Why is homosexuality the one subject that may be too hot to handle?

BryanW92

Hey look, it's a squirrel!
May 11, 2012
3,571
757
NE Florida
✟15,351.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
But, at the end of the day, the church isn't subject to public opinion polls or popular vote. Or, at least, it shouldn't be. I've heard it said that America has a "choice fetish", meaning we're so obsessed with choosing that we absolutely do not recognize authority. If we don't like a Doctor's diagnosis, we find another Doctor. If we don't like what a church has to say, we find another church. Some ways this is good, some ways, it makes US the Doctor/Church/etc., and suddenly we stop recognizing that someone else might have something to teach us.

The "choice fetish" is another word for freedom and I do not trust people who want to limit the choices of others. The proponents of "inclusion" are choice fetishists: they didn't like the answer from the authority of 11 consecutive GCs, so they keep demanding another hearing. In another post in this thread, circuitrider suggests coming to a "compromise" at GC2016 and then locking it in with no more debate for 8 years. At this point anything called a "compromise" on the issue would be a win for the gay side (because they would refuse to accept anything less--except for status quo, which they couldn't refuse), so the 8 year moratorium would guarantee them some time to dig in and fortify that beachhead. It is like Ike asking for a one-week ceasefire in the Normandy area beginning on June 7, 1944.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,567
New Jersey
✟1,148,608.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
The UMC, like the PCUSA, is connectional. I would suggest to you that when we have a change on an issue that is this emotional, we might want to compromise our connectional principles for pastoral purposes. It's not reasonable to expect that people who have been brought up to feel this strongly would suddenly reverse themselves, and we may also not want to eject them from the Church they grew up in and love. Hence allowing some non-connectional leeway for a generation or so may be the right thing to do even if it's not great polity.

I feel the same way on the national level. I'd like to allow leeway in our laws and interpretations.
 
Upvote 0

RomansFiveEight

A Recovering Fundamentalist
Feb 18, 2014
696
174
✟9,665.00
Faith
United Methodist
Marital Status
Private
I certainly think freedom is important and certainly at a political level. I do not think, however, that merely everything is up for popular vote, no. And "freedom" is important, of course, and we're "free" to understand God any way we please. However, I don't like the idea of individual churches just taking a popular vote on what they believe, no. Sorry, that's not the way the church is supposed to work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sahjimira
Upvote 0

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟102,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
The UMC, like the PCUSA, is connectional. I would suggest to you that when we have a change on an issue that is this emotional, we might want to compromise our connectional principles for pastoral purposes. It's not reasonable to expect that people who have been brought up to feel this strongly would suddenly reverse themselves, and we may also not want to eject them from the Church they grew up in and love. Hence allowing some non-connectional leeway for a generation or so may be the right thing to do even if it's not great polity.

I feel the same way on the national level. I'd like to allow leeway in our laws and interpretations.

I can affirm maybe allowing some connectional leeway. I seriously doubt it would work to do it for a "generation" or more. I think the society will move to far in the next 20-30 years for that to be practical.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟102,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Yes; it will be interesting when this is a bygone issue.

And it will be faster than most people think for nearly everyone but a few small enclaves of conservative Christians whose polity would actually allow them to enforce such views.
 
Upvote 0

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Sometimes I wish God did not define sin nor marriage. It would be easier. But God did.

I see many espousing propaganda and bullying from a black-glass pulpit. I wonder if their congregation knows . I should visit. Rather than accept scriptures in their totality some still cherry pick & twist the scriptures and hold fast to talking points like a good politician. The truth bounces off their head like a rubber ball. They ignore the fact that their redefinition of marriage kicks against the divinity of Jesus Christ and relegates the Lord to a mere prophet of His time. They ignore certain scriptures that are not in line with their desire. They ignore that born sinners should repent. Being a natural born killer with a genetic predisposition for certain sins does not make me embrace my sins nor expect acceptance of my sins. Or, maybe I should have sex with my dog while I eat shrimp. After all, Christ said nothing about inappropriate behavior with animals. Don't worry, if I do, I will wait for my dog to be at least 3 years old (7 x 3=21). Otherwise, it may be akin to pederasty (man and boy sex). And, according to some, Paul suggested we can't do that, but anything else goes....

