Seems to me interpretive gymnastics is pretty common in Christianity.
Anyway, good for them.

More progress!
I salute those within the Presbyterian Church that are moving to end prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry within the church.
Peace!

And more good news for equality for all in the Presbyterian church.

“Furthermore, we are uncomfortable with the hermeneutical or interpretive gymnastics required to provide biblical sanction for sexually intimate same-sex relations”
A Word to the wise,
Never try “hermeneutical or interpretive gymnastics” without a spotter. And remeber to wash you hands after.

Alas, my hermaneutical gymnastics were’t up to the task of remaining in the church, but as a PK and recovering Presbyterian, I am delighted to hear that my erstwhile tribe is beginning to see that light, at least on this issue.
~ccm, New Mexico

Yet another “church” sinks into apostasy. Pretty soon the PCUSA will be about as irrelevant as the ECUSA. The Bible clearly states that clergy can’t be just anybody, but there are those with an agenda to cover all that up and serve their own self interests.

Yet another “church” sinks into apostasy.”
Actually, yet another church “sees the light”, and it is good.

“clergy can’t be just anybody”
I’ve seen a lot of “just anybody’s” and in fact there’s no restriction on someone being a preacher. And if they talk well they may make a good living at it. But that doesn’t mean they provide any needed service.

ok i disagree with “sink into apostasy” person but, how exactly is the ecusa or pcusa irrelevant? To whom? I’m sure it’s not to its members, who, I presume, are the only people that really matters, or, should we Episcopalians govern ourselves with an eye towards the approval of Southern Baptists?

I think when this hits them in the pockets there will be regrets.

“Furthermore, we are uncomfortable with the hermeneutical or interpretive gymnastics required to provide biblical sanction for sexually intimate same-sex relations,” the minority report added.
Truth has become irrelevent and has been since sin enter humanity. Humans will continue to rationalize away sin in everyway as many rationalize away the existance of the Great Creator. The attacks on the Holy Word of God will continue until the end of the earth’s time. Humanity only deprecates itself by lack of faith in the totality of the Holy Word and thus continues to perpetuate itself in sin and lies and to the very consequences it unfolds.

Boy, lonevoice, you sure sound like a lot of other people who’ve been on here, some of whom likely envy you your nickname.
I’d have said truth is irrelevant, more or less, to true believers who try to rationalize away facts and even humanity to preserve their baseless beliefs in their various invisible friends. You do realize, I hope, that there is not one reason to believe in your god. Not one physical hint, even, to the existence of whatever particular version of a god you believe in. None. I don’t know what’s happened in your head but outside of your head there’s not one datum to point to the existence of any god.

“”clergy can’t be just anybody”"
Tell THAT to Joel Osteen. To Benny Hinn. To Hagee. To Swaggart. To Haggard. To … well, the list is pretty well endless.
“Truth has become irrelevent and has been since sin enter humanity.”
Well, considering that “sin” ‘entered humanity’ with the very dawn of creation (according to Creationists), then truth has always BEEN “irrelevent” – to Creationists. (And the Republican party – can YOU say “Swift Boat”?)

lonevoice; Welcome to the Teridome. I totally agree with your statement. Truth has an enemy and so will you if you follow the teachings of Jesus; Jesus said that to His disciples, that is His genuine disciples. It seems the truth is still a parable that most don’t understand, even in the church.

cknuck & lonevoice:
What’s the old saying? “Truth is in the eyes of the beholder?” or in this case, in the Brain of the Believer.

It seems the presbytery has gone from scruples to no scruples. Why not bring in a pimp for a pastor if you can have sex with anybody as a pastor. (no question mark needed.)
I never thought I would have to leave the presbytery but I will not go to any denomination that does ordain homosexuals. I just won’t support it, fortunately we own much of our church property.

since when did it become an issue for us and not for God? is it not Gods desire that ALL people are loved and saved? this includes even you who choose to exclude,the least of these. May our GLBT sisters and brothers continue to follow the way of the prophets and LORD Jesus, and not of the voices of those puritans who hold on to the law of moral exclusivism.

“It seems the presbytery has gone from scruples to no scruples.”
Wrong. They just don’t embrace YOUR “scruples”. For example: “if you can have sex with anybody as a pastor”. They can DO that in your church???
“Pimps as pastors”???
“I will not go to any denomination that does ordain homosexuals.”
So much for the “Come unto me ALL ye who labor and are heavy burdened” entreaty. So much for the “Whosoever will may come.” invitation.

cknuck,
Jesus worked and lived among the marginalized. Seems you are only too hapy to (eager to?) marginalize some of His children. How sad for you and for your congregation.
It does, however, keep Jesus in ‘business’, as it were.

Interesting how a segment that constitutes less than 10% of the population is dictating what is or isn’t acceptable behavior.
The Church is full of sinners. As Calvinists Presbyterians believe (or should) in the total depravity of humanity. That means we recognize that with out the grace of God we have no hope of salvation. Those who are regenerate still sin, it’s part of the package. The Bible is our ultimate authority and it holds those in leadership to higher standards of behavior. Currently officers in the PC(USA) are required to maintain “chastity in singleness and fidelity in marriage.” Marriage is still defined as between a man and a woman.
Those who wish that this were not so should form their own denomination and go their merry way. The ones being traumatized and marginalized are the folks in the pews who feel they are being forced to leave because they are trying to be faithful to Scripture and the existing polity of the denomination.

“…..I will not go to any denomination that ordains homosexuals.” cknuck
That is your choice and your loss. Also, doesn’t that go against the Christian message of Loving folks? but wait,only certain folks, huh?
As to the pimp-pastor thing? Don’t some pastors have sex with anyone they want now…on the pretext that those folks are being brought to salvation? Aren’t some of them heterosexual? Think about it. What would make a homosexual pastor any different than a heterosexual one?

