Presbyterian church opens door to gay clergy

[Yusuf Evans]

I have no problem with a homosexual wanting to be a member of the church; I agree that they should repent and be celibate and not advocate homosexuality as something that is pleasing in God's eyes because it just ain't so. I would feel the same way about someone who constantly cheats on their taxes as well.

 

[NateBlack]

It might interest you to know that I'm a repentant homosexual. And yes, I'm still attracted to men. But I believe gay sex is sinful, disordered and a distortion of what God intended sex to be.

So yes, I think the analogy is valid.

Ah. Clarity.

 

[Texas Lynn]

It might interest you to know that I'm a repentant homosexual. And yes, I'm still attracted to men. But I believe gay sex is sinful, disordered and a distortion of what God intended sex to be.

So yes, I think the analogy is valid.

You are certainly free to believe whatever you wish, as am I. I believe the characterization is unfortunate and stated so. I am not particularly interested in your particular situation at all.

 

[Kgreg]

You are certainly free to believe whatever you wish, as am I. I believe the characterization is unfortunate and stated so. I am not particularly interested in your particular situation at all.

I'm not particularly interested in your situation, but you certainly promote it a lot, as if you expect everyone to be.

 

[Kgreg]

Ah. Clarity.

There's hope after all!

 

[Kgreg]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to groundhog again.

 

[HisEagle]

You are certainly free to believe whatever you wish, as am I. I believe the characterization is unfortunate and stated so. I am not particularly interested in your particular situation at all.

Your comment seemed to indicate that I was oblivious to what it was like to be gay. I was informing you that I knew what it was like. But if you're not interested, fine. Excuse me while I go into the other room and sob for a while.

Don't expect me to be interested in reading what you have to say about the matter.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Your comment seemed to indicate that I was oblivious to what it was like to be gay.

Not at all.

I was informing you that I knew what it was like. But if you're not interested, fine. Excuse me while I go into the other room and sob for a while.

Don't expect me to be interested in reading what you have to say about the matter.

Sounds like a plan.

 

[Spherical Time]

So it's okay for you to expect us to tolerate what YOU believe, but it's not okay for you to tolerate what WE believe? Am I understanding you correctly? Don't you see that such a statement is self-defeating? By stating "I don't think that you can have a tolerance...", you are actually stating you don't tolerate something. In this case, you don't tolerate intolerance.

You seem to have some trouble separating a person from an idea.

I tolerate you the person. However, that I tolerate you as a person doesn't mean that I can't disagree and argue against your stance on any particular issue. You're more than welcome to disagree with me, however, if you don't tolerate me as a person, that's where I start to have problems.

I'm not out to keep you from holding public office, or marry someone you love (or with someone who is rich or has a rich parent). I tolerate your religion pretty much everywhere, considering that it is all around me much of the time. My brother tolerates people that share your values, background, and religion as a veteran U.S. Marine.

Yet, when I ask for the same consideration, I'm rebuffed. You don't allow me the same considerations. I don't see how I'm required to tolerate you as a person, and can't expect the same consideration.

But please don't pretend that means I have to "tolerate" your ideas they way I tolerate you as a person. I disagree with you, you disagree with me. That's fine. I can live with that. That's not what concerns me at all.

Again, that would dictate that you are required to tolerate US as much as you want us to tolerate YOU.

You're more than welcome to call for God to clean all of us homosexuals off the face of the earth with fire. You're free to tell me that I'm going to hell. You're free to call me an abomination for being both gay and unconcerned about the fact that I'm gay.

But as soon as you tell me that I don't have the same basic rights (and the courts have ruled that marriage is a right) as your average hetersexual, that's when I begin to care.

Is it loving to allow a child to play with matches and burn himself? If you tell the child it's wrong, and he doesn't believe it is, does that mean you are being hateful by telling him it's wrong?

Interesting analogy, but I disagree that it addresses the situation. I could point out that this website forbids me from telling you that Christianity is wrong, and extolling the virtues of Buddhism. Am I being hateful by not breaking the rules of CF even though I believe that you are on the wrong path?

I'll take it into consideration.

Thank you, it's much easier to reply this way.

 

[Brennin]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to KalEl76 again.

 

[Brennin]

The largest U.S. Presbyterian Church body approved a measure on Tuesday that would open the way for the ordination of gays and lesbians under certain circumstances.

The new policy was approved on a vote of 57-43 percent among 500 church representatives at the biennial meeting of the Presbyterian Church U.S.A. It gives local church organizations more leeway in deciding if gays can be ordained as lay deacons and elders as well as clergy, provided they are faithful to the church's core values.

http://today.reuters.com/News/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-06-20T224406Z_01_N20195923_RTRUKOC_0_US-RELIGION-PRESBYTERIANS.xml

They are in error; Biblical condemnations of homoeroticism are unambiguous.

 

[Toboe]

They are in error; Biblical condemnations of homoeroticism are unambiguous.

