Think about this. Here’s a leader in the Christian church [Tony Jones] who invites readers to respond to his controversial proposal [that sodomy is compatible with Christianity] but prohibits them from quoting the Bible. There’s an obvious reason for this prohibition: the Bible’s not on his side. Worse, the Bible is so far on the other side that he needs to get rid of the Bible to give his side credibility…But more significantly, nobody before recent times could imagine a leader in the Christian church arguing to get rid of Bible-quoting in fashioning an ethics.
My two cents
I guess it was a bit sad to see P. Andrew Sandlin leaving Christian Reconstruction, and while I don’t read about him too much nowadays, I can appreciate this straightforward assessment; he tells it like it is.
If we take Jones’ argument to its logical conclusion, then I suppose we couldn’t quote from the Bible to support the Resurrection either. Instead, we would have to rely on his self-determined “theological and/or philosophical arguments”. Without the Bible, what would you base your theological arguments on anyway? My first thoughts were inference, word of mouth, educated guesses, or a make-it-up-as-you-go-along approach.
More to the point, I think of temptation of Jesus, where He would always quote from the Old Testament to get back at Satan’s temptations. But, using Jones’ approach, Jesus may have been wrong in formulating his ethics. Ethics according to Mr Jones, or Lord Jones? I thought there was only one Lord.
Sandlin, P.A. (2012). Christian Ethics in the Wake of Hypocritical Relativists, Imperious Pharisees, Irrational Postmoderns, and Squishy Emergents. Available: http://docsandlin.com/2012/10/30/christian-ethics-in-the-wake-of-hypocritical-relativists-imperious-pharisees-irrational-postmoderns-and-squishy-emergents/. Last accessed 12th May 2013.