Christians: They were banned! (Jesus, gospel, Sodom, homosexuality, hell)

[Mister_T]

Originally Posted by Endless

I never bracketed them together - i merely asked where you draw the line. Can you have professing Christians living in sin and not being challenged concerning it? According to the Bible homosexuality is a sin, therefore it is not normal. If the Bible is the basis on which the church operates then they have a right to flag homosexuality.

Great. Obesity is a sin. Killing people is a sin. Why aren't they telling overweight people to get out? Why aren't they telling combat active soilders to get out? I'll tell you why....because it's wrong! Passing judgement and condemnation is a sin. Draw the line and throw the finger pointers out too. Since they are persistent in their sin by passing judgement and condemning people.

[Mister_T]

Originally Posted by Endless

In anycase paedophilia is not a crime - it is only when the attraction is acted upon and the children abused that there is a crime. So the question comes when you have a professing Christian in the church who admits to being a paedophile (just attracted to children) yet states he will never act upon it. Is he removed from the church though no crime has been committed? Where exactly is the line drawn? Attraction to children is a state of mind, just like homosexuality is a state of mind. Neither are genetic. Attraction to children is of course a serious state of mind because of the consequences it can lead to.

This is absurd. How can anyone even compare pedophilla and homosexuality together is mindboggling!

One word: CONSENT! A child doesn't have a full comprehension of sex until puberty.

Homsexuality is a state of mind?! Neither are genetic?!
How about gay people who've tried being straight but can't? Try and turn gay and you'll see where these people are coming from.

[CaptainXeroid]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

How you have described the situation certainly is an outrage.

I wonder if you have all the facts...

This was exactly what I was thinking.

onmybelief, I hope you don't take this personally, but you have levelled a charge of hypocrisy with very scant details. I'm not a member of the Methodist Church, but I am aware of their advertising campaign "Open Hearts; Open Minds; Open doors", and my first reaction is that their "higher ups" would not back a decision that went against that policy unless there were some other circumstances that lead to the local pastor's decsion.

I guess I'm saying I need some kind of corraborating evidence before I hang the Scarlet 'H' on anyone.

[onmybelief]

onmybelief, I hope you don't take this personally, but you have levelled a charge of hypocrisy with very scant details. I'm not a member of the Methodist Church, but I am aware of their advertising campaign "Open Hearts; Open Minds; Open doors", and my first reaction is that their "higher ups" would not back a decision that went against that policy unless there were some other circumstances that lead to the local pastor's decsion.

No I do not take it personally, CaptainX. I realize that there has to be other facts involved in the situation. What I wrote was a bit out of anger and frustration. And if those facts come to my attention I will certainly bring them up and admit I was too hasty to label them as hypocrites.

This is just a point that I try to make that all are invited to Christ no matter what your background may be.

[I Panicked! At the Disco]

What are your thoughts on this situation? As you probably have realized now I think it is an atrocity!

I don't believe the situation was handled correctly. Were these two members of that church? If they were, the pastor should have had a private meeting with them, and kindly and calmly explain that homosexuality is a sin, and show them the Bible verses that back that up. If they refused to repent of the sin, they should have been disfellowshipped- but only after they refused to acknowledge that they are living in sin.

[Seyorni]

Wasn't there some objection made to the sort of reprobates Jesus was hanging out with?
Didn't he point out that his purpose was to preach to the sinners rather than the righteous?

[Mister_T]

Originally Posted by Seyorni

Wasn't there some objection made to the sort of reprobates Jesus was hanging out with?
Didn't he point out that his purpose was to preach to the sinners rather than the righteous?

It's amazing that people who claim to follow Christ overlook this fact. YES! you're correct! The people that were giving Jesus a bunch crap for hanging out with sinners was the Pharisees. And as we can see by the subject of this post, Pharisee's still exist today.

[CaptainXeroid]

Originally Posted by onmybelief

No I do not take it personally, CaptainX. I realize that there has to be other facts involved in the situation. What I wrote was a bit out of anger and frustration. And if those facts come to my attention I will certainly bring them up and admit I was too hasty to label them as hypocrites.

I appreciate your understanding the distinction and saying this. If the situation happened as you described it, I share your anger.

Originally Posted by onmybelief

....This is just a point that I try to make that all are invited to Christ no matter what your background may be.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. When I read the New Testament, I don't get the impression that Jesus would turn anyone away.

[I Panicked! At the Disco]

Didn't he point out that his purpose was to preach to the sinners rather than the righteous?

Absolutely! Jesus taught the truth to them. Which is what we should be doing for gay people. And the truth is that homosexuality is a sin.