Matt Shepard v Jesse Dirkhising

Thats correct Christ didn't condemn people but by not following the example that he preached they condemned themselves. If you recall he told the harlot to go and "sin no more". No one who is used as an example as you point out such as Zacheus and the harlot continued on in their previous states. They were set free. But first they had to accept Christs gift and that meant, in part, denouncing their sinful lifestyles and striving to live differently according to his example. So yes, in effect it was "his way or the highway". The choice, however, rests solely on us (theres that word again - responsibility). It is written "Narrow is the way...."

Yep he met the needs of the people, principally deliverence from their sins (example: the man who was let down through the roof "I say to you, your sins are forgiven"). Christ did not give people a free pass on their sins or act like he didn't notice them. When in his presence, conviction ensued. Christ could look right through you and see everything. From him you could hide nothing. Nor could you argue the rights and wrongs of what you percieve to be just and unjust as his was the last word. Christ didn't tell people what they wanted to hear Pharisee or not. He told the people what they needed to hear.

Praise God.

Its not about telling someone how evil they are, that conviction comes from God. My friends who have made sinful choices and not repented of them will tell you that being in my presence made them feel convicted of what they were doing. Not because I am super spiritual or anything - far from it. But because they knew that I strove to live my life differently and they fundamentally knew that example was the right way (striving to do what is just always is). In other words when they were around me, they knew that I knew what they were doing and that it was in direct opposition to what Christ would have them to do. I'll lay you odds that if your gay friends are just ok with you and that there is no conviction on their part, then you are obviously projecting to them that you are permissive of their behavior. A believer can not have an "understanding" with someone who is engaged in unrepentant sin. The only understanding is when they come to understand that unless they fall down, repent, and accept Christ's gift of deliverence and salvation that they are condemned to hell. We as Christians are the only representation of Christ that these people may ever see and if we are projecting to them that we are permissive of their sin no matter what it is then they don't see that God has any problem with it either.

That's the most intelligent thing I've heard you say so far and if that is truly your attitude (and I hope it is) then I commend you. But love as you describe it (the true definition) is universal towards all. I've found that the "Pharisees" in the Church that you speak of are often in need of as much help and compassion as the unsaved, including gays. I have taken shots at self righteous types as well but I also do not withold my sentiments from people such as gays who insist that the way they are living is not wrong or sinful and that everyone in the churches should be made to accept them as they are up to and including the passing of legislation making it a crime to speak out on our convictions on such topics (its happening now). The example that I live by compells me where sin is concerned, to show no favorites even if it means directing those sentiments towrd my little favorite pet group.