'm practically certain that we have little or no idea of the number of truly "honest" misinterpretations of the "Bible" (or other writings) truly exist.

And thus, that is why there are generally REAL and VALID questions about the Bible (also other books) and how they should be applied in this reality. The problem then, is actually what I mentioned above, the intentions of and degrees to which some individuals actually act to impose such writings (or beliefs derived from the same) upon others on this planet.

In the hands of specific groups or individuals, the "Bible" can take on the characteristics of the handler/s; that is undebatable. If someone is a JERK as a person, the practical effect of their "biblical" interpretation and application, is likely to reflect who they are inside of themselves. And I think that is the PRIMARY aspect of humans and religion which Jesus was addressing from the womb to the tomb. He hardly came to mount one of the MOST OPPRESSIVE (and ineffective) campaigns against "homosexuality" the world have ever sustained (as some believers have tended to assert in this present era).

So, as "anti-Christian" as this may seem to some, what I'm really advocating for is something which will truly guard religious freedom (in the end). I don't know how long it would take, but there is only a matter of time between now and the point where certain mindsets and (imposing) actions will ultimately cause religion to become more negative and irrelevant to many people who are watching (paying attention) and asking "real" questions about all things that can be known.

One thing I cannot discount is the "spiritual" aspects of religion; I can only hope that what most people view or accept as good ("love" being most meaningful and important to me) , are truly the things which prevail.

These are many of the things which life has taught me; I didn't grab them from a book or some interpretation of it. My view (not assumed to be absolute "truth") is based upon living what has been said (Chrisianity, secular effects, knowledge garnered through experience). Not that it's intended to supercede what another may "believe", but that it is a part of how I view religion along with everything else. It's NOT 100% "Bible", but I've never agreed within myself, that I could ever sustain such a worldview, and for some other "religious" person (or group) to impose their exclusive perceptions or worldview upon myself or others who possess the same, is a significant part of the major problems for people, which surely stem from "religion" itself.

-Mel-

[micatala]

And wide is the clubmembership of anti-Christians. Usama Bin Laden and Richard Dawkins. Like blood brothers opposing Bible-believers.

You continue to be the pot calling the kettle black. I don't understand how you cannot perceive the disconnect between claiming you do not 'lump people together' and statements like this. It seems you make assertions without any basis in empirical fact or without even consulting a dictionary.

Yes, Bin Laden and Dawkins could both be said to have anti-Christian views. But to imply that they are 'a club' and are somehow 'blood brothers' working inc concert is truly ridiculous.

Following this same grossly over-simplified generalizing logic, we could say that Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell, Adolf Hitler, and Joseph Stalin are all part of the same club because they are all 'anti-liberal'. ONe could certainly easily include others in this same 'club'.

[micatala]

I also note we seem to have gotten far off topic. Here is a reminder.

is thread is prompted by the often-made statement.

Quote:
I have asked you to provide any evidence "from the Bible" (since you have offered that you are a priest), where sodomy/perderasty-homosexuality-Gay, is celebrated, supported, condoned, promoted, or preached as acceptable, anywhere in the New Testament


The implication is that, since the Bible nowhere promotes, condones, or 'celebrates' homosexuality, this is further indication it should be condemned.

Question for debate:

Is this a valid conclusion?

Are there other examples of behaviors, views, etc. that are not promoted, condoned, or celebrated in the Bible, but that Christians typically do not condemn?

So far, we have seen a number of responses to the second question. The discussion on these examples seems to imply that the answer to the first question is 'no' or at least 'not necessarily'.

Many of the examples (e.g. sex with menstruating women, women cutting their hair and men not), are not condemned by Christians, and although some may follow the precepts against these practices, no one that I recall has claimed that they must be followed. They are simply 'good ideas' that most 'sensible people' probably will do anyway, but if a person chooses not to follow these, that is fine as well.

It has even been suggested that following some of these precepts is only a good idea in certain circumstances. For example, 1John claimed the hair-cutting precept might have been in response to homosexual influences in the community which Paul was addressing in that particular letter (although he presented no evidence that this was Paul's intention).


