We all know the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over, but expecting a different result. This whole discussion must secretly feel good because they keep having it. One of the things left out of this article is that the UCC has gained some significant churches as a result of the denominational stance (though, to be honest we have lost a few as well).
God’s love is without limit, qualification, or exemption. It is humanity that tries to bar the windows, lock the doors, and set up checkpoints.
O’ well, neither side is likely to change tactics, goals, or expectations. So I hope they have fun. Ft Worth is an intersting city. When the UCC had their Synod there in ’87 we had a service or worship for the youth in the Riverside Park downtown – an awesome location. Cowboy Up, folks, it’s gon’na be a hard ride!

“For more than 30 years, the United Methodist Church has been trying to show that a denomination divided against itself on homosexuality can still stand.”
Well, I’m not so sure of that. One of the reasons that the homosexuality issue is such a major one is because it belies the more general issue of how to interpret the Bible. Gay-rights activists either have to go through mental gymnastics to make “thou shall not lie with a man as thou lie with a woman” mean something else, or, simply have to deny the supremacy of the Bible altogether, either of which conservatives will not accept. The deeper issue is not so much about homosexuality as it is about the very nature of the religion itself.
Now, obviously I and most of the normal posters here disagree about the right side on this issue, but whichever side is “right,” the fact is that one denomination cannot stand with both opinions within it, unless both sides are willing to basically ignore the fact. It sounds like in the Methodist Church, that has been working, for the most part, for a while. But the controversies make me think that eventually this will no longer be the case, and if so the will have to pick one side eventually, or split.
God bless.

“A double minded man is unstable in all of his ways.”
It’s funny that the biblical quote does not say that the double minded man is unstable in half of his ways, but it does say in all of his ways. I think this is a indication of how God wants us to come into His presence and of what is acceptable, and not acceptable to God.

Amazing how a religion supposedly based on love can find it in its heart to hate a class of people so thoroughly.

“Amazing how a religion supposedly based on love can find it in its heart to hate a class of people so thoroughly.”
Who said anything about hating anybody?
God bless…

Joey-
Can we assume that you follow all the laws in Leviticus?
If not, what is your fascination with Lev 18?
If you do, then let us look at the whole of Lev 18. The New International…….18:6-20 uses the words “sexual relations” as does 18:23. In the New King James….6-20 utilizes the catchy phrase “uncover the nakedness”. So, it the point is that males are not to engage in sexual relations with other males…why does Lev 18:22 not say that in the same way that it is said in 6-20?
I am not sure what you think takes mental gymnastics to understand?
Peace!

Scott they may not hate, but they disrespect GLBT because of the doctrine of their Church. They deny these people and their families their ability to understand what the Medical Profession explains to them and accept them as they do themselves. This makes them look unintelligent and mean.

Henrietta22-
I could not agree with you more.
We are both old enough to remember when churches used similar excuse to justify treating blacks as second-class citizens. The RCC still does this to females. According the the RCC of course females are equal…they just have a different purpose in life and they are not purposed to be clergy, etc.
Same song different dance.
Blaming God for one’s bigotry and/or phobia is unbelievably and profoundly sad.
Peace!

Who said anything about hating anybody?
Words aren’t always required.

Again my former religion has to try and decide what to do about accepting all of their God’s creations or to reject them due to their sexual orientation….and rejecting them is wrong. The article did say that some UMC’s are accepting homosexuals and being inclusive of all. However I guess even those churches can’t allow them to be ministers, unless they are going to remain celibate (might as well be Catholic) and as I guess the acceptance has to be agreed upon by the General Conference.
As to them thinking the Holy Book says homosexuality is wrong…chapter and verse please, especially the part that says homosexual ministers have to be celibate.
I sincerely hope they make some progress towards acceptance and not waste the whole conference debating and not deciding. At least they have women ministers…and they’re doing a good job. Now to allow ALL who qualify to become ministers..as that would be very “Christian” of them.

The Bible is very clear on homosexuality. Never once does it despite a man coming into another man as a desirable act. It does mention many times about man and woman marriage and it has a whole book on relationship right in the middle. No where is a homosexual leader exalted nor a homosexual activity advised. It’s not murky on its view of homosexuality it’s not celebrated and it is condemned. Crazed homosexuals try to have sex with angels and are struck blind, and then their city destroyed. Then Lot’s daughters raised in such an environment turn around and have sex with their father.
The Bible is clear about the sinful nature of homosexuality and it is equally clear about where sin leads.
The church compromised concerning homosexuality now it is faced with people posing as the opposite sex trying to appear as holy leaders. This is what happens when the church listens to folk who don’t believe in the Bible, without the Bible there is no Christian church.

