United Methodists repeal longstanding ban on LGBTQ clergy

[Sabertooth]

I thought that the Methodists church split over this one or two years ago.
How is it news that the liberal faction is continuing to do liberal stuff...?

 

[ozso]

The UMC isn't the first Christian denomination to end prejudiced and discriminatory doctrines regarding LGBTQ persons. As I recall, the Unitarian Universalists did the same in the early 70s. Though I know that traditionalists don't consider the UUs as Christian.

It's worth bringing up though, because it shows what direction the Methodists have gone in.

 

[tampasteve]

ADMIN HAT ON

Just a reminder to keep posts in line with this forum wide rule below. A few posts have been removed.

• Stating or implying that another Christian member, or group of members, are not Christian is not allowed.
  

ADMIN HAT OFF

 

[RileyG]

Methodism was originally not a separate denomination, but a perjorative term for a religious affectation or inclination.

Correct. The Methodist movement started in the Anglican Church since John Wesley was an Anglican priest.

 

[RileyG]

It's worth bringing up though, because it shows what direction the Methodists have gone in.

The Global Methodist Church and free Methodist church don’t accept LGBT propaganda, and are faithful to the book of discipline.

 

[FireDragon76]

Correct. The Methodist movement started in the Anglican Church since John Wesley was an Anglican priest.

The Methodist churches I grew up in were more like Episcopal churches than what Americans think of as "Evangelicals". Indeed, if not for the Revolution, it's doubtful Methodists would have a distinct identity in the US.

At the time of the Revolution, there were no bishops in the US at all. The English Church had neglected their colonies for centuries, so Wesley had to make plans for congregations he helped set up. There is a rumor that Wesley may have received a secret ordination as a bishop, which would have been illegal at the time.

Something similar happened in the Episcopal Church. Episcopalians actually got their Holy Orders from the Scottish Episcopal Church after the revolution, through Samuel Seabury (who had actually been a Loyalist at one time).

 

[RileyG]

The Methodist churches I grew up in were more like Episcopal churches than what Americans think of as "Evangelicals". Indeed, if not for the Revolution, it's doubtful Methodists would have a distinct identity in the US.

At the time of the Revolution, there were no bishops in the US at all. The English Church had neglected their colonies for centuries, so Wesley had to make plans for congregations he helped set up. There is a rumor that Wesley may have received a secret ordination as a bishop, which would have been illegal at the time.

Something similar happened in the Episcopal Church. Episcopalians actually got their Holy Orders from the Scottish Episcopal Church after the revolution, through Samuel Seabury.

Yes! I find that whole history very fascinating and read a lot on it….but we are getting off topic

 

[friend of]

Yeah I don't see how any orthodox church could support SSM

 

[ralliann]

"If one evil thought, if one evil word, if one evil action, deserves eternal damnation, how many hells, my friends, do every one of us deserve, whose whole lives have been one continued rebellion against God!" -
----------------------------------- View attachment 346950

They recognize evil don't they? Repentance therefore is the remedy. That is not happening today, they embrace evil, as good. Different idea altogether.

 

[Whyayeman]

Great thread! Personally, I cannot remember meeting a Methodist who gave the impression of 'rebelling against God'..

(Where's that popcorn?)

 

[ozso]

Rebelling against God means putting anything whatsoever ahead of God.

 

[Whyayeman]

Rebelling against God means putting anything whatsoever ahead of God.

I didn't know that. Is it scripture or dogma? Come to think of it the Methodist people I have known all good people, kindly and cheerful, honest in the main - and as steadfast Christians, forbearing of others.

Where were they going wrong?

 

[FireDragon76]

I didn't know that. Is it scripture or dogma? Come to think of it the Methodist people I have known all good people, kindly and cheerful, honest in the main - and as steadfast Christians, forbearing of others.

Where were they going wrong?

Some Christians have a problem with being kind to people indiscriminately, even if they happen to be gay.

Lots of bad teaching out there unfortunately, that teaches you need to go out of your way to persecute and discriminate against people, just for being who they are, or you are "rebelling against God".

Fortunately, the vast majority of American Methodists aren't really affected by any of this.

 

[Belk]

Open minds was never a value of Christ's. God really doesn't have an open mind.

Is the mind of God knowable in your estimation?

 

[rjs330]

I didn't know that. Is it scripture or dogma? Come to think of it the Methodist people I have known all good people, kindly and cheerful, honest in the main - and as steadfast Christians, forbearing of others.

Where were they going wrong?

No one said they were going wrong. I don't remember if it was this thread or another but I stated tge the Church is not a denomination. There are several Metodist denominations. And within that denomination there are church goers who are members of the Church and those who are not. Just like ANY other denomination. The particular denomination that accepts sin as part of their belief system or doctrine has left the faith. The denomination itself as a governance is no longer part of the Church even though there are members within who are.

