Has anyone ever found a way to reconsile being Gay/Bi/Lesbien and being a Christian?

[Drich]

Unless you are the scribe or writer who invented this text, I'd say that you stand on ground no more solid than I do, at best.

What a foolish thing to say.
If this were remotly true then no one on the planet could ever hope to read and comperhend anything written unless he himself wrote it. This is obviously not true, meaning the whole of your arguement can be dismissed.

You're trying to say that the passage does not mean what it says in explicit and clear terms.

No what I am saying (per your example) is you can not take 1 verse out of 6 and hope to derive the writers intention of the passage. Subsequently if your above statement was correct you have no more right to determine or argue contextual meaning than any other non writer. By your own hand you, yourself do not take your own arguement seriously enough to follow your own conclusions.

Context can only render that passage incorrect, it cannot alter its meaning entirely as you suggest it does. And, if that passage is incorrect, it calls the credibility of every word in the entire Bible into question, so do you really want to go there?

You are using your own measure as a way to obscure context, how can you even hope to be taken seriously here?

You have not done anything close to a satisfactory job of demonstrating why, in context, that passage does not mean exactly what it says.

It does mean what it says! It just does not mean what YOU Think it says. YOU have FAILED to Support the Implied meaning you assigned to this passage.

So, Lets start there if you think otherwise. In plain english tell me what it says and the with book chapter and verse tell me why you think that is a bad thing.

That probably means Christianity is using it incorrectly.

The whole of Christianity... Meaning Peter and Paul as well as every Christian since then are just wrong? But you 2100 years removed have figured it out all by yourself but the kicker being you do not believe in God?

That does not, in the slightest, contradict my interpretation.

then explain your interpertation and then provide biblical references and tell me why you think that is a bad thing. Because the 4 verses I left you seem to teach the oppsite of what you are saying.

Loving the lord with all your heart means you can disregard his laws?

Again Christ tells us the sum total of the law can be full filled in just two commands To love God with all of your being to love your neighbor as yourself. I have not discarded anything. This passage means you can follow the whole law by keeping these two commands. (Christ's own words not mine)

It sounds, to me, like holding his laws in the highest regard is an integral, indeed vital, part of 'loving the lord'. You cannot love him with all your heart if you are not obeying his laws to your utmost ability.

Then for you, You would be bound by the law in order to show God the just part of the righteousness He demands from all of us. Why? Because in our freedom we have the ability to bind ourselves to the law. This principle was played out in Paul's time with the eating of meat offered to idols. For those who thought up holding the laws concerning meat offered to idols was still in effect, then they were forbidden to eat that meat. However Paul goes on to say because their is nothing/no real god to the idols being worshiped, their is nothing wrong with eating that meat. Peter have a similar revelation when an angel of God told him it was safe or no longer forbidden to eat what was once thought to be 'unclean animals.' But for those who thought themselves under the old law they were forbidden to eat that meat.

there are several examples of people binding themselves with their own faith and freedom, and the limits of their understanding of God was/is the limits of God's law for them. Meaning "what ever they bound here in Earth, was bound up in Heaven, and whatever they loosed on earth was loosed in Heaven" (mt 18:18) That said 'we' (those spiritually mature enough to see the freedom God offers) should not cause a brother to stumble by doing the thing or enticing the new brother to do what he thinks is a sin.
1co 8:4-13, 1 co 10:25-32, titus1:15,

Have you already forgotten the book, chapter and verses which we have been talking about? Show me and explain how your understand supperceeds my own.

I think it means exactly what it says it means. You think it means precisely the opposite of what says it means.

Then show me what it says. Show me how what is says is a 'bad or negitive thing.' Or am I supposed to take your word that someone who does not believe in God simply wishes this passage to mean something bad is going to happen?

I am not suggesting that Jesus is saying that following the laws, itself, is the path to righteousness. I am saying that he is making it clear that following the laws is an integral part of following that 'greatest commandment'.

For some you are absolutly correct, and 'we' (the free) are not tell you to do otherwise unless you are ready to look at the rest of the bible.

If you are not following those rules to the utmost, your 'love' is incomplete (if not outright fraudulent). The Pharisees followed the letter of the law for their own ends, which makes their righteousness substandard.

But that is the point of calling the paraisees out is it not? To show that None Are righteous? For they were the Elites of OT worship, and they failed. We even have a NT/Christian example of that kind of Legalism. We call that period the Dark ages of the Chruch. Why? Because in our best efforts to strictly follow the law we ALWAYS follow it to our own ends. If you are willing to read a little I can show you passages where this is made very clear. That NONE ARe Righteous Before God, That All of our BEST Deeds are like "soiled menstruation rags" before God.

It is clear that Jesus expects you to follow the laws for God's reasons rather than their own, but following the laws is still necessary.

Not as a direct Means of salvation. Following God's law has now become an expression of Love for God, which inturns places one in a position to accept the attonement offered.. (If you think other wise or wish to argue this point then know you can only do so with book Chapter and verse.)

What good is atonement for sin if you make no effort to improve your sinning behavior?

Indeed.

You are not making an effort to follow God's laws, and therefore, your 'atonement' is hollow and meaningless.

Or As James 2 puts it "a Faith without works is dead." that is not what I am saying here.

Freedom from the Law does not mean we can or will want to sin in our freedom. Why? Because this all encompassing love we have reigns back in. In that when you love someone with every fiber of yoour being, that you will will closly match the will of the person that love is focoused on. Meaning we will be in the Father's will, through the expressions of love we manifest. Or if you perfer through the 'works' we do. But again these works are meaningless with out this all encompassing love.