Liberal Christianity and sexual ethics

[RDKirk]

Since rules are always broken this would imply we need not have rules at all and live in pure anarchy. If people are adulterous and don't keep monogamy, do we then carve out exceptions for Polygamists or swingers?

It does not imply that at all. It implies exactly what I said it denotes: Either the rules or wrong or they're being incorrectly applied.

No society ever has had Christian values? When the Emperors outlawed Paganism and abolished sacrifice to the gods I would call that a representation of Christian values being put in place and effectively forced. To the point where Paganism became a non-entity.

Paganism never became a "non-entity." It merely changed names.

Know ye not that to whomever ye yield yourselves as servants to obey, his servants ye become whom ye obey, whether of sin which leads unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? -- Romans 6

Your pagan god is whatever you obey. What guided your choice of car to buy? What guided your choice of house to buy? What guides how you spend your free time? Whatever guides and dictates your choices, your actions, day to day and hour to hour is your god.

 

[seeking.IAM]

...What I have in mind is what liberal Christians advocate believe and consider out of bounds for the Christian to do...
For instance, if in this acceptance of everyone, do you extend this to Polygamists or swingers? ...Which I assume, so long as both parties are consenting adults you have no problem with, right?

I am a man in my 60's. I've been around the block a time or two. I've been a member of several different churches in my lifetime, and only in the last 10 years have worshipped in a denomination you might label progressive. In all of my membership classes and confirmation classes in churches of different denominations, not once did anyone ask me about my sexual behavior as a condition of membership or attendance. I am also unaware of any church or denomination of which I have been a member asking a worshipper to leave.

I think one should not equate acceptance of people as having no problem with their behavior. I believe all should be welcome in church to hear the Good News and work out their own relationship with God. That is what acceptance means to me. That is not the same thing as saying I have no problem with their behavior. I may or may not depending upon what they are doing, if I would know about it, that is. I don't know what the person next to me in the pew is doing in the bedroom, nor do I care to know. I'm going to treat him kindly nonetheless. That's inclusion.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I am a man in my 60's. I've been around the block a time or two. I've been a member of several different churches in my lifetime, and only in the last 10 years have worshipped in a denomination you might label progressive. In all of my membership classes and confirmation classes in churches of different denominations, not once did anyone ask me about my sexual behavior as a condition of membership or attendance. I am also unaware of any church or denomination of which I have been a member asking a worshipper to leave.

I think one should not equate acceptance of people as having no problem with their behavior. I believe all should be welcome in church to hear the Good News and work out their own relationship with God. That is what acceptance means to me. That is not the same thing as saying I have no problem with their behavior. I may or may not depending upon what they are doing, if I would know about it, that is. I don't know what the person next to me in the pew is doing in the bedroom, nor do I care to know. I'm going to treat him kindly nonetheless. That's inclusion.

Your personal experience is one thing, but i don't see it's relevance to my question. Your answers only seem to double down and ignore the considerations I've made, rather than actually address them. I'm not advocating an inquisition, only asking whether or not there are sexual standards within liberal Christianity.

I mean, if you're serious about excluding no one and including everyone, then everything is permissible. Even the Apostle had to expel a man from a Church for sleeping with his father's wife, so these issues are not beyond the consideration of Churches. They never have been historically so why do you think we should be completely non-judgmental now?

But you're free to have your experiences, I won't take them away from you, but they do not convince me of anything.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

It does not imply that at all. It implies exactly what I said it denotes: Either the rules or wrong or they're being incorrectly applied..

What are the rules then that we might apply them? At least per a Liberal Christian's reckoning? What are the limitations that you think should be set concerning sexual relations? Are there any? This is the main reason for the thread. Does Liberal Christianity have any definite limits?

I think that it doesn't. It might have ideals, it might have boundaries but if those boundaries are broken, no big deal. That seems to be the basic attitude of liberal Christianity on issues of sex. There's a general hesitancy to say things are forbidden, immoral or beyond consideration.

Paganism never became a "non-entity." It merely changed names.

Know ye not that to whomever ye yield yourselves as servants to obey, his servants ye become whom ye obey, whether of sin which leads unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? -- Romans 6

Your pagan god is whatever you obey. What guided your choice of car to buy? What guided your choice of house to buy? What guides how you spend your free time? Whatever guides and dictates your choices, your actions, day to day and hour to hour is your god.

What do you mean Paganism changed names? Are you saying Christianity post Constantine was a corrupted form of Paganism?

 

[seeking.IAM]

...Even the Apostle had to expel a man from a Church for sleeping with his father's wife, so these issues are not beyond the consideration of Churches...

And Jesus talked with the woman at the well and ate with tax collectors. The church cannot reach those that it expels.

I see you are Eastern Orthodox. Does your church expel persons for sexual sin?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

And Jesus talked with the woman at the well and ate with tax collectors. The church cannot reach those that it expels.

I see you are Eastern Orthodox. Does your church expel persons for sexual sin?

Depends on the sin and the sinner. Is the sin bad enough that it warrants such a punishment? Would they be better served repenting within the Church on the path to holiness?

That however involves the idea of there being such a thing as sexual sin. That it requires repentance, and not just sexual sin but sin generally. That we are not without accountability in these things, to either God or to man. The Orthodox prayer book I have and use (not regularly enough mind you) constantly reminds the individual of their sinfulness and need to abase themselves before God.

My point in bringing up Paul wasn't so much about expulsion as to the fact that our sexual lives within the Church matter. They are not something to be utterly privatized and personal. Historically the Church has never really functioned in that way until recently. How could it? Given the legitimacy the Church gave to marriage and the insistence of our Fathers on it's goodness.

 

[Trev T]

I remember a Billy Graham sermon, and i only listened to a bit of it, where he said that if pastors in the pulpit weren't so afraid to discuss sexual matters in the 1960s+ era, things would be radically different today. I find this whole transgender stuff to be a bit perplexing. I think that's why liberal Christians are so dedicated to evolutionary theory, because it includes genetic errors on that scale. The fall of man created a lot of problems(really, trevor?). Men with womens bodies, women with mens bodies.. men that think they're women.. women that think they're men.. I give into evolution a bit there. There is no explaining women with penises and men with vaginas(in appearance) with a literal Bible, is there? I don't know the entire impact of Adam and Eve's decision on sex and stuff. It's very confusing, but i've only researched a little.