...On this point, I am afraid my friend, that we will have to disagree...
Perhaps we can only agree to disagree.
As I stated in my reply to Steve/Stereoman, I hoped to base my (dis?)agreement only on what is or is not contained in the set of writings we refer to generally as the Jewish and Christian scriptures - no doctrinal or theological points advanced.
As seen in the NT, there is no indication that Jesus was married, even though - culturally - that would have been the norm. However, the Levite law did grant exceptions such as those having taken a Nazarite vow. And there were indeed itinerant, single [rabbis | teachers | preachers] making the rounds then (I believe that Josephus, among others, refers to them). I think it very likely that Jesus was engaged - that would have been common, arranged by the family - but marriage could have been put off or even replaced by a religious duty.
One can also argue - from scripture - that Mary was widowed and that she was a single parent sometime after Jesus reached the legally/religiously accountable age of 12 and that, as a devoted son, he would have put off marriage to care for his mother. I can also argue from scripture that polygamy is perfectly acceptable for a Christian.
As to Jesus not condemning homosexuality, neither did he condemn slavery; however, I cannot see that as being a rational argument that slavery is acceptable. In fact Jesus says that he did not come to destroy the law - which contains those Levite proscriptions against homosexuality - but to fulfill it; he also says 'not one jot or tittle' of the law will be changed - and that presumably includes the proscriptions against homosexuality.
I simply think it is fruitless to argue the pro-position from scriptures since you have to cherry-pick in order to justify it. There is a better, simpler and far more elegant argument from the totality of scripture that escapes the pitfalls of the cherry-picking approach.
