30
Jun 15

An attack on what, exactly? PART TWO

If you cannot guess the topic of today's post you have not been paying attention over the past few days. SCOTUS said that gay marriage was legal across the country, a decision that was met with a great deal of emotion in various extremes.

So. Let me begin by offending everyone, as I am wont.

Can the Bible be read in a way that condemns homosexuality? Yes.

Can the Bible be read in a way that does not condemn homosexuality? Yes.

If our question is "Can a Christian with the intention to honor God and follow the Bible who is reasonably educated in Biblical interpretation come to either conclusion?" we have to once again say: Yes.

So how do we proceed? If we cannot reach a clear conclusion we must proceed to principals. Personally I feel that the principals of the New Testament lead me to say that homosexuality is not condemned and that all people should be embraced regardless of race, creed, color, sexuality, or gender identity.

As for legalization of gay marriage? Even if you think it homosexuality is a sin, you cannot argue form a Constitutional stand point that it cannot be legal.

That's right, the Constitution does not care whether or not something is a sin. In fact, our entire culture is based on a big sin that is better documented than homosexuality: USURY.

Also known as charging interest for loans. That is condemned out right all over the Old Testament, and the abuse of the poor in general is condemned in the Prophets and the Gospels. And the thing is: usury actually hurts others and the society is very meaningful and measurable ways.

Let's sort our priorities people.

Leave a Reply