Dealing with Liberal Christians

[hedrick]

Thank you, Hedrick. That helps to clarify things.

Lutherans look for assurance in the sacraments. That is one reason our theology is based on sacramental realism, and why for a long time we have had so many differences with you all over this issue (whereas Reformed seem to be more congenial to Lutherans than vice versa). We are encouraged to do good works but we don't look for our assurance there.

Of course we (ELCA and PC-USA) have had some agreements on this issue (Marburg Revisited) but honestly neither I nor my pastor completely understands the agreement. But I think that could be a whole discussion in itself, and I'd have to do more research because I am not completely familiar with the document's conclusions.

I'd be happy to talk further, but I don't think Christian Advice is the place.

 

[Lybrah]

I'm glad you mentioned this and was the focus of my inquiry to another poster.

Do you see this as open sin within the church which is ignored. Or supposedly ignored because no one openly confesses such?

For example, at communion each Sunday we present ourselves before Christ and fellow church members as sinners saved by Grace. In my church we have a moment of personal reflection and prayer confessing the sins we committed to God with a heart and mind of repentance.

At that point before Christ we examine ourselves.

Should someone who is in rebellion not recognizing their sin as such partake of the elements?

This brings up an excellent point. Adultery, theft, taking Lord's name in vain, ect., are all sins people continuously repent of and strive not to do (or they should, anyway). But if transgenderism and homosexuality are not seen as sins in the eyes of these people, they won't repent! So they will keep doing it and the church who permits them is standing by and doing nothing about it.

 

[Lybrah]

What matter needs to be dealt with when one is intersexed?

In my opinion, being intersexed or born with both genitals is different from deciding you're going to be the opposite sex.

 

[Lybrah]

The thing that's interesting about that is that I'd argue that it's the gender obsessed people/trans contingent that re-enforces those stereotypes.

When I was growing up in the 70's and 80's, there was a big push toward trying to eliminate those barriers. I remember things like the legos ads - where an EXTREMELY tomboyish girl was put forth as being no less feminine or beautiful than any other girl. I remember everyone talking about how it was okay for boys to like barbies, how it was ok for girls to like trucks, and how none of that had any bearing upon their being a "boy" or "girl". It was almost like there was a push for androgyny.

But then the whole gender obsessed thing came along - which the trans movement is a part of - and suddenly it was back to even MORE rigid definitions of roles. Suddenly there became a really clear distinction between boy toys/girl toys in toy stores...etc. Pink was a sign that you were feminine, and don't get in the way of a boy's expression of being feminine. Blue was a sign of masculinity, and don't you dare step in the way of your girl being masculine. It's okay. It might be an early expression of them being gay - and being gay is ok. Etc... That's how it morphed.

It's weird - because since the push was toward abandoning the idea of gender-specific-things was part of my early childhood - that's what I tend to believe is the right course to go. And it seems to stand very much against the current messaging of the gender-obsessed crowd.

We need to keep boys masculine and girls feminine. We need gender roles. Without them there is chaos. These roles bring order into our lives. They are not outdated. Sometimes practices last thousands of years for a reason---they work.

 

[Lybrah]

That intercourse sodomy is the sin, even if done in a male/female traditional marriage also (Romans 1:26), and therefore so-called "gay marriage" is not the sin said in the Bible, and is therefore not in itself a sin, but instead only the action of intercourse sodomy or other precise sexual sins such as adultery, all listed in Lev 18 exactly.

When preachers preach against "gay marriage" they are not following scripture.

.

Sorry, but one of the main reasons sex was created was to pro-create. Yes, God added pleasure to it. But he told Adam and Eve to go forth and multiply. This is true for humans. I don't care what animals do. The male and female are supposed to have children. Marriage is also a three-way relationship with God. If God calls homosexuality an abomination, then why would he bless a gay marriage?

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

We need to keep boys masculine and girls feminine. We need gender roles. Without them there is chaos. These roles bring order into our lives. They are not outdated. Sometimes practices last thousands of years for a reason---they work.

In what way would gender roles keep genders enacting feminism or masculinity? They are naturally male or female, do they really need lessons like God didn't infuse them already as such.

 

[Lybrah]

In what way would gender roles keep genders enacting feminism or masculinity? They are naturally male or female, do they really need lessons like God didn't infuse them already as such.

You are correct, but there are too many out there thinking that society creates genders in general and are starting to condone people claiming they are non-binary, which means they don't identify as male or female. The left was to destroy the gender roles.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

You are correct, but there are too many out there thinking that society creates genders in general and are starting to condone people claiming they are non-binary, which means they don't identify as male or female. The left was to destroy the gender roles.

Gender roles won't change that. Enforcement of them might.

 

[FireDragon76]

We need to keep boys masculine and girls feminine. We need gender roles. Without them there is chaos. These roles bring order into our lives. They are not outdated. Sometimes practices last thousands of years for a reason---they work.

Separating pure from impure and having neat categories for everything is something Jews did in the Old Testament. I don't see that as significant to the religious ethic Jesus preached. Jesus didn't seem interested in purity all that much. He seemed more interested in authenticity and compassion.