Cknuck – yes, Song of Songs is a book about two lovers, male and female, and what they have together. It is also about two unmarried lovers – I believe in the fourth or fifth poem you find a verse where the woman is saying that she wishes her lover were her brother so she could openly kiss him in the street. This violates traditional Christian teaching on sex before marriage. So is the teaching wrong, or is the Bible wrong?
Also, the Leviticus rules; I don’t think that you can accept one and disregard the others; if you are condemning homosexuality based on Leviticus, I hope you are following all the dietary, health and clothing practises as well.
The other place that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible is in one of Paul’s letters. Paul also has a lot of other rules that he says should be applied; e.g. that a woman shouldn’t cut her hair, or wear jewelry, and shouldn’t be priests… at least that rule is in one letter, but he encourages female clergy in another. His letters have to be looked at in context. I am also slightly wary of Paul; he never actually met Jesus. He had a divine encounter, but does that mean he had diving knowledge about everything?

cknuck states: “This is what happens when the church listens to folk who don’t believe in the Bible, without the Bible there is no Christian church.”
Question: (First, I thought it was that without Christ there is no Christian Church.) That being said: Then exactly how do you follow (or believe in) the Leviticus-based laws regarding “Clean & Unclean Foods” (Chapt 11); “Unclean Creatures” (Chapt 11); “Purification of Women” (Chapt 12); “Skin Diseases” (Chapt 13); “Concerning Women’s Bodily Discharges” (Chapt 15); “The Slaughter of Animals” (Chapt 17); etc? May I suggest these also become current discussion items for the Church – Maybe that will add some context to the discussions which seem to single out only one of the myriad of stated biblical laws.
Furthermore – I deeply share concerns regarding separations within and among churches. At the same time, we can all openly express our unified faith that Jesus Christ, as the Son of God, was incarnate as a human, lived among us, and was crucified to bring the remission of sins to the earth and its people.
He specifically brought new and critical meaning to the old laws, and stated that the two great commandments to be followed are (Synopsis of Dt 6:4, Lv 19:18 & Mt 22:36) Loving God and others – “On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets.” Jesus made it simple for us – No mental gymnastics here. So simple, that living a life of Christ in God as Jesus asks is *simply* the most difficult thing we can do. As we debate, ostracize, separate and struggle to love as Jesus loved us, we must also exercise faith that whatever happens as we try living, loving and working together in this world is God’s will, not ours or mine.
Christ Jesus, that takes away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us.
Christ Jesus, that takes away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us.
Christ Jesus, that takes away the sins of the world, grant us your peace.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Bible universally identifies homosexuality as a sin. Other posts have identified both Old and New Testament passages that do so. The most notable N.T. reference is in Romans 1:26 and 27: “Because of this (the abandonment of the truth about God), God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natura sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one anothre. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”
When I was a Methodist more than 40 years ago, I am very certain these two verses were in the Methodist Bible. They still are. And they are extremely clear.
As to the dietary laws of the Old Testament, these were clearly not for the church, but for ancient Israel. In Acts 10, Peter saw a vision of all kinds of animals, those that were clean according to the O.T. dietary laws, and those that were unclean. He heard a voice telling him to “kill and eat.” Peter protested; as a Jew he could not eat unclean food. But God revealed to him that there no longer were any “unclean” foods. Peter was told, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”
So the dietary laws were changed by God, but the identification of homosexuality as a terrible sin was not. And, by the way, I do not hate homosexuals. I am a sinner, too. Although I have never been involved in any homosexual behavior, the word “sin” covers a broad area of activities, some of which I am guilty of as are we all. I can agree with God as to what is sin, but that does not mean I hate the sinner, nor does it mean God does. The perceived hatred is in the heart of the alleged recipient because he or she finds there are people who do not accept their sinful behavior, any more than I accept my own sinful behavior.
As to the Song of Solomon promoting sex in a non-traditional manner, there are many scholars who believe that Solomon, the second king of ancient Israel, wrote this love poem about his relationship with his first wife. He later had many wives and mistresses, a practice the Bible reports, but does not endorse.
Many non-Bible readers pick up bits of heresay here and there and become convinced on the flimsiest of evidence as to what the Bible does or does not say or condemn or endorse. A careful study of the Bible, as I have been involved in for more than 40 years, shows that Bible people were not sinless and that their evil deeds were recorded, but not endorsed by God.
One final word. Christ Jesus can only take away sin when a sinner trusts Him by faith. Jesus’ blood is not a magical potion that erases all sin or condemnation for sin no matter what the sinner believes or does not believe. Jesus’ salvation is only given to those who trust Him by putting their faith in Him and what He did for them at the cross. A person is not a Christian because he goes to church or reads the Bible occasionally, or even because he accepts all people the way they are. A Christian by definition is a “Christ-One” whose faith for salvation from sin rests solely in the work of Jesus Christ on the cross, clearly and consciously.

This isn’t simply a matter of reading the Bible to find an ethical answer to the question of homosexuality.
150 years ago, some religious leaders would have quoted the Bible to defend the practice of slavery in the American South.
For example, Exodus 21:20-21 does not condemn slavery but does regulate
the severity of whippings. Ephesians 6:5-6 does not condemn slavery but tells slaves to obey their masters.
Because of this lack of scriptural support for abolishing slavery,
Christian politicians like Jefferson Davis wrote that slavery was ” …
established by decree of Almighty God … it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation.”
The Christian minister Rev. Alexander Campbell wrote “There is not one
verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many regulating it. It is
not then, we conclude, immoral.”
Between the 1850s and today, the views on the Bible and slavery have changed even though the Bible hasn’t changed.
Religious people may decide that the Bible’s prohibitions against same-sex acts in Leviticus are not culturally relevant today but were in Ancient Israel.
Or they may decide that an anti-gay interpretative framework for the Bible is just as wrong as a pro-slavery framework for the Bible.