What we are seeing is what Jesus said us the separating of the sheep and the goats. Members if the true Church and those who are not. Because a denomination is NOT the Church.

 

[rjs330]

Some Christians have a problem with being kind to people indiscriminately, even if they happen to be gay.

I agree with this. Some do. Also some Christians think being kind means we no longer recognize bejng actively gay is sinful. And that being kind means we reject scripture and allow openly gay people to be our ministers of a gospel they reject.

Lots of bad teaching out there unfortunately, that teaches you need to go out of your way to persecute and discriminate against people, just for being who they are, or you are "rebelling against God".

Christians shouldn't be persecuting anyone. After all we have all been sinners and all Bern in rebellion to God. That's why Jesus said we are all condemned already. Christians have faced persecution in times past and will again. Some are facing it now.

However discrimination against sinful behaviors MUST be part of the Church within the Church. Jesus and Paul where very clear on that subject. Because allowing sin to be part of the Church corrupts it. And it doesn't matter what the sin is. Be it greed, adultery or homosexuality. Scripture tells us to confront it in a humble and loving way and if the person refuses to repent then they are to be removed from the Church. If that us discrimination then we need more of it to follow the teaching of Christ and the apostles.

 

[FireDragon76]

I agree with this. Some do. Also some Christians think being kind means we no longer recognize bejng actively gay is sinful. And that being kind means we reject scripture and allow openly gay people to be our ministers of a gospel they reject.

Christians shouldn't be persecuting anyone. After all we have all been sinners and all Bern in rebellion to God. That's why Jesus said we are all condemned already. Christians have faced persecution in times past and will again. Some are facing it now.

However discrimination against sinful behaviors MUST be part of the Church within the Church. Jesus and Paul where very clear on that subject. Because allowing sin to be part of the Church corrupts it. And it doesn't matter what the sin is.

Just what do you think Mainline Protestants are doing in their churches? Orgies on the altars? How exactly does having gay people in the church "corrupt" it? The Church's mission is to preach the Good News of God's love and mercy, that is the Gospel. It's not to police peoples bedrooms. A person's private sex life, as long as it isn't violating a previous covenanted relationship (ie, adultery), is between them and God alone, and the Church has no authority to interfere with that, as a matter of individual conscience.

 

[rjs330]

Is the mind of God knowable in your estimation?

I'm guess, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you appear to be specifically speaking of the sin of homosexuality and that God may be open minded on this subject.

His thoughts are not our thoughts. What we do know of the mind of God he has shared with us through the scripture. And the scripture tells us he is unchangeable and that he is the same yesterday, today and forever.

And God has said that sin is sin and it always has Been and always will be. That at doesn't sound open minded to me. Does it to you? He states homisexuality, lying, adultery stealing etc. are all sinful. There is no indication in scripture that he is open minded about these things. Do you have access to something that would indicate otherwise?

 

[Belk]

I'm guess, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you appear to be specifically speaking of the sin of homosexuality and that God may be open minded on this subject.

His thoughts are not our thoughts. What we do know of the mind of God he has shared with us through the scripture. And the scripture tells us he is unchangeable and that he is the same yesterday, today and forever.

And God has said that sin is sin and it always has Been and always will be. That at doesn't sound open minded to me. Does it to you? He states homisexuality, lying, adultery stealing etc. are all sinful. There is no indication in scripture that he is open minded about these things. Do you have access to something that would indicate otherwise?

I was thinking more in general but I think you still answered my question. As you point out being unchanging kind of negates anything we humans would understand as open minded. The issue I see generally on this topic is Christians claiming to understand the mind of God which strikes me as problematic when disusing an infinite being. All Christians can know is what is directly prescribed in scripture. It seems to me that speculating beyond that is going into an area where you are dealing with the ultimate black box. God would be so far beyond our understanding that our limited logic is bound to fail.

 

[FireDragon76]

I was thinking more in general but I think you still answered my question. As you point out being unchanging kind of negates anything we humans would understand as open minded. The issue I see generally on this topic is Christians claiming to understand the mind of God which strikes me as problematic when disusing an infinite being. All Christians can know is what is directly prescribed in scripture. It seems to me that speculating beyond that is going into an area where you are dealing with the ultimate black box. God would be so far beyond our understanding that our limited logic is bound to fail.

Even if we take the Scriptures as infallible and inerrant, human interpretations of them are not.

Needless to say, other Christians have actual, principled reasons for coming to different interpretations of the Bible on this particular topic, other than to take up reactionary talking points against the LGBT community. We just aren't allowed to openly discuss them on this forum. However, the notion we aren't "faithful", or aren't "real" Christians, is a direct attack on our faith, one that we can barely defend against given the rules of discourse here.