My own religious tradition does not emphasize the purity of Christians, in fact our faith is that we are impure but that God accepts us anyways because of Jesus sacrifice, and that we cannot make ourselves pure or holy through our own strength or will, but God gives these things to us as a free gift.

 

[salt-n-light]

In what way would gender roles keep genders enacting feminism or masculinity? They are naturally male or female, do they really need lessons like God didn't infuse them already as such.

Ideally we should be born with understanding of ourselves being a male or a female, but because we are also of sinful nature, the understanding of our identity and the responsibilities and characteristics that comes along with it very often gets distorted. If we naturally had perfect understanding of being men and women as God intented us to, topics like these wouldn't need to come up.

So no not lessons, more like guidance. From the Word.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Ideally we should be born with understanding of ourselves being a male or a female, but because we are also of sinful nature, the understanding of our identity and the responsibilities and characteristics that comes along with it very often gets distorted. If we naturally had perfect understanding of being men and women as God intented us to, topics like these wouldn't need to come up.

So no not lessons, more like guidance. From the Word.

Shadows are still shadows. Without that which is the substance distortion is in the premise.

 

[salt-n-light]

Shadows are still shadows. Without that which is the substance distortion is in the premise.

Deep!

But uh, can you elaborate on what you just said please? lol

 

[seeking.IAM]

This brings up an excellent point. Adultery, theft, taking Lord's name in vain, ect., are all sins people continuously repent of and strive not to do (or they should, anyway). But if transgenderism and homosexuality are not seen as sins in the eyes of these people, they won't repent! So they will keep doing it and the church who permits them is standing by and doing nothing about it.

Does your church ask the repentant divorced & remarried person to abstain from sex with their new spouse? (Go and sin no more?)

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Deep!

But uh, can you elaborate on what you just said please? lol

The reality is that in Christianity the roles of female and male denote the roles of Christ and His church. So enforcing gender roles is to put one in the position of God over another.

 

[GingerBeer]

In my opinion, being intersexed or born with both genitals is different from deciding you're going to be the opposite sex.

How is it different? An intersexed person will eventually decide between remaining intersexed, becoming a male, or becoming a female.

 

[salt-n-light]

The reality is that in Christianity the roles of female and male denote the roles of Christ and His church. So enforcing gender roles is to put one in the position of God over another.

Are you talking about enforcing the wordly expectations from gender roles, or the Biblical expectations of gender roles?

The roles (or responsibilities) do exist.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Are you talking about enforcing the wordly expectations from gender roles, or the Biblical expectations of gender roles?

The roles (or responsibilities) do exist.

Christianity. The patterns are there. The only thing that remains permanant to this world is child bearing and the means to obtain it.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

All churches are 100% filled with sinners.

The wheat are those who confess and repent of their sins. The tares are those who don't.

I can see your point of blind spot but must ask what you mean.

My pastor had a good sermon in September about "liberal" sins and "conservative" sins. He did it according to what the one said of the other.

He gave an example that conservatives will point out homosexuality but liberals will point out hypocrisy and coldness. Both sets are found as sins (1 Corinthians 6:9-11) in the NT.

I believe our more liberal brethren want others to be consistent in calling out sin in the church. While the more conservative of the brethren focus on sins they believe liberal brethren are sanctifying. Meaning not counted among the sins pointed out keeps one from the Kingdom. (See 1 Corinthians 6)

I've met christians who have a conservative theology except for their theology around their own issues that scripture address, directly. It's easy for me to see, because my flesh has a particularily heinous sin that comes intuitively and remains quite invisible if I don't bring it up.

 

[Halbhh]

Sorry, but one of the main reasons sex was created was to pro-create. Yes, God added pleasure to it. But he told Adam and Eve to go forth and multiply. This is true for humans. I don't care what animals do. The male and female are supposed to have children. Marriage is also a three-way relationship with God. If God calls homosexuality an abomination, then why would he bless a gay marriage?

"Homosexuality" isn't in the original text of course, but instead in more literal translations the equivalent word to sodomy and "sodomite", which are more precise.

Today the paraphrase translation "homosexuality" is getting less clear to some people since some take it to mean being gay even if celibate (not everyone takes the word that way, just some).

That clarified, we agree 100% in what you said here.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Thanks for your replies. But what happens is that I get treated like I said something really mean and rude, and people tell me how bigoted and hateful I am. Then I feel bad and question, am I wrong? Am I NOT being godly? What if I am wrong, and God would not approve of me thinking this way? I get accused of being crazy and then wonder if I am indeed wrong. What if I am really being hateful?

Think of it this way, in Jesus day, when Jesus denounced many of the cities in which he performed so many miracles because of their unbelief, I imagine in this day and age that would be considered "hate speech". Remember the story where Jesus cleared the temple? Today he would be arrested and considered a loon. Anytime Christians take a firm stand for truth, and especially if it is based on the Scriptures, heat will likely come, in one form or another. Why allow others hate to change your thinking? That is what is happening, in saying those awful things about you, they are expressing hate, and even if you were hateful, is the approach then to fight hate with hate? How is it they crusade against "hate" using hate themselves? That's hypocritical to say the least.