Church (Page 2)

shadowline: I am sorry to see that this other non-issue about homosexuality has come up. There seems to be no keeping this out of almost any conversation about Christianity today - or indeed many another conversation.

Homosexuality is condemned as immoral in both the Old and the New Testaments. The term "lay" in reference to doing so with your own gender means "engage in sex" in the Bible. It is so used to refer to engaging in sex in several other situations also, in the Old Testament.

Of course there are many moral directives in the Old Testament which nobody considers applicable today. Christians consider them to be not applicable today when they are not repeated in the New Testament, because they believe that God's relationship with mankind was a work in progress before the coming of Christ. That which is repeated in the New Testament is in force as a moral directive for Christians, and that, like it or not, includes the condemnation of homosexuality.

Denying this can only be an exercise in hypocrisy. Declaring that your religion - the moral interpretation of life you claim to accept precisely because it is not of mere human origin - has been wrong about its own Scriptures, and wrong about the moral teaching it has drawn from those Scriptures, throughout the entire course of its history until your own lifetime, is rejection of that religion.

Accepting and rejecting a religion at the same time, is hypocrisy. And that is a form of behaviour for which Christ reserved a very special contempt.

chronology: Shadow. What I find most disturbing about the entire Gay debate is that the people pushing homosexualality are mostly not homosexual.
I often pass churches schools business offices all flying the rainbow Gay flag. But whenever I try to suggest that Gay people are entitled to a fair and open debate on the subject I am called intolerant.

The only line of debate permitted is the line that promotes homosexualality. This is unfair to gays who deserve to hear a frank and open discussion, not just be railroaded into a lifestyle.

shadowline: Yes, I see the sense in your position there, chronology. For whatever reason the subject of homosexuality has moved into the arena of rights and race, a place where it may or may not belong. This means that it is widely thought that there is only one acceptable opinion on the subject, and anything else is violently pilloried as equivalent to donning a bed sheet and burning a cross. That seems quite unthinking to me. But it's popular. Very popular.

Zanjan: Chron, there’s no Church of England in my country, for obvious reasons. I wouldn’t talk to any church on gay issues – it’s outside of their purview. We know how a certain church counselled their own pedophiles and how that turned out. Nobody can fix another person.

You wrote: "I often pass churches schools business offices all flying the rainbow Gay flag."

They're just kowtowing to the government. Lemmings believe that what others think of them is more important than truth. Overall, it's an official show of tolerance, the well-meaning aim being to stamp out contempt and hatred for a minority group.

What they don't know is it takes better aim than that. There's an old saying that 'for a thousand people hacking at the branches of evil, one is chopping at the root'. God isn't oblivious to a perennial problem; to remove it, He addresses the cause.

Zanjan: Shadow: “I'm not sure why this has to be said so many times”

It doesn’t have to be. Repetition doesn’t create understanding. How about changing course?

“The concept of the divinity of Christ is found in the New Testament”.

There's the confusion – the conception of Christ was virginal….how others perceived Christ, was not. The Holy Spirit is above and beyond the human spirit – like fire and water, they can’t exist in the same place.

The claim that God is incomprehensible means God is inconceivable by humans. No mind on earth can wrap around that. When you counter claim that Jesus is God, who has the conception of God?

Divinity is NOT a concept – it’s the Sun of Reality; reality is ONE. You can’t chop that up into pieces, you can only be in grievous error or lie about it.

Zanjan: Shadow: " I am sorry to see that this other non-issue about homosexuality has come up."

YOU brought it up, remember? Of course, it was bound to happen, given how churches are responding to modern issues. Appears to be a tremendous diversity of responses to the identical text. However you read it, you can't miss that it's addressing uncivilized behaviour.

To wit, you say, "The term "lay" in reference to doing so with your own gender means "engage in sex" in the Bible. "

According to 100% of Christians, the Biblical term used for *engaging in sex* was "To know her/him". That passed as the correct answer on the quizz show, Jeopardy. I think one should be very careful about dabbling with interpretation. Like moderns, the ancients had several terms for the same thing - who picks?

There's an old saying that if you lay down with pigs, you get up smelling like garbage. It's rather crude; then again, the Bible uses that term (officially, swine). In fact, it frequently names people as being like certain animals. Jesus called Herod a fox.......He didn't mean "sexy".

