Sunday, November 08, 2009 Last Update:11:25 am ET

Church|Wed, Jun. 25 2008 02:34 PM EDT

Presbyterians Advance Gay Clergy Proposal

By Lillian Kwon|Christian Post Reporter

The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) moved forward Tuesday with proposals that would allow for practicing gay clergy while rejecting one that would have redefined the definition of marriage.

In a 41-11 vote Tuesday night, the Committee on Church Orders and Ministry recommended to the 218th General Assembly – the denomination's highest governing body – that it delete wording in the ordination standard that requires "fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness."

The ongoing debate over ordination requirements in the PC(USA) began Monday morning in a public hearing before the committee. Some members of the committee did not return to the meeting room after a dinner break Tuesday evening when a decision was set to be made, according to the Presbyterian news service from the General Assembly, which is meeting in San Jose, Calif., this week.

The Rev. Emily McColl, who opposed the overture, or resolution, said she was "so saddened by their absence that my heart can hardly stand it."

Debate over whether non-celibate gays and lesbians should be ordained has gone on for more than 30 years in the 2.3 million-member church. The 2006 General Assembly sparked controversy and confusion when it adopted an "authoritative interpretation" of the ordination standard, which some said gave leeway to local and regional governing bodies to ordain practicing gay ministers.

Earlier this year, however, the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission – the church's highest court – upheld the "fidelity/chastity" ordination standard. The court ruled that although church officials are allowed to express disagreement with the wording or meaning of provisions of the constitution, they are not permitted to disobey those behavioral standards.

Supporters of gay rights are pushing this week, during the biennial meeting, an amendment to the standard. The Boston presbytery submitted an overture, or resolution, calling for the deletion of the "fidelity/chastity" requirement. It also offered replacement wording that "reaffirms standards that are important to us in our ordination questions," as overture advocate the Rev. Roderick MacDonald stated.

McColl said approval of the proposal would mean that they will no longer be considered Reformed in their understanding of biblical interpretation and theology.

And the consequences can be severe, some said.

"Churches won't wait for the ratification votes [by the presbyteries] but will leave immediately, though I hope they won't," said committee member David Reimer, according to the news service.

McColl expressed hope that congregations that could not tolerate another debate over ordination standards be allowed to "graciously leave" the denomination, as reported by the news service. A motion urging a gracious and pastoral response to congregations seeking to leave the PC(USA) was approved.

The General Assembly will decide on whether to send the motion amending the ordination standard to the presbyteries for a vote this week. It will also consider a proposal, approved by the committee, for an authoritative interpretation that would countermand the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission's ruling requiring candidates to obey the current "fidelity/chastity" standard.

Also on Tuesday, debate over the definition of marriage ended in a vote by the Committee on Church Polity to reject a proposal that would have changed the PC(USA) constitutional definition of marriage from a man and a woman to "two people."

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
1 | 2
  • Wed Dec 17, 2008 3:06 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Thank you PCUSA. Nobody should ever be held back for teaching the word of christ; ever. God chooses people to proclaim his word!!!! he is not discrimitory, niether should the church. GO PCUSA!!!!!!!

  • Mon Jun 30, 2008 7:21 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    wbmoore,
    It is so. Amen.

  • Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:07 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    hlerwin,

    "Many of your children or grandchildren or their children will be worshipping in healthy churches that are open to all (including gay people), and they will be Christians, too."

    Actually, by definition, a healthy church is one which teaches the whole word of God. But accepting homosexuality as something God embraces goes against the Bible, and thus is heretical. Thus, if anyone attends a church that teaches this, they attned a heretical church and not one where the whole word of God is taught. Thus that is not a healthy church, and in some cases, would not be a Christian church (if God got tired of the rebellion, He will remove His torch from that church).

  • Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:01 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    hlerwin, Praise the Lord! That is why we don't have "bishops" in the SBC!

  • Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:12 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    That's why we have bishops, to settle all the constant bickering among the faithful. The PCUSA may vote this issue down this time, I think. Still "the moral arc of the universe is long, but it always bends towards justice." Many of your children or grandchildren or their children will be worshipping in healthy churches that are open to all (including gay people), and they will be Christians, too. I don't believe you have to change your ideas one bit. But our descendants will not grow up with "our ideas."

  • Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:41 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    This motioned passed twice before and the congregations voted it down, and will again. The Episcopals had this force on them by the Bishops, who also stated there were other ways to heaven (how do they know? who do they represent?)
    The major problem we face is pride, and then divison. It is a sad day when the leaders usurp authority, promote another gospel, and split the church.
    They are being used, and the bigger picture is to destory the church, not advance tolerence.
    A wise person discriminates who they marry, and who they associate with, and only a hypocrite would deny that.

  • Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:33 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    We are the stewards of the Bride of Christ.
    I really fear God, and believe in Jesus, and I hope you do too. I can not find in my heart to yield to homosexual rights, but many confuse the sexism and racism of the past with those that practice homosexual behavor. As I reflect on this it seems the culture that force sexism and racism now force a sexual practice or cult upon society, and if the Bride of Christ does not want to repeat the sinful cultural norms, they should resist the tolerence or death crowd.

  • Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:40 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    hlerwin,

    It seems I have hurt or upset you somehow. I am sorry. Such was not my intent. We were having what I thought to be meaningful conversation. But now you seem antagonistic.

    I am mot exclusive. I know and work with (in a secular position) and play with and minister to people of all religions. I work with people who are agnostic, humanist, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, etc. Most of them seem like good people. Most of them seem to be very moral. Most of them seem to be very productive.

    It is Christ who is exclusive. CHRIST SAID HE is exclusive. John 14:6
    6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

    People are free to believe this or not. It is not about me. It is about God and what HE has said. If people do not believe this, it is no skin off my nose. However, I might be saddened because I care for that person and I know what God has said, and I would like that person to have the blessings that come with belief, and avoid the problems that come from not believing.

    However, when people claim to be Christian and then do things that go contrary to what the Bible teaches, we each have the right and responsibility to say something. More importantly, when people being to teach something that is contrary to what the Bible teaches (heresy), we have the right and responsibility to help them see their error. If they do not stop, we have the duty to separate from them. They are free to believe what they want. We are not free to support it.

    I do not live in a theocracy, and I dont think I would like it if I did. However, this does not mean I should not work to have laws passed based upon what I think is right or wrong. We each have that responsibility. For instance, I think you would agree that child pornography is wrong, that it harms people, and that it should be illegal. I would guess you would support laws that make it illegal in its various aspects.

    I base my believes upon a book I believe God wrote. It does not change. God does not change.

    What do you base your beliefs upon?

  • Sat Jun 28, 2008 11:54 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I think you, wbmoore, are with a group that will always exclude more people than it includes. Of course, you may go to your grave with the complete conviction that you are right. (That's doesn't mean you ARE right.) Maybe you are in the 144,000. When you get to heaven, do see if John Adams and his son are there. That anthropomorphic "heaven," based on ancient humans' idea of the king or chief or big kahuna with jewel-encrusted mansions probably will not appeal to the New England, democracy-minded Adamses. It will remind them of why they left OLD England.

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:00 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    matthewr1

    I agree that the church should have nothing to do with heretics. However, we live in the world where heretics abound. So unfortunately we need to address the heretical teachings. No sin is better or worse than any other. But to teach that something which God calls sin as good is what God's word says will happen in the end times.

    We can rejoice that the end is near. And redouble our efforts to try to reach the lost and correct the mistaken.

    2 Tim 2:24-26
    24 And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. 25 Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, 26 and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

    But that does not mean we are to continue in fellowship with them. IF necessary, we need to expel the heretics from the Christian Church.

    2 John 1:8-10
    8 Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. 9 Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. 11 Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:07 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    I for one am quite discusted that we live in a church that blatant sin such as this is even debated. It should just outright be outlawed. These dogs are allowed to go into ministry and lead people astray with their false doctrines. I'm not even talking just about gay theologians/pastors; I'm also talking about liberal theologians, false prophets such as Todd Bentley, and the like. These dogs are all bent for destruction, why do we even give them an ear in the church? I say kick them out on the street (of course with the hope of their repentence). You think Paul would think twice about excommunicating such people?

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:09 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    For instance, if someone teaches that belief in Christ's saving work is not necessary to be a Christian and go to heaven, they would be teaching heresy. If the truth is pointed out to them and they insist on teaching heresy, we have a duty to name it what it is and to not have fellowship with them.

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:43 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    hlerwin,

    I have no problem with differing interpretations of scripture amongst Christian, as long as the differences do not encourage heresy of important matters, such as sin or salvation or grace. But when someone begins to teach heresy, it is the duty of Christians to call it such.