Yes, Jesus went and worked among the marginalized, but he also said to them after helping them, “go and sin NO MORE”. He didn’t say, do whatever you want.
I think that is what liberals want to do, is turn everything around and say they are being discriminated against. Traditional Christianity makes it clear that while homosexual inclinations may not be sinful, homosexual acts most certainly are. Put two and two together, and Christ would not condone this.
I find it amusing that several of the people that support the PCUSA’s move are not even Christian. Wow…

“Traditional Christianity makes it clear that while homosexual inclinations may not be sinful, homosexual acts most certainly are. Put two and two together, and Christ would not condone this.”
Quite a reach since, according to your beliefs, Christ was representing “God” who knew this book would be written and “it” was so all-fired concerned about homosexuality he could sure have had Jesus say something about it, right? No record of that in the Bible some consider inerrant. Sounds to me like Jesus, if your theology were true, didn’t give a whit about homosexuality.

mnwillems wrote: “Interesting how a segment that constitutes less than 10% of the population is dictating what is or isn’t acceptable behavior.”
I’m not a Presbyterian, but it seems the PCUSA is quite democratic. If the majority don’t accept this decision, then it won’t stand long. According to the article, 118 of 197 presbyters voted for this. Are they all gay? Do gay folk have special powers to control minds and influence votes? Do they have compromising photos of the presbyters? No, it’s because people are becoming convinced of the rightness of their cause, and eyes, minds, and hearts are opening up.
While some may not like it, it seems clear to me that the majority of people in the Minnesota prebytery, gay or straight, wish to ordain gay clergy. It’s not the result of some phantom power wielded by homosexuals.

mystery poster #1, 2/1/08 at 8:13 PM:
“Put two and two together and Christ would not condone this.” (homosexual acts)
Interesting that you can speak for Christ and what he would condone and what he wouldn’t. Where in the Bible does it say this?
You mentioned that “traditional Christianity makes it clear that homosexual inclinations may not be sinful”, acting on them is.
Key words -Traditional Christianity-not written in the big book Christianity.

“hermeneutical or interpretive gymnastics”
Are those like the interpretive somersaults required to dismiss nearly the entire book of Leviticus as not applicable to Christians, except for the parts about homosexuality?
Or the hermeneutical backflips one must do to accept a liberal interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14, and allow female clergy (as the PCUSA rightly does), but then turn around and become fundamentalists in regard to any verse mentioning homosexuality?
Or the limberness of mind one must have to dismiss the proscription against consuming blood in the book of Acts (rare steaks anyone? Blood transfusions?) but then invent a proscription of homosexuality from the letter to the Romans, in which homosexuality is only mentioned as a consequence of idolatry for a specific group of people, the ancient Greeks?
It’s clear to everyone with a brain and heart that two people loving each other is a GOOD thing. And that right and wrong are not found in our genitals.

The argument that Christ did not say anything about homosexuality is really lame, a loophole tactic that does not beer up to the teachings of Jesus and how He specifically describe marriage, relationship, and what is good in the eyes of God. Jesus was very clear on what is husband and wife and the value of a one man one woman marriage.
Most people that support this move are not Christian even in the church. You cannot follow Christ and pervert His word.

The argument that Christ condemns homosexuality because he did not say anything about same gender marriage is really lame, a loophole tactic that does not beer up to the teachings of Jesus

“Jesus worked and lived among the marginalized.”
ex Pentecostal two points are homosexuals especially in America are not marginalized, second Jesus could have lived and worked among homosexuals in His time (there certainly were some) but He didn’t either work or lived among them.
If we can get our facts right we find Jesus having but one standard about relationships, marriage, period. He said just as the old law said “for this reason a man shall leave his mother and father and become one flesh with his wife.
We find Him performing His first miracle in John at a wedding.

wannabe theo,
The items you present are strawman arguments and have little to do with this discussion. However, to address this: It’s clear to everyone with a brain and heart that two people loving each other is a GOOD thing. And that right and wrong are not found in our genitals.
Where does it stop? You seem you would advocate biological siblings to marry each other, perhaps a biological father to marry his daughter. Hey, they love each other, nothing wrong with that! Utterly pathetic…
Pagansister, you lecturing me on Christianity is about the same as me lecturing you on your make believe paganism. Best not go there since you have no idea what you are talking about…truly.

no name at 11:04P
“Pagansister, you lecturing me on Christianity is about the same as me lecturing you on your make believe paganism. Best not go there since you have no idea what you are talking about…truly.”
So you are not lecturing about being homosexual….are you? Afterall, if you think one must still be Christian to know about Christianity….would it not follow that one has to be currently gay in order to understand homosexuality?
Peace!

“Where does it stop? You seem you would advocate biological siblings to marry each other, perhaps a biological father to marry his daughter. Hey, they love each other, nothing wrong with that! Utterly pathetic…”
“Utterly pathetic” indeed. Thanks for critiquing your own post. Biological siblings should not produce biological offspring and if they do they should be penalized; that’s biological common sense. And of course homosexuals won’t. But biological siblings (same or opposite sex) may spend their lives living together – it’s not unusual – and it might benefit them to have a legal arrangement akin to marriage (a civil union).
As far as father and daughter or mother and son there is too much chance there for the parent to force the child into such an arrangement and there are the same biological problems as with siblings. There should not be anything akin to marriage there. While they could live together innocently, if they did and needed a legal relationship I’d think their parent-child relationship might already provide that.
So while your advancing sociological rather than imaginary reasons for your bias is a step up, you didn’t think your slippery slope examples through very well.

anonymous wrote: “The items you present are strawman arguments and have little to do with this discussion.”
I was responding to the claim by conservative members of the PCUSA that justifying same gender relationships required “interpretive gymnastics”. I was pointing out their hypocrisy in applying liberal hermeneutics to certain passages when it fit their “lifestyle” (female preachers, blood transfusions) and then doing an about face and becoming fundamentalists when it suits their prejudices.
As for the rest of your post: slippery slope arguments are the equivalent of admitting and announcing to the world “I can’t find anything wrong with homosexuality, so I’m going to discuss incest instead.” Are you justifying the proscription against same gender relations purely as a barrier against other behaviors? That’s quite a sacrifice to ask of homosexuals: “You either have to change your sexual orientation (good luck) or remain celibate, not because there’s anything wrong with your relationships, it’s just about what I imagine other people might do.” If you are against incest, then denounce incest. Don’t drag homosexuals into it.

