Replies

Your interpretation totally overanalyzed what was stated.

There are no "good" sinners or "bad" sinners.....sin is sin. We must humble ourselves as to not think we are any better than another because of "their" sin. The first shall be last and the last shall be first. Pride goeth before the fall.

Implied in your statement, given the context, is that to be disgusted by homosexuality is somehow putting oneself up as a "good" sinner. In the context of the topic, the person who doesn't commit the sin is better than the person who does. To be repulsed by it is a proper response. One of the consequences of sinning in a particularly gross manner is that other people will be repulsed by it. So the statements about how badly homosexuals are treated rings hollow for me. No they should not suffer any violence. But words are not violence, and they must understand that if they make known their gross habits then the consequences will frequently be verbal disapproval. It's a consequence of the sin, and should actually be used as a help to make the sinner ashamed and hopefully repent.

The topic was homosexuality, so the sin of homosexuality is what applies. If you want to change the topic, then we can change who is guilty and who is innocent in that context. It serves no one to blur the lines on any given sin. Homosexuals are giulty of that sin in deed and in heart. They should pray that God search their hearts and clean their hearts of that sin as with other sins. When they emerge spouting out to the world how wronged they've been, forgive me if I don't believe they've really repented. Stop telling people who are innocent of homosexuality that they need to not be repulsed. It serves no one, not even the homosexual. They need to feel ashamed of that sin, and they need to see how it is particularly harmful to all of society. They should feel bad about their part in it and seek to support the idea that it is wrong, not tame it.