Homosexuality

[topher694]

that would miss the point

No, that's entirely the point. You are basing this on a sample of what? Probably 1-3 examples? Out of how many? It's a broad brush your using with little paint.

 

[JSM83]

No, that's entirely the point. You are basing this on a sample of what? Probably 1-3 examples? Out of how many? It's a broad brush your using with little paint.

If we can’t agree that it’s a theme amongst enough churches that they require homosexuals to not practice, but don’t require the same standards for other “sins”, then the conversation is at an impasse. I think it’s common enough to be more than a tiny fraction as you indicate- you think it’s a tiny fraction that I’m drawing huge conclusions from - we are at deadlock

 

[topher694]

my attempt at ballpark - enough to say - Christians in my circles have all heard the policy and it’s not unusual. Many would find it unusual to disallow leaders based on the faith of their children or leaders based on whether or not they are prone to overeating or other indulgences

How about this:

At my church I fully follow Titus 1:6 and am even more strict about leadership than that scripture outlines. Most of the pastors I know, which is dozens, follow Titus 1:6 as well. The ones that don't follow it, also don't follow the homosexuality part as well. And, the overeating thing is a narrow/incorrect application of the actual meaning of that scripture.

 

[topher694]

If we can’t agree that it’s a theme amongst enough churches that they require homosexuals to not practice, but don’t require the same standards for other “sins”, then the conversation is at an impasse. I think it’s common enough to be more than a tiny fraction as you indicate- you think it’s a tiny fraction that I’m drawing huge conclusions from - we are at deadlock

We are not at a deadlock, as I have actual real world experience with this and it appears you do not.

 

[JSM83]

How about this:

It my church I fully follow Titus 1:6 and am even more strict about leadership than that scripture outlines. Most of the pastors I know, which is dozens, follow Titus 1:6 as well. The ones that don't follow it, also don't follow the homosexuality part as well. And, the overeating thing is a narrow/incorrect application of the actual meaning of that scripture.

Deadlock - we can’t agree on the prevalence of the matter. I think it’s much more prevalent. I also think dissipation includes overeating. You do not. Deadlock here too.

 

[JSM83]

We are not at a deadlock, as I have actual real world experience with this and it appears you do not.

You didn’t ask for real world experience you asked for numbers.

I have real world experience of the exact situation of which I speak - such led to my question

 

[topher694]

Deadlock - we can’t agree on the prevalence of the matter. I think it’s much more prevalent. I also think dissipation includes overeating. You do not. Deadlock here too.

Well if deadlock means you are wrong, then sure. But if you insist your evaluation is correct, then, provide any sort of evidence even if it is anecdotal.

 

[topher694]

You didn’t ask for real world experience you asked for numbers.

I have real world experience of the exact situation of which I speak - such led to my question

Numbers of your personal real world experience... sheesh

 

[topher694]

You didn’t ask for real world experience you asked for numbers.

I have real world experience of the exact situation of which I speak - such led to my question

I don't question that it happens. I question the implication of how prevalent it is.

 

[JSM83]

Well if deadlock means you are wrong, then sure. But if you insist your evaluation is correct, then, provide any sort of evidence even if it is anecdotal.

Ok - a church talk on homosexuality, the statement was as follows “Practicing homosexuals may not be ordained into leadership” - the person giving the talk constantly spoke of their overeating habits. Conversations amongst countless Christians “practicing homosexuals must be loved but not allowed into leadership”. A random affirmation from a church bodies code “ practicing homosexuals mustn’t be ordained” however no mention of other sins. That is a sample of my experiential evidence

 

[JSM83]

Ok - a church talk on homosexuality, the statement was as follows “Practicing homosexuals may not be ordained into leadership” - the person giving the talk constantly spoke of their overeating habits. Conversations amongst countless Christians “practicing homosexuals must be loved but not allowed into leadership”. A random affirmation from a church bodies code “ practicing homosexuals mustn’t be ordained” however no mention of other sins. That is a sample of my experiential evidence

you are the first person ever (in my experience) that maintained that you followed all the rules in Titus 1:5-7.

 

[JSM83]

you are the first person ever (in my experience) that maintained that you followed all the rules in Titus 1:5-7.

none of those quoted ever spoke of the other items of leadership “children must be believers” for example

 

[topher694]

Ok - a church talk on homosexuality, the statement was as follows “Practicing homosexuals may not be ordained into leadership” - the person giving the talk constantly spoke of their overeating habits. Conversations amongst countless Christians “practicing homosexuals must be loved but not allowed into leadership”. A random affirmation from a church bodies code “ practicing homosexuals mustn’t be ordained” however no mention of other sins. That is a sample of my experiential evidence

ok, so some observations and questions about that:

A) if the talk was presented as being on homosexuality, it shouldn't be a surprise that that is what they focused on. Other sins would be a different topic.

B) did he talk about his current overeating or his past overeating that he has since overcome? That's an important distinction. If it the answer is "current", that is clearly a hypocritical and unwise thing to say. And as a leader I would address it, privately.

