[bramps]

Where does Warren say that he doesn’t know that homosexual behavior is a sin?

[MrB]

Intentionally obtuse, much?

[MrB]

Here, let me rub your nose in it:

“No, it’s not a sin to love somebody,” Warren said. “It might be a sin to have sex with them,” he added. “It might be.”

“might be” means “possibly could not be”.

Now, don’t poop on the carpet again.

[dragonblustar]

"“It’s not illegal to love somebody,” Warren replied. “But you think it’s a sin,” Hill asserted. “No, it’s not a sin to love somebody,” Warren said. “It might be a sin to have sex with them,” he added. “It might be.”

it might be a sin? Is he for real?

[rusty schucklefurd]

re: “Or, different readings of the Bible,” Hill injected. “Or different readings — that’s very true,” Warren agreed. Later during the interview, when Hill asked Warren if he believes homosexuals will go to Hell, he replied that they will not. “No, not because they’re gay,” he said. “We go to Hell because we choose to reject the grace of God.” When Hill asked what happens to a homosexual that accepts Jesus, Warren responded enthusiastically. “He’s going to Heaven!” he declared. “Without a doubt.”

Here is the quote from the article that is creating the problem:

“When Hill asked what happens to a homosexual that accepts Jesus, Warren responded enthusiastically. “He’s going to Heaven!” he declared. “Without a doubt.”

If you take what Warren said, without qualifying that a homosexual/lesbian must stop practicing homosexuality, then it can sound like he’s saying that a practicing homosexual, if he/she accepts Christ as their Savior, will go to Heaven.

On the other hand, it is possible that Warren implied that the homosexual who turns to Christ must stop living that life of sin - but what is reported in the article does not do that. So, one could be left with the impression that as long as a homosexual accepts Christ as Savior, no lifestyle change is necessary and that person will go to Heaven.

Warren needs to explain what he meant by his last statement.