Chuck, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. I try to approach this discussion with humility and openness, while at the same time bringing out the truths of the Bible and the issue. I've spoken some compelling truths regarding the discussion at hand, which have gone unanswered by those who present a bold criticism of the conviction of many Christians, that the issue of homosexuality has been misunderstood and the Bible misused towards the lives of others. The fact that you are "unpersuaded" by these components of the issue and Scripture that I have raised, which is for the purpose of an honest discussion and thought on the issues at hand, provides no weight to the discussion.

Understanding the truth is the goal of believers in Christ, or should be, and I don't know of a better format on the Web at this time for this discussion, if for no other reason than the record of an open discussion. I said that I will be brief in answering, so all that was left to be done here was an honest address on your part regarding the question that I asked you, which you declined to provide, the reason being that an address of the words of Jesus Christ regarding marriage, and the pursuit of conservatives to establish its definition in the church and in laws of the land, would apparently be much too lengthy. (I neglected to provide this reference to the words of Jesus before, so I'll do this here: It is Matthew 5:32. I see the innocent party in a divorce, in particular, in the same category Scripturally as the gay believer who loves God. He is a God of the heart.) You could've kept your comments simple, but no answer speaks volumes as to the integrity of your position. Is this segment of the body of Christ seeking the truth, or simply working to support a social club that sweeps clear and compelling truths under the carpet?

As to my original address of your words, is it actually an insulting thing to speak to an address of the issue that purports itself to be assessing "evidence" on the issue, i.e. your reference to what you have heard about "the gay community," while ignoring the evidence which shows that the lives of people in wanton rebellion and lust do not describe "the homosexual relationship," as a concept in and of itself? Life-partnerships are not seen in the sinful scenario that you based your address of gay marriage on. In contrast, if you were saying that the statements of Paul were all that you need to know, that would be one thing, and God will be the Judge as to the substance and consistency of our beliefs, and I contend the Bible shouldn't be used simplistically (unless, of course, you are speaking about "love" being the entirety of God's law)--but you are speaking about evidence and testimony, and it is a patently false portrayal of the evidence. It perpetuates nothing more than prejudice, and this has nothing to do with the truth or justice.

I'll look into these authors and see if they have addressed the components of the social issue and the Bible, as you say they have. May God be glorified in and through those who love the truth, which is born out much more by all that we say and do along the way in establishing our beliefs, than the ultimate conclusion itself that we hold on the issues.

A note to Dr. Bock: I read your final edition on this series, and my personal opinion is that it was fair. The social issue does have its complexities. Love is the goal of the church. I appreciate your time with this issue. Thanks again for writing about this and God bless.