“If your hermeneutical framework matches Hays, then the answer is no. If Scripture is the norm that is not normed by any other norm, then we cannot set homosexuality aside as an issue of moral indifference. In other words, it is impossible to hold to biblical authority and follow McLaren’s view. They are mutually exclusive. We cannot be silent on this. The revisionist scholars are not silent, and we dare not be either. The stakes are too high because Paul says that homosexuals and effeminate persons will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 6:9).30 Would not evangelical silence on this issue be a death-sentence for sinners who must repent?” (Page 219)
“None of us works in a vacuum, and we are all conditioned by our own experiences and context. Yet our own experiences and context should never be turned into a pretext for distorting the interpretation of Scripture.” (Page 220)
“Jesus and Paul do not look to any of them as the paradigm for understanding marriage and sex. Instead, Jesus and Paul look back without exception to the pre-fall monogamous union of Adam and Eve in Gen 2 as the norm of human sexuality and marriage. ‘For this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall cling to his wife; and they shall become one flesh’” (Page 224)
“When Burridge says that ‘Jesus and the gospels have nothing to say’ about these issues, he echoes the objections that homosexual activists have raised for years. They protest that Jesus’ silence on the issue shows that homosexuality was of little or no concern to the historical Jesus.” (Page 218)