OK, once more for the new folks who are not weary of this comment – Leviticus, null and void. The Temple is gone, the system of sacrifices has been abandoned, the entire premise on which it was built has been gone for 2,000 years. Even the “faithful remnant” no longer participate in these rituals. SO leave it alone, unless you are willing to set that entire code and practice churning back to life.
Song of Songs (or of Solomon) – yes, it is about a wedding, just as Hosea is about a marriage. Read it not literally as a wedding service. Try reading it as a metaphor for God’s relationship with Israel – just as hosea’s marriage to Gomar was a metaphor, a very difficult and unpleasant metaphor. It is far more about love than it is sex.
Sex with angels – “Crazed homosexuals try to have sex with angels and are struck blind, and then their city destroyed. Then Lot’s daughters raised in such an environment turn around and have sex with their father. “(cknuck’s contribution) – I am not sure if even Freud coined a name for this psychosis. I suppose “Angelphile” would do. I think Victoria’s Secret has tapped into this stimulation. If we assume angels have no gender than this argument can get filed away under either “frustration” or simply the very large file, “silly”. And Lot’s diaghters’ sin is incest – HETEROsexual incest. Talk to Oedipus, he’ll help you sort this one out.
A final word from Jesus (John 13:34) “I give you a new commandment that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another.” OK, I know this is a variation of Leviticus 19:18, chosen by John for Jesus to say (via Mark 12:31 – “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”.) But by drawing that verse into the Gospel it is given new life and meaning. See also the Good Samaritan. All of these are examples of unconditional, unqualified, unexempted love. Anything else and anything less is a human barrier, a flawed excuse, and lazy faith.

“Who said anything about hating anybody?” – joey
No one needs to say it; we can SEE it. The continued bearing of false witness about God’s gay and lesbian children is in ample evidence here on B’net.

More re above…
Words and phrases like “obviously I and most of the normal posters here”, “Crazed homosexuals”, “folk who don’t believe in the Bible” abound.
As if “Lot’s daughters raised in such an environment turn around and have sex with their father” was an example of homosexual behaviour!!!
“The Bible is very clear on homosexuality and the unnatural nature of it.” – cknuck
If it WERE clear, we wouldn’t be having this debate.
“men also abandoned natural relations with women” – Windsor’s Child
This only shows how little you understand gay people, WC. It would be quite UN-’natural’ for gay men to have ANY sexual relations with women – it ain’t in their nature! DUH.
“I do not hate homosexuals. I am a sinner, too.” – ibid
Naw, you don’t “hate” us; you just like calling us “sinners”. Do we go around to the myriad heterosexual boards and call you folk “SINNERS!!!“??? And are you a “sinner” merely because you are heterosexual??? How daft.
Besides, the concept of what is “sin” varies from religion to religion. You can go to your Church and I’ll go to mine TUVM. Homosexuality isn’t mentioned in any of the 10 commandments nor in either of the 2 that Jesus left us with.
Henceforth, let ONLY the one among you who is without “sin” cast the first stone. If you take Scriptures seriously like you say you do, you might just shut up about it.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Bible universally identifies homosexuality as a sin. Other posts have identified both Old and New Testament passages that do so. The most notable N.T. reference is in Romans 1:26 and 27: “Because of this (the abandonment of the truth about God), God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natura sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one anothre. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”
When I was a Methodist more than 40 years ago, I am very certain these two verses were in the Methodist Bible. They still are. And they are extremely clear.
As to the dietary laws of the Old Testament, these were clearly not for the church, but for ancient Israel. In Acts 10, Peter saw a vision of all kinds of animals, those that were clean according to the O.T. dietary laws, and those that were unclean. He heard a voice telling him to “kill and eat.” Peter protested; as a Jew he could not eat unclean food. But God revealed to him that there no longer were any “unclean” foods. Peter was told, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”
So the dietary laws were changed by God, but the identification of homosexuality as a terrible sin was not. And, by the way, I do not hate homosexuals. I am a sinner, too. Although I have never been involved in any homosexual behavior, the word “sin” covers a broad area of activities, some of which I am guilty of as are we all. I can agree with God as to what is sin, but that does not mean I hate the sinner, nor does it mean God does. The perceived hatred is in the heart of the alleged recipient because he or she finds there are people who do not accept their sinful behavior, any more than I accept my own sinful behavior.
As to the Song of Solomon promoting sex in a non-traditional manner, there are many scholars who believe that Solomon, the second king of ancient Israel, wrote this love poem about his relationship with his first wife. He later had many wives and mistresses, a practice the Bible reports, but does not endorse.
Many non-Bible readers pick up bits of heresay here and there and become convinced on the flimsiest of evidence as to what the Bible does or does not say or condemn or endorse. A careful study of the Bible, as I have been involved in for more than 40 years, shows that Bible people were not sinless and that their evil deeds were recorded, but not endorsed by God.
One final word. Christ Jesus can only take away sin when a sinner trusts Him by faith. Jesus’ blood is not a magical potion that erases all sin or condemnation for sin no matter what the sinner believes or does not believe. Jesus’ salvation is only given to those who trust Him by putting their faith in Him and what He did for them at the cross. A person is not a Christian because he goes to church or reads the Bible occasionally, or even because he accepts all people the way they are. A Christian by definition is a “Christ-One” whose faith for salvation from sin rests solely in the work of Jesus Christ on the cross, clearly and consciously.
Posted by: Windsors Child | April 24, 2008 8:54 AM
////////////////////////
Very well said, Windsors child
For those posters who keep going back to the Leviticus laws, please see Romans 1:26-27 for the New Testament version – as Windsors noted above. All of us have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (see Rom 3:23 – sort of like shooting an arrow or dart and missing the bullseye). Homosexuality is a sin.
Also, I do not believe that God created people as homosexuals from birth. There may be some who feel attracted to members of the opposite sex (I don’t know) but we all make choices in life. Sinful behavior requires a conscious choice (like telling a lie).
Furthermore, there are those who have renounced their homosexual lifestyles. If one were “born that way” I don’t think they could just renounce it so easily.
As a believer, I follow the Lord Jesus Christ and the bible. I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God and I choose to follow it rather than some ideas created by man (psychology, medicine, etc). Science is constantly changing and revising itself. Take for instance the whole issue on water that has been in the news lately…after years of being told we should drink 8 glasses per day that is now being challenged. The Word of God is over 2000 yrs old and has never been proven wrong. We once thought the earth was flat but the bible said it was round/circular(see Isaiah 40:22, Job 26:7 for a few examples).
Anyway, I am rambling. Not looking for a debate but just adding my 2 cents (or 50 or w/e – haha). Thanks again Windsors child for the excellent post.
sbryantmom