On the question of truth, refer to all the Prophets of God, whether one believes in all of them or not. ALL of them up to the present, were unified in condemning ACTS of homosexuality and immodest/lewd behaviour - not the individuals, themselves.

Since all the Prophets supported the same truth, we are rightly guided; therefore, we should say and do the same.

chronology: Well I feel that the Church of England does provide an excellent and well informed service of counselling to Gays who ask for help in resolving issues regarding their Gay lives.
There have been many cases reported where gays have sort help in other churches and found that the experience was quite frightful and unnerving. Weird unbalanced sounding characters would rattle off speeches insisting demons lived inside the Gay person and recommendations of exorcism would be prescribed.
Many Gays have been really unnerved at these do it yourself churches advise.

But the Church of England does have an excellent reputation for well grounded help to gays.

Zanjan: What was the outcome then? Got stats?

I agree that many Christians have approached gays badly; then again, those Christians are affected by delusions of grandeur. Is there some reason gays can't talk to GOD?

Zanjan: My own approach would be to remind gays if you go with a God who only does things you like, that's a false god.

He tests each and every one of us, and those are grueling and sometimes, downright mean - why should gays be an exclusion? Not all tests are the same but they're always the right tests for each individual, every time. We don't design those, He does; He'll let you know if you passed them or or not.

The ONE test that's the same for all is proof of trust in GOD. Thus, we shouldn't turn to anyone else other than HIM for advice about our soul and our lives.

chronology: Stats? No idea Zan, the Church of England takes confidentiality very seriously, I doubt they would be keeping statistics on this subject.

Zanjan: Good point. Then who says they were helped? Serviced, yes.....but made better?

chronology: Good point

shadowline: I didn't bring up the subject of homosexuality. I was responding to someone else's having done so. Homosexuality has been legitimized today precisely because Christian morality is no longer a major societal influence. The societal norm was the opposite to ours for several centuries because Christian morality was the widely accepted norm. A modern secular society of course claims the right to decide for itself what is right and wrong - whether that means killing helpless life in the womb or drawing an equals sign between sodomy and marriage. Whether those decisions are wise or stupid remains to be seen.

But when it comes to the practice of Christianity itself the situation is a little bit different. Christianity is not a modern secular society. It is a religious belief. What it teaches on the subject of homosexuality has never been in doubt. Nor is it now, for all the clever self-serving attempts to make it go away. There is only one Christian view of homosexuality. Anyone who thinks that that teaching is benighted and cruel, or that it reflects an ancient understanding of human nature very inferior to the modern one, is welcome to do so. But they are not welcome to pretend that they are at the same time practicing a religion which teaches the opposite.

Incidentally there is a "Church of England" in both Canada and the United States. It's just not called that. It is called Anglican in Canada, and Episcopalian in the U.S. But it is the same denomination, with the same structure and theology.

chronology: Shadow, goodid points. The Church of England always holds out to gays a friendly welcome and well thought out counselling. But with the understanding that Gay lifestyle is not compatible with church practice. If am not mistaken the episcopal church in the USA has little objections to practising gays as ministers or members.

The flying Squirrel: I knew the USA and moral standards would get dragged into it .I remember someone demonizing Russia for not allowing gay Marriage. Or was it dropping sicks of Hollywood dynamite on people I forget

Zanjan: Thank you, Shadow, for your clarification of church names. However, to say they're the same doesn't strike me as valid.

The Episcopalian church doesn't have the Monarch of England as it head (supreme governor) but the Anglican church does; neither is their most senior ranking cleric the same. Historically, both have undergone many dramatic changes, some in my own lifetime, and disagree on quite a few important church matters. They're clearly different denominations, emerging from different eras and places, regardless of their parentage.

When I think of the local Baptist church, compared to the southern Baptists of the USA, these congregations are a world apart in perspective and focus on values. Baptists here agree the Southern Baptists are "insufferable", while Mormons beleive all other denominations AND religions are unsuitable.

On the matter of homosexuality, neither Anglican or Episcopalian church permits gay church marriage, yet they permit gay civil unions (marriage) among their membership. Is that hypocrisy or just a double standard?

