How can any true Christian accept an Appointing of a gay bishop ?

[David M]

No, God's word condemns homosexuality because God condemns this practice.

No it doesn't. There is no evidence that any of the original words should be translated to mean homosexual as that term is used today.

Prove me wrong, find evidence that arsenokoites at the time meant more than temple prostitute. Show me the greek literature where arsenokoites can be demonstrated to mean homosexual.

 

[Duck]

No, God's word condemns homosexuality because God condemns this practice.

While Christians are no longer under the law of Moses, the Bible says that "All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16). The Law of Moses gives insight into God's thinking on matters including homosexuality and adultery. "God will judge fornicators and adulterers" (Hebrews 13:4) The Christian Greek scriptures make it clear that homosexual conduct is a sin against God and that unrepentant homosexuals will not inherit God's kingdom. (1 Corinthians 6:9,10) That scripture contains this warning "Make no mistake: neither libertines nor...any who practice sodomy or submit to it... will inherit the reign of God" (Bible in Living English)

And haircuts, what to have for dinner, burial practices, the proper way to offer a sacrifice of wheat, how to treat your slaves, what price to fetch for your children when you sell them into slavery, what is allowed to be done on the Sabbath, when to pay people for their services, and when to execute your disobedient children.

Personally, my objection isn't to christianity, nor is it to your bible, nor its condemnation of me to eternal torture. My objection is to christians shoving their religion in my face by knocking on my door at the weekend, by influencing school boards to promote religious dogma as equivalent to actual science, by legislating their religious rules and regulations to apply to everyone (regardless of religion), and by legislating what are and are not acceptable relationships between adults.

I would have a lot less objections and a lot more tolerance towards christians and christianity if they actually behaved morally, and particularly if they kept their religion and its morals to themselves. If I want to hear the "good news" I will ask about it.

 

[jml03]

Sin is sin. I sin daily, yet I still teach a Sunday School class. There is no sin greater than another, save one- blasphemy. And to me, blasphemy is knowing God is real, accepting Him, and then denying (saying He's not real) him - but even that can have loopholes - PETER for example (not saying Jesus was God, but if you saw Him, you've seen the Father). Deny, deny, deny. If my theory is 100%, Peter is in Hell, but I don't believe he is. So, there are alot of things that I don't take 100% from the bible. It's not a pick and choose. I just follow the word as much as I can, and when I'm doing something I shouldn't, God lets me know. Frankly, I don't get the bishops, priests, etc thing. But, if you disapprove of something, don't participate. If I don't want to hear a gay minister, I won't go to that church.

I do believe bad things have happened to certain people. Sodom and Gomorrah, the Egyptian army, the residents of Jericho- minus the prostitutes family. There was a reason for it - but I think the reasons were greater than just being gay.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Sin is sin. I sin daily, yet I still teach a Sunday School class. There is no sin greater than another, save one- blasphemy. And to me, blasphemy is knowing God is real, accepting Him, and then denying (saying He's not real) him - but even that can have loopholes - PETER for example (not saying Jesus was God, but if you saw Him, you've seen the Father). Deny, deny, deny. If my theory is 100%, Peter is in Hell, but I don't believe he is. So, there are alot of things that I don't take 100% from the bible. It's not a pick and choose. I just follow the word as much as I can, and when I'm doing something I shouldn't, God lets me know. Frankly, I don't get the bishops, priests, etc thing. But, if you disapprove of something, don't participate. If I don't want to hear a gay minister, I won't go to that church.

I do believe bad things have happened to certain people. Sodom and Gomorrah, the Egyptian army, the residents of Jericho- minus the prostitutes family. There was a reason for it - but I think the reasons were greater than just being gay.

Not just a pretty face ....

 

[Muffled]

So according to this criteria, do the Christians that are currently against the appointment of this bishop believe that he is a practising homosexual or is it possible that he lives in repentance, abstaining from a life of homosexuality, and is that not good enough?

I have never seen a statement by the bishop stating that homosexuality is a sin and in fact he has made statements that have been supportive of the sin. I could not vouch for sure what his relationship is but he is reported to be living with a man. As I said before what he is doing is far less important than what he is saying. It is reasonably possible for a man of belial to lead a visible holy life while being anything but a holy man. It is up to the Holy Spirit to weed out the masqueraders (as sheep when they really are wolves). However this bishop has publically proclaimed his sin.

