Good Stuff
Allow me to point out, and endorse, the thoughts on the gay marriage debate shared by my buddy Lynn Sebourn. You can find them here.
JLH
JLH
posted by JeffreyH | 4:26 AM
About Me
- Name: JeffreyH
- Location: Huntsville, Alabama, United States
Married to the lovely and gracious Tanya. Two Sons: Levi and Aaron. One Basset Hound: Holly.
- Local Notes
- The Lincoln County Republican Party Announces its2...
- For Now
- A Lot Of Catching Up To Do
- Armed Forces Day Recap
- A Pleasant Problem? Maybe, But Still A Problem.
- Where Have I Been?
- By Any Other Name
- We Can Handle The Truth
- No Pleasant Explanation
4 Comments:
Please cite book, chapter and verse, and be able to establish that the book, chapter and verse you cite apply under the New Covenant that the Bible plainly speaks of.
Colossians 2:13-15 speaks of Christ taking such requirements of the Old Law (under which Leviticus falls) out of the way. The New Law makes no such restrictions on eating shrimp. But it does speak out against homosexuality.
While the New Testament does not address homosexual "marriage" specifically, it does speak out against homosexuality in Romans 1:24-32 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.
Hard to see how a "marriage" based on a "relationship" that the New Testament prohibits can be valid from a New Testament perspective.
Precisely. It's really not a question of what the New Testament teaches on the subject. It's a question of whether you're going to accept the teaching of the New Testament on that subject.
Many people, including many who wear the name "Christian" choose not to accept the NT on this subject. For my part, personally, I just don't believe I have the option to accept some of its teachings and reject others.
There's a lot of things about Christianity that I would probably change "If I were in charge." But I'm not.
I don't feel it is necessary to legislate from the Bible. You are the one who started this line of discussion by citing it.
I need more of an explanation on what you mean by smoke screen.
Jesus teaches individuals to love individuals. But at the same time He was not hesitant to light into those who did wrong when they should have known better, wanting them to turn from their errors.
How does that apply to the post that started this discussion?
Post a Comment
<< Home