Why are some churches celebrating sinful conduct?

[seeking.IAM]

First Congregational Church is part of the so-called "United Church of Christ" (UCC)...

No, I'm pretty sure it's actually called that.

 

[Albion]

No, I'm pretty sure it's actually called that.

It IS called that, but First Congregational is the name of the local church, dating back to before the merger between the Congregationalist Church and another one which produced the United Church of Christ. This local congregation is a member.

 

[Radagast]

No, I'm pretty sure it's actually called that.

That's what I said.

 

[Albion]

Its all in how it was worded (or so I thought).

 

[His student]

Why are there churches that celebrate homosexual pride?

Generally, as a group, Congregational Churches are notoriously liberal.

There's an old saying. "Being a liberal means never having to say you're sorry."

That's true in politics and it's true in Christianity.

Liberals just keep flowing with the current stream of culture. There is no anchor one can appeal to that will bring them back on track since they've long ago abandoned absolute standards.

In liberal politics it's a strong belief in authority of the constitution as a standard that's been rejected and is missing.

In Christianity it's a strong belief in the literal authoritative truth contained in the Bible that's been rejected and is missing.

The likely end of the downstream flow for liberalism in politics is finding your nation afloat in the sea of history where long dead nations rot.

The likely end for liberalism in Christianity is Christ spewing you out of His mouth and into Hell.

Any old fish can float down stream. It takes a strong healthy fish to swim upstream.

In politics and in Christianity that means being a conservative no matter how unpopular it may be and no matter what the social consequences may be.

 

[Strong in Him]

Feel free to use this space as your confessional before you hypocritically call out others. Show us your plank before you address our splinters.

I was not hypocritically calling out anyone.
I said that some Christians like to loudly condemn the sin of homosexuality, while remaining remarkably silent about the sin in their own lives, which may be just as bad. This is a fact - you only have to look at Westborough Baptist church.
I did not accuse anyone on this forum of doing this; nor did I claim that I am perfect myself, therefore have a right to judge.

If my post wasn't clear, I apologise. But you might want to check you understand what I am saying before calling me a hypocrite.

 

[Strong in Him]

Amen and absolutely... and then he said to them, "go and sin no more."

My point was, though, that he welcomed them.
He didn't say "it wouldn't be good for me to be seen associating with you", or "it would ruin my reputation, and witness, to be seen in the company of impure, lawbreaking sinners". He ate and drank with disreputable people, touched those who were unclean and forgave women with dubious sexual behaviour.

The article which was linked to, was all about a church celebrating openness, acceptance and inclusivity. The church were NOT saying that they rejoice in, and promote, the "sin" of homosexuality.
(And I'm putting that word in inverted commas because I'm not entirely sure that it's not something you are born with. None of us can even choose to be born; never mind things like our eye colour, whether or not we are healthy or our sexuality. But that's a subject for another thread.)

 

[Ken Rank]

My point was, though, that he welcomed them.
He didn't say "it wouldn't be good for me to be seen associating with you", or "it would ruin my reputation, and witness, to be seen in the company of impure, lawbreaking sinners". He ate and drank with disreputable people, touched those who were unclean and forgave women with dubious sexual behaviour.

The article which was linked to, was all about a church celebrating openness, acceptance and inclusivity. The church were NOT saying that they rejoice in, and promote, the "sin" of homosexuality.
(And I'm putting that word in inverted commas because I'm not entirely sure that it's not something you are born with. None of us can even choose to be born; never mind things like our eye colour, whether or not we are healthy or our sexuality. But that's a subject for another thread.)

I am agreeing with you in that he welcomed anyone as they are... no doubt. Anyone who says otherwise needs to sit down and read the NT again, at least the gospels. My point though... he does not condone sin... nor does he allow it to continue. While he accepts you as you are, he expects you to CHANGE if your life is sin filled. Whether that is beating your wife, drunkeness, envy, pride... or homosexuality... God does not change and sin is whatever He proclaimed it to be whenever He proclaimed it.

Blessings.
Ken

 

[Foxfyre]

My point was, though, that he welcomed them.
He didn't say "it wouldn't be good for me to be seen associating with you", or "it would ruin my reputation, and witness, to be seen in the company of impure, lawbreaking sinners". He ate and drank with disreputable people, touched those who were unclean and forgave women with dubious sexual behaviour.