 

[Muffled]

Depends on whether one sees sin through the eyes of a lawyer or a poet doesn't it?

I wouldn't give credit to either view. Sin has to be seen through the eyes of God.

 

[LuisDantas]

Muffled, while many Christians swear that homosexuality is sinful, there is much controversy.

IMO the biblical evidence is feeble at best, and pragmatic reality makes it very clear that being homosexual is not at harmful to society.

Have you considered the possibility that this Bishop (and his church) simply don't see anything particularly wrong with homosexuality? That would make their interpretation of Sin different from yours, but not necessarily sinners or hypocrites.

Of course, if to you homosexuality is and must always be considered a sin by Christians, then there is no way for you to be at peace with that Bishop. A shame, really, but certainly your right.

 

[LuisDantas]

I wouldn't give credit to either view. Sin has to be seen through the eyes of God.

See, that is the crucial point. No one can speak for God, particularly when attempting to justify rejection of people in the name of the Christian God (which, from what I understand, is supposed to be remarkably inclusive).

I don't particularly believe in Sin as a concept, but unless that community is remarkably blessed, there are certainly things much more deserving of moral worry there than a simple private relationship that just happens to involve two people of the same sex. It is not like such a relationship is at all morally wrong, after all. At the end of the day, it is just two people aiming to be happy together. It is no more wrong than any other couple, in and of itself.

 

[Muffled]

Christians who are anti-gay are highly unpleasant. Homosexuality is totally normal. Jesus could have been gay for all we know, he certainly never condemned homosexuality.

By that standard raping and murdering a 5 year old girl is normal also. There is no way Jesus could have been gay because He was without sin.

The null hypothesis is never proof of anything. By that criteria you have never said that you didn't rape a five year old girl so you must have done it.

Christians are unpleasant when it comes to any kind of sin. If you are looking for approval of your sin don't look here.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

No, God's word condemns homosexuality because God condemns this practice.

What a pitiful dodge. You must have missed the question, since you obviously didn't bother to answer it.

Let me ask you again (on behalf of David M):
Have you ever had a shave or a haircut?

 

[Autodidact]

As I said before what he is doing is far less important than what he is saying.

This exemplifies the essential hypocrisy of the right-wing Christian position. As long as you lie, you can shtup whom you please. Ted Haggard is a good Christian (lying whore and adulterer) while Mel White is a sinner (who lives a life of faith and integrity.)

 

[sojourner]

God's word condemns all homosexuality, not just child abuse. Asserting that God's ban on homosexuality was due to "population issues" in Israel ignores what the Bible says in Leviticus. “When a man lies down with a male the same as one lies down with a woman, both of them have done a detestable thing. They should be put to death without fail.” (Leviticus 20:13)
This practice is covered by the word por·nei′a (“fornication”), used by Jesus and his disciples. The disciple Jude used that word when referring to the unnatural sex acts of the men of Sodom and Gomorrah. (Jude 7) Homosexuality there caused degradation that produced a loud “cry of complaint.” And it led to God’s destruction of those cities and their inhabitants. (Genesis 18:20; 19:23, 24) I Corinthians 6:9, 10 lists “men who lie with men” among those who will not inherit God’s Kingdom if they continue such a practice. Also, describing the results to persons who ‘dishonor their bodies in uncleanness', going after “flesh for unnatural use,” the Bible says that they “became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error.” (Romans 1:24, 27) The words "toward one another" indicate such conduct was often consensual. Such persons not only fall under God’s condemnation, but they also receive a “recompense” of mental and physical corruption.
As to those who choose to ignore or change what God commands in the Bible,
I am reminded of Isaiah 5:20 "Woe to those who are saying that good is bad and bad is good, those who are putting darkness for light and light for darkness, those who are putting bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!"

None of this addresses my points of either the holiness code, or the need for Israel to populate quickly. Since there was no understanding in those days of orientation, and since Xians don't follow the holiness code, your point here is completely moot.

 

[sojourner]

No, God's word condemns homosexuality because God condemns this practice.