6Yet when we are among the full-grown (spiritually mature Christians who are ripe in understanding), we do impart a [higher] wisdom (the knowledge of the divine plan previously hidden); but it is indeed not a wisdom of this present age or of this world nor of the leaders and rulers of this age, who are being brought to nothing and are doomed to pass away.
7But rather what we are setting forth is a wisdom of God once hidden [from the human understanding] and now revealed to us by God–[that wisdom] which God devised and decreed before the ages for our glorification [to lift us into the glory of His presence].
8None of the rulers of this age or world perceived and recognized and understood this, for if they had, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory.
9But, on the contrary, as the Scripture says, What eye has not seen and ear has not heard and has not entered into the heart of man, [all that] God has prepared (made and keeps ready) for those who love Him [[a]who hold Him in affectionate reverence, promptly obeying Him and gratefully recognizing the benefits He has bestowed].
10Yet to us God has unveiled and revealed them by and through His Spirit, for the [Holy] Spirit searches diligently, exploring and examining everything, even sounding the profound and bottomless things of God [the divine counsels and things hidden and beyond man's scrutiny].
11For what person perceives (knows and understands) what passes through a man’s thoughts except the man’s own spirit within him? Just so no one discerns (comes to know and comprehend) the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
12Now we have not received the spirit [that belongs to] the world, but the [Holy] Spirit Who is from God, [given to us] that we might realize and comprehend and appreciate the gifts [of divine favor and blessing so freely and lavishly] bestowed on us by God.
13And we are setting these truths forth in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the [Holy] Spirit, combining and interpreting spiritual truths with spiritual language [to those who possess the Holy Spirit].
14But the natural, nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and becoming better acquainted with them] because they are spiritually discerned and estimated and appreciated.
15But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him].
16For who has known or understood the mind (the counsels and purposes) of the Lord so as to guide and instruct Him and give Him knowledge? But we have the mind of Christ (the Messiah) and do hold the thoughts (feelings and purposes) of His heart.
I find it interesting that non-believers “waste” time on a website like this one and others. Deep within the embryo of every soul abides the Light of Christ which gives us the tug that God is real–faith.

JohnQ
“would it not follow that one has to be currently gay in order to understand homosexuality?”
No JohnQ one would only have read the Bible to know where God stands on this topic.
Pagan you are only an authority on dislike of the church so it would be wrong for you to preach on church government. I have nothing to say on paganism mainly because of lack of interest. I am curious to why you would be so interested in Christian as a confirmed pagan. Not to much going on in the pagan world?

lonevoice, you can preach all you want but it’s wind into the wind. Your words have no meaning and no significance except I suppose to a decreasing band of people who have nothing better to do than read an old book full of fantasy.
cknuck, you are mostly only an authority on the dislike of homosexuality so it would be wrong for you to tell other people what to comment on.

nnmns actually you are incorrect I have no dislike for homosexuals and I will have a guest over my house who is homosexual along with the rest of my friends for the super bowl. We will hang out have refreshments and enjoy the game and the subject of homosexuality (although my views are clear to everyone) will not even come up. It comes up here when I read misinformation concerning homosexuality and the bibles and Christianity. So the picture of me you try to paint is incorrect I serve homosexuals in my ministry with the same compassion I serve anyone else. I repeat the act of homosexuality is sinful according to the bible along with other sins. I have no dislike for any human beings. Now if you can honor my statements of belief then that would show growth in the fact that you can accept that everyone does not non do they have to believe what you believe.
Most of the pressure the church has succumbed to concerning homosexuality has come from outside of the church.

2/1/08 mystery poster 11:04PM (this would be easier if you had a name)
Again you assume I know nothing about Christianity. I’m not ignorant of my former religion, Christianity. Lecturing you? Only asking a question. You haven’t told me where the Bible says homosexuality (acting on it that is, of course) wrong. As to lecturing me on my “make believe” Paganism. What is make belief Paganism? Pagans accept all who come to them, glbt, and try to do as we want as long as it harms none. Can you and your beliefs say that? The none acceptance of glbt seems to suggest otherwise.
cknuck, how many times do I have to mention that I don’t dislike or hate or loath Christianity? Like governments everywhere it has it’s problems. I just don’t believe in Christianity’s fairy tale stories, like Christ’s divinity. He was just a man, no different than any other man,which automaticly makes me a non-Christian. However, I do find it wrong that any religion that claims to love all it’s people and has a supposedly loving god would exclude those who love a person of the same gender. Simple as that. BTW, the Pagan world is doing just fine. Thanks for asking.
As to my interest in Christianity? I was raised in it, have sisters and friends etc. who still are in it, but I find all religions intriguing.

mnwillems,
“Interesting how a segment that constitutes less than 10% of the population is dictating what is or isn’t acceptable behavior.”
I really don’t think the Presbyterians are “dictating what is or isn’t acceptable behavior” for ALL of the population. I think they only get to decide what’s acceptable/not acceptable for members of their particular faith.
“As Calvinists Presbyterians believe (or should) in the total depravity of humanity.”
That’s a wierd belief, imo, but they’re welcome to it. (Are ALL Presbyterians “Calvinist Presbyterians”, btw?)
“Currently officers in the PC(USA) are required to maintain “chastity in singleness and fidelity in marriage.” Marriage is still defined as between a man and a woman.”
Bully for them. It’s slightly different in our Church. Pax vobiscum and all that, eh?
“Those who wish that this were not so should form their own denomination and go their merry way.”
Many have already done that. Again, pax etc.
“The ones being traumatized and marginalized are the folks in the pews who feel they are being forced to leave because they are trying to be faithful to Scripture and the existing polity of the denomination.”
I can think of an entire other group of people who are being traumatized and marginalized. And I disagree that those “folks in the pews” are being “forced” to leave, as well as for the specific reaon you gave. Polity changes sometime, ya know. It sure did in my old faith denomination, tho the change happened too late to be of any benefit to my 2 divorced sisters – they had to leave their Church.
Scary stuff this change business.

