In keeping with accuracy then. Pagan, Pagans. I apologize for the slight to my non and anti-Christian neighbors.
I'm sure they appreciate it.
Jesus said to "treat them AS YOU WOULD," a pagan or a tax collector. He's talking about His own people and comparing their behaviors to that of pagans.
I'm not sure what you are talking about here. Christ routinely said to treat others well. He said that we should obey the Golden Rule, to treat others in the way we want them to treat us. About the Pagans (the Romans) he said that if they would compel you to go a mile, that you should go twain. And when it came time to illustrate the point about who your neighbor is, he used a Samaritan, considered the worst of the worst by the Jews, to demonstrate compassion and love for a neighbor without judgment.
Matthew is the name of a Gospel.
And it was written by one of Christ's apostles, whom you pointed out was a publican.
Matthew did not call Jesus a taxaphobe.
And have you ever seen me call someone a homophobe? At the same time, Jesus did not make claims of a "publican agenda" or "publican lifestyle", rather his example was to treat them as the Golden Rule states -- just like he treated everyone else.
The hubris of the Pharisees can be seen in the "pride" they took to "parade" their haughtiness in public. Need some scripture to show that????
Interesting that you yourself have mentioned that you share that "haughtiness". It is seen among most of the Fundamentalists here, if you ever really look, as they condescend to others -- even most other Christians -- claiming that they alone follow the Bible correctly.
Let's not pretend shall we?
What pretend? Please show me where I claim that Jesus supported Paganism.
And please, let us drop the pretense that homosexuality is Paganism. If you sincerely want to believe that then you must also agree that all heterosexuality is Paganism; after all, there were far more heterosexual sex acts in ancient Pagan worship that homosexual ones. Rather, let us get back to the truth that Pagan sex acts were sex acts with temple acolytes (translated at times in Deuteronomy as "temple prostitutes") for the purpose of worshiping God; and this is not what we are talking about when we mention either heterosexual or homosexual sex today.
Many. Look at TV evangelism. Most just seem to want money, and all that goes with it. BUT, "they" would "also" be violating the "fundamentals" of Christian life and the Christians faith. It is always done by altering scripture, redefining it, or ignoring it for a selfish purpose.
But it would be a straw man to claim that these are the only Christians that are comparable to the Pharisees.
Shall we move on to gay theology? There is not one place in all of scripture that promotes the pride that the GLBT's take about their lifestyle, and no where in scripture is there any supporting it.
And I have mentioned that I have no interest in debating that with you, neither of us would change the others mind anyway. There have been those that have attempted to explain to you and you simply have not really listened. BigBadWlf is quite good at explaining the issues. Things like how Leviticus is oddly phrased in Hebrew, a literal translation being closer to men not having sex in a woman's bed (which would appear to imply adultery or temple prostitution than homosexuality). The fact that every behavior that is given the death penalty in Leviticus is repeated in Deuteronomy (and vice versa) except for homosexuality -- rather in Deuteronomy (as previously pointed out) it is temple prostitution that requires the death penalty. Interesting that an oddly worded verse that is typically interpreted as homosexual acts in Leviticus is not found in Deuteronomy and that no death penalty for temple prostitution is found in Leviticus -- especially when you bring in the question of translation of the Leviticus verses.
Then there is the idea that "natural" in Romans is talking what is natural for the person, not against nature. BigBadWlf explained it well in
this post in the Debates on Homosexuality section, as well as Paul's usage of "arsenokoites". Honestly, that Debates on Homosexuality, being in the theology area, would have been a far better area for you to post the OP as it is in a Christian area.
Care a go at their attitude? There is NOTHING humble about it. And of course nothing accurate about it either. Look at how the Pharisees, acted, dressed, and paraded about in public and compare that to Gay Pride. How about another thread for that examination?
Sorry, I can't see the comparison with gay pride. Gay Pride is not about telling others how to live their life or to make gays richer, either one. Rather, it is about being open and honest about how they live their life and that they have the right to do so. I'm not saying gays are perfect, I've not seen anyone say that (but you, when you attempt to argue it as a straw man). Rather, the entire point is that they should have the right to live their lives according to their own consciences, not be force to hide in closets and only have sex in bathrooms because some feel that if they show affection for the one they love in public they are "recruting".