Please, recovering ex-Pentecostal, when you quote the bible (men also abandoned natural relations with women) as you did, don’t put my name next to it. I didn’t write it. That phrase is from the Bible. Your argument is not with me, it is with the Bible and God Who wrote it. I just believe it and quote it. Putting my name next to the quote just shows how little you understand what the Bible actually is all about.
Love and acceptance are not necessarily the same thing. Nor is acceptance unequivocally the outcome of love. Love often seeks change. Growth. Improvement. I loved my children when my wife and I were raising them. But my love for them did not accept everything they thought or did or wanted to do. My love for them expected them to grow, which they did. Today they are all living for the Lord and seeking to raise their children with an understanding of Who God is and what He said in His Word.

And thank you, sbryantmom, for your kind remarks. Keep the faith.

jestrfyl:
It is so nice to be able to read the comments you make regarding the quotes and mostly literal comments from the Bible that some think condemn homosexuals. IMO Jesus was supposed to be about love, calling part of God’s creations “sinners” because of those they are drawn to to love doesn’t match that definition. Sounds like Livicus is a great “read” but has nothing to do with reality…at least not this one in the 21st century.
The above poster,sbryanmom, said she doesn’t think God created people homosexual. How can that be when Christians believe God created everyone and everything? Apparently medical research to the contrary means nothing. And of course she is entitled to her opinion.IMO those that she mentioned who have “renounced the lifestyle” are trying to please some Christian idea of not “acting” on their homosexuality, because it would be “sinful”.
“The word of God is over 2000 years old and has never been proven wrong”. sbryantmom
Really? Too many things have been proven wrong to go into in this discussion.
Personally, I’ll take science and medicine. Yes, there has been contraditions made in those, but we aren’t all dying of malaria, polio, the plaque, etc., now. Yes, there will always be disease and illness, but men and women working in science and medicine will be working on ways to continue to improve life as we know it. A 2000 year old book for my health and welfare…no. I’ll take the man made ideas in science and medicine. Life 2000 years wasn’t exactly “heaven.”

Really, pagansister, I didn’t know anybody died of “the plaque.” Did you mean the plague?
sbryanmom did not deny that God created people who become homosexuals. She said that God did not create them as homosexuals; they chose to be that on their own.
I accept science and medicine as well. But they both have their limits. We may not be dying of some of the things you mentioned, but we are all still dying. The Bible says that the average lifespan is threescore and ten (70 years), and maybe fourscore (80). Have you noticed? That is the average life span today. And when this life is over, science and medicine can do no more for any of us.
But the God of the Bible has promised that life continues beyond death. I go with Him.

Windsors Child
There is no “Methodist” Bible. We all use the same Bible, regardless of what the cover may say. The translations may differ, but I expect you will find the words in your “Methodist” Bible are the same in many (most) others.
Leviticus is about far more than mere dietary laws. There are 667 laws about all sorts of things, and how to correct or become righteous through a system of sacrifices at the Temple.
The Song of Solomon is more about joy and fidelity in a relationship than it is about sexual relations.
You wrote
“Christ Jesus can only take away sin when a sinner trusts Him by faith. Jesus’ blood is not a magical potion that erases all sin or condemnation for sin no matter what the sinner believes or does not believe. Jesus’ salvation is only given to those who trust Him by putting their faith in Him and what He did for them at the cross. A person is not a Christian because he goes to church or reads the Bible occasionally, or even because he accepts all people the way they are. A Christian by definition is a “Christ-One” whose faith for salvation from sin rests solely in the work of Jesus Christ on the cross, clearly and consciously.”
All this is true for a gay person, an illegal alien, a woman, a person of any/every race, you, me and anyone else. I see no exclusion, qualification, or exemptions here. As you believe it, live it.
To which was added by sbryantmom,
“The Word of God is over 2000 yrs old and has never been proven wrong. We once thought the earth was flat but the bible said it was round/circular(see Isaiah 40:22, Job 26:7 for a few examples).”
Check with Copernicus or Galileo on this one. I think they might find a few points of argument here. There may have been some acceptance about the roundness, but there was all sorts of heated debate about where in the cosmos earth was located. Even Martin Luther thought Copernicus (a good Roman Catholic bishop his whole life) was a heretic. I suggest at least one drink of water, just to chill out a bit.