While Christians are no longer under the law of Moses, the Bible says that "All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16). The Law of Moses gives insight into God's thinking on matters including homosexuality and adultery. "God will judge fornicators and adulterers" (Hebrews 13:4) The Christian Greek scriptures make it clear that homosexual conduct is a sin against God and that unrepentant homosexuals will not inherit God's kingdom. (1 Corinthians 6:9,10) That scripture contains this warning "Make no mistake: neither libertines nor...any who practice sodomy or submit to it... will inherit the reign of God" (Bible in Living English)

Are you aware that not all homosexual acts include sodomy?
And you failed to answer his question: have you ever gotten a haircut or shaved?

 

[The Voice of Reason]

By that standard raping and murdering a 5 year old girl is normal also. There is no way Jesus could have been gay because He was without sin.

The null hypothesis is never proof of anything. By that criteria you have never said that you didn't rape a five year old girl so you must have done it.

Christians are unpleasant when it comes to any kind of sin. If you are looking for approval of your sin don't look here.

There are at least three different logical fallacies in this post.
1) Begging the question (Jesus couldn't have been gay, because he was without sin)
2) Circular reasoning
3) Non sequitur

Your post also breaks down due to a couple of items like red herrings and straw men, as well as some very questionable premises.

 

[sojourner]

I have never seen a statement by the bishop stating that homosexuality is a sin and in fact he has made statements that have been supportive of the sin. I could not vouch for sure what his relationship is but he is reported to be living with a man. As I said before what he is doing is far less important than what he is saying. It is reasonably possible for a man of belial to lead a visible holy life while being anything but a holy man. It is up to the Holy Spirit to weed out the masqueraders (as sheep when they really are wolves). However this bishop has publically proclaimed his sin.

What sin? Are you suggesting that sin should be covered up by clergy -- as in the case of the RC abusers?:foot:

 

[jml03]

Are you aware that not all homosexual acts include sodomy?
And you failed to answer his question: have you ever gotten a haircut or shaved?

These are both valid points.

 

[rusra02]

Are you aware that not all homosexual acts include sodomy?
And you failed to answer his question: have you ever gotten a haircut or shaved?

Yes, I am aware that not all homosexual acts include sodomy. The Bible is clear about sexual acts between persons of the same sex, calling such acts disgraceful,unnatural, and obscene: "That is why God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error." (Romans 1:26,27)

As to whether I have ever gotten a haircut or shave, what in the world does that have to do with the discussion of whether a practicing homosexual should be a Christian leader? (to answer the question, yes, I have gotten both a shave and a haircut).

 

[The Voice of Reason]

As to whether I have ever gotten a haircut or shave, what in the world does that have to do with the discussion of whether a practicing homosexual should be a Christian leader? (to answer the question, yes, I have gotten both a shave and a haircut).

Blasphemer!! Idolator!!

How dare you show your face in God's house on Sundays!!

People that shave and get haircuts are going to HELL - and they have no place in God's great plans!!

How can any true Christian accept getting their hair cut, or shaving their facial hair?

Remember, my friend - Hell is forever!!

 

[jml03]

I believe myself to be a Christian, true or untrue doesn't matter to me. I believe Jesus died on the cross, in essence it was the last sacrifice that ever had to be made for my repentance - no more healthy livestock had to die.

But God gave me freewill and His Holy Spirit goes with me daily. God gave his word to prophets and the authors of the Bible. Because of this, I rely on the thoughts that God gives me on certain subjects more that the written word. Man/Woman is fallible. Translators are fallible. The same word can have multiple meanings, in any language. "Soda POP, I'm gonna POP your mouth, Don't POP the balloon".

Also, many books were written second hand, by a person not present for the actual event. They have to interpret what God has shown them in their own words. Plus, many books in the New Testament were written as letters to various churches to condone or condemn the actions of the members at the time.

The Bible has endured, therefore everything in there is there for a reason. Just because I don't interpret something the way another Christian does- well it doesn't mean that I'm wrong or they are wrong. It's not as simple as that. The words that Jesus spoke, I take them entirely to heart - He even wrote in parables, I believe, to give us each a way to make them a part of our life. They can be interpreted many ways.

 

[ChristineES]

Here is a point. If someone were to commit a sin but did not know it was a sin, is that still sinning? Or if it is sinning, which is worse- doing something you know is a sin and "sticking your tongue out at God" (so to speak) or doing something that you don't know or aren't sure is a sin. We have to give each and every idea a good thinking through before we make any judgments.