mystery poster,
“Traditional Christianity makes it clear that while homosexual inclinations may not be sinful, homosexual acts most certainly are.”
But then again, not all people ARE “traditional Christians”, are they? Heck, some people in the Good Ole U. S. of A. (TM) aren’t even Christians at all. Why, did you know that some Americans are Jews? Did you knkow some are Hindus? And that others are Jains? Gosh, I’ve heard that there are even pagans and Wiccans, and atheists, and – GASP!, say not SO!!! – Muslims.
So tell us why you think those non-traditional Christians and people of other faith must accept the tenets of “traditional” ones? Must Presbyterians now accept what the Catholic Chruch teaches too??? Must Reformed Jews abide by your Church’s teachings???
Such a narrow view of faith traditions.

Hey ck,
“that does not beer up to the teachings of Jesus and how He specifically describe marriage, relationship”
1. Is to “beer up” anything like to “man up”?
2. The passage in which Jesus gave the description you so dearly cking to is His response to whether or not D-I-V-O-R-C-E was permissible. I think you know that. I think you also know that His answer was a solid “No, it isn’t!” Ergo, marriage is for life (a la Huckabee). If you think Christ’s answer was “lame”, if I were you, I’d take it up with Him.
We, otoh, think His answer wasn’t about homosexuality, and that your ‘arguing’ that it was is what is lame. Homosexuality sure wasn’t included in the Big Ten, or the Great Two, and Christ Himself made no mention of it.
“The lady doth protest TOO much, methinks.” – Wm. Shakespeare

cknuck wrote: “Most of the pressure the church has succumbed to concerning homosexuality has come from outside of the church.”
I disagree. How are non-Presbyterians “pressuring” Presbyterians into this change? This change is occurring because the majority of people in that presbytery want it. You seem to be in some very serious denial. Whether you wish to believe it or not, many of your fellow Presbyterians disagree with you on this issue, and their numbers increase every day. The same is true for the Lutherans, Episcopalians, Methodists etc. I just don’t see the basis for these loopy “conspiracy theory” ideas that people from the outside are somehow controlling and manipulating these denominations. These changes are absolutely coming from the inside.

“two points are homosexuals especially in America are not marginalized”
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA. One can STILL be fired in 37 States just for being gay. One can still be refused housing accommodation just for being gay. And we haven’t even begun to talk of same-sex marriage. I think job discrimination and housing restrictions are BIG, concrete examples of the marginalization of gay people in America.
“second Jesus could have lived and worked among homosexuals in His time (there certainly were some) but He didn’t either work or lived among them.”
I don’t get your distinction. Care to clarify it?
And while you’re at it, you could pull out that wonderful example of Christ “healing” a homosexual in the Bible. Ooopps, that ain’t there either.
“If we can get our facts right …”
I sincerely doubt you can, cknuck. Haven’t seen much evidence of it yet.
“we find Jesus having but one standard about relationships, marriage, period.”
Au contraire. 1.) (re: marriage) His “standard” was “for life”. America doesn’t seem to have a problem with ignoring THAT part of His ‘definition’, so I’m not sure why they (well, YOU) want to be a stickler about 1 man/1 woman (at a time) types of marriages so popular among the heterosexuals nowadays. 2.) Not all Americans are Christian. 3.) Christ created a new type of family in His dieing moments on the cross, so I’m sorry, but I don’t really trust your “one standard about relationships” invention.
“He said just as the old law said “for this reason a man shall leave his mother and father and become one flesh with his wife.”
Yes, I agree He DID say that – in response to a question from the Pharisees as to whether or not D-I-V-O-R-C-E was permitted. And He was very, very clear that it was NOT. Oh, and since we’re doing Bible lessons, He also said in another part of the Book, “Alas, alas for you, lawyers and PHARISEES, HYPOCRITES”.
“We find Him performing His first miracle in John at a wedding.”
Like I didn’t know that. And the point of this is … ???

mystery poster,
It’s rich hearing you lecture wannabe theo on “straw man ‘arguments’”, and then have you come up with: “seem you would advocate biological siblings to marry each other, perhaps a biological father to marry his daughter. Hey, they love each other, nothing wrong with that! Utterly pathetic…”
theo didn’t suggest that, so you invented an evident straw man. (Oh, and a hint: neither the imaginary siblings nor the invented father/daughter combo require marriage to establish kinship – they already ARE kin. But thanx 4 tryin’.)
And to call another’s firmly held faith beliefs “make believe” is pretty low. But as you yourself typed, best not go there since you have no idea what you are talking about…truly.

cknuck wrote: “Most of the pressure the church has succumbed to concerning homosexuality has come from outside of the church.”
Yet more false witness. Take a look at the VOTE, ck. It was overwhelming – “197 voted to allow the re-ordination, 79 did not” – that’s more than 2 to 1 in favour. And, ahem, only members get to vote. Outsiders do not.
Sorry, but you are simply – and again – wrong.

nnmns: “you are mostly only an authority on the dislike of homosexuality”
cknuck: “nnmns actually you are incorrect I have no dislike for homosexuals” and “I repeat the act of homosexuality is sinful”
I was careful in my writing; I expected you’d deny a dislike for homosexuals (though your choice of type of Christian religion to pursue brings that into question) but you’ve made it over-clear you dislike homosexuality.
It’s really discouraging how much more chatter this topic gets than almost any other one.

