RITB and gay-marriage
Joseph Carson (email@example.com)
17 Jul 96 08:14:29 EDT
>My reasoning on the point is similar to that of Phil Johnson in his recent
>book REASON IN THE BALANCE. Is marriage of man or God? If of man, anything
>man agrees to goes. Who's to judge - the Grand Sez Who?
>If marriage is of God, as I'm assuming anyone who
>joined ASA agrees with (but dissenters, please speak up), shouldn't that be
>part of the justification of a conclusion?
I don't know what Phil Johnson said, but Carson expresses a common sentiment
I have heard among evangelicals: that the secular world, without benefit of
the Bible as a moral authority, is "off the hook" in the sense that "anything
man agrees to goes. Who's to judge?"
Joe: In my post, I did not limit to evangelicals, I encompassed theists
(implicitly). In human history, almost every time of arrangement has been
modeled in families at some time or place. Whose to say what's right and on
what basis (other than physical force, at the end of the day?) regarding
families or any other situation in which there is not a clear "victim?"
(again, probably not in everyone's eyes, so that's another discussion) I
commend Phil Johnson to you for his critique.
If mankind is a product of chance and necessity, our thoughts, dreams,
passions, etc the accidental byproduct of collocations of atoms, in a
decaying universe - what difference does it make, ultimately? That the
grand metaphysical story of naturalism's relentless outcome, except that
outcome does make sense either as upon what basis can we assume any ability
to reason that is valid?
Without a transcendant from which we can establish a "ground zero,"
we seem stuck in box after self-referential box. At least that's how I've
come to see it.
Thanks for replying, I think your points make great starters for an
effective apologetic for the perplexed today.