You made the claim that scripture didn't instruct us in judging sin. I simply used one of many passages that prove otherwise.<quoted text>
I was in the process of writing a small dissertation in response to what I have come to consider a so-called Christian "drive-by". You know what I'm talking about... Those one or two, cherry-picked pieces of scripture that you guys lob at gays as "proof positive" that Christ disapproves of homosexuality.
But I'll try to keep it brief...
1.) Paul was a fallible man.
2.) He was raised a Jew. He was brought up in the ancient Jewish traditions. He had been heavily influenced throughout his life; believing that the way to worship God was through the strict adherence to the 613 commandments handed down by God. He was considered to be a somewhat ruthless Rabi prior to his conversion.
3.) I believe that even though he converted to following Christ, he never made the full transition to living a life without following extremely structured laws. He had a new set of laws. But laws and commandments were always important to him.
4.) Paul's letter to the religious leaders in the city of Corinth was in response to a letter they had sent to him. They needed "clarification". They wanted specifics on how to correctly follow Christ's teachings. And Paul, with his long history of being reliant upon laws and commandments, gave them exactly what he thought they needed.
5.) At no point in his letters to anyone do I believe Paul thought, "I'm writing this letter with the knowledge that they will one day be included in a collection of stories and letters that Christians will entitled,'The Books of the New Testament'."
These letters were written to specific people to address specific issues. I'm not sure what Paul's letters would have looked like had he known that one day an INCREDIBLE amount of importance would be placed on them.
It's very important to keep this in context.
6.) The world that Paul lived in is very different than the world that we live in. During that time, there was there was no scientific or medical understanding of chemical dependency.
Given what we know now--that some people are born with a gene that predisposes them to alcoholism--it is unlikely that God would refuse them entrance to Heaven because of their medical problem.
The same is true with homosexuality. We now know that homosexuality is not a disorder. It is not a choice and is therefore biologically based.
This is not to say that homosexuality and chemical dependence can be compared to one another. Obviously, someone who is chemically dependent has difficulty functioning either in their personal life or within society.
Homosexuality DOES NOT impair people the way that chemical dependency does.
My point is that we live in a different world--a different time--with different understandings about these and other issues than those who lived in ancient Greece.
5.) Final point... God didn't stop speaking to people when the final book of the New Testament was canonized. As I've shared before, He spoke to me about my being gay. He has spoken to many other gay Christians.
Regardless of what early Christian leaders may have said on the subject, we know--through our faith in Christ and belief in God--that we're living the life that God gave to us.
Now, I'm sure you have all kinds of responses to my post. That's fine. Go right ahead and attempt to argue, convert, explain, etc. But you're not going to move me. And you're not going to move others.
I would appreciate it if you stopped lobbing scripture at me and others as though you know how God will judge us when we stand before Him.
You don't know. No one knows. So just drop it.
So much for brevity...
I am fully aware that as a reprobate you disparage the Bible. Your views are classic heresy.