“It’s really discouraging how much more chatter this topic gets than almost any other one.”
Ain’t that the truth!
Can you imagine what if feels like to be gay/bi and each time any article talks about anything positive to do with HO-mo-sex-u-ality to have ones existence/life discussed as though we were talking about fictional lives in a book.
It no longer bothers me at all. However, I do worry about younger lgbt people who are not secure in themselves. The exceptionally high suicide rate amongst lgbt youth is not because they are defective….it is because of people who claim to be trying to save them.
Again I salute the Minnesota Presbyterians as well as all the other Presbyterians, Lutherans, Catholics, Episcopalians, Methodist, Jews, etc that are working to end prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry. Oops, and not to be left out….pagans and atheists. Even those from Canada. *smile*
Peace!

The change is coming from the members of the Churches of the denominations mentioned by some of you. It’s happening because people are studying, and seeking into the past of the Bible and the world as it was at that time. Knowledge has increased with the communications we now live with, and new discoveries of ancient books, like The Dead Sea Scrolls, Nag Hammadi, The Gospel of Phillip, Thomas, Mary, etc., more probably to come, because Gods truth will be known, despite mans atempt to cover it up. With truth comes love, and acceptence just as Jesus Christ intended from the start.

Henrietta22: I agree with the first part of your post, about change coming from within the various mainline protestant churches. I don’t however, believe Gnostic gospels have anything to do with this issue. Is there some connection I’m missing?

Yes, wannabe theo. The fact that many people who take every word as infallible, and only one interpretation of everything printed in the Bible, such as Homosexuality is a sin, period. Many manuscripts were eliminated over putting the Bible together the way they wanted it to be for themselves in these centuries after Christ. I understand other teachings from Jesus are coming to light, and who knows what they will show in the future. Gnostic Christians dig for new understandings, at least from what I’ve been reading. They seek truth in their religion.

nnmns it seems that you have not only choose your words carefully but you have choose mind as well.

nnmns don’t pretend that you are concerned for young black people to promote homosexuality that’s quite unfair and if you want I will prove your motives concerning young black people.
This is about homosexuality not race there is a vast difference so climb of the backs of Black folk and stop exploiting something that you are not an advocate of change. You are a advocate for homosexuality not racial equality. Stick to your fight and don’t perpetrate.

cknuck, I challenge you to “prove my motives concerning young black people”.
There is a difference between homosexuality/heterosexuality and race: it’s easier to tell one’s “race”, either by appearance or by genealogy. Other than that I don’t see much difference; both are things we are born with.
But I did hope that by bringing that up you would see the parallels between the two as far as young or vulnerable members of both groups are concerned.
And I do consider myself an advocate for racial equality. It doesn’t seem to come up much here but if it did I think you’d realize that.

cknuck-
I too am an advocate of racial equality. I have been my whole life….well, maybe only since I was six years old.
Any and all prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry is wrong.
I am more than well aware that not just lgbt people suffer at the hands of prejudice-supportive people. Over-weight, older, female, black, asian, native American, middle eastern, hispanic, Muslim, Jewish, athiest, and sometimes even Christian and white people suffer. Prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry against any person, is just wrong.
Out of respect for you, I usually avoid any mention of race/ethnicity in relationship to lgbt equality because I know it bothers you so very much. Perhaps, I have been in error in doing this for the last few years. Perhaps I should have continued to demonstrate the connection.
One does not have to be black to know that prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry is wrong. But, to be black or gay and perpetuate prejudice, and bigotry is even worse than to be an ignorant white person or an ignorant Christian (please note, I am not suggesting all white people nor, all Christians are ignorant)that has not stopped to questions the hate they have learned.
As a white man, I do not know what it is like to be black and suffer prejudice, etc….however, as a gay person, I am well aware of what prejudice feels like. And, I have to believe they feeling is similar if not identical.
How any black person can perpetuate prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry (except perhaps against white people) is almost beyond me. When I read a few of your posts, I often have tears in my eyes with a sense of the pain you must have deep within to write some of the things you do. I have great respect for you and I truly believe that you mean well. However, from time to time your pain shows. I often wonder if you even feel the pain…..or, out of self-defense you have become numb to it.
Regardless, may you let the warmth of our Lord’s love heal you.
Peace!

“you have choose mind”
THIS is the kind of “thinking” we have to put up with!
“nnmns don’t pretend that you are concerned for young black people to promote homosexuality that’s quite unfair and if you want I will prove your motives concerning young black people.”
I just re-read this entire thread and nnmns hadn’t posted a single post on race. As if someone can “prove” another’s “motives” to begin with is absurd, but how anyone can “promote” homosexuality is simply unreal. Can one “promote” people into becoming black??? Equally as absurd. Either one is or one is not attracted to others of the same sex just like either one is black or one is not black.
And if you want to understand just HOW offensive your remarks are, try to imagine someone suggesting a person be “healed” of their skin colour (as some well-meaning (?) “Christian” folk often suggest about gay people). Revolting, no? And equally impossible too.

