The openly gay bishop at the center of much of the divisions in the Anglican Communion rejected a conservative bishop's call for him to resign in order to restore unity.
"Those calling for my resignation seem to be under the impression that if Gene Robinson went away, that all would go back to being 'like it was,' whatever that was! Does ANYONE think that if I resigned, this issue would go away?!" New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson said Wednesday in his blog.
"We are not going away, as much as some would like us to," Robinson added, referring to gays and lesbians.
On Tuesday, the Archbishop of Sudan, the Most Rev. Dr. Daniel Deng Bul, called for Robinson’s resignation "for the sake of the Church," saying his behavior violated "the norms of the Anglican Communion."
The New Hampshire bishop has lived openly with another man for 20 years and had a civil ceremony in June 2008. The Anglican Communion, meanwhile, rejects homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture.
“Three hundred bishops have stayed away from this conference because of Gene Robinson. Shouldn’t Gene Robinson resign to allow the 300 bishops to come back to the house?” the Sudanese archbishop said as he also called for repentance from the American bishops who supported Robinson's consecration in 2003.
Robinson received news of the Sudanese bishop's call just before making an address at the University of Kent's Law School's Centre for the Study of the Law, Gender and Sexuality. He was there as Anglican bishops from around the world were meeting for the once-a-decade Lambeth Conference at the university. Robinson was not invited to attend Lambeth but is in Canterbury on the outskirts of the event.
Although he said in his latest blog that he has decided not to make an official response to the Sudanese archbishop's remark, he reflected on the remark in two long paragraphs.
"Everyone seems to forget that I am not here representing myself, but rather all the people of the Diocese of New Hampshire, with whom it is my privilege to minister in Christ's name," Robinson wrote. "They have called me to minister with them as their Bishop, and suggestions that I resign ignore the vows that I have taken to serve my flock in New Hampshire."
He added that his denied representation at the Lambeth meeting also deprives his entire diocese of "a seat at the table."
The Anglican spiritual head, Dr. Rowan Williams, had withheld invitations from "bishops whose appointment, actions or manner of life have caused exceptionally serious division or scandal within the Communion" when they were sent out last year.
Some U.S. Episcopal bishops are sponsoring "Fringe" events for Anglican bishops and their spouses of the global Communion to meet Robinson during Lambeth. Attendees will hear how he was consecrated and testimonies from bishops who voted for and against his consecration.
Robinson will share his own testimony but he insists the event will not be a "sell job."
"My goal is to talk about my own life and journey in Christ in such a way that those who are listening will perceive that the God I know in my own life is the same God they know in THEIR lives," he said. "Then we can wrestle with the faithful differences we have in interpreting that God's will for us and for God's church."
More than 200 bishops are boycotting the Lambeth Conference mainly in protest of the invitation of bishops who supported Robinson's consecration and the Communion's failure to discipline those who participated in the 2003 event. Conservative bishops contend the U.S. church body along with other is departing from orthodox Christianity on issues of human sexuality, the authority of Scripture and the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.
The Sudanese archbishop affirmed Tuesday, "We reject homosexual practice as contrary to biblical teaching and can accept no place for it within the Episcopal Church of Sudan. We strongly oppose developments within the Anglican Church in the USA and Canada in consecrating a practicing homosexual as bishop and in approving a rite for the blessing of same-sex relationships.”
RSS
Of course heresy won't go away unless we 'crucify' heresy. Judgement Day is coming, those who wish to remain in Sodom will suffer the fate of Sodom.
Our wicked generation is suffering the judgement of heretics being allowed to publicically parade their Sodomy even to the Alter. What a terrible judgement.
It may not change anyones mind but it does allow one to develop their knowledge of Biblical principal. It also allows for the discussion to be posted for people to read. I'm sure that not all the people who read these posts post here themselves.
It works out much like 'Conversations with an Athiest'. It may not change the athiests mind but it does provide food for thought (which is so rare in our society).
A person stuck in their ways will not change. I have found debating gets no-ones mind changed.
That is God's job, and He'd do it if we let Him every once in awhile.
God Be with you all.
Adelz.
Defense of marriage pt II just came out here on CP. It answers many of troyg's questions.
troyg,
Now we agree to disagree, I suppose.
Your inner being is no different than mine. I just think I recognize myself as a sinner to the core, and you aren't there yet. Maybe you never will be, since you identify so closely with it. But I pray you will see the truth someday.
Until then we will each believe the other is wrong and will feel sorry for other's blindness and will pray for each other.
God will sort it out later.
Hey now. I was created the way I am, and I am a sinner. Just as you say, so God's glory may be shown.
troy,
He created you to be gay? That is sick. But all things being equal, then he made the adulterer the way he/she is. He made the child molester the way he/she is. He made the murderer the way he/she is. And how hypocritical it would be of you to expect them to change.
But you could be partly right. Jesus and His disciples came upon a blind man. The disciples asked Jesus if it was because of his sin, or his father's sin that he was blind. Jesus replied that he was thus so that the glory of God could be revealed...and then healed him.
