RickD wrote:Sugar coating what God calls an abomination, just so someone won't be offended, or feel "negative emotions", isn't really what we should do, is it? Again, maybe we as Christians should just preach universalism, and pretend eternal separation from God is just a lie, so we won't cause any negative emotions.
The difference, of course, is that universalism is false, and saying that homosexuality is unnatural is not. When people appeal to what happens in nature, we can explain to them that they have misunderstood the term "natural."
Jesus said to be wise as serpents even as we are gentle as doves. Paul says we should persuade men. Solomon says a kind word turns away wrath. And my grandmother says you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Pick your authority. The point should be obvious. If we don't
have to offend people when we tell the Truth, then why should we? Put differently, if we can make a case for Christian morality using more offensive terms and the case using less offensive terms, shouldn't we make the case using less offensive terms?
It may give us a good feeling to vent our frustrations and call things abominations. Yeah, baby! Let it out. But ask yourself if you aren't doing that more for yourself than for the person you are speaking to. Remember that when Moses called HS an abomination, he was talking to believers. Keep that kind of language in the church and the Bible study. If someone asks, don't lie about it. If an unbeliever says, "But doesn't your Bible call homosexuality an abomination? Isn't that intolerant?" then have the conversation. But to just come out with guns 'a blazin' using that kind of language is unpersuasive, inappropriate, and does no one any good.
Besides, why would you expect a non-Christian to abide by Christian ethics, particularly as enumerated and detailed by Christian Scripture? If someone wants to know your
personal morality, then fine, share Scripture. If they want to know why
they ought to adopt
your moral views (and they aren't Christian), appealing to Scripture is useless. Meet them where they are. Use general revelation (thus, Rom. 2:14-17). All that's even more true if you are trying to make an apologetic for Christianity--that is, that Christian morality is superior, and therefore we should be Christian. If you try to use Scripture to prove that Christian morality is superior in that case, then you are just using a circular argument.
So all in all, Paul is correct. I'm not denying that homosexuality is an abomination. I am denying that it is good practice to make that case and use that term to non-believers. Use teleological arguments (bad for the body/mind) or ontological arguments (it is unnatural). You'll find much more success, and you'll do the Christian cause good in general in the mind of the public, since you will be just one more witness of Christians who have a genuine case about why they believe what they do that can be differentiated from why the Muslims believe what they do (i.e., my holy book says so!).