First of all JohnQ I do also have respect for you but the act of homosexuality is a sin, being black or any other color is not. Homosexual advocates such as nnmns so easily did try to make the comparison; once again I will show the awful error in this selfish thing. Slavery, murder, breeding, whipped, mutilated, mass lynching, mass graves, snatched from parents, vaudeville blackface ridicule, ridiculed in movies and television shows, made to walk in the gutter if a white person was on the sidewalk, killed for looking a white person in the eye, or looking at a white woman, kicked for not doing a job well, segregation, denied services, denial of education, contained living areas, Jim Crow, identity robbery, job limits, targeted with drugs, targeted with alcohol sales, targeted with cigarette sales, profiled, and jailed more than any other citizensI could go on and on to show you white folk who want to compare homosexuality to being Black you just don’t have the right after all we have suffered from your forefathers. But I will say this; I do not ridicule homosexuals because I think the act is sinful and therefore harmful, I have not harmed any of my homosexual friends, or denied them services or even jobs with my organizations or did any of the things mentioned above. I believe with all of my heart it is sinful and I will not, unlike the Presbytery, be pressured to change my views in this matter.

cknuck-
Again, I salute the Presbytery for their change in direction.
I believe that the things that were done to black people in this country in the past (and, is some cases still today) are beyond awful….actually beyond words. I am no more guilty of what our forefathers did to blacks than you.
While I can not take responsibility for the action of our forefathers, I can and do take responsibility for my words and actions. That is why I continue to do what I can to spread understanding, love, and acceptance of all people.
Blacks were not humiliated, tortured, and gassed to death by the Nazis…..gays were. Blacks children have rarely been thrown out of their homes by ther parents and told that they were sick and would burn in hell. Gays have certianly been the but of countless jokes, ridicule on tv and in movies….and, still in many locker rooms across the country.
Thankfully, today few churches preach white supremacy……countless churches still make gays their scapegoats. In the last two presidential races candidates have rallied the faithful and whipped them into a frenzy by ranting against gays, equality, and marriage. Thankfully, no presidential candidate would be given the time of day ranting against blacks.
The point is not who has suffered more. All people suffer whenever any person is oppressed. All people suffer whenever prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry exist.
I completely agree that being black (or, any other color) is not sinful. However, I would take that a step further and state that sexuality is not sinful.
I stated that out of respect for you I do not usually make the connection between blacks and gays. I also usually avoid the connection because equal-rights for lgbt people can stand on its own merits. Yet, I would tell you that I believe that the equal-rights are equal-rights and the prejudice demonstrated in the past (and, to some extent still today) is the same as the prejudice exibited against lgbt people.
One of our early advocates for equality for lgbt people was also an advocate for equality for the races. I am sure you have heard of him…..Bayard Rustin.
ckunck, I am not trying to presure you nor, anyone else into changing my views. I am trying to assist you in really examining your views from a big picture pov.
Your Brother in Christ.

cknuck, much of what JohnQ said I agree with, and he said it better than I would. But let me be clear: all those things you listed that have happened to black people were terrible and all the things JohnQ listed that have happened to gays, etc. were terrible. Both should be ended, along with all other kinds of discrimination and bigotry and hate crimes. As an atheist I feel somewhat vulnerable to hate crimes though we can be very hard to identify. But that may be why I argue and vote so as to try to end all such behavior. I think everyone else susceptible to it would be wise to act the same way, but it’s clear the human race are not an especially wise bunch.
Please consider that a LOT of people identify themselves as Christians and have been able to find acceptance for a much wider group of people and their behavior than you have. You, too, could remain a Christian while condoning a wider range of non-harmful behavior if you’d just do it.

lonevoice:
You said you found it “interesting” that non-believers “waste” time on this and simular sites. Following that line, why do you believers “waste” time on this site and others? The site is to have an exchange of ideas on religion…ALL religions, not just Christianity. I can’t answer for the other “non-believers”, but for me, I find the exchange of ideas and opinions informative and enlightning. Believe me, I wouldn’t waste my time here if I thought I was wasting my time. You?

JohnQ it is true that the Nazi did great atrocities to many people but I’m talking about here in America where being homosexual and white has nothing to do with anything you mentioned. Can you say smoke screen? How come you don’t equate it to Jews, based on your argument it seems logical that you would pick Jewish people instead of Black folk, I guess we’re just handy. But go ahead continue to do what your forefathers have done use Black folk to further your agendas. If you were concerned in the least about what your forefathers have done to Blacks you would have tried to d something about it. Considering the severity of the deeds then the acts or rectifying would have been apparent. JohnQ you may be my brother in Christ but you are no friend to Blacks, your concern is to promote homosexuality, and mind is to remind folk it is not only sinful but unhealthy.
nnmns if your argument on homosexuality is strong then you can keep it separate from my heritage

cknuck, I am very sorry for what has happened and continues to happen to blacks as well as Jews, lgbt’s, Palestinians and on and on. And I’m sorry for the hurt you experience when it’s brought up. But I won’t promise to not draw the obvious parallel between bigotry against blacks and bigotry against homosexuals.
Suck it up. Or better, open your eyes to the obvious.

nnmns, I said I would prove your lack of concern for black youth, and your last post proves your “I’m sorry” is insincere and in pasting. (Suck it up)? How very civil. Thanks for making my point. So you think just throwing the Jews and Palestinians in your statement cleans it up enough to use “blacks” (lower case b in is noted) to promote your agenda. We are a race you no longer own to do with what you will. I only set out to prove your insincerity concerning using my heritage to add weight to your argument about homosexuality. I am a Presbyterian and a Christian (you by your own admission are neither) I have objections about homosexual leadership in my denomination. So the best you can do is to compare a sexual attraction to the same sex to a heritage of a race people.

By the way nnmns do you make it a practice to make the comparison to Black folk you come in contact with? I’d love to see that.

Let’s see your “proof”.
Educate me on the politically correct use of capitalization in black/Black. I would not worry if someone wrote about “whites”.
I never owned anyone and I hope I would not have, but who knows what anyone would do in the wrong circumstances. Even you.
For instance, I have no reason to think that if Blacks had had the power and Whites had been in the position Blacks were in in say the 1600′s then Blacks might well have enslaved and badly used Whites. They’ve enslaved other Blacks all too often. My point is that, given the opportunity and bad public morality, any group might do equally bad things.

“By the way nnmns do you make it a practice to make the comparison to Black folk you come in contact with?”
I don’t have that many conversations about bigotry against homosexuals other than here, but if I did and the occasion arose I wouldn’t hesitate to bring that up.

cknuck, it occurs to me you can’t tell the difference between my comparing Blacks with Homosexuals, which I’m not, and bigotry against Blacks and bigotry against Homosexuals, which is what I am doing.