The article which was linked to, was all about a church celebrating openness, acceptance and inclusivity. The church were NOT saying that they rejoice in, and promote, the "sin" of homosexuality.
(And I'm putting that word in inverted commas because I'm not entirely sure that it's not something you are born with. None of us can even choose to be born; never mind things like our eye colour, whether or not we are healthy or our sexuality. But that's a subject for another thread.)

That's how I see it too. Jesus did not judge people on anything they had no control over or even their past sins. He met them as who and what they are and what they could be. He who is without sin cast the first stone. Go and sin no more.

I think ANY Christian denomination or congregation seriously errs whenever it takes sides on any social issue. The duty of the Church is not to indoctrinate but to educate, encourage, build up, inspire, edify. It is not to support any political position but is supposed to equip the Saints to choose and order their lives constructively and in a way pleasing to God.

IMO, Jesus did not join us here on Earth to find and love the pure and sinless. He came for the benefit of sinners and those who need to turn their lives around. If the Church does not welcome sinners and/or those who need to turn their lives around--that would pretty much be all of us--it is not His Church. And all who not disrupt classes or worship services or behave themselves inappropriately should be welcomed, loved, included regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or any other such characteristic.

 

[Ken Rank]

I think ANY Christian denomination or congregation seriously errs whenever it takes sides on any social issue.

I agree save for this point... homosexuality isn't a social issue, it is an abomination according to a God that is eternal and says He does not change. We have to understand, that if we create a theological environment where God changes the rules or foundations or principles... then He can change it on ANYTHING including whether or not Christ's work is sufficient. He called killing a sin... then it is a sin and if killing becomes a social issue (like abortion) we as Christians can't legislate morality but we also can't condone murder. Yet, God can meet a murderer where he is and change him. That is what happens when we REALLY meet God... we change. It might take time but we change. So... a homosexual (or murderer, or drunk, or any other sin) who meets God might not change that moment, but they will change or their experience can't have been real because Christ's own words, his own expectation, was that we go and sin and no more. Sin is darkness, and sin and light do no live in harmony.

 

[seeking.IAM]

It IS called that, but First Congregational is the name of the local church, dating back to before the merger between the Congregationalist Church and another one which produced the United Church of Christ. This local congregation is a member.

Please allow me as one who has close affiliations with UCC folk. The UCC is a 1957 merger that united 4 streams of Christianity over a century: German Reformed Church in the United States, the Evangelical Church, the Congregational Church, and the Christian Church.

• The German Reformed Church merged with the Evangelical Church to form the Evangelical & Reformed Church.
• Elsewhere, the Congregational Church merged with the Christian Church to form the Congregational Christian Church.
• Finally, in 1957 the Evangelical & Reformed Church merged with the Congregational Christian Church to form The United Church of Christ. (Note some Congregational churches went their separate way and retained their name as Congregationalists so not all are UCC.)

As it pertains to this thread, here's the thing. The UCC has congregational polity, which means it is governed from the bottom up. While the positions of the national UCC are, indeed, liberal some local congregations are not open and affirming and care not what the national church thinks. So, when you've seen one UCC church, you've really only seen one UCC church. Generalization is tough with this particular religious body in my opinion. For the record.

 

[Albion]

My point was, though, that he welcomed them.
He didn't say "it wouldn't be good for me to be seen associating with you", or "it would ruin my reputation, and witness, to be seen in the company of impure, lawbreaking sinners". He ate and drank with disreputable people, touched those who were unclean and forgave women with dubious sexual behaviour.

I am wondering if the first paragraph ^ is meant to agree with the following one, or stand in contrast to it???????

The article which was linked to, was all about a church celebrating openness, acceptance and inclusivity. The church were NOT saying that they rejoice in, and promote, the "sin" of homosexuality.

How does celebrating the group and what it stands for NOT amount to rejoicing in and promoting that? We are all aware of the manner of these congregations which fly the LGBT flag, advertise its support of gay "pride," host the groups meetings on the church's premises, etc. etc.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Here is a news article I found about a church celebrating homosexual pride: First Congregational Church celebrates LGBT Pride, one year of inclusion

1 Corinthians 6:9-10, a New Testament scripture, says that homosexuals will not inherit the Kingdom of God. This verse is even more severe than the Old Testament verse Leviticus 20:13, which proscribes the death penalty for sodomy. Why? Because perdition is eternal, but death is only temporary.

