This UMNS News story ( “Delegation chairs look toward General Conference” https://buff.ly/2QDZNWA ) contained a comment

“The issue is Scriptural Authority! ”

Which, in this context means: “What **I** say the Bible says is what it means, and to “fail” to agree to that is to “question Scriptural Authority”. In other words, difference in interpretation is the issue, and the issue of homosexuality is a litmus test for whether one “truly” believes Scripture (meaning agrees with those who tout “Scriptural Authority” as synonymous with (and apparently indistinguishable from what *they* have decided are the measures). Sounds very familiar. The Southern Baptists just came right out and said that, and did not tie it to the homosexual issue up front, although it likely could have been the key issue for many of the “inerrancy” advocates. Pick a wedge issue throughout history, and we see the same claims being made by “Scriptural Authority is at stake” camps : agree with me on “what the Bible says” about this, or you simply don’t believe Scripture, or “don’t like what the Bible says” at all, which is why one would question the interpretation of any of these “Authorities” on “Scriptural Authority”. Unwilling to distinguish “God’s Word” from “their own appropriation of it” (this was preached in chapel by then Southern Baptist Theological Seminary President Duke McCall, which was also a part of the program in The Heart of America Bible Conference in the fall of 1980, when I was an M.Div. student there)