Both Paul and Jesus tell us in the New Testament that we are not under the Levital law. These laws were laws of “Holiness” given to the priests. They were instructed not to wear certain clothing, eat specific foods, and to abstain from several sexual situations. Many Biblical scholars, believe that the quoted scriptures about men lying with men refer to the, then common, pagan practice of men taking male prostitutes within the temple.

Even when we believe the Scriptures are “infallible” and “without error,” it’s terribly dangerous to think that our understanding of every Biblical text is also without error. We ARE fallible. We DO err”. And we can certainly misunderstand and misinterpret these ancient words.

Was the Bible wrong, James? Or rather, were the people interpreting the Bible through the lens of their ignorance and racism wrong? Fundamentalists like to cling to old translations of the Bible (negating the progress made in understanding the meaning of words) because it suits their frame of mind, simply. They are scared of anything that is not simplistic, black and white, cut and dried.

Do you know some children are born with an ambiguous gender, incomplete genitals, or hormone signatures that are not clearly male or female and sometimes with extra chromosomes? These children are created by God, James. Is Creation evil?

According to the latest scientific research, homosexuality is decided before birth. (God gave us heads to use them, said my old pastor.) Children often know at a very young age that are gay and sometimes their parents know it too, before puberty, in the absence of any contact with any gay adult or other outside influence.

How then can you say that this is a “perversion” (meaning by that a conscious choice to do evil)?

These children are also created by God. They are my brothers and sisters. But you prefer to act like Cain.

John, I am so happy to have found your blog.

“John 1: 1-2 states that, ‘In the beginning was the Word, and Word was with God, and the Word Was God. He was in the beginning with God.’ Guys, this is the trinity. The ‘Word’ here is Jesus.”
We’re aware of that (and personally I think those verses and the ones which follow are some of the most profound verses in any Scripture ever). The problem seems to be that *you* aren’t aware of that, and its implications. You think the Word is the Bible, instead of Jesus (and what that really means is that you think the Word certainly says whatever your interpretation of whatever Bible you happen to choose happens to be). Now Jesus doesn’t go around telling people they’re not allowed to be married. Of course, neither does the Bible, but whatever. (In fact, the Bible never *does* anything; Jesus, however, works miracles—yes, even the miracle of uniting a same-sex couple in Holy Matrimony! Would you believe that? O you of little faith, all things are possible with God [I know, that's the problem I have with God too].)

“When you reject concrete teaching of scripture (which is the infallible word of God), you effectively reject Jesus-the ‘Word’.”
But look at the difference in capitalization that you used. I don’t know about you, but to me that makes a difference. Are you saying that capitalization is without effect as regards concrete meaning? Well, is it the same to talk about an apple store and an Apple Store? Sorry, but Jesus is not a book. Jesus is a diving being, and Jesus is a human being. His human being can be seen in flesh and blood; his divine being—in love and truth. That’s all love, James: gay, straight or indifferent, Jesus is in their midst! The new covenant, writes Paul, is not of the letter, but of the Spirit.

“sin is sin” — Agreed. So I’ll pray that what your saying hasn’t and doesn’t hurt someone, and I’ll pray for your forgiveness if so.

“addictions to pornography is just the same as homosexuality”
How so? Are all homosexual persons unhealthily lustful? (Or is it that all porn addicts are gay?)

“If we live in habitual sin, we have not been born of the Spirit, and we certainly have not been washed with the Word (Jesus).”
Exactly. So I really hope that this isn’t a habit for you, James. I’ll trust this is the first time you’ve said these hurtful things publically and that it will be a one time mistake, yes?

On a more theological matter, assuming you meant God’s Word is timeless (otherwise, I’m not sure which of God’s words exactly you could be referring to as somehow timeless), why do you think so?
The Father is without beginning, and so without time, but the Son—the Word—is the beginning and the end, in time, so as, in the fullness of it, to reveal the Father, becoming (and remaining) man, which is such a being as abides in time. How else does the Timeless minister to those stuck in time but by sending word into time in some way? Now, the Word is indeed immortal, but only because he died, that Hades holds no power over him, but by his death (a real event in time, as I understand it) he put Death to death, for those who believe in him. While the Father is eternally the same, the Son, in order to do the will of the Father in these things (and so much more that I doubt the world itself could contain all the books that should be written), did will to be incarnate—and matter does not exist except with energy and motion at some level, and these have meaning only assuming time. “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.” (Luke 2:52) So it doesn’t sound like the Word is timeless to me; ever-existing—perhaps, but if so, ever-moving and ever-changing; the Everlasting, from everlasting, to everlasting, which we see as beginning and end, which know as different forms—Alpha and Omega—though the essence is One with Father and the Holy Spirit: and the essence is Love, James. God is love.

hmmmm.