“Your argument is not with me, it is with the Bible and God Who wrote it.”
and
“The Word of God is over 2000 yrs old and has never been proven wrong.”
Then why all the bloopers?! To list one whopper from Ezra 1.7-11:
7(A)Also King Cyrus brought out the articles of the house of the LORD, (B)which Nebuchadnezzar had carried away from Jerusalem and put in the house of his gods;
8 and Cyrus, king of Persia, had them brought out by the hand of Mithredath the treasurer, and he counted them out to (C)Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah.
9 Now this was their number: 30 (D)gold dishes, 1,000 silver dishes, 29 duplicates;
10 30 gold bowls, 410 silver bowls of a second kind and 1,000 other articles.
11 All the articles of gold and silver numbered 5,400. Sheshbazzar brought them all up with the exiles who went up from Babylon to Jerusalem.
If anyone does the arithmetic now they get a total of 30+1,000+29+30+410+1,000 = 2,499 gold and silver articles but “God” got 5,400. That would seem to mean that to keep the Bible inerrant like so many people think, we need to change our calculators so that the arithmetic above comes out to 5,400 rather than 2,499. If they do that I don’t want my airplanes designed using one of those calculators.
Then there’s the silliness in I Kings 7:23-26 which makes pi = 3, not to mention the lists of tribal sizes in Ezra 2:64 and Nehemiah 7:66, too long a lists to quote here but Ezra’s adds in modern arithmetic to 29,818 and Nehemiah’s to 31,089. But in both cases “God’s” arithmetic leads to 42,360.
Apparently the last example was first called to attention by the great American patriot Thomas Paine. Of course “God’s” ability to add was not the only problem with inerrency there; the various tribes as listed just had different numbers of people. If two things give the same fact and both are true, they must agree. The Bible is rife with these cases of identical claims with differing details between the books.
My point: If the Bible was inspired by “God”, “God” can’t be counted on for truth.

Scott you said who said anything about hate?
You did. April 23, 2008 @6:53 P.M.
Quote: “Amazing how religion supposedly based on love can find in its heart to hate a class of people thoroughly.”

So the people who believe every word of every verse in the Bible would rather stick with letters on a page and appear illiterate, and mean, in the belief that this pleases God; and this blows them up with human pride of holiness and a firm assurance they will be accepted into heaven someday. God gave me intelligence and wisdom along with my belief in Christ Jesus that GLBT are born to be who they are, just as heterosexual people are. The Medical Societies of America, and the world agree with me.

While I am a happy atheist, I recognize that many of my homosexual friends are not, and actually do want a religious component in their lives.
I applaud the Methodist church for their love and inclusiveness.

Sherry, I do too, the Mehodist Churches that give this. It should be the same throughout all Methodist Churches, because until it is they aren’t absolved of the blight of the current doctrine they have.

“please see Romans…”
Let’s not and say we did. OR, we could refer to what Paul also said in Romans that women are not permitted to preach OR teach. Remember that, sbryantmom. We could also re-visit Paul’s advice on how we should treat our slaves and how they should obey us. Seems Paul was none too fond of women, slaves OR us homos. Me? I follow Christ, not Paul.
“Homosexuality is a sin”
According to YOUR religin. Not mine.
“I do not believe that God created people as homosexuals from birth.”
So what? We DO believe that. Why do your “beliefs” trump mine?
“we all make choices in life”
So when did YOU “choose” to be attracted to the opposite sex??? Or, maybe ya just ARE.
“Sinful behavior requires a conscious choice”
Since I don’t consider my loving my husband a “sin”, your statement is pretty much irrelevant.
“Furthermore, there are those who have renounced their homosexual lifestyles.”
1. It ain’t a “lifestyle”. Gay people have lives. And ‘renouncing’ one’s innate characteristic is sorta like one renouncing one’s left-handedness. It doesn’t make them str8.
“If one were “born that way” I don’t think they could just renounce it so easily.”
Of course, we’ve been asking for people who have become str8 to come forward for decades now, and every one who has has been proven to be either lying (and got caught in their lie) or simply became celibate. Not a single one – EVER – has become hetersoexual.
“As a believer, I follow the Lord Jesus Christ and the bible.”
Me too. But I capitalize the Bible because I revere it.
“I choose to follow it rather than some ideas created by man (psychology, medicine, etc).”
Or like “reparative therapy”??? And you mean to tell us you don’t go to a doctor? That’s just plain nuts.
The rest of your ‘preaching’ is either off topic or just simply not relevant. As you said yourself: “Anyway, I am rambling.”
Feel free to try again, but DO BETTER!

“Please, recovering ex-Pentecostal, when you quote the bible (men also abandoned natural relations with women) as you did, don’t put my name next to it. I didn’t write it.”
Ah, but you QUOTED it, Child, and rather extensively at that.
“Your argument is not with me”
My argument is with everyone who takes pull quotes without examining the meaning or context, especially when their sole purpose is to judge others (which Christ Himself admonished us not to do), and to cast stones (which Christ also told us only those without sin could do – try it sometime, eh).
“and God Who wrote it.
Sorry, but MEN wrote it. Mainly shephereds and fisherfolk, but definitely MEN.
“I just believe it and quote it.”
Seems you selectively “believe” it and equally selectively quote from it.
Again, your preaching (nonsensical spewing about “love” which you neglect to show here) is quite tiresome. Certainly I see no truth OR love in it.

Yes, WC, I did mean plague, of course. As to what sbryanmom said about homosexuality, (as you pointed out) it is her opinion that God didn’t make them that way…they chose it, but I want to know why would anyone choose to be called a “sinner’ and told there was something wrong with them, and be discriminated against? No, it is not a “lifestyle” it is who the person it from birth, at least in my opinion.