At any rate, let's stick to the topic.

[1John2_26]

It has even been suggested that following some of these precepts is only a good idea in certain circumstances. For example, 1John claimed the hair-cutting precept might have been in response to homosexual influences in the community which Paul was addressing in that particular letter (although he presented no evidence that this was Paul's intention).

I used Biblical texts as evidence. This is a Christian debate.

There has never been even a shred of evidence for the atagonistic crowd to prove that same-gender sex acts and same-gender unions "can" be equated to slavery and hair length.

There is no silence on the issue of homosexuality in the Gospel and the letters. Marriage is a man and a woman. There is also no reason to alter this. In fact the way Jesus describes the joining of mand and woman is immutable.

It is only on comparing "other things" that western society has loosed or licensed do we arrive at the satatnic goal of total altering of the family.

There is right and wrong. The adversaries of Christians need to prove "with" supporting text that same-gender sex is valid for followers of God.

They cannot.

They can only present interpretations that cross over from "opinion" to ulterior motive.

You never hear a word about the condemnation of the promoiscuity and lascivious licentiousness that literally defines the gay and lesbian culture.

Sinners look to change their ways. Homosexuals demand to have their culture thrust into Christian definition. Marriage is similarly supported by the world's civilizations past and present. The intolerant ones want to force everyone to alter truth for them.

That can only happen by altering and changing the behavior and going in another direction. Not, by coming up with slick new ways to force an impossible new ideology into Biblical truth.

Let's look at a liberal view:

And of course this is the final act of those who would rather not have to think.

The Bible shows clearly a developing picture of God from that of a tribal God among many to acknowledgement of God as being the all in all. This, however, required human-beings to use their minds as God intended them to be used but all along the way there have been those whose response was to call the thinkers cursed, infidels, dis-believers.

And the New Testament, when we use our minds instead of our emotional stress to drive our thinking, paints a picture of leaving homosexual sex and coming out of that kind of world. Paul, Peter, Jude, James, John, make that more than clear. Paul from Romans, and the other writers, do not proclaim any support for the altering of marriage and family. They offer a way out for those practing detestable acts.

I am happy to be included among those cursed dis-believers who would not accept that slavery was acceptable despite the cries of the 'Bible-believers",

And when the passion of emotions died down, it was in keeping with orthodoxy to free African people that were kidnapped into slavery and sold like animals. Though I find it odd that the same poeple that agree with ending slavery pretend they do not like war.

It was the gun; Christian's killing people that would not change and enslaved and murdered others, that ended slavery. (Remember that in the upcoming wprold-war with Islamists.)

I am proud to be among those who extended the rights of full citizenship to people of colour over the cries of the conservatives.

That is a statement forcing a concept where it does not fit. Biblical slavery and kidnapping Africans and forcing them to be products, have little in common. That is if we use our brains.

Note that people in America and New Zealand are free to do whatever sexual things they want to so with each other. Adult people one would hope. New slaveowners want to make children sex objects. Literally. We must use our minds when loosing sexual deviance on the world. Once every sensible thought is destroyed for emotion political power, there are no more rules. We arrive at "do what thou wilt . . ." Not a Christian concept "if" we use our brains and read the New Testament correctly.

My country was the first to give women the vote even though the Bible-believing christians asserted it would destroy the very fabric of society.

New Zealand seemed to have been filled with very Bible-believing people. Once upon a time. Following the advice of Paul on slaves, Christians would see the need to free them and love them as brothers and sisters. That is using the orthodoxy within the Bible on the subject. Using your brains that is. There is no rational reason to alter marriage and morality for sexual deviance to rise to the level of accetability for "Christians." We are to help free people from the bondage od lust and perversions. We literally see that logic in those addicted to porn and negative self-harming behaviors. What's next heroin dealers as priests?

Likewise I see in the movement to acceptance of GLBT folk the work of God's most Holy and life-giving Spirit.

Though it would contradict the words inspired by God to Paul and every other wroter of the New Testament. Including Christ Jesus. There is no rational way to equate open rebellion to repenting and converting people to salvation in Christ.

