Church of Scotland to allow same-sex marriages

[Valletta]

The position you describe, describes more religious people than agnostics.

While the terms agnostic and atheist are very misunderstood, the "creating God in their own image" (specifically, "God has the same political views as me") is pretty common...at least in American politics

Which is why so many US Conservatives uplift verses about homosexuality and abortion, and so many US Liberals uplift verses about loving everyone and taking care of the poor (both to uphold their political positions)

Political conservatism is about life and liberty with government playing a limited role. Political liberalism is for big government, we know what is best for you because we are smarter and more compassionate and
thus are prone to going along with what is most fashionable, like being woke.

 

[FireDragon76]

Nothing happened except in the progressive churchea who no longer follow the carpenter of Nazareth and instead follow a political ideology of progressivism in order to try and stay relevant.

Have you actually studied any theology of mainline churches? Being popular has nothing to do with it.

 

[FireDragon76]

The carpenter from Nazareth who asked Saint Paul why he was persecuting him and who taught his Apostles to be his followers and leaders of the Church after he left.

Jesus also is said to have warned of "wolves in sheep's clothing".

Christians exist as a body, not as atomized individuals interpreting the philosopher.

Your opinion, not all would agree.

 

[Redac]

We largely agree on obesity it sounds like, it's a self-control issue.

To some extent, yes. It can be complicated, but people do have some responsibility for it. How much can be debated, but again, it's beyond the scope of this thread to have that debate.

However, it does relate to the thread because it's a comparable example. It's an example of Churches enabling (and even celebrating) things that go against some of the extraneous rules listed in the bible.

Matrimony is a sacrament instituted by Christ Himself, and moral law regarding marriage and sexuality is far more deeply rooted than you're suggesting. This is not about "extraneous rules listed in the bible". You can equivocate between bake sales and gay marriage as much as you want, but it doesn't make the one the same as the other.

If someone feels that homosexuality is a sin and that a church officiating a wedding for it is "embracing" or "celebrating" that sin.

Then the same would have to be said about a church advertising a bake sale, and willingly selling a cheesecake to a church member with a 52" waistline knowing that it could contribute to the sinning of a member.

Having a bake sale is not a sin. Selling food is not a sin, even if that person is obese. Heck, being obese is also not a sin. Sinful actions can lead to being obese, but being obese is not a sin; in the same way, extra-marital sex is sinful, but being pregnant is not.

As for "contributing to the sinning of a member", selling food to an obese person who might be indulging in gluttony is no more a sin than providing alcohol to guests at a wedding is a sin because someone there might drink too much. You might as well say that having any kind of social gathering at all is encouragement of sin because someone there might get in a fight, or gossip, or whatever. That would be a ridiculous thing to suggest, and I think you know that.

All that said, gluttony is frequently a venial sin in Catholic reckoning. Same-sex marriage is not. They're not on the same level.

But by that standard, a gay wedding wouldn't really meet that criteria either.

It's not denying a core doctrine, and doesn't involve either participant rejecting the faith.

Speaking from a Catholic position: I can't find a definitive answer about whether or not it's heresy in a strict sense, but it does have to do with rejecting definitive Church teaching regarding one of its Sacraments. Even if it's not technically heresy, it's right there.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Matrimony is a sacrament instituted by Christ Himself, and moral law regarding marriage and sexuality is far more deeply rooted than you're suggesting. This is not about "extraneous rules listed in the bible". You can equivocate between bake sales and gay marriage as much as you want, but it doesn't make the one the same as the other.

What is this supposed to mean?

Before Jesus there was no marriage?
Jesus performed the first wedding ceremony?
Jesus was the first person to get married?

 

[Pommer]

What is this supposed to mean?

Before Jesus there was no marriage?
Jesus performed the first wedding ceremony?
Jesus was the first person to get married?

Jesus instituted the sacrament, oh sure, people got married all of the time, (we’re pretty sure that Jesus’ mother was married, after all), but since the church wasn’t yet founded, the sacrament did not yet exist either.
Yes it’s specious, but a valid(ish) point,

 

[rjs330]

Jesus also is said to have warned of "wolves in sheep's clothing".

Yes he did and that fits the Church of Scotland.