    2 Tim 2:24-26
    24 And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. 25 Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, 26 and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

    When someone teaches heresy, they break communion with God and the universal church and are no longer considered to be Christian.

    2 John 1:8-10
    8 Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. 9 Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. 11 Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.

    Rev 2:14-16
    14 Nevertheless, I have a few things against you: You have people there who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin by eating food sacrificed to idols and by committing sexual immorality. 15 Likewise you also have those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans. 16 Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:03 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Still, wbmoore, it's really not up to you to decide who is a "Christian" or, more specifically, "your kind of Christian." The Holy Spirit enables anyone to read and be enlightened by scripture. Neither you, nor any church governing body, nor the Pope, nor James Dobson has any right to say: "You are not a Christian. Go away." Besides, the very people you don't accept don't CARE what you or anyone else thinks of them. It is not your business.

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:18 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    hlerwin, You are correct, Christ came to save people. Churches who do not stand on the word of God are bound to disappear. But before they do, they can lead people into hell, instead of helping lead them out of it.

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:16 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    The church should be a place where people grow in knowledge, sanctification, and obedience to God.

    I have no issue with people in sin being in the church - until they grow past their sin or are confronted and refuse to repent - at which point, they should be asked to leave.

    The problem comes when people in active sin want to attend church or become members but do not want to repent.

    Accepting people who are different is not the issue. Tolerating people living in sin is one thing, condoning people's sins is a different issue entirely - nor should we encourage people to sin.

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:11 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    As for living a lifestyle of sin (immoral sex for example) and claiming Christ as Savior, Christ said in Matthew 7:21-23,
    “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

    Jesus said we are to obey His commands.

    John 14:15
    If you love me, you will obey what I command.

    John 14:21
    21Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.”

    Luke 16:15
    He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of men, but God knows your hearts. What is highly valued among men is detestable in God’s sight

    Jesus said to not sin:
    John 8:11-12
    11 She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "I do not condemn you, either Go From now on sin no more." 12 Then Jesus again spoke to them, saying, "I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life."

    Matthew 15:18-20
    18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20 These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' "

    Mark 7:20-23
    20 He went on: "What comes out of a man is what makes him 'unclean.' 21 For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. 23 All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.' "

    Now, sexual immorality would refer to what God had defined as wrong already by the time of when Christ said this – this would come from the Old Testament.

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:54 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    oh, let's talk about what the Bible says concerning whether Christians should judge people or their actions.

    We have to take the scripture in context and look at all of it. Jesus did not say to not judge, he said to not be a hypocrite. If you judge, you will be judged by the same standard. We are to be merciful, and not consider others less or more than ourselves, but we are to judge between right and wrong.

    Matthew 7:1-5 ”Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

    Luke 6:36-38 “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful. Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”

    Jesus Himself said we are to judge what is right or wrong.

    Luke 12:57 Why don’t you judge for yourselves what is right?

    In fact, Jesus said to call sinners on their behavior:

    Luke 17:3 So watch yourselves. “If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him.

    Paul said to not be a hypocrite:

    Romans 2:1 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.

    But we are to discern what is right and wrong and avoid wrong.

    Romans 12:9 Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.

    1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?

    So Christians should judge their own actions first and deal with sin in their own lives. But we are to judge the sins of those inside the church. Even so, this does not mean we are to judge someone as being better or worse than ourselves. If someone outside the church does bad things I still have the responsibility to judge whether that thing is good or bad. Whether someone does something good or bad does not necessarily indicate a person is good or bad. Judging something to be a sin is a good thing. Judging someone is not. There is a distinct difference that people who are doing things that others call wrong do not make.

  • Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:16 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    The Presbyterian General Assembly is facing an issue all the churches must face soon. And just as with the Episcopal Church, the PCUSA will vote to "include" people who are "different" from the majority of the membership. Besides, if johnmorrison finds the exit to his church (which I'm sure someone will point out to him), the situation will be the same as with the Episcopalians. If these denominations disappear, so what? Jesus came to save people, not organizations.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:18 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    My church, Darnestown Presbyterian Church has a represeative there, and I have gotten updates, but not on this. There must be politics behind this, they abandon 200 years of traditions? Call the chaste bigots?
    I have informed them that if tolerance means silence then I will not remain a Presbyterian.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:14 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    troyg, Yes God is a loving heavenly Father and in Hebrews He says because He loves us He will discipline us when we sin and if we are willfully living in sin and we do not sense God's discipline in our life He says we are not His child. So apparently sin is important to God. If we are to have the close intimate relationship with God that He desires to have with us we'll do all we can to avoid any kind of sin because when we sin we can not draw close to God and He can not grow close to us until we repent of that sin and receive His forgiveness. In fact the Bible also teaches that as long as we have uncinfessed sin in our life God will not even hear our prayers. The way you used the verses you shared you were I believe saying that God condones sin because the very passages you used to defend the sexual practices of homosexuality can be used by anyone who desires to find verses to give them the freedom to both sin and live in sin. This falls into the category of what many call cheap grace theology or salvation where the main concern is about not going to hell as opposed to having a close intimate relationship with God through Christ, with this thinking you say a prayer, get baptized, and join a church and from that point on your free to live your life anyway you want since after all you've got a get out of hell free card. But unfortunately that is nothing more than a counterfeit form of salvation and whoever buys into that is still lost and without Christ.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:01 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    troyg: You are correct in saying that God desires a relationship. But a requirement for that relationship is righteousness. God's nature will not allow sin to enter His presence.
    Jesus can only forgive sin if the sinner is repentant. You don't sound repentant to me. You actually sound like you are not acknowledging your sin.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:38 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Believer-

    I guess I don't understand your obsession with "sin". The God I have walked with in this life is a Father of more profound love than I have ever experienced, who deeply desires His children to draw close to him. That to me is the point of the gospel.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 4:49 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    troyg, so in your mind there is no sin anymore, anything goes as long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else?

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 4:40 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Believer says

    “…But once again as of this post you or no one else has shown me any passage of Scripture that presents the sexual practices of homosexuality in a positive way and I wonder why they either won't or can't?..”

    How about:

    "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven." Luke 6:36-38

    And how about:

    " One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?"
    "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.'The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'There is no commandment greater than these."
    Mark 12:28-31

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:50 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    troyg, I think the issue your trying to push is not so much the sins that are addressed in the texts you mention but the punishment for those sins. First off no matter how you cut it God hates sin and in the Old Testament there were severe consequences for those sins with regards to the children of Israel, however in the New Testament God still hates sin but because we are under grace the consequences of those same sins has been changed. I think we need to look at the historical context in order to better understand God's prescribed consequences to these sins you point out, but the bottom line is the consequences may have changed, but the fact that they are sins have not. Plus all the sacrificial commands in the Old Testament were fulfilled by the work of Christ on Calvary and are no longer required so are no longer applicable. But once again as of this post you or no one else has shown me any passage of Scripture that presents the sexual practices of homosexuality in a positive way and I wonder why they either won't or can't?

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:18 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Believer,

    Thanks for your post.I have ben thinking about the Hebrew text during this discussion and glad you have brought it to light.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    troyg; please see john's post @ 2:10 and believer's post @ 2:34. They have stated the facts quite eloquently.
    Suffice to say that God does not bless sin.
    I have no doubt, however, that He blesses "your" children. He blesses ALL children
    And if you cannot stand to live 70 years on earth according to His law, don't worry. You'll not have to worry about spending Eternity with Him.

    2 Timothy 2:43 "or the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear."

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:54 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    Blacksho89 says

    lina and troyg:
    Genesis 2:24 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh."
    Exodus 20:14 "You shall not commit adultery."
    Explain to me what is hard to understand about that? What possible interpretation can there be?

    Exodus 20:14: My same-sex Christian partner and myself have been together now for 8 years and have not committed adultery.

    Genesis 2:24: I don’t see anything wrong with a man uniting with his wife and becoming one flesh.

    My partner and I have been together for 8 years. We have a beautiful, loving relationship that God has blessed, and continues to bless, daily. We have two beautiful children who just had their first birthdays last weekend! My experience of God in my life is that He loves me, blesses me, and has a unique spiritual journey for me. I have no doubt that He created me to be gay and wants me to be with my partner and our children. I’m a progressive Christian, I don’t believe God creates junk (to paraphrase a kids song). God loves his gay and lesbian children and created them to be on this earth to carry out his will. It is the conservative Christians who often interpret the scriptures to reinforce their own predjudices. My experience of God is love and caring, not hatred and condemnation.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:42 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    Well John14-6,

    The Bible accepts sexual practices that we condemn and condemns sexual practices that we accept. Lots of them! Here are a few examples.

    • DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21
    If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately.
    • DEUTERONOMY 22:22
    If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
    • MARK 10:1-12
    Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced.
    • LEVITICUS 18:19
    The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman's period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.
    • DEUTERONOMY 25:11-12
    If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy's genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.

    These are also all ancient Mosaic Law. So, John14-6 you believe all these things too?

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:34 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    the watch, Jesus has already laid out in Matthew how both an individual Christian and a church should handle known sin in the church with the goal always being restoration as opposed to revenge or excommunication. Secondly, God never stops loving a child of His and in fact in the Book of Hebrews says because He loves His child He will disciplne that child and if we are willfully living in sin and are not experiencing His discipline then we are not a child of His in the first place. As I told john this is a super tough issue that he has brought into the discussion.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:27 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    john, that was a powerful challenge to all of us in ministry and leadership roles in our churches, but I think a real problem occurs in the fact that in too many pews sit people who profess to be Christians and are members of the church who are willfully living in sin and nothing is said. And in many cases unless the pastor has his bags packed he best not say anything about it either or he's gone depending on the clout that person or the relatives of that person have in the church. The reality is in most evangelical churches today church discipline is sadly lacking and then we wonder why were not effectively reaching our commmunity and world with the Gospel of Christ. I say that to say this, I agree, with an in your face scenario as you suggested, the church is almost forced to do something, but if they are weak in the area of church disciplne I am not sure if they even have a means to effectively deal with this. How can they even think about enforcing any type of church discipline in this situation when they apparently turn their heads on others in their congregation who are willfully living in sin. But I agree with you it is an issue that must be dealt with and I believe the church needs to address it before it shows up on the front pew.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:25 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    john14-6

    What would Jesus do? That is the answer we need to seek. I do not claim to have all the answers, but I do know that to God, sin is sin. The answer to sin is Jesus. What would Jesus do? He changes hearts and lives every day and has been doing it for 2000 years. What if your son or daughter turned out to be gay? Would you stop loving them or turn them out to the street because of their sin? Does God stop loving you because of a lie you told? I don't believe so on either case. I believe the love is still there with a prayer of hope. A hope of repentence and change. By seeking Christ in all things we become his example.
    As far a someone subverting the church...the church should have and in most cases do have safegaurds protecting it's sanctity and the morality of it's clergy. Unfortunately, we do have churches compromising those things by trying to please everyone through politically correctness. The church does suffer. It also suffers when we quit seeking Christ for the answers and use interpetations as a judges gavil. We love the sinner and hate the sin. Sometimes we confuse the two or cannot distiguish between the two. What would Jesus do?

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:10 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    troyg--

    Paul was a Pharisee and as such was immersed in Jewish culture and Mosaic Law. Homosexuality was an abomination in Mosaic Law and a cultural and social taboo going back to the very earliest Semitic culture.

    Playing word games with Koine Greek shows just how desperate the people of the "Soulforce" crowd, or people like the "Dr. Whites", truly are. Jesus and Paul were both adherents of Jewish Law. Jesus himself said he did not come to overthrow the Law but to fulfill it. Jesus didn't speak about homosexuality for the same reason he didn't speak about bestiality, pedophilia, necrophilia, necromancy, sorcery, etc - because all of those things were already condemned in the Mosaic Law. He didn't speak about them because it was understood - it was a given.

    Paul is reiterating the list of grave sins in Romans and 1 Corinthians for those who were Greeks and did not understand the whole of Jewish Law. Paul *did* mean homosexual behavior (of *any* kind) because he was reiterating Jewish Law (a man shall not lie with a man as with a woman, it is abomination). Any Biblical scholar or Greek scholar other than some lunatic-fringe liberals will tell you that, too.

    They all need to stop playing word games. The meaning is clear from the both the context of the verse, and from the social-cultural context - the point of view - of Paul himself as a Pharisee and devout Jew.

    The ignorance on display here, even the quotes by scholars who appear to be equally ignorant, is astonishing in its brazenness.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:52 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    The Watch--

    I would agree with most of what you said, however, here's one for you:

    What do you do with a homosexual couple that shows up at your church, with children in tow, and basically comes with the attitude of, "this is my family, accept us or else"?