Like my Lord before me here I stand, I can do none other.

Jesus was quoted as saying:

15"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

16"You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they?

17"So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.

18"A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit.

19"Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

20"So then, you will know them by their fruits.

21"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

22"Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'

23"And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'

Kiwimac

How do we equate lawlessness with following the word of God? Where is the holiness of a life lived in open rebellion? There is a healthiness to examining what people say with what the actually do, or license.

I found the following here: http://www.wyattnewsletters.com/Ron/lord.htm. I like the way this is worded.

Is it possible that there are those who appear to be doing the Lord's work that are actually NOT of Him? The Word of God not only says its possible, It says it WILL happen:

Christ asked a very appropriate question of his disciples:

LUK 18:8 When the son of man cometh shall he find faith on the earth?

Why would He ask this? Then, Paul gives the warning:

2TI 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Christ should have the last word on any subject. Here is that word:

MAT 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, THEY SHALL DECEIVE THE VERY ELECT. 25 Behold, I have told you before.


2CO 11:13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

Today is the time of the greatest battle of all time- not a physical battle, but a battle with the unseen. Time is soon to be over and if we are alive when Christ comes again, we will have taken part in the battle which vindicates God's government. But in order to fight successfully, we must have the "sword" and the "armor".

EPH 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. 13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. 14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; 15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; 16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. 17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

Paul's letter to the Corinthians says that Satan's ministers will be transformed, or appear to be, "ministers of righteousness". There is grave danger in allowing ANYONE to "feed" you their version of the Gospel.

This is not to say that some are not Godly men, led by the Holy Spirit. But today, you CANNOT tell the "good from the bad" without examining every word that comes out of their mouths, as well as examining the example of their lives. 99% truth is NOT good enough. God's Truth includes EVERY WORD in the Bible, not just the portions various preachers are fondest of. The danger we are all facing is very real- without our OWN knowledge of the Truth as revealed in the Bible, we are in danger of believing lies and Satan's deceptions.

He has already gotten some of his insidious "interpretations" of what Scriptures "really" mean accepted by a large amount of people.

[micatala]

It has even been suggested that following some of these precepts is only a good idea in certain circumstances. For example, 1John claimed the hair-cutting precept might have been in response to homosexual influences in the community which Paul was addressing in that particular letter (although he presented no evidence that this was Paul's intention).

I used Biblical texts as evidence. This is a Christian debate.

I have also used Biblical texts as evidence.

What evidence is there in the Biblical text that Paul's hair-cutting admonition had anything to do with homosexuality, as you implied?

There has never been even a shred of evidence for the atagonistic crowd to prove that same-gender sex acts and same-gender unions "can" be equated to slavery and hair length.

I don't see anyone has 'equated' these. It has simply been noted that the Bible condones slavery and does not condone women wearing short hair and men wearing long hair. It has been noted that modern Christians are fine with prohibiting slavery and fine with any length of hair for anyone. It is clear that some modern Christians are inconsistent in applying Biblical precepts and admonitions. The evidence is irrefutable.

There is no silence on the issue of homosexuality in the Gospel and the letters.

The gospels do not mention homosexuality, so they are silent on the issue.

It has been noted that Paul's letters are at best ambiguous on what is meant by homosexuality and whether it is a sin or not in all cases. I and others have used Biblical evidence to support this position. It would be incorrect to say that the NT unambiguously supports your position.

Marriage is a man and a woman. There is also no reason to alter this.

In your opinion.

In fact the way Jesus describes the joining of mand and woman is immutable

Again, in your opinion. The fact that Jesus discusses heterosexual marriages does not imply, by His silence, that he would not condone any homosexual marriages. You are making a big assumption in asserting this.

I would allow that you could make the case that heterosexual marriage is more 'natural.' However, as has been repeatedly shown, an act being unnatural does not make it immoral.

There is right and wrong.

Agreed.

The adversaries of Christians need to prove "with" supporting text that same-gender sex is valid for followers of God.