I would write a letter to the bishops but see clearly that UMC is full of adokimos minds. I will not bend or bow before this beast nor will I have my children drink heretical milk from such beast. I am a young man.

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Marius27

Newbie
Feb 16, 2013
3,039
495
✟6,009.00
Faith
Messianic
Politics
US-Democrat
And it will be faster than most people think for nearly everyone but a few small enclaves of conservative Christians whose polity would actually allow them to enforce such views.
I hope you're right. Looking at the views on this board, you'd think we're dealing with Middle East mentality towards gays. A lot of vocal hatred of gays on this forum.
 
Upvote 0

Celticflower

charity crocheter
Feb 20, 2004
5,822
695
East Tenn.
✟9,279.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
I hope you're right. Looking at the views on this board, you'd think we're dealing with Middle East mentality towards gays. A lot of vocal hatred of gays on this forum.

I can never understand all the hate coming from a people who are supposed to be called to love. Makes no sense.
 
Upvote 0

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟102,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Sometimes I wish God did not define sin nor marriage. It would be easier. But God did.

I see many espousing propaganda and bullying from a black-glass pulpit. I wonder if their congregation knows . I should visit.

Yes, the Bible clearly defines marriage as arranged by their parents. It also clearly defines polygamist marriage in the Old Testament. Let's not forget that Israel had two wives and Solomon hundreds. So what we are talking about is Biblical interpretation and not "cherry picking."

The most obvious cherry picking that is going on Ohorseman is yours and conservative Christians who equate our modern understanding of a couple choosing to get married for romantic love as "Biblical" marriage when it is not even a form of marriage found in the New Testament. Yes, husbands are commanded to love wives who they were probably ordered to marry by their parents. That's a far cry from what any of us do with marriage today.

So what does that leave us with? People like Kim Davis claim to be upholding the sanctity of marriage because her four marriages were all to men. It isn't LGBTQ people that are messing up marriage. Straight people have been screwing up marriage for years with over half of those straight marriages ending in divorce.

I'm not sure what you mean by a "black-glass pulpit" unless I suppose you are referring to computer screens. But, I'm not the one hiding my identity behind cute artwork. And I'd venture that most of the folks here know who I am if they want to bother to check since I've posted material in the past that goes back to my own website.

And yes my church folks do know what I believe and my DS too in case you were wondering.

But then I'm a United Methodist pastor with the freedom of the pulpit and the freedom to agree and disagree with other United Methodists. So veiled threats to come visit and "out" any of our views show how little you really get the UMC.

It is one of the reasons several of us have a hard time understanding why this forum would even be having a poll to decide if we should or should not be censored or prevented from discussing homosexuality. Censorship isn't a United Methodist ideal.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No, I am not talking about a computer.

Consider my figurative use of the word "beast" and think not that my words in my previous post are for you alone, circuitrider. I have other issues with my local church(s). There is acceptance that homosexuality is a sin but an unwillingness to teach truth publicly due to PC concerns.

But I can see how you would presume that I single you out considering that it is you that takes the lead in coming against those you deem "conservative" and lack "modern understanding". Funny how you say you are against censorship but practice a form of censorship yourself, though you would deny it. Figuratively speaking, you have black lines blackening out this and that in your Bible. I have seen it again and again by you. Also, I see a type of bullying by you and others that leads to further censorship. You did it on this very thread, here:

And he said, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” ~ Mark 4:9

Yes, now what do you expect that we would hear? So you've not actually said anything.

I understood exactly what my sibling in Christ was saying before you pushed him off your playground. This was condescending and without love. Then comes the pile on - or maybe it is a burial. It is a pattern throughout your section of the playground. So, no one wants to come around. Then you and yours alone have the bullhorn and can say false things like this:

And it will be faster than most people think for nearly everyone but a few small enclaves of conservative Christians whose polity would actually allow them to enforce such views.

Yes, that is false. Sorry brother. I am just making observations here. Black-glass pulpits, playgrounds, beasts, and cherries aside, what does the "True Vine" say about the subject at hand:


“Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”


Thrice I have done this. And twice Christ mentions one man and one woman.... This you and others will ignore, right along with other scriptures DIRECTLY related to homosexuality and the UMC Book of Discipline which states clearly that homosexuality is incompatible with the Christian life style. But I better understand the beast now and know this matters not to you and some. I only come and say this because I do not like the false perception that the UMC believes that homosexuality is NOT a sin - except for the old people awaiting the grave as said before, along with the brown and black Methodists of far away and uncivilized lands.

