To make any sense, the pro-gay candidates (Belle, Bolbach, Kim, Lauterer & Nielson) are probably using one of the following rationales. Either they truly believe that homosexuality is not a sin or they feel that homosexuality deserves a unique exception to God's law. Name another sin that a person can continue to do without repentance, or any guilt and still be considered qualified for ordination.
To quote a well known Christian apologist...
"Inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument." James White
Let's look at the Apostle Paul's brief list in 1 Corinthians and see if any of these would be given an exception.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (New American Standard Bible)
9Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
I listed the sins below. Should a person who refuses to believe that their action is a sin and thus refuses to seek forgiveness and change their behavior be qualified for office? Let's analyze this question for each of the sinful characteristics Paul lists.1. Fornicators - nope
2. Idolaters - nope
3. Adulterers - nope
4. Effeminate - good question - nope
5. Homosexuals - liberals - according to one's "interpretation" of scripture; everyone else - nope
6. Thieves - nope
7. Covetous - nope
8. Drunkards - nope
9. Revilers - nope
10. Swindlers - nope
Would it be consistent to grant an exception for homosexuals?
Soli Deo gloria!
Brian Granstra
