Homosexuality

[Paidiske]

The topic of this thread is homosexuality & leadership, which is within the context of what I think we're discussing.

As I understood your comments, you were not saying anything about homosexuality, but rather gender-based hierarchy. If I misunderstood that, please feel free to clarify.

I already know you don't like the fact that God is portrayed as a Father & Jesus walked the earth as a man in a Jewish culture that had Law against homosexual sin. Is this why you want to redirect me - because I study His Word and believe it instructs us how to think and live according to His will?

Actually, I have no problem with recognising the first person of the Trinity as Father, or that Jesus was male in his humanity. My issue was that you seemed to be extrapolating from that to posit gender-based hierarchy today.

I wanted to redirect you because the question of gender-based hierarchy is not the topic of this thread.

 

[GDL]

As I understood your comments, you were not saying anything about homosexuality, but rather gender-based hierarchy. If I misunderstood that, please feel free to clarify.

I first responded to your comments about portraying God in gender. Part of my response was to convey the male portrayals of God and thus the male heirarchy. My first point was the Biblical representation of God the Father & the Son as males (addressing the homosexual point of this forum and responding to your comments about danger re: gender expression). Heirarchy (addressing the leadership topic of this forum discussion) per the Biblical position was my secondary point.

So, have you redirected this discussion to be solely about homosexuality and not leadership?

 

[Paidiske]

My first point was the Biblical representation of God the Father & the Son as males (addressing the homosexual point of this forum and responding to your comments about danger re: gender expression). Heirarchy (addressing the leadership topic of this forum discussion) per the Biblical position was my secondary point.

I don't really understand what you're saying. That we use masculine imagery for God doesn't speak to the question of homosexuality at all. But if we reify that masculine imagery it does become dangerous in how we understand human men and women and the relations between them.

But this thread was talking about leadership qualifications, not in terms of sex or gender but in terms of ethics. So again, I don't really see the relevance of your point.

 

[GDL]

I don't really understand what you're saying. That we use masculine imagery for God doesn't speak to the question of homosexuality at all. But if we reify that masculine imagery it does become dangerous in how we understand human men and women and the relations between them.

But this thread was talking about leadership qualifications, not in terms of sex or gender but in terms of ethics. So again, I don't really see the relevance of your point.

This is the opening of the forum.

Assume true:
Homosexuality is a sin. A practicing homosexual may come to church but may not be in leadership.
Question:
Must we forbid the following people to be in leadership too.
1) Those who have children who do not believe, 2) People prone to dissipation (like overeating or such), 3) Alcoholics who are not abstinent?.

Re: leadership: This forum began with a discussion re: a homosexual in church leadership & then proceeded to ask re: other types of sinners being in church leadership. Are you still on point or redirecting the discussion?

Homosexuality is a gender issue. You posted your opinion that "Nothing in Scripture establishes that "God's image is masculine." Your opinion re: gender is stated in absolute form. I took you up on the imagery of God in the masculine in our Text, while also giving you an agreement that God is Spirit (also per our Text).

So, what's your issue here in response to the opening points of this forum? Homosexual sin? Homosexual sinners in church leadership? Practicing sinners of other types in church leadership? Or something other than this that you are discussing, like deifying masculinity?

 

[Paidiske]

Homosexuality is a gender issue.

Sexuality is not gender.

So, what's your issue here in response to the opening points of this forum? Homosexual sin? Homosexual sinners in church leadership? Practicing sinners of other types in church leadership? Or something other than this that you are discussing, like deifying masculinity?

As you will see, I have been participating earlier in this thread, and discussing my experience of how qualifications for ministry are assessed in reality, and discussing questions of abuse, and sexuality, and sexism as they were raised in relation to the OP. In that regard I was particularly careful to respond to posts putting forward what I saw as both a very inaccurate and very damaging view of women in particular.

If I were to try to articulate any issue I have directly in regard to the issue raised by the OP, it would be to agree that selection of people for leadership in the church is often done in ways which are inconsistent and unhelpful (both for the candidates and for the churches they might serve).

 

[GDL]

Sexuality is not gender.

It is easier to discuss when one doesn't change the other's words.

Rather than quote your last comments, are you guided by the Biblical Text in your opinions, or just by what you think is inconsistent & unhelpful (even in the Bible) to a church or its attendees?

 

[zippy2006]

Assume true:
Homosexuality is a sin. A practicing homosexual may come to church but may not be in leadership.
Question:
Must we forbid the following people to be in leadership too.
1) Those who have children who do not believe, 2) People prone to dissipation (like overeating or such), 3) Alcoholics who are not abstinent?.

Titus 1:6-7
"...having children who believe.......not accused of dissipation......not addicted to wine..."
NASB Version

No, we need not prevent such people from assuming leadership roles simply because we prevent practicing homosexuals from assuming leadership roles. As I see it the principle is that people who obstinately engage in serious sin should not be Christian leaders. Practicing homosexuality is a serious sin, and the person in question is intentionally and obstinately engaging in it. None of your other examples contain such conditions.

(I realize this thread is on a different topic now. Just thought I'd reply anyway.)

 

[FreeinChrist]

ADVISOR HAT

This thread is closed for review.

As a reminder, the Statement of Purpose for this thread includes;
​

Homosexuality, Same-Sex Marriage, Bisexuality and Transgenderism/Transexualism: Discussion of these topics must comply with the sitewide rule barring the promotion of homosexuality, same-sex marriage, bisexuality, and transgenderism/transexualism. Discussion and debate should only be directed toward political, legal, historical and civil rights issues, and should not be directed toward the morality of homosexuality, same-sex marriage, bisexuality or transgenderism/transexualism.


​

 

[ewq1938]