OK, I’d like to back off from the idea that sex is not important. I agree that sex is important, and it certainly deserves serious discussion among Christians who are concerned about right behavior. However, my point has been that there are other issues in regard to right behavior that are at least as important as sex. Among these I would include justice issues, war, how to treat our enemies, the right place and use of money, who is our neighbor. (And, from my point of view, sex is less important than these in part because they seem to be of greater important to Jesus. He talks about these things much more than he talks about sex.) I like Ian’s point 3 in this regard.

However, I disagree with Ian’s point 2. The Gospels are particularly important because in them we see Jesus living out the scripture. The Gospels are a historical record of Jesus, the Living Word. To see the Gospels as of particular importance does not mean that we disregard other scripture. It simply means that we bring the rest of scripture to Jesus to see if there are implications to be found in His earthly witness.

For example, I believe that Jesus shows us that the way in which we approach issues of faith is of crucial importance. The religious enemies of Jesus often attempted to present Him with a difficult ethical situation and quote to him a scripture that would seem to mandate a particular action that had to be taken. A case in point is the woman taken in adultery. Jesus often responds in a way that places the importance of people above the importance of the law. He saves the adulterous woman’s life, even though she clearly appears to be guilty. This is also true in situations where Jesus insisted on curing people on the Sabbath. In other words, Jesus opponents seem to be more concerned about a rigid interpretation of scripture, while Jesus takes a more grace-filled approach, tending toward mercy.

Benjamin, I hope this responds to your point about environmental degradation.  I do believe that the Gospels present a priority of issues. For example, I tend to take “love the Lord with all your heart…and love your neighbor as yourself” as a keystone found both in the OT and NT but having particular import because Jesus underscores their central place in scripture. If I am right about an issue, but at the same time am failing to love the Lord or my neighbor, of what use is it to be right?

I think Leigh has hit upon something very important with her point about the theology of creation. I’ll continue to reflect on this. I believe God has been doing and is doing a wonderful thing in the world, and I am joyful and thankful for it.

Point taken Randy.

However, I disagree with Ian’s point 2. The Gospels are particularly important because in them we see Jesus living out the scripture. The Gospels are a historical record of Jesus, the Living Word. To see the Gospels as of particular importance does not mean that we disregard other scripture. It simply means that we bring the rest of scripture to Jesus to see if there are implications to be found in His earthly witness.

I was responding to those who will only take the 4 Gospels as authoritative Scripture and dismiss the rest.  There are then of course those who will impose further limits of their own making.  There is a particular group who like to exclude St’ Paul.  Another would exclude some of those attributed to St. Paul, ... and on and on and on!  The editing of the Scriptures seems to me to be a tactic used to limit discussion as much as others would accuse me of proof texting.

There used to be an old saying about contexts and pretexts.  Maybe someone can help me.

The goal here is honest discussion, intellectual and spiritual.  I believe that there need to be some parameters, and that for me these are usually those defined historically in the councils of the Church.  I.e., the canonical Scriptures as authoritative as a whole.

Randy+,

If sexual expression is not as important as those other items you list, then why do the progressives keep bringing it up and why do they continue to act in ways the hurt the unity of the Church?

Progressives, it seems to me, have two options.  First they can say that blessing homosexual sex (perhaps limited to a mutually monogamous relationship, perhaps not) is a gospel imperative and it is worth breaking fellowship with those who do not bless homosexual sex. 

Second, they can say that they don’t care about the unity of the Church - it is less important than blessing what the rest of the Church calls “sin.”

What progressives cannot say is that this this issues is not that important.  It is obviously more important to them than fighting poverty, disease, or working to spread the Kingdom of God through evangelism.  If it were not so important, they would not be pushing it until the other issues were (mostly) resolved.

Remember, it is not the conservatives who kept bringing this issue up before General Convention until GC gave a “Yes.”  The progressives were the ones who did that.  Their actions speak louder than any words concerning social justice, poverty, health care, or evangelism - let alone on Christian Unity.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder