I wouldn't either. They're very unhappy people.julie21 said:I wouldn't personally use that term , and Jesus wouldn't have used it in His day as evidenced in the Bible. It's a mute point to question if He would use it today, unless we want to presume what Jesus would do.
[quote\Jesus was intentionally offensive when He wanted to be. I can read where he was intentionally offensive to the "brood of vipers" and in the Temple with the money changers, but I don't read where He, in His ministry on earth, was offensive or abusive or derogatory to a homosexual.[/quote]
Are there any recorded instances where He confronted a homosexual, at all?
What about what the Father said about it? He called it an abomination.
Queer means weird, odd, wrong, not normal. And that is what homosexuals are. And to be of the world would to be a queer. Or to be tolerant of them, as has been evidenced in this thread. The people that agree with you the most are the ones who are of the world, Julie. Think about it.Nothing wrong with the term 'queer'...if you use it in its original context...or do you wish to use it from the 'worldy' perspective? Not going to be 'of' the world are you?... which IS NOT what we are to be, told to us by Jesus. Remember?