    Should you fellowship with people like this? Should you take communion with them, or allow them communion? Should you say nothing and just hope they "get it"? This is the dilemma of many a modern mainstream Protestant church and unfortunately, rather than the churches approaching the sinner, reproaching them for their unrepentance and their sinful lifestyle, they typically adopt the latter attitude, I listed up above. This allows them to move into the body of the Church, and once established, they attain leadership positions and start working to corrupt the church from within. The very reason that you see so many of these mainstream denominations starting to give themselves over to the apostasy of supporting homosexuality in the church or clergy is directly attributable to the move that liberal activists have made in these various denominations to take over the leadership (a typical liberal tactic - it's why they worship the state, and love politics. It's their church and their God. It doesn't surprise me that they attempt the same things in the church).

    "Good Christians" who don't want this, are afraid to speak up for the truth, and let these activist liberals run roughshod over them until it's too late, and the denomination is in the hands of women priests, gay bishops, and other sundry lay activists with a far-left agenda.

    So my question stands. What do you do with that homosexual couple that shows up in your church with children in tow? These are unrepentant homosexuals, and thus any good Christian cannot enter into fellowship with them. Do you confront them, or do you let them come week after week without saying anything to them?

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:42 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    troyg, I mistakenly directed a post to the watch that should have been directed to you and I would like you if you are willing to respond to that post. It was my 1:11PM post, thanks believer

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:40 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    blacksho89, thanks for the correction and my apology to the watch for my confusion.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:15 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    believer: Your disagreement is with troyg, not the watch.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:12 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    lina and troyg:
    Genesis 2:24 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh."
    Exodus 20:14 "You shall not commit adultery."

    Explain to me what is hard to understand about that? What possible interpretation can there be?

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:11 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    the watch, let's say you're right that the Word of God does not condemn the sexual practices of homosexuality. Let me ask you as I have asked several others who hold this view. Please show me any passages from the Word of God that either endorse, approve, or encourage the sexual practices of homosexuality. Whereas there are numerous passages that speak to both heterosexual marriage and sexual practices and there are passages that talk about the heterosexual family and even passages that talk to the choice to remain single. These passages talk to both the positive behaviors as well as negative behaviors on these matters. And yet when it comes to a lifestyle that you and others seem to say is a legitemate lifestyle not a positive reference can be found in either the Old or New Testament. If that is true do you not see that as a high indicator that the sexual practices of homosexuality are not appropriate in fact they are sinful.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:49 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Am I missing something? When did we put ourselves in a position of authority above God?

    Did Jesus say "if you love me, you will consider my suggestions?" Father, forgive us for trying to be You.

  • lina »
    Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:43 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    The word Jesus and hateful should never be in the same sentence. I'm going to pray that you both humble yoursevles and accept people for who they are. There is no reason to be so full of anger. What is causing that anger anyway?

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:32 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    The Watch cites I Corinthians 6

    Rev. Dr. Mel Whites discussion of this passage may help shed some light. He says it better than me, I will quote from him:

    The Jewish law was created by God to help regulate human behavior. To remind the churches in Corinth and Ephesus how God wants us to treat one another…The list goes on to include admonitions against fornication, idolatry, whoremongering, perjury, drunkenness, revelry, and extortion. He also includes malokois and arsenokoitai.

    Heres where the confusion begins. Whats a malokois? Whats an arsenokoitai? Actually, those two Greek words have confused scholars to this very day. Greek scholars say that in first century the Greek word malaokois probably meant effeminate call boys. The New Revised Standard Version says male prostitutes.

    As for arsenokoitai, Greek scholars dont know exactly what it means—and the fact that we dont know is a big part of this tragic debate. Some scholars believe Paul was coining a name to refer to the customers of the effeminate call boys. We might call them dirty old men. Others translate the word as sodomites, but
    never explain what that means. In 1958, for the first time in history, a person translating that mysterious Greek word into English decided it meant homosexuals, even though there is, in fact, no such word in Greek or Hebrew. But that translator made the decision for all of us that placed the word homosexual in the English-language Bible for the very first time. In the past, people used Paul’s writings to support slavery, segregation, and apartheid. People still use Pauls writings to oppress women and limit their role in the home, in church, and in society. Now we have to ask ourselves, Is it happening again? Is a word in Greek that has no clear definition being used to reflect society’s prejudice and condemn Gods gay children?
    We all need to look more closely at that mysterious Greek word arsenokoitai in its original context. I find most convincing the argument from history that Paul is condemning the married men who hired hairless young boys (malakois) for sexual pleasure just as they hired smooth-skinned young girls for that purpose.

