Quote Originally Posted by Columcille View Post
It is not a point to compare apples to oranges. The subject is a call for a quadrilateral support of a pro-God defense of the ****sexual lifestyle. Behavioral sins do affect the mentality of the people to the point that they justify their behavior. The alcoholic blames their loved ones for driving them to drink. The slanderer seeks to elivate themselves by cutting others down, the glutton seeks to feed their appe***e. It is the state of mind where there is no repentant desire to end the behavior. The glutton, knowing he is fat should not desire to stay that way. The same goes for ****sexuality, and all the behavioral mortal sins. What is worse is that you have professing Christians supporting the lifestyle as the Bishop Gene Robinson in the Episcopal Church USA. You have just recently a Lutheran faction now embracing it. Really, is this the type of defense you want to justify that lifestyle?
I think you're still not getting ActRaiser's point. What he/she (sorry, haven't met you yet ) is saying is precisely to compare apples to apples. You yourself cited Paul in putting "****sexuality" on the very same terms as greed and slander.

So if you're denying that "salvation" is achievable for an unrepentant ****sexual person, you'd better be ready to bar the kingdom of heaven to an unrepentant greedy person.

(Quotes on "salvation" because I think you're needlessly conflating "salvation" with "going to heaven after you die". I don't take that to be a necessary Christian view, but that's a topic for another day.)