There's only ONE Jesus but so much schism in Christianity, it's impossible to convince anyone they all believe the same thing! They don't even read scriptural text from the same translation.

" A modern secular society of course claims the right to decide for itself what is right and wrong"

Is this not what all the churches have been doing so far? Did Jesus say it was ok to divide the House? How can such a divided people help repair a divided world?

Zanjan: My aim isn't to focus on faults, neither to pretend they don't exist. My aim is to look to the future and how to make it a better one; no matter how dirty your coat is, it can be washed. A few permanent stains doesn't make it any less functional.

Therefore, it IS possible to change perspective and start viewing all believers as well-intending co-workers in the Cause of God, each with their own place.

THAT Cause includes many religions and Prophets. When we stop esteeming, we stop respecting - that negativity flows out to our relationships with everyone, including other religions. I've seen too much of that and its not what the world needs.

God knows what the world needs - that is, for mankind to be united in Spirit, aim and service. We need to value each other's work and collaborate on spiritual ventures if we are to assist society in returning to God; active believers have the tools to establish that new model. They only need to arise.

The differences in understanding aren't really worth much mention - they'll prove their worth in time..........just as we prove our own worth to God.

cloudygrey33: Weird how there are so many hinderances to kindness and love cushioned in the familiar guise of Christian concern. Just an FYI on the topic of homosexuality and the Bible- The bible (both Old and New Testament) mentions how we treat the poor, and our charity towards the disenfranchised over 2000 times... There are around 6 main verses used to condemn homosexuals. Some of which have to do with the practice in Roman civilization of sodomizing young slaves ...A practice some of the wealthy liked to engage in. I might be mistaken, but it seems that there is an over-arching theme that is getting lost in the shuffle with modern evangelicals... I can't for the life of me fathom the extreme focus on those six verses compared to the 2000 we ignore.

Think about how much Franklin Graham talks about gay people compared to how much he endorses political candidates who actively seek out policies that do extreme harm to the weakest among us ...

I'll just leave this here as a fun little tidbit in response to Shadow...

shadowline: I'd be interested to hear some of the "so many hindrances" to kindness and love that are cushioned in the familiar guise of Christian concern, if there are "so many" of them.

I don't see any reason to suppose that all of the Bible's exhortations to charity are being ignored while its condemnations of homosexuality are being emphasized. Anyone who believes in the Bible's message will be moved to respect both. And they are, as far as I can see.

I don't happen to know anything about Franklin Graham, but, if he refers frequently to homosexuality it shouldn't be hard to see that he does so because the subject is on view to such an extent in the society he lives in. The needful virtue combats the besetting sin, and that goes for the needful preachment as well.

Christianity recommends full attention to all of the Bible's teaching - on charity, on right worship, on truth telling, on sexual propriety. But however few the Biblical verses may be that condemn homosexuality, they do condemn it. Writing them out, or misinterpreting them to refer to "temple prostitution" or "a Roman practice of sodomizing young slaves", or otherwise finding ways to look the other way from them, I repeat, qualifies as a form of behaviour that didn't elicit a lot of admiration from the Saviour of the world.

Belief in charity toward others, belief in the forgiveness of God, belief in faithfulness to your wife, and belief in the moral standard that applies to sex, go hand in hand in Christian belief. They're not at war with one another. Unless you want to make one of them go away.

Zanjan: Way too many ministers waste time preaching against sin, rather than expounding on that which edifies the soul. Sounds like they're worried about their own conduct.

Is there no enlightenment among them?

Commandments say "don't do this, don't do that" - that's for executive laws only, not for teaching. Laws require obedience but teaching requires learning. If one combines the two in their address to an audience, they shouldn't be addressing non-members.

The path of love is always positive; when Christ taught, He said "do this, do that" because people didn't know what they were supposed to do. He raised them up. One doesn't criticize the student, they criticize the teacher.

Sometimes, Christ was altogether silent. I'm sure a look from Him would make one swoon with a hundred meanings.

Believers should look past faults if they desire to see the beauty in the soul. Perceived faults are a fence around the garden- you'll never see inside unless you go through the gate. This is why Christ said 'No one comes to the Father except by Me" - He was the Gate.

The wise understand that people don't need a complete list of taboos, they only need to be pointed in the right direction. They'll figure out the details themselves.