Why are there churches that celebrate homosexual pride? It isn’t different than celebrating pride in other types of sins such as adultery, thievery, perversity, etc.

Most all churches have homosexual people that attend their services. That is between them and God and it is really none of my business. BUT if you want me to approve then we are going to have a problem. Just because we accept the sinner does not mean we have to accept their sin.

This becomes a litmus test for liberals. They are not accepting of non liberals but they expect non liberals to be accepting of them. This is a double standard.

 

[joshua 1 9]

the Congregational Church

The Pilgrim Church merged with the Congregational Church somewhere along the way. I am descended from people that came over on the Mayflower back when they had the mayflower compact before the constitution was written.

 

[Anthony2019]

I think it has less to do with celebrating any particular "conduct", but rather that they believe their mission as a church is to reach out to people of all backgrounds, to honour and respect them as individuals, and to emphasise radical Christian inclusion. There will always be differing views regarding the ethics of sexuality, but in the words of the Bishops in my local diocese, there is nothing wrong with the theology of providing welcome.

 

[Albion]

I think it has less to do with celebrating any particular "conduct", but rather that they believe their mission as a church is to reach out to people of all backgrounds, to honour and respect them as individuals, and to emphasise radical Christian inclusion. There will always be differing views regarding the ethics of sexuality, but in the words of the Bishops in my local diocese, there is nothing wrong with the theology of providing welcome.

OK. My point was that this is not what the best-known gay-affirming churches do, however (such as the UCC which was mentioned before).

They actively promote. Individual readers here can be in favor of that or opposed, but that is the reality; and it is what the OP was calling our attention to.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

Jesus would never turn away any type of sinner, whether he’s a homosexual, thief, adulterer, or whatever. As people who were once sinners but now saved, the key is not to engage in our prior sinful conduct anymore. Which is to say that a homosexual who become born again must not continue in his immoral proclivities and instead embrace a repentant life of chastity and wholesomeness.

The arrogance we exhibit sometimes. Calling other groups out for their sin. We are so hypocritical with out even realizing it. We are all just law breakers. There’s isn’t separation between a homosexual and myself or anyone else who still struggles with sin on any level.

 

[tturt]

Wonder if they've ever had an outward celebration for Jesus.

 

[Strong in Him]

I am wondering if the first paragraph ^ is meant to agree with the following one, or stand in contrast to it???????

Agree with it.
Jesus welcomed, accepted, healed and taught anyone who came to him; tax collectors, the unclean, a woman who had been caught committing adultery and another who had had 5 husbands. He did not, ever, say "I can't be seen with someone of your reputation/your sin is too great for me to even talk to you."
He did not expect anyone to be good enough to come to him; he died for sinners.

How does celebrating the group and what it stands for NOT amount to rejoicing in and promoting that?

They were celebrating the fact that they are a church which is open to, and welcomes, everyone.
They were not glorifying the homosexual act; big difference.
Jesus welcomed the woman who had had 5 husbands and was living with another man; in fact, he revealed himself to her as the Messiah. That doesn't mean he was celebrating, or promoting, infidelity in marriage. Among the 12 that Jesus CHOSE, were a zealot, a tax collector, a thief and betrayer and one who denied him - that doesn't mean that he approved of theft, extortion, betrayal and so on.

Basically, as I see it, the church in the article were saying, "whether you're gay, lesbian, transgender or something else, you are still welcome here to join our worship and learn about God's love for you"; which is as it should be. Rather than saying "no gays allowed" or "we don't want your sort here".

 

[Albion]

Agree with it.
Jesus welcomed, accepted, healed and taught anyone who came to him; tax collectors, the unclean, a woman who had been caught committing adultery and another who had had 5 husbands. He did not, ever, say "I can't be seen with someone of your reputation/your sin is too great for me to even talk to you."
He did not expect anyone to be good enough to come to him; he died for sinners.

I got that, and I think it is a view that is generally accepted in the churches, but that is a far cry from endorsing, celebrating, endorsing, or sponsoring it.

They were celebrating the fact that they are a church which is open to, and welcomes, everyone.

It's wishful thinking to believe that such is what the "celebrating" is about. Of course, each congregation marches to its own tempo, but the usual is for the churches that welcome gays to also promote them in a very public way, which IS to say that the church approves of what they -- their organizations, clubs, celebrations and so on -- stand for.