So then we are brought to the question: How can we tell which law is what kind? By what rule or rules can we know if one verse is binding and another obsolete?

I cannot see any set of rules that is both consistent and includes a prohibition of loving, comitted homosexual practice. And thus, when I apply myself unto wisdom, I choose a consistent set of rules that does not include such a prohibition, a position supported by the arguments I've often mentioned already. Specifically, I choose to consider laws listed only as "to'eva" ("abomination") as only being prohibitive of exploitative or spiritually violent behaviors, and as having nothing to do with loving, comitted homosexual relationships.

An important point to keep in mind as well is that references to "sexual immorality" only condemn those sexaul acts that are defined as immoral elsewhere: they are not definition statements by themselves, nor blanket terms to put any sex act one chooses under. Similarly, the circular argument "it's immoral because it's out of wedlock / it's out of wedlock because gay marriage isn't allowed / it's not allowed because it's immoral" is complete bs. Since the passages can be read as only descriptive and or limitedly prescriptive, it is impossible to make the conclusion that they are also proscriptive, especially considering the possibility that what we call "homosexuals" falls under the category of "eunuchs (born)."

Love in Christ,
~CSL