Replies

"Well said, Marlowe. It's interesting, isn't it, that those who cite Gal. 3:28 on this subject always do so very selectively?"

And they interpret too broadly. It was meant to describe the make up of the church, like Eph. 2 and 3, not God's total plan for the nation of Israel. During the "times of the Gentiles" (the church age) it is the church God is dealing with and both Jew and Gentile are dealt with in the same way by the Holy Spirit. But Paul in Romans 11: 25-27, says after the "fullness of the Gentiles be come in" the temporary blindness of the nation of Israel will be removed and God will deal with the believing remnant of Israel again and they will be saved and their salvation will cause Gentiles to turn to God. That is what the tribulation period and the millennium is for.

Paul warns us if we are ignore this mystery we are at risk of becoming wise in our own conceits.

I just did a google search and apparently there are a lot of people out there who are using the "OP Absolute Law"^® method of interpreting Galatians 3:28 in order to justify homosexuality. I didn't realize that when I made by post at post 51. But if you take the Absolute Law theory of the interpretation of that passage, then one cannot argue that marriage between a man and a woman is superior to a marriage between a man and a man. After all there is no longer male or female, just Christians.

OP was so sure of his interpretive method that he was willing to call down damnation from God against any who disagreed with his interpretive method. Well is he ready to call down damnation from God against anyone who opposes gay marriage between same sex Christians?

Somehow I think not. But these days nothing surprises me. I would have thought that saying G-- D--- was out of bounds on the religion forum. But it seems that is quickly becoming an acceptable fad. Maybe it will replace "Purpose Driven" as the new universal Christian adjective. Instead of people going to a PD Church, they can go to a GD Church.