All right, I've got to comment on Rick Santorum and sodomy laws. First, in Rick's defense. It is a fallacious argument (or problematic) to say, "The government has no place in the bedroom." If that indeed was the assertion, then what Rick said is quite true. How could we regulate more obvious (generally agreed upon) inappropriate behavior? We do that on behalf of minors all the time. But the best argument is that government should not regulate sex between consenting adults. It's a breathless waste of time for anyone to pass laws against homosexual sex, or enforce them. I wish America was a Godly nation. I wish we ALL believed in our Lord Jesus Christ. I wish sin wasn't here. But we cannot as Christians conscript others into our morals. We try this all the time. Christians are so eager to have others at least act like them that Christian political organizations don't even quibble about doctrine. That's garbage. That's a false religiosity. ONLY the grace of God revealed in Jesus Christ and the conviction of the Holy Spirit changes the heart of a man. Our nation was a 'Christian' nation only because we had the influence to make unbelievers act like we do. My opinion: Homosexual acts are wrong. That's quite clear from God's Word in Scripture. But as much as I'd like to make our law reflect God's law, I cannot compel it. We have much to fear from compelled morality imposed by the state. We cannot make the same mistake, no matter how great our cause, or how great our King.
Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con
Comments