Peter said this:

But among the people there were also false prophets, just as there will be false teachers among you. Under false pretenses they will introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, and thus bring on themselves swift destruction.Many will follow their debaucheries; and because of them, the true Way will be maligned.In their greed they will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their punishment, decreed long ago, is not idle; their destruction is not asleep!For God did not spare the angels who sinned; on the contrary, he put them in gloomy dungeons lower than Sh’ol to be held for judgment.And he did not spare the ancient world; on the contrary, he preserved Noach, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, and brought the Flood upon a world of ungodly people.And he condemned the cities of S’dom and ‘Amora, reducing them to ashes and ruin, as a warning to those in the future who would live ungodly lives;but he rescued Lot, a righteous man who was distressed by the debauchery of those unprincipled people;for the wicked deeds which that righteous man saw and heard, as he lived among them, tormented his righteous heart day after day.So the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and how to hold the wicked until the Day of Judgment while continuing to punish them,especially those who follow their old natures in lust for filth and who despise authority. Presumptuous and self-willed, these false teachers do not tremble at insulting angelic beings;whereas angels, though stronger and more powerful, do not bring before the Lord an insulting charge against them.But these people, acting without thinking, like animals without reason, born to be captured and destroyed, insult things about which they have no knowledge. When they are destroyed, their destruction will be total —they will be paid back harm as wages for the harm they are doing. Their idea of pleasure is carousing in broad daylight; they are spots and defects reveling in their deceptions as they share meals with you —for they have eyes always on the lookout for a woman who will commit adultery, eyes that never stop sinning; and they have a heart that has exercised itself in greed; so that they seduce unstable people. What a cursed brood!These people have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Bil‘am Ben-B‘or, who loved the wages of doing harmbut was rebuked for his sin — a dumb beast of burden spoke out with a human voice and restrained the prophet’s insanity!Waterless springs they are, mists driven by a gust of wind; for them has been reserved the blackest darkness.Mouthing grandiosities of nothingness, they play on the desires of the old nature, in order to seduce with debaucheries people who have just begun to escape from those whose way of life is wrong.They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption; for a person is slave to whatever has defeated him.Indeed, if they have once escaped the pollutions of the world through knowing our Lord and Deliverer, Yeshua the Messiah, and then have again become entangled and defeated by them, their latter condition has become worse than their former.It would have been better for them not to have known the Way of righteousness than, fully knowing, to turn from the holy command delivered to them.What has happened to them accords with the true proverb, “ A dog returns to its own vomit.” Yes, “The pig washed itself, only to wallow in the mud!” - 2 Peter 2:1-22 Bible Gateway passage: 2 Peter 2 - Complete Jewish Bible

 

[rjs330]

Have you actually studied any theology of mainline churches? Being popular has nothing to do with it.

Popular isn't the point. Relevant is. I have read some of these decisions and they often come from the place of wanting to be more inclusive, which is my point. They need to stay relevant in hopes of garnering more people.

 

[rjs330]

Jesus also is said to have warned of "wolves in sheep's clothing".



Your opinion, not all would agree.

Well scripture agrees and that's what really matters. We are all part of the body and each of us although individuals are part of the body. We don't exist as a church with only one member, but are all part of the Body with differing functions.

For just as the body is one but has many parts; and all the parts of the body, though many, constitute one body; so it is with the Messiah.For it was by one Spirit that we were all immersed into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, slaves or free; and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.For indeed the body is not one part but many.If the foot says, “I’m not a hand, so I’m not part of the body,” that doesn’t make it stop being part of the body.And if the ear says, “I’m not an eye, so I’m not part of the body,” that doesn’t make it stop being part of the body.If the whole body were an eye, how could it hear? If it were all hearing, how could it smell?But as it is, God arranged each of the parts in the body exactly as he wanted them.Now if they were all just one part, where would the body be?But as it is, there are indeed many parts, yet just one body.So the eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you”; or the head to the feet, “I don’t need you.”On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be less important turn out to be all the more necessary;and upon body parts which we consider less dignified we bestow greater dignity; and the parts that aren’t attractive are the ones we make as attractive as we can,while our attractive parts have no need for such treatment. Indeed, God has put the body together in such a way that he gives greater dignity to the parts that lack it,So that there will be no disagreements within the body, but rather all the parts will be equally concerned for all the others.Thus if one part suffers, all the parts suffer with it; and if one part is honored, all the parts share its happiness.Now you together constitute the body of the Messiah, and individually you are parts of it. - 1 Corinthians 12:12-27 Bible Gateway passage: 1 Corinthians 12:12-27 - Complete Jewish Bible

 

[rjs330]

Let me know when that starts to happen, can you?

