Christian Ethics according to Liberal "Christian" Sects are unchristian.*

I would like to reprimand my opponent for his crass, sarcastic, and otherwise rude response to my argument. "Notice: After a Character count my opponent used more time being analectic that arguing, he spent more time reviewing the argument than arguing, I will honor his waste of characters and consider his claims. (1 to Zets). " Perhaps you should have posed more points instead of acting so haughty and arrogant if you wanted me to allot more characters to rebutting your contentions instead of reprimanding your rude and condescending attitude towards this debate both in the debate and in the comments section. If you pose one verse as a contention, expect me to refute it using a due amount of characters. "Also - He has not refuted any of my points, just presented his own" Ad Nauseam Source: . http://ddofans.com... "The terms of a Debate are unto one's skills. " Ad Hominem "but the Instigators rules must be adhered" Not if they defy simple logic which debating 7 contentions in 1 round does. You're simply using this as a point on why you should win, however I think you'll find that the voters have common sense in abundance. "think of it like a Pact of agreement" You very vaguely stated to accept the debate if you agreed with 5 out of 7 of the contentions. This does not mean that anyone would ever believe that you would actually debate all 7 contentions. Next time be clearer in your affirmation. However, expect it to be changed by the contender unless each contention really is simplistic, you start your arguments in the first round, and don't intend on forfeiting a round. "Calling my resolve vague still doesn't give you the ability to snap out the rules" Protip: Assumptions are not rules. "My arrogance? Same can be said about your posts" There's a difference between being full of yourself and your own abilities, and calling a spade a spade. One verse from the old testament with literally no logical backing or reasoning is extremely half-hearted. "Do I need a warning to denounce a possible misconception? " If you are given no reason to denounce something then doing so precludes that you expect me to do it. Which to me is insulting. "Christians are against homosexuality. God is Christ, not Christians or Christianity, this debate is of the followers of Christ the followed presence is irrelevant. " Pure semantics. Using the word "Christianity and then attempting to make a conclusion that it has nothing to do with Jesus Christ is laughable. Christians follow Christianity. Christianity literally is the teachings of Christ. Therefore it is extremely relevant what the teachings of Christ actually are. "Your argument is that Jesus destroys the old Covenant of Moses in as sense destroys the 10 commandments. Homosexuality falls under the sins of adultery. Jesus says I come to restore the covenant and not to destroy it again Mathew 5:17-19, It's not the first time I've had to use this. " Never did I say that the old covenant was destroyed LOL. Nor that the 10 commandments are destroyed. Again: "36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law? " 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. '[a] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself. '[b] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments. " As you can see both commandments = the 10 commandments My opponent has failed to show how homosexuality falls under either of these two commandments. Furthermore I fail to see how HOMOSEXUALITY = ADULTERY? ?? ? Stating something does not make it show, you actually have to logically back up statements. You shall have no other gods before me - Love your God You shall not make for yourself an idol - Love your God You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God - Love your God Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy - Love Your God Honor your father and mother - Love your neighbors You shall not murder - Love your neighbors You shall not commit adultery - Love your neighbors You shall not steal - Love your neighbors You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor - Love your neighbors You shall not covet your neighbor's wife - Love your neighbors You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor - Love your neighbors Jesus fulfilled the law when he was crucified. Galatians 3:23-25 (New International Version) 23Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. 25Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. Ephesians 2: 15 by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace My opponent failed to show how Paul word is equated with the word of God. He has not proven how homosexuality is a sin and instead has acted arrogantly, forfeited a round, and attempted to claim the conduct point as his own. He also has attempted to make the claim that I have broken "a rule" by not debating 7 contentions in one round which never was explicitly stated but for some reason was supposed to be assumed? In either way my opponent has failed to prove his resolution.