How, I never saw anything about in the bible about not allowing people who are atracted to same sex into the clergy, besides its on a case by case bases. Regardless of wether or not your interpretation is correct or not what harm could this cause.

 

[Brennin]

How, I never saw anything about in the bible about not allowing people who are atracted to same sex into the clergy, besides its on a case by case bases. Regardless of wether or not your interpretation is correct or not what harm could this cause.

Homosexuals who do not engage in homosexual sex are a different story; I see nothing wrong with allowing them as clergy.

 

[Stinker]

Many Bible scholars are beginning to see that the Bible does not address homosexuality as we understand it today. Apparantly those in this denomination have finally convinced enough of their leaders of this.

 

[HisEagle]

You seem to have some trouble separating a person from an idea.

Thanks for the insult. You seem to have some trouble separating tolerance from respect.

I tolerate you the person. However, that I tolerate you as a person doesn't mean that I can't disagree and argue against your stance on any particular issue. You're more than welcome to disagree with me, however, if you don't tolerate me as a person, that's where I start to have problems.

If tolerating you means I place myself in a position where I am exposed to your unrepentant advocacy of sin, then I can't do that.

I'm not out to keep you from holding public office, or marry someone you love (or with someone who is rich or has a rich parent).

Do you presume that I am? ("Someone who is rich or has a rich parent"?? Where did that come from?)

I tolerate your religion pretty much everywhere, considering that it is all around me much of the time. My brother tolerates people that share your values, background, and religion as a veteran U.S. Marine.

Yet, when I ask for the same consideration, I'm rebuffed. You don't allow me the same considerations. I don't see how I'm required to tolerate you as a person, and can't expect the same consideration.

Likewise, everywhere I turn I am surrounded by unbridled sin - whether it's the "in your face" display of navels and cleavages of young women, or billboards that show skimpily clad women advertising lingerie, or people gyrating their hips and sticking their fingers down their pants in commercials for beer - or just the fact that nearly every show I would like to watch on television now has to include a gay person shoving their sexuality down my throat. I am surrounded by a culture that wants to suppress my right to speak out against homosexuality. Yet I am expected to just sit back and take it, all in the name of tolerance. I am surrounded by a culture that won't allow creation to be taught in school. I am surrounded by a culture that feels my tax dollars should be used to fund abortion. Shall I go on, or do you want to keep crying about tolerance?

You're more than welcome to call for God to clean all of us homosexuals off the face of the earth with fire. You're free to tell me that I'm going to hell. You're free to call me an abomination for being both gay and unconcerned about the fact that I'm gay.

Where have I even done anything like that?

But as soon as you tell me that I don't have the same basic rights (and the courts have ruled that marriage is a right) as your average hetersexual, that's when I begin to care.

Again, where have I done anything like that?

Interesting analogy, but I disagree that it addresses the situation.

What's the situation?

I could point out that this website forbids me from telling you that Christianity is wrong,

And yet atheists do that all the time, but the mods don't blink an eye, do they?

and extolling the virtues of Buddhism. Am I being hateful by not breaking the rules of CF even though I believe that you are on the wrong path?

Sorry, but that doesn't even make sense.

Thank you, it's much easier to reply this way.

I said I would give it some consideration, but what if it isn't easier for me?

 

[DistillMyHeart]

Homosexuals who do not engage in homosexual sex are a different story; I see nothing wrong with allowing them as clergy.

Which is exactly what the article in the OP indicates.

They are in error; Biblical condemnations of homoeroticism are unambiguous.

So, now how exactly are they in error?

 

[deb7648]

Times change, but you cannot change the words of god.
i will not judge anyone,however i will not support any church that throws out the word of god.

 

[Brennin]

Many Bible scholars are beginning to see that the Bible does not address homosexuality as we understand it today. Apparantly those in this denomination have finally convinced enough of their leaders of this.

Homosexual acts are condemned, and that is what matters.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Many Bible scholars are beginning to see that the Bible does not address homosexuality as we understand it today. Apparantly those in this denomination have finally convinced enough of their leaders of this.

I do not believe that the Bible is so difficult for Bible scholars to understand that it was not until New Age philosophy figured out the “truth” that any of them could understand what the Bible says about homosexuality! The doctrine that the practice of homosexuality is not a sin is not based upon New Testament exegesis, new information about the Greek language and Helenistic culture, or anything at all pertaining to the Bible—it is based upon New Age philosophy and human reasoning that absolutely and incontrovertibly contradicts the New Testament.

Rom. 1:18. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19. because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
20. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
21. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22. Professing to be wise, they became fools,
23. and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
24. Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
25. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26. For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
27. and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
28. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,
29. being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips,
30. slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,
31. without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful;
32. and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

1 Cor. 6:9. Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
10. nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

It does not require a Ph.D. in New Testament exegesis to understand these passages in the New Testament. The practice of homosexuality is a sin, and those who practice that sin will NOT inherit the kingdom of God.

Prov. 14:12 There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death.

(All Scripture quotations are from the NASB, 1995)

 

[Brennin]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to PrincetonGuy again.