We don't pass judgement on them. The church does not go out and punish people.

When's the last time the church went out into the world and grabbed a homosexual off the street and beat them?

And if any individual member of the church did so they are in violation of scripture.

 

[Bradskii]

We don't pass judgement on them.

Gimme a break, rj. Most of the threads on the LGBT community or gay marriages are nothing but a procession of posts where people are being judgemental.

 

[Redac]

What is this supposed to mean?

Before Jesus there was no marriage?
Jesus performed the first wedding ceremony?
Jesus was the first person to get married?

No to all three. Pommer is basically correct: Jesus elevated marriage to the level of a Sacrament.

The point was that this isn't some minor, "extraneous" little thing; rather, it touches on much deeper and more fundamental issues than it was being given credit for. It's not equivalent to churches having bake sale fundraisers where fat people buy food.

 

[rjs330]

Gimme a break, rj. Most of the threads on the LGBT community or gay marriages are nothing but a procession of posts where people are being judgemental.

Calling something sinful is NOT the same thing as judging them. Scripturally passing judgement has to do with discipline. When you read what Paul has to say about judgement it's a reference to disciplining people.

You cannot preach than men repent everywhere if you do not tell them what they have to repent of. The scripture is full of that including things Christ preached and pointed out to people.

It is a worldly view that calling sin for what it is is judgemental. That is not a scriptural view.

It's merely an attempt from unbelievers to get Christians to shut up because they don't want to be confronted with their need for Christ.

 

[Bradskii]

Calling something sinful is NOT the same thing as judging them.

If that was the only thing most Christians do then I wouldn't have a problem with it. But it isn't. So I do. The Pope on the other hand is quite clear:

Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?

But as the article says: 'His remarks on gay people are being seen as much less judgemental than his predecessor's position on the issue'.

 

[rjs330]

If that was the only thing most Christians do then I wouldn't have a problem with it. But it isn't. So I do. The Pope on the other hand is quite clear:

Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?

But as the article says: 'His remarks on gay people are being seen as much less judgemental than his predecessor's position on the issue'.

Your barking up the wrong tree, it's Muslim countries that kill gay people. It's not Christians doing that.

And yes calling it sinful is pretty much all that Christians do. They aren't calling for punishment of them. And if anyone does they are violating scripture.

 

[Bradskii]

Your barking up the wrong tree, it's Muslim countries that kill gay people.

This is a few hundred metres from where I live:
The Gay-Hate Decades: 30 unsolved deaths

The USA
https://www.hrc.org/resources/fatal...r-and-gender-non-conforming-community-in-2021

And thirty other countries:
List of acts of violence against LGBT people - Wikipedia

Two of which are Muslim.

 

[rjs330]

This is a few hundred metres from where I live:
The Gay-Hate Decades: 30 unsolved deaths

The USA
https://www.hrc.org/resources/fatal...r-and-gender-non-conforming-community-in-2021

And thirty other countries:
List of acts of violence against LGBT people - Wikipedia

Two of which are Muslim.

How about these?

Iran, Yemen among countries where being gay is punishable by death

Your first link doesn't prove any of them were killed for being gay and they certainly were killed legally. Same goes for the second article. Just cause you are gay and were killed doesn't mean you were killed BECAUSE you were gay.

AND it's not Christians doing it. It's the Muslim religion that supports the killing of gays, not the Christian one.

There is not one single supporting verse in the NT that supports Christians killing anyone as a discipline for sin. You are still barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Bradskii]

Your first link doesn't prove any of them were killed for being gay...

This area wasn't a dangerous place in itself. But those parks they mentioned were something of a gay haunt. All the killings were in that area and all were of gay men. I've been here over thirty years and I can't offhand think of any other murders in that time.

Times have changed. Some religious people (Muslims, as you pointed out, being included) haven't.

 

[FireDragon76]

Your barking up the wrong tree, it's Muslim countries that kill gay people. It's not Christians doing that.

That's wrong and dishonest to say. Though things have improved for gay people, your statement belittles the real persecution that gay people have faced at the hands of Christians.

 

[FireDragon76]

Popular isn't the point. Relevant is. I have read some of these decisions and they often come from the place of wanting to be more inclusive, which is my point. They need to stay relevant in hopes of garnering more people.

That's not how they see it. The focus on inclusion comes from their theology, not merely a desire to be popular.