Good luck convincing any actually gay people of that “big difference.”
“Gay people are like thieves.” I can see you’re already off to a good start.
I never said gay people are like thieves. The point I was trying to make is that adultery is a sin and so is stealing. If you are going to quote me, at least have the decency to do it in the correct context.
No, I haven’t. Not my job.
Ahhh…so the rules have changed slightly.
Could you cite up some verses on God’s hatred for the practice of homosexuality?
Strictly speaking, an accurate rendering would be “gay sex is like theft”, since Oddball is claiming a distinction between gay sex and gay people.
It’s a specious distinction to me, snd I described earlier that I’d judge a religion by the level of irrationality it demands of its followers.
Bullshit.
Right. Gay sex = adultery = stealing. Therefore, gay person = adulterer = thief.
You are welcome to attempt whatever contortions you think will allow you to state that belief in a way that is not fundamentally insulting to gay people. You will not be successful.
I’m not interested in being lectured about “decency” by a bigot.
And you are better than most of the right wing evangelicals of these days.
Piffle, like if there are no prohibitions against mixed fabrics, ripped-knees jeans, to round the hair corners of your heads, to eat shellfish, get a tattoo, to plant a garden with different seeds, etc. (We are all damned already it seems. 
)
The reality is that things change, even religious rules. (And in the new testament a justification was found to eat pig and for guys to have no need to be circumcised)
In modern times even mainstream religion found ways to ignore rules about slavery, and a few are doing the same about the rules against gays.
Now go, be an agent of change, and do not eat Beef Stroganoff. 
Genesis 19:1-11 Leviticus 18:22 Leviticus 20:13 Judges 19:16-24 1 Kings 14:24 1 Kings 15:12 2 Kings 23:7 Romans 1:18-32 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 1 Timothy 1:8-10 Jude 7
Dibs on the first one!
So blindness for the men, but the guy who tries to prostitute his virgin daughters is o.k. by God?
Edited to add: And it was only temporary blindness so that they could not find the house, at that. Their sin was more sexual assault, not homosexuality. Do you know the difference?
How many of those specifically condemn homosexual acts, as opposed to homosexuals? At a quick glance, I see Lev 18:22 (NIV) says:
Arguably specific to the action rather than the person, but Lev 20:13 (NIV) says:
Which seems pretty clearly not a “love the sinner, hate the sin” stance, but a “hate the sin, kill the sinner” one.
You forgot “hater”, that usually comes right after bigot. You don’t seem as though you would want to hear anything about decency from anyone. How professional from a “moderator”
I don’t know if you are a hater, but do you love bacon?
It’s not clear that the position you claim is one of decency, merely adherence to an arbitrary rule. A few generations ago in the West (and probably still in some places), it was probably considered “decent” to use punishment to discourage left-handedness. Why? Arbitrary rule.
[quote=“Bryan_Ekers, post:71, topic:721136”]
How many of those specifically condemn homosexual acts, as opposed to homosexuals? At a quick glance, I see Lev 18:22 (NIV) says:
Arguably specific to the action rather than the person, but Lev 20:13 (NIV) says:
Which seems pretty clearly not a “love the sinner, hate the sin” stance, but a “hate the sin, kill the sinner” one.[/QUOTE
The “kill the sinner” part (as you put it) was Old Testament…Before the birth of Jesus. The “hate the sin” part still applies…as I said earlier.
So nothing has changed…except for the parts that have. All the rules are the same, but the punishment is different now?
Typically of your kind: you can dish it out, but you can’t take it.
Oh, hey, more rock solid consistency from you:
Versus:
What you also said earlier was:
It’s okay if you want to have it both ways, but why should we take you seriously if you try?
Yep…sure do. And before you try to bait me, here is a pretty good article on the subject. Is it okay for Christians to eat pork and shellfish? – Bible Q
Missing the point spectacularly, the point was that indeed Religion can change. There is no reason why we should assume that what was written will remain a rule forever.