Level 4
Statement Against Unity Requires Us To Agree To Disagree
Acts 15
Although circumcision played a very prominent role in Israel in the Old Testament, John Calvin, in the light of New Testament revelation, considered it a matter of ceremonial law. As such, as far as the four categories of confessional, moral, wisdom and adiaphora are concerned, it could very well be considered a matter of adiaphora. Or, the correct understanding of the practice and purpose of circumcision might be considered a wisdom matter.
Either way, when the dispute between Christians over it arose in Acts 15 it was very appropriate for the Apostles to resolve the matter in a way that did not sacrifice unity.
Sexual matters, on the other hand, are always viewed as matters of morality in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. Adultery, fornication, incest etc. are all treated as significant matters, non-negotiables. The language of the Bible, when read in a very straightforward manner, prohibits same-sex marriage (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, Romans 1, I Corinthians 6:9 and I Timothy 1:10).
Since these are two very different cases it does not work to cite Acts 15 as an example of how the church should treat opposing views of same-sex marriage. Acts 15 is not relevant when it comes to moral matters.
.
Index Level 4
Introductory Page: Does Unity Require Us To Agree To Disagree?