In Australia Vic Government trying to pass laws that criminalise preaching

rjs330 said:

Okay, that's all I wanted. You don't believe scripture condemns homosexual sex.

Click to expand...

Again, that is not what I said.

I am navigating, here, a very delicate path between both my own church's current practice, the ongoing conflict around and challenges to that practice, and the constraints of CF rules. In fact, under CF rules, any discussion of the morality of homosexuality is not allowed at all. I am mildly astonished that moderators have not already closed this thread.

I am also very aware that we do not know who might read our posts, and the consequences they might have. I will not say online everything that I might say in real life.

So, my posts stand, but I would appreciate others not reading into them what I have very carefully not said.

rjs330 said:

But we ARE involved in sending p ople to judgement if we tell them that what they are doing is okay.

Click to expand...

Which is another thing which I have very carefully not said.

Hi, I'm new here, Thanks . Check out this amazing book I read that helped me a lot. for free.
Just click on the link
https://amzn.to/39632Ob

Philip_B said:

Thank you for entirely ignoring the point I made.

Click to expand...

I apologise I did focus on the gaydar point.

You mentioned walls. And I do understand what you are saying. And I do believe that the gospel is compelling. Repent of your sin and follow Jesus. Whatever that sin may be. Because we are all sinners. All lost and all need Jesus. To harp on one particular sin is to miss the larger point. The unbeliever is lost without Christ. Period.

And we should never, ever tell an unbeliever they are not welcome. Jesus is our example here.

He stated that he came to seek and save those that are lost.

My concern is not without the church. It is within the church. The acceptance of sin IN the church. Paul spoke extensively on this subject. Particularly to the Corinthians. The danger to the church body when we accept sin and don't confront it in our midst. NOT UNBELIEVERS. The scripture tells us we are NOT the world's judge. They have already been judged. But we ARE judges within the body.

I Cor 5:11 ff.
Gal 6:1
James 5:19

Judging one another is never done with pride or haughtiness. It so done with humility and live recognising that we too fall into temptation and we SHOULD ourselves welcome a brother who approaches us to speak with us about our own sin.

Cause the scripture does warn us all that we can be blinded by our sin. Our conscience can be seated. And that is why we cannot leave each other to their own conscience on matters where scripture defines sin. Because it will sear our conscience. And we won't see it.

As the great theologian Dana Key said "It's my business to watch over you. I hope your business is watching me too."

We need each other. That's part of what the body is for.

Paidiske said:

Again, that is not what I said.

I am navigating, here, a very delicate path between both my own church's current practice, the ongoing conflict around and challenges to that practice, and the constraints of CF rules. In fact, under CF rules, any discussion of the morality of homosexuality is not allowed at all. I am mildly astonished that moderators have not already closed this thread.

I am also very aware that we do not know who might read our posts, and the consequences they might have. I will not say online everything that I might say in real life.

So, my posts stand, but I would appreciate others not reading into them what I have very carefully not said.



Which is another thing which I have very carefully not said.

Click to expand...

Okay, then is theft a matter of a person conscience as well? How about adultery. Is that also a matter of a person's conscience.

Or does the bible state both of those things is sin? Or does the Bible teach that we get to choose by our own conscience if it is sin or not?

rjs330 said:

Okay, then is theft a matter of a person conscience as well? How about adultery. Is that also a matter of a person's conscience.

Or does the bible state both of those things is sin? Or does the Bible teach that we get to choose by our own conscience if it is sin or not?

Click to expand...

This is all off topic.

This thread is not about how we deal with sin, in general or specific. It is not about the morality of homosexuality, which cannot be discussed on CF.

It is specifically about a proposed law to ban conversion therapy, and on this forum, must limit itself to consideration of the political, legal, historical and civil rights implications of that law.

rjs330 said:

This isn't about me or you. It's about them.

Click to expand...

and it is the question i would ask them. Try to keep up

SilverBear said:

and it is the question i would ask them. Try to keep up

Click to expand...

Then you should address their comments with them. It's what they said and what they claim. If you wish to challenge their experiences then talk to them.

Paidiske said:

This is all off topic.

This thread is not about how we deal with sin, in general or specific. It is not about the morality of homosexuality, which cannot be discussed on CF.

