Better to have “idolatrous morals” than idolatrous fear of God’s comprehensive will.
"Idolatrous morals" was not the best term to use on my part. (I'm not sure why I chose to use that term.) "Idolatrous belief systems" would be more accurate.
That being said - what you are saying here doesn't make much sense, for several reasons. First, it seems like you're implying that I said God's will doesn't apply outside of the church. Saying that God doesn't want Christians to use the government to try to force Christianity on the population is not the same thing as saying God's will doesn't apply outside the church.
Second - even if I were guilty of idolatry in this circumstance*, this is nothing more than a deflection - and one which doesn't make much sense at all. It's like saying "better to worship golden idols than bronze idols."
(*I would argue that all of us are guilty of idolatry in some way or to some degree, and on a somewhat regular basis... and those who say they aren't are lying to themselves. But when you try selling your idolatry as being essential to Christianity in the manner that we are seeing left/right partisan politics and Christian nationalism being sold
at the pulpit in many churches, it becomes especially problematic.)
Better to have “idolatrous morals” than idolatrous fear of God’s comprehensive will.
God equips “God’s minister to you for good” (Rm 13:4) outside of the church (1 Cor 5:13), but also equips for us, spiritual overseers inside the Church (1 Cor 5:12).
I'm not sure how your intending to use Romans 13:4 here - is it in defense of using the government to try to punish fornicators? Because that is what the OP is about, and what some in this thread (whether seriously or not) are arguing for. Just thought I'd ask the question, because you haven't made your intentions very clear.
If you're trying to use Romans 13:4 in defense of that stance, there are many verses which I believe would run contrary to that viewpoint. Not to mention - Romans 13:4 states to submit to governing authorities**. But currently, there are no laws in the U.S. (or in any western nation that I know of, for that matter) which prohibit fornication. And if our government remains democratic, there very likely never will be. So Romans 13:4 currently doesn't (and likely never will) apply. If you want a country where one smaller segment of the population tries to rule over another (rather large) segment of the population with force (and very likely at gunpoint), then I think you need to start looking elsewhere. Again - I'm not sure if this is what you're driving toward - but that is what is being argued for and supported in this thread.
(**And there are exceptions to this in scripture, of course. And I think one needs to understand the context and original Greek, as outlined
here.)
Ohh, now I see, both sides of the door are covered by the will of God. If a Christian is “sexually immoral”, that one is to be disassociated with, we have read that many times. But to date, there remains a difference between re-reading easily the things we can accept, and re-reading indigestible passages such that foremost of all, requires our support of both ministers BEFORE we can even begin to discuss what is done with Sodom and Gomorrah types outside the Church.
See my previous points about the will of God... I never said it didn't apply outside the church (quite the contrary, in fact).
The Sodom and Gomorrah comment - I'm not quite sure how to interpret that, either. Do fornicators fall into the "Sodom and Gomorrah" category for you? Do all sexual sins fall into that category? If so, that is painting with a very broad (and very judgmental) brush. Once again - I don't want to make assumptions about what you're saying here - but I think you've made it rather unclear.