Re: On Ethics again
Moorad Alexanian (alexanian@UNCWIL.EDU)
Mon, 02 Feb 1998 14:12:55 -0500 (EST)
At 02:45 PM 1/30/98 -0700, John W Burgeson wrote:
>"I just have one comment. "But beyond this, my son, be warned: the
>many books is endless, and excessive devotion to books is wearying to the
>body." Perhaps your clear positions prior to taking the course were the
>correct one. If your earlier positions were biblically based, then I
>reconsider your "new knowledge.""
>If I took your advice completely, my friend, I'd retreat to my pre-school
>days. Santa Claus is real, and dad knows everything.
>Some ethical questions can be answered "easily" from Scripture. Some with
>difficulty. Some not at all.
>As an example, had you asked me ten years ago if God disapproved of all
>homosexual activity, I would have considered the question naive; of
>course He does.
>I have found that (1) not all Christians hold this belief and (2) at
>least some of those who do not hold it have good reasons for asserting
>that Scripture does not proscribe some (at least) homosexual activity
>(that which occurs within a long-term monogamous relationship). Their
>reasoning is based on Scripture.
>Whether (or not) I go along with them is not the issue. The fact is that
>reasonable, committed, people-of-Christ do differ on some of these
>issues. That is because the issues are complex, not simple.
>I could add examples from "cloning" or from "abortion" or from a number
>of other ethical issues. But that might get tedious.
It is clear from the writings of Paul and the OT that homosexuality is an
abomination to God. It may not be to some Christians. Making issues complex
is the sure way to go away from obedience of God's laws. Abortion is murder.
Cloning will never erase the sin nature of man.