“I am a Presbyterian and a Christian (you by your own admission are neither)”
Call it a proud proclamation.

“cknuck, it occurs to me you can’t tell the difference between my comparing Blacks with Homosexuals, which I’m not, and bigotry against Blacks and bigotry against Homosexuals, which is what I am doing.”
Ditto me!
Peace!

Allow me to help you:
One is a race of people, who you cannot say “if” about because if is not a possiblity.
The other is sexual perference it’s in the reference “homo” “sexual” not a race of people.
So one is about race and the other is about sex.

You can have sex you can even have homosexual sex but you can never be Black, one you have reference the other you don’t. And because of what was done to Blacks in “this” country the last thing you would want to do is to trivialize it by comparing it to homosexuality.

I don’t know whether I could have homosexual sex or not; I kind of doubt it. My understanding is, being homosexual means you are attracted to your own sex; I’m not. So while I don’t know what I’d be inclined to do in some circumstance I’d have to say I’m not homosexual and even if I somehow managed to have sex with a man I don’t think that I’d become attracted to men.
I do not mean to trivialize what happened to Blacks in America. It was awful and a blot on America that will never go away. Another such is what “we” did to native Americans.
But to compare the effect on young or vulnerable Homosexuals of the bigotry against them to the effect on young or vulnerable Blacks of the bigotry against them is not to trivialize what’s been done to Blacks or to Homosexual or even to compare the magnitude of the horrors of what’s been done to those groups of people.

Let’s face it, there has been discrimination against many groups of people because of the color of their skin or the shape of their eyes or whatever….Japanese, Blacks, Chinese etc.forever. The Native Americans got squashed by the Whites who thought the Naive Americans were sub human and proceeded to take their land away and tell them where they could live. Everyone has had problems. However this is the here and now. None of use were responsible for what our ancestors did or may have done. If some of us had/have problems because of our color or religion, that is sad, but reality. It isn’t or wasn’t right, but no one said life is fair. Homosexuals however, come in all sizes, shapes, colors and religions. That is a fact. The fact that some folks dislike them because of their sexual perferences is as stupid as disliking someone who is a different color or religion or comes from Mars.

depends on what plans the Martians have for us.

pagan, you want to blend sexual preference in with skin color and race, but it is different.

I’m of the impression that, like race, sexual preference is genetic. To the extent it’s not, I’m pretty sure we don’t know what causes it. No parent, I think, is going to say “Let’s make Judy a homosexual; they have so much more fun.”

Nope, cknuck, not blending. Only said that discrimination has a past, all the way back to and before JC’s time…and probably before. I’m sure one caveman disliked another cave man because he had the wrong color eyes, or hair or wasn’t frightened of the thunder and lightning gods as he was supposed to be.
Prejudice or discrimination for whatever reason is wrong. It’s just as wrong to discriminate against a person for their sexual orientation as it is to discriminate against a person for their skin color. What you don’t seem to process is that skin color isn’t a choice and neither is one’s sexual preference. That is the difference here. Love between 2 consenting adults, no matter same gender or opposite gender is what is right. No act of love is wrong.
The only way skin color can be continued is if the parents are the same color, and there is no mixing of the races. That too is a personal choice…but the “baby” has had no choice in it’s characteristics…even in who he/she will love as an adult.

“Prejudice or discrimination for whatever reason is wrong.”
“Love between 2 consenting adults, no matter same gender or opposite gender is what is right. No act of love is wrong.” (emphasis added)
Two very broad and wrong statements. So you’re basically saying that I cannot discriminate between two job candidates in ANY way? I cannot discriminate based on experience, or training received, or specific skills?
You are also giving blanket consent to incest. After all, it is love between two consensing adults and NO act of love is wrong. Why is one OK in the eyes of some here and the other not? Hmm??

un-named poster: 3:00 PM 2/4/08:
You can discriminate between 2 job candidates based on experience, or training received or specific skills…that’s a no brainer. However, not because of race, religion, or sexual orientation. Called Equal Opportunity Employer. Gee, I thought you knew that.
“You are also giving blanket consent to incest. After all, it is love between to consenting adults and NO act of love is wrong.”
Stretching things a bit, aren’t you?
I’m not giving consent to anything….that would be the 2 consenting adults that would be doing that. Key word, “consenting”. Do I think incest is right, no, but that isn’t my decision, is it?
Why is what OK in the eyes of some here and the other not?

You can discriminate between 2 job candidates based on experience, or training received or specific skills…that’s a no brainer. However, not because of race, religion, or sexual orientation. Called Equal Opportunity Employer. Gee, I thought you knew that.
I do know that. That’s why I said your statement was wrong. Thanks for participating.
Do I think incest is right, no, but that isn’t my decision, is it?
So are you saying the government shouldn’t legislate against that? After all, it isn’t YOUR decision. It doesn’t affect YOU. These are the same arguments that are used for homosexual acts. See where I am going? Both are immoral. Period.

Incest that produces a child is immoral because of the real danger to the child’s genetics. Incest between a parent and child is, to me, immoral because of the likelihood the parent forced it. What a brother and sister do between themselves as adults is, as far as I’m concerned, their business as long as they use good birth control. And no, I never had a sister. And of course same-sexed sibs won’t produce a child.
I don’t see what that has to do with homosexual relations outside the family.

no-name poster, 2/4/08, 3:52 PM :
There are laws about incest….that’s a whole different deal than laws against homosexuals. nnmns expressed well the problems with incest and consequences.
Consenting adults, outside the family,having a homosexual relationship…not immoral,IMO. Laws that don’t include equality for homosexuals…immoral.

