While not a member now, I grew up in the UMC. I hope that a split can be avoided, but time will tell.
Upvote
0
...Any Christian who would cater to sodomite weddings is committing a grave sin. God will judge him for his abomination.
I admit my earlier post may have come across as a bit harsh. To be more tactful, I should have added that active homosexuals are always welcome to repent, meaning they have to quit engaging in sexually deviant conduct and receive forgiveness from God. Sodomy is still an abomination, as is the case with all sin. But at the end of the day, we’re all sinners who need God’s mercy. There isn’t any reason why LGBT people can’t turn from their ways and embrace a holy life. It's no different for any other type of sinner.
Eating shrimp is called an abomination in the Old Testament as is wearing clothing with mixed fabrics. If you are going to use the holiness code from the Old Testament to argue that sexual orientation is an "abomination" you likely have to admit that you've committed "abomination" yourself if you've ever wore a cotton/poly blend shirt. Thankfully, last I checked, Christians don't follow the Kosher laws, the Old Testament holiness code and aren't practicing orthodox Jews.
There are a lot of reasons that LGBTQ can't be something other than who they are. You might as wells say, "people with brown eyes can turn away from having brown eyes and embrace a holy life."
You need to re-evaluate your reading of the scripture and your reading of medical science.
BTW, you were not more tactful. Using language like "deviant" and "Sodomy" lacks tact and compassion but also understanding. "Deviant" is a psychological term and psychologists and doctors no longer believe that homosexuality is "deviant" or unnatural behavior. "Sodomy" in the Bible is about the lack of hospitality and not the sexual acts in the text. It was women who were raped and not men.
If you want to talk about deviance, Lot disgustingly gave his daughter to be assaulted by the men of Sodom. So much for parental responsibility.
This United Methodist adheres to the Lord's commandment (Leviticus 18:22) that homosexuality is an abomination.Does the UMC have a definitive stance on the ethics of catering gay weddings and serving gay couples?
I grew up in the UMC but I am Lutheran today. Our denomination officially says that discrimination against gays and lesbians in public services is not countenanced, and I have it on good authority from my pastor that applies to Christians catering gay weddings. I told my pastor that I could not, in good conscience, fellowship with other Christians that saw it otherwise, because just as Paul rebuked Peter for refusing to fellowship with Gentiles, I think this strikes at the heart of the Gospel, that it frees us to serve our neighbor.
What do Methodists have to say on this? I know that the Book of Discipline says that, if I remember correctly, homosexuality is incompatible with Christianity, but I would like clarification beyond this. I know that our churches have limited recognition of shared ministry, so it is a concern I have.
I could not in good conscience be a Methodist as a result of the Book of Discipline's stance on this issue, but I would not automatically reject a Methodist as a brother in Christ with a shared ministry. So I'd like clarification on the United Methodist's stance on this issue. I've seen Methodists on this forum say different things on this issue. I would like to hear from a pastor.
This United Methodist adheres to the Lord's commandment (Leviticus 18:22) that homosexuality is an abomination.
This United Methodist is obedient to the Lord, not the United Methodist Book of Discipline. It doesn't mean I believe in harassing homosexuals, but it does mean that it disgusts me to see United Methodist pastors, superintendents, and bishops pandering to homosexuals.Um, no. That language is not used in the Book of Discipline at all. The terms used are “incompatible with Christian teaching.” While I don’t agree with the current position of the Church it is not an “abomination.” Abomination is an Old Testament term for specific violations of the holiness code. We aren’t Jews, we are Christians.
Eating shell fish is listed as an abomination in the OT as is wearing mixed fabrics. If you want to describe the position of the Church please don’t extrapolate something the UMC never said.
This United Methodist is obedient to the Lord, not the United Methodist Book of Discipline. It doesn't mean I believe in harassing homosexuals, but it does mean that it disgusts me to see United Methodist pastors, superintendents, and bishops pandering to homosexuals.
Nobody has to define "abomination" for me. The Lord made it very clear that homosexuality is a sin. I do not believe in harassing homosexuals, but when our church leaders start giving their blessing to something the Lord called a sin, we have trouble.While I am also a traditionalist on this issue, I believe your post fails to acknowledge circuitrider's soundexplanation of the word "abomination" in Leviticus. It seems that the Book of Discipline would be more in line with actual Biblical teaching than a post like #26 in this thread.
It might depend on how you mean "enforce." I've never advocated harassing homosexuals, but when church leaders start blessing the sin of homosexuality from the pulpit, trouble follows, including church division. As for divorce, you might remember that divorce is acceptable when the reason for divorce is unchaste behavior by one's partner (Matt 19:9).Should we also start enforcing the Lord's commandments vis a vis divorced persons, so you suppose?
But as you know, it's okay to divorce someone if that person is guilty of unchasty.By enforce, of course I meant forbidding the remarriage of divorced persons in our churches or by our pastors, and disqualifying remarried divorced persons from ordination.
And you can quit trying to "teach" me scripture. Check Mark 10: 11-12.
Many do not recognize that (or any other) exception.But as you know, it's okay to divorce someone if that person is guilty of unchasty.
Is it also your personal opinion that a Christian businessman should be legally censured and financially ruined for following the same practices as your church does when it comes to officially participating in same sex marriages?FrireDragon76,
I'm a UMC pastor. (an Elder in Full Connection) The UMC has no official position on the wedding cake issue. However, as said above, while we cannot at this time perform same sex marriages, we are not supposed to reject persons who are LGBTQ.
Also while I may not perform a same sex wedding or do anything that makes me look like the officient, it is my understanding that I could attend such a wedding, pray at the wedding, read a scripture, say a prayer, etc. But I could take no part in what is considered the clergy part of the wedding.
My personal opinion is that when you go into business with the public you are agreeing to sell your products equally to all members in the public. You don't get to decide you aren't going to serve someone because you don't like their race, their religion, their looks, their personal morals, their choice of spouse, etc. If you can't do that you probably shouldn't be running a public business.
But Jesus spelled it out for us (Matt 19:9) and he is still boss.Many do not recognize that (or any other) exception.
But Jesus spelled it out for us (Matt 19:9) and he is still boss.
By enforce, of course I meant forbidding the remarriage of divorced persons in our churches or by our pastors, and disqualifying remarried divorced persons from ordination.
And you can quit trying to "teach" me scripture. Check Mark 10: 11-12.
No, I think he's allowing divorce in the case of unchastity. It's unclear to me whether or not it's okay to remarry in that situation.I don't think Jesus is listing that as an exception for divorce. In verse 9, Jesus states, "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” He gives that exception not to allow for divorce, but to actually say that in the cases of sexual immorality, adultery is ALREADY being committed.
I think the best route to take would be grace, however I do think we should try to really wrestle with these passages and take Jesus' teaching seriously. I think the United Methodist Book of Discipline and Social Principles takes an appropriate stand on both wedding/divorce issues.
Biblically, the ONLY reason to divorce is to allow for remarriage.No, I think he's allowing divorce in the case of unchastity. It's unclear to me whether or not it's okay to remarry in that situation.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?