That’s not really the question. The question is whether St. Paul would agree that his prescriptions for church administration are of less importance than his views on same-sex intimacy.
The Supreme Court ruling inspired the discussion, so I would approach this as two separate arguments.
Argument 1: Should religious beliefs be allowed to define the laws that govern personal behavior?
This is not an argument about Christianity or the Bible or homosexuality. Can Muslims require you to wear a hijab? Can Jews mandate kosher meals for everyone? Can Christian Scientists ban hospitals? Can atheists ban church attendance? Why then is a Christian belief belief about homosexuality different? This is just a public policy debate about what we should base our laws on, and I don’t think we can use religious principles alone in determining those laws.
Argument 2: What’s the Biblical position on homosexuality?
This is really more the debate that the OP talks about. For myself, I find that homosexuality is pretty soundly condemned as sinful in many passages of the Bible, but it is condemned on the same lines as things like premarital sex, divorce, adultery, lying and disrespecting your parents. In other words: I believe you shouldn’t be doing it, but it’s no better or worse than bad things most of us do everyday. To me, that makes it an issue between the individual and God. I won’t kick a homosexual out of my church any more than I would kick out single parents and rebellious teens.
Have you made this argument in person with people against homosexuality? What do they usually say?
What penalty remains that Jesus has not already paid in full for us? Is one of the question I like to ask.
I’m sure that St. Paul would be happy to give his opinion on both topics.
Is it not Ockham’s Razor?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam’s_razor
But as applied to this case, one could argue that strict application of the principle would mean that the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions attached is that the Bible, whatever it says or whatever it means, is not the infallible word of the Almighty. Or indeed, that there is no Almighty in the first place.
You did. I’ve only been reading English for fifty years, I struggle with basic comprehension now and then. :smack:
Loving and accepting others is good and it is what we should do, and I am sure your friend Keith agrees. On the other hand – assuming for the argument’s sake that the word of God says that certain conduct is sinful – loving others would not entail denying that sin is sin, but in doing all you can for their good in spite their sin (for am I not a sinner also?).
No, someone else correctly stated what I meant by it – that Anthony’s words could be applied with equal force to the OP as well as to his opponents. You can discuss why there is no God elsewhere on these boards, to judge by what I’ve seen while I’ve been here.
I withdrew money from my IRA early, in order to pay for a car repair. There was a pretty substantial penalty for that.
I would imagine that the conservative evangelical Christian would also avoid answering this question saying, “I’m not judging others. God is judging them.”
Isn’t the answer to that apostasy?
Within this paragraph you seem to be switching back and forth between “homosexuality” as something one does and as something one is. Do you, or does Keith, have an understanding of homosexuality as an orientation? The way some Christians talk, it seems to me that they’re working from the assumption that everyone is heterosexual by nature, but that homosexuality is a behavior that goes contrary to that nature.
That’s why Jesus saves.
I think some Christians probably do think that way, but I think others just think that everyone has different things they are tempted by. From the conservative Christian perspective, some people are more tempted to look at porn and have to really fight to not give in to their urges, and some just have zero desire to look at porn. But even if you are extremely tempted and it’s very difficult to resist looking at porn, that doesn’t make it okay if you give in, it just means you have to fight harder than those not tempted. It’s the same way with homosexuality. Most people are not tempted by homosexuality, but some people are, and they just have to fight harder to not give in to those urges. To be clear, I’m saying that’s what some conservatives believe; I have zero problem with homosexuality and no problem with porn in general.
But you are right that some people view homosexuality in weird ways that don’t make sense to a lot of other people, and to have a productive debate it might be best to find out first how they view it, why they think people are gay or engage in gay activity, and why they think it’s wrong. Otherwise you might argue against things they don’t believe and won’t be able to convince them of anything and they’ll think they won.
It’s a little of both, which is why I tend to use it in both senses.
If a guy is turned on by other guys, then obviously he has a homosexual preference, or at least bisexual, or some sub-division on a scale that can be as complicated as people want to make it. That in and of itself is not a sin. If there is a sin, it’s lust, but lust is common to all types of people.
Homosexual activity, on the other hand, does seem (to my interpretation of the Bible) to be defined as sinful and that would be true regardless of what orientation you think describes you best.
I do understand that homosexuals have a preference that is not of their own conscious choosing. Be it nature, nurture, some combination, whatever, I fully get that you can’t just say “I want to be heterosexual!” and snap your fingers. Those people have that issue to deal with in their spiritual lives. It’s not such a big difference from people with other unique temptations. Alcoholics have a different relationship to alcohol than non-alcoholics and gay people have a different relationship to sex than straight people. Both of them are facing a challenge that doesn’t affect me… and I’m sure I face some personal temptations that don’t particularly affect them. (Which is why I don’t judge. When I figure out how to be perfect, I’ll be sure to let everyone else know. 
)
On the other hand, I do know that I’ve talked to Christians who are very hung up on the orientation issue. They’ll insist that being a “homosexual priest” is somehow wrong even though all priests are supposed to be celibate according to their own vows. Or they’ll insist that it is just a choice or something that can be fixed, which does not seem to be backed up by any successful scientific practices (and not for lack of effort). So I can’t speak to what everyone thinks - there is a range of opinions.
A religious coworker asserted that it was actually having sex with someone of the same gender that defines homosexuality. That was his way of side stepping the entire “God made me this way” argument. So if you were born with a preference you are fine unless you act on it.
He was pretty much a jerk on other topics too.
But Moses invests.