It is specifically about a proposed law to ban conversion therapy, and on this forum, must limit itself to consideration of the political, legal, historical and civil rights implications of that law.

Click to expand...

Some of us don't really see it off topic. Because the concern here is that the law could be used to forbid the church from telling a person in the church that they are sinning by committing homosexual sex. Because that could be damaging to them.

Of course if you are unwilling to say that then if course you have nothing to worry about. But there are churches that would call sin by its name and they are ones who could be in trouble under this law.

Your avoidance makes me wonder if you really do see it as sinful. I would have to say that the matter of conscience comment of yours is telling.

rjs330 said:

But we ARE judges within the body.

Click to expand...

Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
Matthew 7:1-5

but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
John 8:1-8

I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness. “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world."
John 12:46-47

rjs330 said:

Some of us don't really see it off topic. Because the concern here is that the law could be used to forbid the church from telling a person in the church that they are sinning by committing homosexual sex.

Click to expand...

No, the law cannot be used in this way. That is outside the scope of this law, because telling someone they are sinning is not, in and of itself, conversion therapy.

rjs330 said:

Your avoidance makes me wonder if you really do see it as sinful.

Click to expand...

I see a range of acts as sinful. I do not see the orientation, in and of itself, as sinful. But this is irrelevant, because the law is not about what is and is not sinful, or what we can or cannot say is sinful. The law is about conversion therapy, or attempts to change someone's sexual orientation or gender identity.

Philip_B said:

Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
Matthew 7:1-5

but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
John 8:1-8

I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness. “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world."
John 12:46-47

Click to expand...

Perhaps this is my mistake in using the word judge. When I am speaking about the word judge I am referring to recognizing when others are sinning.

You find yourself making the mistake many people make. You did list the entire passage in Matthew which most people do not. But you have missed an important part of the passage.

Re-read the entire passage. Jesus did not forbid us from noticing the faults in others. The context of the passage is very clear. He was telling us to not be a hypocrite. Take a look at the last verse in your passage.

You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

Scripture must be interpreted by scripture. Context defines the verse. If all Jesus said was Judge not, then that would be the end if it. BUT the rest of the passage clarifies his thoughts on the matter. Which are, be careful on judging. Because how you judge matters. Check yourself. Make sure you don't have any glaring things in your own life before you work on removing someone else's specks. Remove your own large issues before you help someone remove their small ones.

Other passages indicate Jesus is okay with recognizing right and wrong in others. He says that if someone sins against you you are to go to them. That's a judgement. Jesus said we know who are sheep and goats and that is a judgement we make on people's works.

So it is a violation of proper exegetical understanding to use this passage to state we are not allowed to notice sin in others and help them deal with it.

The passage in John is not a treatise on recognizing sin in our brothers and helping them to do better. Who was Jesus speaking to? Was he speaking to those who have given their lives to him? No he was speaking to the Pharisees whos sole purpose was to try and trap him. They wanted to accuse him. Again scripture is clear. This is not a passage about the church and church discipline. To attempt to use it to discredit Paul and the apostles is a violation of scripture.

And your last passage has nothing to do with us as believers. It's about the mission of Christ. Jesus said he did not come to the world to judge it. His purpose was not to judge. Not at that time.

John 5:22 Jesus says he IS a judge. Acts 10:42 says Jesus is the judge of the world.

2 Cor 5:10 says Jesus will judge everyone.

John 9:39 Jesus says for judgement he came into this world.

You see, we have to take into consideration all the scripture and what it has to say. To take a verse out of context is not proper.

Let's not be hypocritical in our work in the church. Let's love one another, but not just sit idly by and let a brother destroy themselves and others because of their sin. THAT is NOT loving in the least.

It pains me greatly as a scholar to see the Word of God misused by anyone for any reason. Far too often our theology is not determined by scripture. Too many people use scripture to try and support what they believe rather than determine what they believe by scripture. (By the way I am not accusing you of doing that. I get the distinct impression that you have gotten some of your thoughts from listening to others who don't really study scripture to the point of understanding.)

Scripture never contradicts itself. So if it seems to that's our fault for not doing our due diligence in study. Don't dismiss a scripture just because it doesn't fit what we believe.

I encourage you to search the scriptures for truth. It's the only way we can really get what it teaches.

If we spent as much time dealing compassionately WITH each other as we often do in judgement OF one another then perhaps Christians would not have the name of that we do.

