Lynn:

Again, a short reply. I see what you are doing in your first point as an attempt to create a category the Scripture does not give room for. You speak of love as positive, but we have nowhere in the Scripture where sexual same sex love is spoken of positively. In other words, one has to be able to establish that this category is a neutral category, not ruled out for such a consideration, before we get to the application of the kind of liberty principles to which you are appealing. I see nothing about the way Scripture handles this specific practice that takes us to such a place. (I also think that the way you try to connect discussions on hair and jewelry as equally condemned is a stretch). But let us assume you are right on those connections. A proper response is not to permit acticity in the area condemned or criticized (or treat it as permitting another area to be so handled), but to urge the church to be faithful in responding in those areas as well.

The difficulty you have dealing with the accepted cultural backdrop for Paul's negative remarks (Ie, alternative lifestyles are not accepted as moral) and the nature of inspiration is also a major problem for your approach (as is the appeal to biological factors). Did God not know about these biological realities in His creation as he speaks ot these topcis through Paul and others? God is NOT merely allowing a misunderstanding in such cases in his Scripture; he would be misdirecting our basic ethical instruction in the area. But Scripture is said to be able to guide us into truth in these very areas of how we live (what they church has called faith and practice). I do not have to believe that Paul spoke with full knowledge of the area (as you say), but with sufficient knowledge and with a proper sense of God's mind on how to view the area. In sum, Paul's tone gets his basic exhortation in these areas right.

Now as for condemnation. The beauty of the gospel is that grace triumphs over sin. There are thousands, I am sure, saved homosexuals. Just as there are thousands of saved liers, slanderers, greedy, etc. Many of these people struggle to overcome that for which Christ died. What is disturbing about the position you are holding to is that it fails to truly face the way God spoke about this practice. You even make a point of it in stating your personal identity ("I am a gay, born again believer myself"). I can be greedy and angry as a person, but that does not make me proud to have those qualitied in my life and I pray that God continues to work on these areas. Grace is capable of reversing and is at work on these. Your position is such that you are arguing this is not necessary in an area Scripture consistently portrays negatively. That fact alone would give me pause, if I were you, about whether my view of liberty is actually correct. Please note I say this not to judge, but to observe about what Scripture says and seek to apply the Word that comes from the one who loved me enough to die for me and enter into my life to help me become the person he designed me to be.

Lynn, I have no doubt by the tone of your interaction that your desire is to honor God and seek his will. This is why I write so directly. In everything God has revealed to us directly on this area of discussion in his Word, his remarks challenge this lifestyle as offensive to his design. He has not faked us out here. He means it. So with all the best intentions, I hope you will reconsider how you have created a "safe haven" for an alternative lifestyle. It is not a safe place to be. God desires more and better things for us that what that lifestyle offers.

Sincerely in Him,

 dlb