I am glad you think my art is cute. To me it is worship, like a song, and it is also my horse.
 
Upvote 0

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟102,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
It appears you see having a strong view and arguing for that view as bullying. But you can use arguments like referencing "the Beast" and that is perfectly OK. So you can call others the anti-Christ and feel perfectly justified??

This is a discussion forum Ohorseman. You came on strong with your "Sometimes I wish God hadn't defined marriage and sin." Which is a not so subtle way of saying in your first line "God's on my side and not on yours." It is akin to poor Biblical arguments that start out with "the Bible obviously says...."

Your "thrice" quotation isn't relevant to the topic. There is no evidence from the quotation you gave that Jesus is also saying "But not same sex couples." He never said it. You are inferring it from his statement about marriage and that he does mention men and women as a couple. And given that in Jesus day we know of no time in his community when same sex marriage would have been practiced there is no reason Jesus would have ever commented on it one way or another. Jesus is never quoted in the Bible referring to same sex marriage or homosexuality.

You can't make an argument from Jesus' silence on the issue. And you couldn't pass a Bible 101 class trying to use that passage as an argument against same sex marriage when it says nothing about it.

As to your reference to the Discipline, I disagree with the Discipline's position on this issue. And every United Methodist has a right to agree or disagree with the Discipline. I fully abide by the rules in the Discipline and do so as I have promised to do. But every four years the Discipline is changed by General Conference delegates who disagree with some portion of the Discipline. No one agrees 100% with everything in the Discipline ever or it would never be changed. My best estimate is that about 40-45% of United Methodists disagree with the Discipline on same sex marriage. I see that percentage rising and at some point the rule may change.

If the rule on the Discipline changes I hope that progressives and liberals are kinder to conservatives about disagreeing with it than conservatives have been to progressives and liberals thus far.
 
Upvote 0

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
And that's the reality we're up against and why many will demand a vote.

Well they can demand all the want. But I hope the GC is smarter than to set it up that way.

So... you don't want to give in to the demand for a vote. You do not want the largest percentage to have their way.

My best estimate is that about 40-45% of United Methodists disagree with the Discipline on same sex marriage. I see that percentage rising and at some point the rule may change.

Oh wait... you do think percentage is important and do want them to have there way.

As to your reference to the Discipline, I disagree with the Discipline's position on this issue. And every United Methodist has a right to agree or disagree with the Discipline. I fully abide by the rules in the Discipline and do so as I have promised to do.

Per the Book of Discipline, "the United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching." But your positions and words indeed condone the practice.

Condone
  1. accept and allow behavior that is considered morally wrong or offensive to continue

Further, you even go so far as to teach that it is NOT "Christian teaching". And yet you actually think that you are "keeping your promise"... really.


There is no evidence from the quotation you gave that Jesus is also saying "But not same sex couples." He never said it. You are inferring it from his statement about marriage and that he does mention men and women as a couple. And given that in Jesus day we know of no time in his community when same sex marriage would have been practiced there is no reason Jesus would have ever commented on it one way or another. Jesus is never quoted in the Bible referring to same sex marriage or homosexuality.

You can't make an argument from Jesus' silence on the issue. And you couldn't pass a Bible 101 class trying to use that passage as an argument against same sex marriage when it says nothing about it.

You are wrong again.

The word "define" means: a.) To state the precise meaning of. b). To describe the nature or basic qualities. Christ does not define marriage by stating the things that it is not. Nor do we define "squirrel" by stating all the things that a squirrel is not.


So, what you should say is that I would not pass a Bible 101 class... if you were teaching it. Otherwise I would do just fine.


Further, Jesus does not comment on same sex marriage nor does he say an adult can not marry a prepubescent child nor does He comment on whether someone could marry his or her goat or other choice animal. However, he does clearly define marriage and He does so without fault nor forgetfulness. You claim that Jesus was not acquainted with sexual sins of the aforementioned. Do a study on the Roman city of Caesarea Philippi and you will recognize the contrary. And that is just one example. Think not that He lived in a world sanitized by Jewish law. Nor should you think that His innocence rendered Him ignorant. Again, we have notions that go against the divinity of Christ.