C) in my experience the reason homosexual ordination is singled out in conversation is because it is continually brought up in conversation. That is the reason it is discussed... it's what people are asking about... just like you did here. That doesn't dismiss other sins, but that topic is a very hot one right now, no surprise that would be talked about more.

D) specific experience does not equate to general consensus. One church or leader may have a reason (albeit misguided) for imposing limits for homosexuals while ignoring other biblical leadership requirements, but that doesn't automatically equate to "everyone else is doing it". A clear pattern of consistent behavior across multiple unconnected churches would need to be established to make such a statement.

 

[topher694]

you are the first person ever (in my experience) that maintained that you followed all the rules in Titus 1:5-7.

Well I could introduce you to many more.

 

[JSM83]

How about this:

At my church I fully follow Titus 1:6 and am even more strict about leadership than that scripture outlines. Most of the pastors I know, which is dozens, follow Titus 1:6 as well. The ones that don't follow it, also don't follow the homosexuality part as well. And, the overeating thing is a narrow/incorrect application of the actual meaning of that scripture.

narrow - I grant that, I isolated one aspect of dissipation. Incorrect - I’m not so sure.
My original query being about those who require homosexuals to not practice also not following Titus and the other ideals of leadership - you say you do follow those - you you’re not in the group of who I speak (which I think is large and you think is tiny).

 

[JSM83]

ok, so some observations and questions about that:

A) if the talk was presented as being on homosexuality, it shouldn't be a surprise that that is what they focused on. Other sins would be a different topic.

You’re isolating specifics and I’m speaking of a theme.

B) did he talk about his current overeating or his past overeating that he has since overcome? No current and continuing in this specific That's an important distinction. If it the answer is "current", that is clearly a hypocritical and unwise thing to say. And as a leader I would address it, privately.

C) in my experience the reason homosexual ordination is singled out in conversation is because it is continually brought up in conversation. That is the reason it is discussed... it's what people are asking about... just like you did here. That doesn't dismiss other sins, but that topic is a very hot one right now, no surprise that would be talked about more.
I concede to that - and so ought we as a body take more control of the agenda - isn’t the message of Christ being lost by allowing others to frame our conversation and faith ?

D) specific experience does not equate to general consensus. One church or leader may have a reason (albeit misguided) for imposing limits for homosexuals while ignoring other biblical leadership requirements, but that doesn't automatically equate to "everyone else is doing it" I was careful not to say everyone - I speak of themes and generals
. A clear pattern of consistent behavior across multiple unconnected churches would need to be established to make such a statement. I think one exists - you do not.

ok, so some observations and questions about that:

A) if the talk was presented as being on homosexuality, it shouldn't be a surprise that that is what they focused on. Other sins would be a different topic.

B) did he talk about his current overeating or his past overeating that he has since overcome? That's an important distinction. If it the answer is "current", that is clearly a hypocritical and unwise thing to say. And as a leader I would address it, privately.

C) in my experience the reason homosexual ordination is singled out in conversation is because it is continually brought up in conversation. That is the reason it is discussed... it's what people are asking about... just like you did here. That doesn't dismiss other sins, but that topic is a very hot one right now, no surprise that would be talked about more.

D) specific experience does not equate to general consensus. One church or leader may have a reason (albeit misguided) for imposing limits for homosexuals while ignoring other biblical leadership requirements, but that doesn't automatically equate to "everyone else is doing it". A clear pattern of consistent behavior across multiple unconnected churches would need to be established to make such a statement.

 

[JSM83]

Well I could introduce you to many more.

That’s fair if you think I could use some levelling of my experience, I’m open to names I can look into.

My question was about whether or not we are singling out homosexuals. Also, is it the point of our faith - to have everything right and always be right?

 

[topher694]

narrow - I grant that, I isolated one aspect of dissipation. Incorrect - I’m not so sure.
My original query being about those who require homosexuals to not practice also not following Titus and the other ideals of leadership - you say you do follow those - you you’re not in the group of who I speak (which I think is large and you think is tiny).

I am not saying it is tiny, that would be to make the same error I believe you are making. I know what my personal experience reflects and that is contrary to the assumption you are making.

Further, when discussing the practices of churches and church leadership, I find it unfruitful, divisive and therefore unbiblical to start from the assumption and accusation that they are doing something wrong. It's not right to throw "most" churches under the bus as a starting point. That doesn't mean there is no error out there, clearly there is.

 

[topher694]

My question was about whether or not we are singling out homosexuals (even if it’s because of the agenda we are “given” to answer for). Also, is it the point - be have everything right and always be right?

I'm not understanding this statement.

 

[JSM83]

I am not saying it is tiny, that would be to make the same error I believe you are making. I know what my personal experience reflects and that is contrary to the assumption you are making.

Further, when discussing the practices of churches and church leadership, I find it unfruitful, divisive and therefore unbiblical to start from the assumption and accusation that they are doing something wrong. It's not right to throw "most" churches under the bus as a starting point. That doesn't mean there is no error out there, clearly there is.

the beginning of the thread is a question - not an accusation or a tarring many with the same brush - I’ll look over my thread and see if I accused or tarred and edit as necessary