Cknuck,
I would take any of the gay individuals I know over most of the blacks that I have to deal with each day. They want to make improvements on their lives. The children I have met being rasied by these individuels are tolerant of others and not constantly rude with a chip on their shoulders.
I don’t know what others feel, but I don’t owe your race anything. It is time for them to get their act together and stop behaving like they say we pagans are. I am sick of getting condemned for not believing in your god, but its okay for these good christians to have 4 or 5 kids with as many men/husbands or what ever. I on the other hand had the number of kids I could afford to raise. I didn’t get every little thing handed to me on a platter. I had to pay big bucks for my kids to got to preschool or have after school care.
Oh bye the way, I am not prejudice, have many black friends, did a great deal of my education at an inner city community college, but I am so fed up with ill mannered parents and children who think the world owes them and that they don’t have to behave in a civilized manner.
This starts in preschool too. Children screaming at, hitting, kicking slapping teachers and parents who say oh they never act like that at home. Yeah right. Its time for them to get their act together and stop counting on the freebies, like the rest of us who have low paying jobs do.
Sorry for the rant all, but I am sick of people like Cknuck putting down others.

Well said, Ruairi. Can relate.

Greetings. Yes God is Good all the time.
We who are children of the most High.
Love all people who or whatever they may be.
For we must not judge or condemn , and most of all perhaps we dislike the things they do we can but pray perhaps say a kind word or two its no good bible bashing gays or whoever we can only pray that god releases them from bondage .
I have been praying for years on these situations but i know somtimes we have to put actions with prayer.
BUT let the almighty sort it out for we must keep our minds on Christ for He alone is the way the truth and the life some people will not stand still and listen to the voice within or listen to their concience but who knows what goes through peoples minds when they sleep or try to sleep.indeed a guilty concience will play tricks on the mind and lead some into suicide and I can honestly say no man can win the heart of anyone with a bullet for he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword. man learns by his own mistakes when there is nothing left man will say what have i done. it is said in the bible man will destroy himself and the world wil be in chaos but this I say be not concerned with the problems of the world we must keep our minds on Christ.OBEY THE WORD AND FIND SALVATION
he cannot rectify the mistakes when he is dead but stands in the judgement of God.
to this I say amen praise the LORD.for the truth the love the power and the compassion we must show one another.for the truth will hurt but the truth will set us free.
Also I say the mule is a stubborn animal and likes to do what he like we are like a mule somtimes this is why we must repent in order to become a new creation. through a simple prayer asking God to forgive us And be baptised this we pray will turn us into a new creation.

Rev.H. Henry:
And your point is?

cknuck
Prejudice is prejudice – in all its forms. There is a great song in the show Avenue Q that says “Eveyone’s a little bit racist, sometimes” (sung by a black character). It goes on to skewer all the prejudices we so lovingly harbor. Prejudice is a sin – in that it blocks you from your relationship with God. Now the question becomes how do you deal with your sin? Denying it simply makes you look foolish. Ignoring it is not much better. Confessing it and accepting forgiveness is great, unless you continue to be prejudiced. So the best thing is to address it full on, deal with it, and find a new, untired path. Some folks are blocked by race, others by government documentation, other’s by affectional orientation (it ain’t ALL about sex).
Sin is sin, baby. Now what are you going to do?

jestrfly:
There is also a great song from one of my favorite plays, and movie “South Pacific” which describes the truth in how prejudice is spread. “You’ve Got To Be Taught” which says “you’ve got to be taught to hate and fear, you’ve got to be taught from year to year, to hate all the people your relatives hate, you’ve got to be carefully taught.”
I worked with kindergardeners, and they were accepting of everyone in the class…not noticing color at all. Hopefully they would stay that way, but many times it doesn’t.

The bible says that we are to love all. Even our enimies as ourselves, those who persecute and despise us. We are to pray for them . We are to welcome all who come through the doors of our church. Remember “but for the grace of God there go I”. It seems to me that the gay community wants to lump us all together as they say we do to them. They preach we are dicriminating and hateful and maybe some are. While we may view sin in a different light than they do sin is what God says it is not what man says it is. It is not about the person, God loves all, but he hates sin. Yes this includes liars,adulterers, fornicaters,thieves,cheaters,so on and so on.
All who come to Jesus must repent and be cleansed from their sins. There are no exceptions. Sin must not rule our lives. Doesn’t mean we are perfect or better than anybody else it just means we are saved from the wrath to come. Pray and read the whole 2nd chapter of Acts, especially Acts 2:38 it is the key to salvation. It’s God’s word, believe what you will. 2 Cor.11:14-15 “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.15 Therefore it is no great thing if his minister also be transformed as the ministers of rightousness; whose end shall be according to their works.”

Pagansister,
I know the song well! The reasson i preferred working with kids for more than 20 years was that I did not have to UNteach very much. Adults are so stinking slow to learn because they have so much to unpack.
I offer a new strategy, which is this…
Instead of arguing about why to keep them out, what would happen if homosexuals were allowed to become full and free members of your church? Would anything actually change?
One thing I have been told (and have seen evidence of myself) is that as a group, they are generous (stewardship may increase). Also, once they are committed, they participate quite a bit (more folks in the pews, and more people to serve in all the jobs).
There is no more frequent incidence of domestic turmoil than with heterosexual couples. There are no more incidents of inappropriate advances or contact. than with heterosexual people.
So all I see here are the upsides. All that keeps the doors closed is fear and self-righteousness. Those are lousy reasons, for sure.

I like your suggestions that homosexuals be allowed to become full and free members of the church. Now, if the Presbyterians would take your suggestion, that would be great. There can be nothing but up sides with inclusion of all in a church. But that is hard for some folks to understand. Time will tell what happens in this case.

Haven’t visited this wasteland in over a year and am surprised to find the same old self-interest, deception and subversion.

Hell awaits. That is, until you accept the free gift of God’s grace and turn from your ways.

Do it now, you don’t know that you will have another opportunity.

pagan your interest in homosexuals and church are not surprising you are pagan and it is obvious your interest has nothing to do with Christ. All those folk on the fence about this should know that their thought if they are for homosexuality lines up with yours, a pagan. Nothing to do with Christ everything to do with sexual = homosexual activity