First off, it is not only the adversaries of Christians that believe same-gender sex might be valid for followers of God. Many Christians would hold that same-gender sex can be considered moral at least in some circumstances. Heterosexual sex is also moral in some circumstances, and immoral in others, according to most Christians.

Secondly, why should those who believe homosexuals should be allowed the same sexual freedoms as heterosexual Christians have to prove anything to anyone?

Can you find me Biblical support which proves it is OK for people to wear glasses, massage their spouses foot with their own, use a computer, fly an airplane, chew gum, do crossword puzzles, engage in sex for the sole purpose of pleasure without any intention or possibility of procreation?

When you can provide such evidence, then it might be appropriate for us to consider whether proof is necessary for same gender-sex to be considered moral in some circumstances.

The Bible clearly allows each believer to have their own relationship with God, and to weigh in their own conscience what is sinful and what is not sinful within this relationship. This is why it is OK for Christians not to follow all the OT dietary laws, etc., why it is OK for women to wear buzz cuts and men to wear long hair, why it is OK for Christians to engage in a whole host of practices which are either not mentioned or even which are explicitly spoken against in the Bible, as long as they in faith and good conscience in communion with the Lord are assured by faith that they are acting properly. In such a circumstance, the Bible clearly says it is not up to other believers to judge.

The burden is on those who claim that believers who are homosexual cannot ever engage in same-gender sex and be considered in right standing with God to provide proof.

[melikio]

I used Biblical texts as evidence. This is a Christian debate.

Those "texts" aren't absolute "evidence" to everyone, 1John; and that goes without a pointed examination of your personal interpretations of such texts.

And no, this is not exclusively a "Christian" debate (as you might tend to define "Christian", or wish it to be). The perspectives and concerns of many (besides Christians) are expressed here (just as reality reflects here).

Honestly, I've seen most Christians define things very "narrowly" overall. Many are apt to quickly tell you it's their way, or the highway.

Here on this site, reasonable and respectful criticism of "Christians" and "Christianity" are allowed period; in a strictly "Christian debate", such is rarely allowed (which imho ultimately stifles that which can be learned).

No, this IS NOT an exclusively "Christian debate" (as I believe you are imagining it to be). It is a discussion by many, who are approaching things from other than a purely "Christian" point of view. And so it goes with this website; it allows most any perspective upon Christianity, whether it's coming from the "Bible" or other source.

The discussion contains the perspectives of "Chrisitian" from various biblical and other social perspectives, but I have seen nothing in the topic or the rules of this forum, which limit the discussion to a strictly "Christian" perspective (which isn't ALWAYS the only way to see reality).

-Mel-

[McCulloch]

I used Biblical texts as evidence. This is a Christian debate.

There has never been even a shred of evidence for the atagonistic crowd to prove that same-gender sex acts and same-gender unions "can" be equated to slavery and hair length.

The point, in case you missed it, is that the Bible seems to dictate both the appropriate gender for sex acts and correct hair length based on gender. One is deemed critically important to Christians and the other is virtually ignored.

You never hear a word about the condemnation of the promoiscuity and lascivious licentiousness that literally defines the gay and lesbian culture.

Do the Christians equally condemn the promiscuity and lascivious licentiousness of certain heterosexuals? Do Christians withhold their condemnation from monogamous and dignified gay people?

This is not to say that some are not Godly men, led by the Holy Spirit. But today, you CANNOT tell the "good from the bad" without examining every word that comes out of their mouths, as well as examining the example of their lives. 99% truth is NOT good enough. God's Truth includes EVERY WORD in the Bible, not just the portions various preachers are fondest of. The danger we are all facing is very real- without our OWN knowledge of the Truth as revealed in the Bible, we are in danger of believing lies and Satan's deceptions.

He has already gotten some of his insidious "interpretations" of what Scriptures "really" mean accepted by a large amount of people.

Emphasis added.
Ron Wyatt seems to get the point. Why are Christians rejecting homosexuals from their congregations when they accept women with short hair and gold jewelry? Why do they reject a man who is married to another man but accept a man who is living as husband with a woman who is, according to Jesus, still married to another man?