@Paidiske’s comments suggest issues that are may not be appropriate to this thread. How should pastors approach people who engage in same-gender sex, particularly those in gay marriages? On one side we have about 1/4 of pastors who think these things are OK. (Mainline Pastors Drive Growth in Pastoral Support for Same-Sex Marriage - LifeWay Research) They will have no problem counseling them. On the other side, we have pastors who think these things are so abhorrent that any counseling will be directed at helping them stop homosexual practice.

Is there any room for a pastor who themselves would not conduct a gay marriage but would counsel a gay person or couple the same way as a straight couple? In effect, is there any room for someone who is willing to accept that people who come to different conclusions than their own are still Christians and should be counseled that way?

In CF the party lines seem clear. No ambiguity is permitted. But our contributors are primarily lay, and haven't faced this issue in actual ministry. I’m not sure about what actually happens in pastors’ offices, nor have I found any source that tries to assess this.

rjs330 said:

Perhaps this is my mistake in using the word judge. When I am speaking about the word judge I am referring to recognizing when others are sinning.

You find yourself making the mistake many people make. You did list the entire passage in Matthew which most people do not. But you have missed an important part of the passage.

Re-read the entire passage. Jesus did not forbid us from noticing the faults in others. The context of the passage is very clear. He was telling us to not be a hypocrite. Take a look at the last verse in your passage.

You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

Scripture must be interpreted by scripture. Context defines the verse. If all Jesus said was Judge not, then that would be the end if it. BUT the rest of the passage clarifies his thoughts on the matter. Which are, be careful on judging. Because how you judge matters. Check yourself. Make sure you don't have any glaring things in your own life before you work on removing someone else's specks. Remove your own large issues before you help someone remove their small ones.

Other passages indicate Jesus is okay with recognizing right and wrong in others. He says that if someone sins against you you are to go to them. That's a judgement. Jesus said we know who are sheep and goats and that is a judgement we make on people's works.

So it is a violation of proper exegetical understanding to use this passage to state we are not allowed to notice sin in others and help them deal with it.

The passage in John is not a treatise on recognizing sin in our brothers and helping them to do better. Who was Jesus speaking to? Was he speaking to those who have given their lives to him? No he was speaking to the Pharisees whos sole purpose was to try and trap him. They wanted to accuse him. Again scripture is clear. This is not a passage about the church and church discipline. To attempt to use it to discredit Paul and the apostles is a violation of scripture.

And your last passage has nothing to do with us as believers. It's about the mission of Christ. Jesus said he did not come to the world to judge it. His purpose was not to judge. Not at that time.

John 5:22 Jesus says he IS a judge. Acts 10:42 says Jesus is the judge of the world.

2 Cor 5:10 says Jesus will judge everyone.

John 9:39 Jesus says for judgement he came into this world.

You see, we have to take into consideration all the scripture and what it has to say. To take a verse out of context is not proper.

Let's not be hypocritical in our work in the church. Let's love one another, but not just sit idly by and let a brother destroy themselves and others because of their sin. THAT is NOT loving in the least.

It pains me greatly as a scholar to see the Word of God misused by anyone for any reason. Far too often our theology is not determined by scripture. Too many people use scripture to try and support what they believe rather than determine what they believe by scripture. (By the way I am not accusing you of doing that. I get the distinct impression that you have gotten some of your thoughts from listening to others who don't really study scripture to the point of understanding.)

Scripture never contradicts itself. So if it seems to that's our fault for not doing our due diligence in study. Don't dismiss a scripture just because it doesn't fit what we believe.

I encourage you to search the scriptures for truth. It's the only way we can really get what it teaches.

Click to expand...

I think the point where I get hung up if that we seem to often identify this as singularly the worst of sins, ye even unforgivable if you listen to some, yet in the end sin is sin. Bishops mishandling the truth about parishes they are assigning clergy to, and mishandling the truth about clergy to the parishes they assign them to may be thought of as telling the truth carefully, or it might just be lying. Would you call this sin? Would you see this as a better sin or a worser sin than someone who is Gay and open about it. I don't want to say that it is not sin, as much as anything I don't understand enough about it.