As a life-long Christian I certainly do believe God made people the way they are. As a Christian I certainly do not believe people choose their sexuality. And, as Henrietta has noted….Medical Soc/Assn agree. Actually, ALL reputable Medical, Psychiatric, and Psychological Assn/Soc in North America embrace the theory that individuals are born with whatever sexuality they are. And, that it is unethical to attempt to change an individual’s sexuality.
However, for the sake of the discussion…..it some of you really with to completely disregard the scientific communities…well, it would appear that far more “heterosexuals” change into homosexuals than homosexuals that change into heterosexuals.
Any thoughts as to why an individual would choose a life of ridicule? Choose to subject themselves to the love of (some) Christians show when they accuse homosexuals of “terrible” sin?
Peace!

JohnQ if any heterosexuals change into homosexuals it’s because they’ve always been homosexuals, and have finally stopped denying it to themselves and others.

Henrietta-
I know. And, I also know that homosexuals that become heterosexual…usually have not really changed……rather they give up and decide to live a lie to please other people and/or to conform to what (some) other people think is the way they should live (to please God).
If God had wanted homosexuals to be straight God would have made us heterosexuals.
For the Methodists, Episcopalians, Catholics, Evangelicals, Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc who continue to use the Bible and/or God as an excuse to exclude lgbt people…..Get Over It! LGBT people are not going to go away. We are in the churches of every denomination in the USA and probably the world. We are not going back into the closet to allow you to be more comfortable. Time to use the brain God gave you and get over your bigotry, prejudice, and/or phobia.
The trend is towards equality. It is happening in TEC and certainly the Methodist, Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc are not far behind. The UU’s, UCC, and most branches of Judaism have already embraced equality.
Peace!

jest Lot’s daughters committed sin and sin grows out of sin just as homosexuality is a sin.
JohnQ everything that God created in the Bible was stated as a God creation and homosexuality is not one. No where in the Bible does it lift homosexuality as a God given attribute. It’s not one of the fruits of the spirit (no pun intended) There are no same sex incidents in the Bible that have any reference as to being a good thing and the only references are of a sinful and bad nature. You simply cannot spin it as a God made thing but it does refer to it as a product of sin. And the event of it showing up in church leadership is ripping the church apart. It will ultimately change church forever; people will see no need to go to a church where the leadership is going into another man or be a woman that does what lesbians do. The church will become a social function that will not be able to support itself like when it had devoted Christian followers.

I see people are still listening to the serpent hiss “Did God REALLY say……..?”

Puddinchat-
Yes, God did really say:
36″Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[1] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[2] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Matthew 22:36-40
and
34A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” John 13 34-35
Does that answer your question?

Loving someone doesn’t mean excusing their sin. If you really love someone, you tell them the truth. Twisting scripture to make them more comfortable with their sin is death. That’s not love.

“Loving someone doesn’t mean excusing their sin. If you really love someone, you tell them the truth. Twisting scripture to make them more comfortable with their sin is death. That’s not love.” puddinchat
And your definition of “truth” is ? And Sin? Why do I think it is, in your opinion, laid out by the Bible? I may, of course, be wrong in that opinion.
All folks have their own interpretation of the Bible and what is says and what it doesn’t. It really isn’t a reliable source for how to run your life and or to define right and wrong.(IMO).

pagansister:
It really isn’t a reliable source for how to run your life and or to define right and wrong.(IMO).
Everyone has opinions as is their right.

“Loving someone doesn’t mean excusing their sin. If you really love someone, you tell them the truth.”
Have you been going from restaurant to restaurant telling people eating shell fish about their sins? Have you been standing up in church telling divorced people about their sins? Have you been in banks telling rich people about their sins?
I’m guessing you haven’t and the “sinners” you mostly harass are homosexuals whom you don’t much care for anyway.
In other words I think you, like most here, choose what parts of the Bible to attend to based on your biases. But unlike some you don’t admit it, perhaps even to yourself.

‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ Matthew 22:36-40
This was taken from Torah (the Hebrew Bible), Deutoronomy Chapter 6, changed in the “new” testament. Original reads:
“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.”
It is part of the discussion we call the V’Ahavta, which follows the Shema, which says, “Hear, Oh, Israel! The Lord our God, the Lord is One.” (Deut 6:4)
It burns me when people think everything Jesus said was original.

eastcoastlady:
“It burns me when people think everything Jesus said was original.”
Good point… Jesus WAS a Jew after all.
I have a feeling that most Christians like to think everything in the Bible is original to JC…since he is “saving” them. (from what I don’t know).

Although for us who are truly Christian Jesus is the Word, the Truth and the Light period and the Bible is truth we recognize this is not of everyone’s opinion. We are not ignorance when we read Jesus say “I did not come to change the law” and it is clear when Jesus says “you have heard it said” so to think that we think that what Jesus said in His earthly form was the first time it was said is pretty narrow minded, ignorant and insulting. If that’s what you are shooting for then bullseye. We know Jesus was a Jew in His earthly form and He for the most part taught the Torah. We are also aware that the Torah does not complete Jesus but He the Torah. Also we know in the original Torah it does condemn homosexuality it even speaks unfavorably on masturbation. So for all of those with original wisdom (lol) who speak down on Christians as though we are dumb, although we will not bow to your wisdom it has no redeeming value to us, except on what not to do we realize it is yours and valuable to you.
We are aware one cannot support homosexual values with the Bible, nowhere in the Bible is homosexuality deemed to be a good thing or honorable or profitable. God did not create it nor does He promote it. The Bible does however state God is not pleased by it.

eastcoastlady-
No offense intended. I have often reminded people that Jesus and his mother were Jewish. I quoted the NT because I thought it was be more effective with puddinchat.
Peace!