Brother, most would have left you and your boy preacher's spot a long time ago. But... I love you and hope you can rise out of apostasy.
 
Upvote 0

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟102,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Ohorseman, the promise I'm keeping is that I'm not performing same sex marriage. I never promised to not disagree with the Discipline. No United Methodist is obigated to always agree with the Discipline. That isn't how it works. The Discipline is always a work in progress. And yes, decisions about what is in the Discipline is made by a majority vote of the members of GC.

And I'll hope that you rise out of the blasphemy you just committed claiming to know who is and isn't saved. Only God gets to do that. No matter how annoying you are I'd never accuse you of not being saved. But isn't that what ultimately right wing Christians do? They claim they are the only Christians.

Find for me an historic creed that proclaims that I'm not a Christian because I believe that LGBTQ people are also beloved children of God. I'll give you a hint, you won't find it.

As to the vote, over 90% of Methodists on this forum so far have voted they want to be able to talk about homosexuality without being censored.

BTW, I don't discuss theology with people who insist that I'm going to hell because I don't agree with them. So I won't be responding to your posts further.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Ohorseman, the promise I'm keeping is that I'm not performing same sex marriage. I never promised to not disagree with the Discipline. No United Methodist is obigated to always agree with the Discipline. That isn't how it works. The Discipline is always a work in progress. And yes, decisions about what is in the Discipline is made by a majority vote of the members of GC.

And I'll hope that you rise out of the blasphemy you just committed claiming to know who is and isn't saved. Only God gets to do that. No matter how annoying you are I'd never accuse you of not being saved. But isn't that what ultimately right wing Christians do? They claim they are the only Christians.

Find for me an historic creed that proclaims that I'm not a Christian because I believe that LGBTQ people are also beloved children of God. I'll give you a hint, you won't find it.

As the the vote, over 90% of Methodists on this forum so far have voted they want to be able to talk about homosexuality without being censored.

BTW, I don't discuss theology with people who insist that I'm going to hell because I don't agree with them. So I won't be responding to your posts further.

Apostasy - the abandonment or renunciation of a religious or political belief.

That specific belief being that Christ is God incarnate and that marriage is holy and rightly defined by Christ Himself in the Bible.

I never insisted you were going to Hell. I intentionally called you brother and you should know the implications. Calling you brother indicates that I indeed see you as saved in Christ. However, if it is the word "apostasy" that makes you react so strongly, I apologize and I retract that word. Replace it with "dangerous doctrine".

Further, I never said God does not love sinners - like me, you, & everybody else to include gay people.

It is odd to me that you vote to allow discussion of this topic. However, you have demonstrated to me twice that you do not really want to discuss it - you just want people to agree with you. And... if they do not agree with you or leave your spot... you make false accusations against them and refuse to respond. This is the second time you have done this....

:swoon:
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟102,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Since Ohorseman and I won't be conversing further (as I have been consigned to hell by him and he is now on my forum ignore list) the whole conversation does point out something.

There are some Christians (maybe Ohorseman in the group) who actually believe that your beliefs about sexuality rise to the level of apostasy, meaning if you don't believe the right thing you are hell bound.

I find this astonishing since I've yet to see a scripture verse or even a statement in a creed that says, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and believe the right stuff about gay people and you shall be saved...."

But clearly that is one of the problems. If you've decided that right belief on sexuality is a salvation issue you aren't going to be able to let it go. Because now it is more important than the sacraments, more important that confessing Christ. It because a matter of life or death to believe the right things about sexuality.

Of course the danger of raising some doctrine to the level of salvation issue is apparent. Church that raise the idea that you have to be immersed to be saved or that you have to walk an aisle and make a certain kind of confession or whatever lead to the same problem. It raising something up above the saving grace of Christ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dayhiker
Upvote 0

JCFantasy23

In a Kingdom by the Sea.
Jul 1, 2008
46,723
6,386
Lakeland, FL
✟502,107.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
There are some Christians (maybe Ohorseman in the group) who actually believe that your beliefs about sexuality rise to the level of apostasy, meaning if you don't believe the right thing you are hell bound.