The scripture that does sit most on my heart is the often recited line form the Lord's Prayer:


In terms of the function of the Church, be it mission or ministry, we need to be talking about Jesus a whole lot more, and dare I say it, what happens in someone else's bedroom a whole lot less.

When it comes to the subject of this thread, Gay Conversion Therapy being outlawed in Victoria, I support it. One of the reasons I support it is that it seems to me that much of the practice demeans the humanity of Gay people, and in so doing demeans the humanity of our whole society. Now we probably don't scientifically know absolutely if gayness is Nature or Nurture, or just a choice people make. Your arguments make some sense if it is simply choice, however if in some sense if it is Nature, and having spoken at depth to members of my own family who are now in single gender marriages, which certainly for them seems to be Nature, then surely we should be encouraging them to be the best person they can be.

Sometimes I think 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' was a whole lot easier for all of us.

hedrick said:

In effect, is there any room for someone who is willing to accept that people who come to different conclusions than their own are still Christians and should be counseled that way?

Click to expand...

I would hope so, not only on this issue but on so many others. If we cannot respect the paths people have walked which have brought them to our church doors, we have no business being in pastoral ministry at all.

hedrick said:

I’m not sure about what actually happens in pastors’ offices, nor have I found any source that tries to assess this.

Click to expand...

Probably most pastors would be unwilling to share the confidential conversations they have had with those in their care. And I suspect from the other side people would not be keen to share those conversations either.

Philip_B said:

Bishops mishandling the truth about parishes they are assigning clergy to, and mishandling the truth about clergy to the parishes they assign them to may be thought of as telling the truth carefully, or it might just be lying.

Click to expand...

Surely this would never happen.

Paidiske said:

Probably most pastors would be unwilling to share the confidential conversations they have had with those in their care. And I suspect from the other side people would not be keen to share those conversations either.

Click to expand...

Obviously I wouldn't expect them to share specific cases. But it's not unreasonable to be interested in the overall approach pastors take.

Paidiske said:

I would hope so, not only on this issue but on so many others. If we cannot respect the paths people have walked which have brought them to our church doors, we have no business being in pastoral ministry at all.

Click to expand...

We are called to help people on their walk - sadly some see that as we want you to walk like us - as in the Holiness Code where the people of Israel were called to walk not like an Egyptian.

Paidiske said:

Surely this would never happen.

Click to expand...

Did you nose just grow a little?

Philip_B said:

Did you nose just grow a little?

Click to expand...

You're meant to read that in sarcasm font.

Speaking as a Bishop: I am all too aware of my own impenetrable darkness and weakness.

FutureAndAHope said:

The problem with the bill is that by definition it states:

(1)(a) to eliminate so far as possible the occurrence of change or suppression practices in Victoria; and

....

(2)(b) to affirm that a person's sexual orientation or gender identity is not broken and in need of fixing; and (c) to affirm that no sexual orientation or gender identity constitutes a disorder, disease, illness, deficiency or shortcoming; and


(1) In this Act, a change or suppression practice means a practice or conduct directed towards a person, whether with or without the person's consent— (a) on the basis of the person's sexual orientation or gender identity; and (b) for the purpose of— (i) changing or suppressing the sexual orientation or gender identity of the person; or (ii) inducing the person to change or suppress their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Why is this bill, in my opinion so dangerous to the church? It makes law the false idea that homosexuality is not a "shortcoming", and it states that "gender identity is not broken and in need of fixing". The bible presents the opposite idea, as such is opposed to the law.

Note the law applies to "conduct", not just practices. Illegal, conduct under the bill, is inducing someone to change, could be a sermon of repentance, or the act of trying to change or suppress gender.

The true church, those who obey, and teach the words of the bible, will naturally fall foul to this law. For they are inducing, and advocating for a change of gender identity.

Taken from the legislation https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-12/591143bab1.pdf

Click to expand...

Thank you FutureandHope for that expert analysis. It sure is a danger to the evangelical church - those who accept the Bible as God-breathed Scripture.

There is a presupposition which underlies all of this ideology, i.e. sexual orientation describes the gender issues and not sexual sin or promiscuity.

I acknowledge my presuppositions are based on the authority of Scripture, with the original languages interpreted literally, grammatically, culturally and in context. That means all ethical issues are determined by the Word of God and for the Christians, that refers to the values promoted in the New Covenant of the New Testament.

Oz