JohnQ: “I quoted the NT because I thought it was be more effective with puddinchat.”
Odd assumption since my partial quote was from Genesis 3:1.

ecl and others,
The Gospels are our only record of anything about Jesus. And they worked very hard at showing how Jesus was first a continuation of the OT covenant. SO there is lots of material referencing the OT. All of the Gospel according to Matthew keeps trying to make Jesus into a new Moses. Quotes form Isaiah, the Psalms, and the Torah flow through all their stories. He was not only trying to be a good Jew, he was trying to get others to do the same. The problem was the Temple has so “fouled its own nest” , that he had to help the people no longer allowed to participate in the rites and traditions to find their way “home”.
One of his hopes was the Pharisees. Sure Jesus harassed and harangued them, but he never gave up on them either (like so many of my teachers had to do with me – bless them). An example is the Parable of the Good Samaritan. It was addressed to the Pharisees and made fun of the Levites and the priests – Temple flunkies. The Pharisee could feel good because he was neither, but still recognized the lesson Jesus was making. It was through the synagogues that he maintained contact with his roots, and was able to spread his reforming word. Because he was literate and able at interpretation and application, I believe he had Pharisaic training himself, and so they welcomed him as an equal. After all, he was often addressed as “Rabbi”.
Just cuz it ain’t original don’t make it true. After all, much of Judaism has its roots in Zoroastrianism. What is true is the community called in faith to act out of love, joy, and peace. Whether they are called to celebrate the covenant God made with Abraham and Moses, with Jesus, or with Mohammed, or with anyone else is not all that important.

jestrfyl-
Well said as always!
Thank you for all you do to make the world a better place for all the rest of us.
Peace!

I really don’t see Matthew’s attempt to convey Christ to first century Jews an attempt to make Jesus a new Moses. I see maybe the people in the Matthew Gospel maybe thinking that even the disciple but when asked who do people say I am Moses was not mentioned. (Matthew 16:13 to 16)So I would say you are incorrect jestrfyl and in your zest to play Christianity down you do take leaps, JohnQ I am a little surprised at your eagerness to agree.
There is disagreement among scholars as to exactly when and where Zarathustra lived, most agree that he lived in eastern Iran, probably around the sixth century B.C.E. there is too much uncertainty to try to draw such too many conclusions, there is not nearly as much documentation as there is in Judaism and Christianity.
Although Zarathustra taught that there were two choices dark or light and encouraged humans their choices would affect their lives after death. The Greeks saw him as a philosopher, mathematician, astrologer or magician, while Jews and Christians saw him as a heretical prophet and a magician. He was known in Greece as Zoroaster, a Graecization of the Iranian Zarathustra. I hardly think that he would think of either Judaism or Christianity as his cup of morality. I know Christians did borrow from Judaism but would not consider his philosophy as way to God.
Actually there were many religious similarities all over the place even Ceasar was thought to have risen and be seated at the side of gods, but no religion have outlived Christainity, Judaism, or Islam.

“….but no religion has outlived Christianity, Judaism, or Islam.”
cknuck
Guess the earth based religions (Pagans) don’t count, huh cknuck?
How many “heathens” have the Christians tried (sometimes by force) convert? How many customs etc. have come from Pagan ways? Easter bunnies, Christmas trees and others, for example. Think I’ll stick with my “true” religion.

cknuck-
“….but no religion has outlived Christianity, Judaism, or Islam.”
Buddy, Buddhism has been around more than 600 years longer than Christianity….Hinduism has been around about 3000 years longer than Christianity. And, as pagansister has already pointed out….there are the Earth based religions. These have roots dating back before the beginning of recorded history.
I am not sure that I would say the Christianity borrowed from Judaism…as much as I would say that Christianity grew out of Judaism.
And, I certainly do not think that jestrfyl was playing down Christianity. For the record, I am an unabashed Christian. However, I do think that there is room in the world for all the different religions that currently exist…and, then some. I respect each individual’s right to support whatever religion that individual chooses.
Peace!

mystery buddy I never said there weren’t religions older than Christianity please get you facts right before you thrush, so that your point would have meaning.
Many so-called Christians down play Christianity, even Jesus warned us of them. jestrfly in my opinion is one, neither hot or cold. 1Kings 18:21b “how long will you falter between two opinions.” Matthew 16:15 “But who do you say I am?” John 14:6 “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”
Everyone who denies these words cannot hold water when it comes to the Christian faith and claiming to be a follower of Christ, and those who claim to be ministers and deny the words of Christ, Christ himself called them false prophets.
Jestrfly stands in agreement with pagans, some Muslims, some Jews, all atheists, and the list goes on to whom he stands with in calling the Bible a bunch of fairy tales, there is no difference in him and the rest.
I hope I explianed what I base my opinion on.

cknuck-
Sorry, that was me. When you wrote “outlived” I thought you were referring to the age of a religion.
As far as John 14:6, my understanding is that Christ was saying that he is the way, the truth, and the life and no one comes to the Father without the way, the truth, and the life.
I do not worship the Bible….I worship our Lord.
While I certainly can not speak for jestrfyl….I have never read anything that he has posted that even hinted at being disrespectful of Jesus Christ.
Peace!