    Responsible homosexuals would join Paul in condemning anyone who uses children for sex, just as we would join anyone else in condemning the threatened gang rape in Sodom or the behavior of the sex-crazed priests and priestesses in Rome. So, once again, I am convinced that this passage says a lot about God, but nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:25 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    john14-6

    If you would read the whole context of my post you would see the meaning of accepting of people is not accepting them with out repentence of their sin. Jesus did meet, eat, talk and at times admonish them, but He did give them a chance to repent and experience grace. With that, I do STRONGLY believe that practicing homosexuals should not be clergy. I also STRONGLY believe that homosexuals should be in church and have the same opportunity to repent and experience the saving grace of our Lord, because with that saving grace they are new creatures and would turn from sin and temptation. With that, I STRONGLY believe that a homosexual who has accepted Christ and has turned from their old life can be clergy.
    I do STRONGLY believe that we water down the Gospel with political correctness by accepting things in the church that goes against biblical principles and promotes worldly ides but I also STRONGLY believe that we impede the Gospels message by taking biblical principles and using them to judge people instead of taking those principles and adding the Good News of Jesus's love and grace. We walk a fine line with doing that and I have been guilty of doing that also.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:55 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    The Watch--

    Jesus wasn't "accepting of people", Jesus went to sinners and called them to repentance. He didn't accept their sin, he met with them, ate with them, and in his presence they saw God, and he called them out of their sin. Matthew was a tax collector, but he didn't *stay* a tax collector. The woman who was accused of adultery sought mercy, Jesus said, "let he who is without sin among you, cast the first stone." They were shown their own sinfulness and left. But what else did Jesus say to the woman? "Neither do I condemn you. Now go, and sin no more."

    Too many Christians have a soft and fluffy image of Jesus. Jesus is your "buddy", Jesus forgives everything without any requirement on your part. This is *not* Christian Faith, and this demeans the image of the Son, in the Trinity. God forgives us, in Jesus name - for his sake, the sake of his atoning sacrifice - but that does not leave us without any responsibility. Our responsibility is to conform our life more and more to Christ, to recognize our sinfulness and try as much as is possible in our mortal and human weakness, to *stop sinning* and be *repentant*.

    Everyone wants God's forgiveness, but few remember that Jesus almost always admonishes the "forgiven" with some variant of the words, "repent" or "go and sin no more".

    Read your New Testament again. Jesus quite often adds some admonishment about continuing in sin. We should all, as Christians, remember this. Even when I ask for forgiveness, I always try to remember the second part and change my behavior to avoid that sin again. Doesn't always work, but I try.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:54 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    lina,

    "I'm going to pray that you humble yourselves."

    Great... you do that. Meanwhile, you did not address Jesus' and Paul's hateful approach. Care to comment?

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:41 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    John 14-6,

    I'd recommend this site:

    http://catholicforum.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=262233#

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:34 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I do not agree with a practicing Homosexual as a practicing clergy. The same goes as anyone involve in a sexual immoral sin. Biblically it is wrong and clergy should be held to the highest of standards.
    1 Corinthians 6:
    "18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? 20 For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body[c] and in your spirit, which are God’s."

    On the same token, Jesus was and is accepting of all people. He accepts all who in turn accept him and frees them from their sin. With that, he transforms them(reference Romans 6). Sin no longer has dominion, for we are no longer under the law but grace. With this knowledge, one can not truthfully operate as a minister or clergy of God if they are living still shackled in the chains of a sexual immorality. How can one lead others in the saving grace of Christ if they cannot resist temptation themselves? It skews the concept of redemption and salvation. The church is becoming more and more like the church of Corinth, patting themselves on the back and proclaiming, "look at how good of Christians we are by accepting this," instead of letting God transform them and work in their lives. We are impeding the Gospel by our political correctness.

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:33 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Perhaps the reason the Catholics in the US have remained conservative is because they are being led by a former Presbyterian. Interesting article today:

    http://www.the-tidings.com/2008/060608/diffce.htm

  • Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:30 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    God hates sin.
    http://wbmoore.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/god-hates-sin/

    There's nothing wrong wth calling that which God has condemned what it is.
    http://wbmoore.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/should-christians-judge/

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Also on CP
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Church
  • Gifts
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links