I have no doubt most of us are in error about something, whether large or small. It's the way the walk of life in Christianity goes. We grow, we learn, we experience, and sometimes the perspectives may change with that experience and growth. I'd certainly never doubt another Christian's salvation on my own anyway, that is for God alone.
 
Upvote 0

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟102,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
I have no doubt most of us are in error about something, whether large or small. It's the way the walk of life in Christianity goes. We grow, we learn, we experience, and sometimes the perspectives may change with that experience and growth. I'd certainly never doubt another Christian's salvation on my own anyway, that is for God alone.

Yes, indeed. And if you start attaching eternal significance to always being right then honestly none of us are going to heaven. It isn't about being right, its about knowing Jesus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JCFantasy23
Upvote 0

JCFantasy23

In a Kingdom by the Sea.
Jul 1, 2008
46,723
6,386
Lakeland, FL
✟502,107.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Yes, indeed. And if you start attaching eternal significance to always being right then honestly none of us are going to heaven. It isn't about being right, its about knowing Jesus.

So true Circuitrider. There are several theological issues I'm just not sure on yet - it's a confusing mess sometimes. I sit with God in prayer and talk it out with Him and share my thoughts and what I think and admit I'm confused about it. I try to talk it through with Him and acknowledge I may be leaning on the wrong or right side. I definitely don't go out the door knowing everything right off the bat.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Brother, most would have left you and your boy preacher's spot a long time ago. But... I love you and hope you can rise out of apostasy.

I quote myself above.

Since Ohorseman and I won't be conversing further (as I have been consigned to hell by him and he is now on my forum ignore list)...

No words of mine "consign you to hell". You made that up.

There are some Christians (maybe Ohorseman in the group) who actually believe that your beliefs about sexuality rise to the level of apostasy, meaning if you don't believe the right thing you are hell bound.


You said hell bound, not me. Here are some of the beliefs of my group:

2012 Book of Discipline Statements Of the United Methodist Church

¶ 214. Eligibility: All people may attend its worship services, participate in its programs, receive the sacraments and become members in any local church in the connection.

¶ 304.3 Qualifications for Ordination: While persons set apart by the Church for ordained ministry are subject to all the frailties of the human condition and the pressures of society, they are required to maintain the highest standards of holy living in the world. The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.

¶ 613 Responsibilities
The [conference council on finance and administration] shall have authority and responsibility to perform the following functions:
19. To ensure that no annual conference board, agency, committee, commission, or council shall give United Methodist funds to any gay caucus or group, or otherwise use such funds to promote the acceptance of homosexuality

¶ 806.9 Fiscal Responsibilities
[The General Council on Finance and Administration] shall be responsible for ensuring that no board, agency, committee, commission, or council shall give United Methodist funds to any gay caucus or group, or otherwise use such funds to promote the acceptance of homosexuality...

(I guess activist pastors found a loophole.)


From page V of the Episcopal Greeting from The Council of Bishops, I quote:
"The Discipline defines what is expected of its laity and clergy...."

Yeah, that says "clergy"....

The bylaws are balanced. We accept homosexuals. They belong right beside the rest of us sinners asking God for forgiveness and worshiping Him. They are called to repentance, just like us. And homosexuality is recognized as sin.

The broken promises and lies should stop. A few activists pastors should not re-define what it means to be Methodist. It's not their job.

So circuitrider, you tell a lie on me (for a second time), put me on your ignore list, and then mention me... twice.

I find this astonishing since I've yet to see a scripture verse or even a statement in a creed that says, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and believe the right stuff about gay people and you shall be saved...."

Well, that would be a silly creed. We follow the Apostle's Creed and recite every Sunday. It should often remind us that church tradition matters and is not to be thrown to the street in exchange for political correctness and apostasy.

I'd certainly never doubt another Christian's salvation on my own anyway, that is for God alone.

Sister, you quoted his comment and responded to it as if I really said that... but I did NOT. Go to the source. Quote me... not him. Otherwise, you unintentionally reinforce and participate in his "bearing false witness against thy neighbor". But... you can't quote me... because it's not there. But I know you did not mean it that way and no offense taken. I am just making a point.

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0