I knew it was you JohnQ by your “Peace!” ending.
No disrespect but the way both you and jest homor all gods and just plain don’t believe the Bible, according to the Bible which I believe means to me a different Gospel then that of Jesus Christ. Who do you say He is? Just one of many? A good man? A few good stories? Who? If you think any of these then you cannot be a follower of Christ according to the Bible and if you discount the Bible then your Gospel means nothing more then a few good deeds. I don’t know if that makes sense to you and I’m pretty sure if it does not then it is offensive as the Word said it would be to many.

cknuck-
I thought you probably had an idea that was my post…even without the “Peace!”. I know the few times you have left your name off a post…I was still pretty sure you had written the post.
I am not sure that I would say that I honor all gods. I would say that out of respect for all other people…I honor their beliefs.
To clear up any misconception….to me Jesus Christ is the son of God and my personal Savior. I value “good deeds” and believe through good deeds we can make life easier and more enjoyable for others….as well as for ourselves. I also, believe that good deeds catch the attention of others and through being the recipient of good deeds many people are more receptive to listening to the Word.
I spend so time each day on good deeds. Not to impress others….not as an attempt to impress God…but rather, to make our community, this great nation, and the world a better place to live. And, as an entry into spreading the teachings of our Lord.
However, I believe that our salvation lies in the Grace of God…not, in our good deeds. To me good deeds simple make it easier to carry out the great commission.
I also believe that God has spoken through others besides Christ. And, I believe that one can learn from reading the writings held sacred by other religions and groups of people. However, I do not believe that this in any way diminishes the greatness of our Lord.
Peace!

cknuck:
Yes, jestrfyl, JohnQ, and Henrietta and a few others, accept all other’s beliefs : pagans, atheists, Jew, Muslims etc., because they are Christians, in the truest sense of the word and it’s meaning, IMO. It’s called respect, and love.
Unfortunately the Methodists haven’t come to the conclusion that all people should be accepted and loved into their community, as their Savior did. As a former member of that group…and with a sister who is still a very active Methodist, I hope they do the right thing, as TEC has and other’s are working on doing. My sister would be voting “yes” if she had a vote.

pagan: Another false statement insomuch Jesus did not promote homosexual leaders or ministers. He also did not accept all behavior but He did change people’s behavior. So as a pagan and a false prophet you can see where the word of God is against what you do when you preach false doctrine on the behalf of the church you do not abide in or believe in.
JohnQ I totally agree with the first of your statement but I see no evidence that there is any like the Lord. I also believe as you do that God did not speaking through literature after the Bible but I also believe the Bible is the foundation and is true and alive and speaks to those who would listen it does not contradict itself, but it does confuse non-believers and those who would approach it with intellect. It is my pleasure to know of your love for our Lord and although I will not agree with everything you say I do feel the kinship.

ck,
Please know I do not hold the Biblical stories on the same level as fairy tales. I do understand them to be interpretive of human experiences of the divine. But I have no expectation that they are part of an objective, journalistic tradition that has only been around a couple of hundred years (and some may argue that it has not yet been fully realized). Also, I give them more weight than other religious works. To do otherwise would be silly for a person in my profession. We read from the Bible each week (Gospel and either OT or Epistle, and Psalm for Call to Worship or Confession – depending on the mood of the Psalmist), not other religious works, except as commentary on something from the Bible. But I also do not discount other people’s experience of the divine simply because they are from another time and place.

Pagan AND false prophet? Pagan, yes. Prophet? Gee, you give me too much credit! However I’ve never claimed to be a prophet. As to the church that I no longer belong to, I sincerely hope that it does the right thing in accepting, as I said before, all of those who wish to belong and contribute to it’s ministery. My sister is still a Methodist, and I know she has never rejected anyone due to their sexual orientation. As to the word of God being against me? No problem.

Above post (30 April 8:12 PM) response to cknuck. 28 April, 5:18PM. Obviously forgot to write that.

jest funny but when you addressed yourself as “a person in my profession,” it put me in mind of Patrick Henry and his case against professional clergy.

cknuck,
“Jesus did not promote homosexual leaders or ministers”
Please enlighten us as to how you know that, ck. I don’t think the Bible ever lists who was and wasn’t gay, and you certainly weren’t around then.
How absurd. You must assume everyone who ever lived was heterosexual.

This is SO ridiculous.
A lot of you are distorting the debate here and making into one about hate vs love rather than the question of homosexuality as a sin.
Newsflash: God hates sin! Yes, he is all loving because he created us and in loving us wants us to TURN AWAY from sin. This does not change the fact that he HATES sin and homosexuality is a sin. You can justify it all you want but it is sin.
Also, you seem to think that us heterosexual Christians are claiming to be sinless. Uh, hello? The bible says that homosexuality is a sin, it does not state that it is the only sin. Get over yourselves, we are all sinners! Being homosexual doesnt give you the right to be new age PC and above sin anymore than being heterosexual does.
Every one of us is a sinner and the only way we will be saved is if we repent. SO that means, for all of you who seem so incapable of understanding the bible, ‘saying sorry’.
So, I’ll repent for sex before marriage (though I’d like to point out that when I found my faith I immediately made a life change regarding this and waited just as you can stop having homosexual sex), all of my other sins because I accept that I am a sinner.
Is your sexuality so fragile that it will be undermined by accepting you are sinners? No one hates you, we are all in the same boat so stop being so defensive! The only person on this earth to ever be free from sin was Jesus, get over it. Repent.