So.....are you going to allow the glory of God to be revealed in you by allowing Him to deliver you and change you? Or are you going to deny His power and make Him in your image?
"I don't believe the Bible condems who I am, or my relationship with my same-sex partner, or the sanctity of our marriage and our family."
The Bible condemns all of us. If not Jesus would not have needed to die in our place now would he? We will be judged based on if we laid down our life and took His life as the Bible says.
The Bible is clear there will be many who think they are OK with God but will find out they are not on judgement day. Whose fault will that be? Is the Bible unclear? Will people blame God or will He say...you should have died to self and lived for Him the way he said?
There is a parable of the wheat and the tares. It is where an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat. Of course, they didn't know about the weeds until they grew up. When the workers asked if they should remove the weeds the owner of the field said no. He didn't want to hurt the wheat in the process. He said it would get sorted out in the end.
If what any of us believe is wrong then we will be sorted out as the weeds. The goal here is to be the wheat BEFORE harvest. Are you wheat or weed? You will know them by their fruit.
Wbmoore:
So you and I interpret Romans very differently.
So now what?
My walk and my witness are still clear. I don't believe the Bible condems who I am, or my relationship with my same-sex partner, or the sanctity of our marriage and our family. I will continue to follow God's call for me: to be a living witness to His inclusive love, and to claim that as his creation, he intentionally created me to be gay, and blesses me everyday as that creation, despite the attempts of some Christians to tell that my very nature, the core of my being is a sin I must turn from. But I, like Gene Robinson and millions like us, must be true to myself, and true to God's calling for me.
igh, Daniel Paul,
"Then i can marry my goat!"
"OK...so what happens if someone "got my goat"? "
I'd probably have to call that sin! :)
But is it thievery, bestiality, incest, same-type, sex before marriage, or adultery? Hmmm. for some, maybe all (Some married person who is a real goat steals his father's wife to be with it, gets divorced and marries the goat)? choices choices....
oh the bad jokes keep coming.... for shame.
Troyg, (5)
“Notice what Paul said about judging others, "Therefore you are without excuse every one of you who passes judgment, for in that you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things (Romans 2:1)."
Let us realize he is saying to not be hypocritical. He did not condemn judging those within the church. In fact, he said to do so, when dealing with the man who was having illicit sex with his mother-in-law. Note that in this case, it did not have to do with ‘passion’ or temple worship, simply a type of sex the old testament indicates is sin.
1 Corinthians 5:12-13
12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
One can not ignore the Old Testament when dealing with the New Testament. It tells us what is right and wrong. It tells us who God is and what God has done and what God likes and dislikes. Yes, we are free from the Law, in terms of punishment, and in terms of the price has been paid for those who believe. But if you believe, you will obey. If Christ is God, and God has said certain sexual acts are wrong, then Christ has also said they are wrong. Plus, when Christ said a man cannot divorce a woman without making her an adulteress unless she has already committed adultery, He was speaking of the multitude of sexual activities included in Lev 18, 20 and Dt 22.
“Paul was certainly aware of the variety of ways that the teachers interpreted the word "indecency" and he used I in a variety of ways himself. To read into "indecent acts" a whole world of homosexual ideas is to abandon the realities of objective academic study and to embark on useless and damaging speculation that cannot be supported by the meaning of the word or by Paul’s use of it elsewhere.â€Â
I am not reading anything into the term indecent. I am reading the text. Epiqumia means desire, craving longing, wanting that which is forbidden. Akatharsia means uncleanness. Atimazo means to dishonour, insult, treat with contempt.
Metallasso is to exchange. Phusikos is inborn, ‘agreeable to nature’. Chresis means ‘use’, as sexual use of a woman, function. I could go on, but there really is no need. To ignore what Paul wrote concerning homosexual sex being a sin is to ignore scripture.
“If Paul had intended to condemn homosexuals as the worst of all sinners, he certainly had the language skills to do a clearer job of it than emerges from Romans. The fact is that Paul nowhere condemned or mentioned romantic love and sexual relations between people of the same sex who love each other. Paul never commented on sexual orientation. As in the rest of the Bible, Paul nowhere even hinted hat lesbians and gay men can or should change their sexual orientation.â€Â
He dealt with an issue at hand: exchanging the truth of God for a lie and the consequences thereof. I repeat what I have said before:
By putting one's desires above God’s one places oneself, a created creature, in the place of God in one's life. By refusing to accept what God has said about homosexual sex being a sin, one refuses to honor God. By ignoring His word, one is ungodly, and suppressing the truth. By saying that one's thoughts on the subject are more important that God’s thoughts on it, one exchanges the truth of God for one's own thoughts.
“The use of Romans 1:26-27 against gay people turns out to be a blunt instrument to batter and wound people who were not intended in the original text. Paul clearly taught throughout Romans, Galatians, and his other letters that God’s freely given and all-inclusive love is for every person on earth. “
I agree that Paul taught God’s grace and love and even salvation is available for everyone. But there is a requirement: they must repent, and believe. And if they believe, they must obey (Acts 26:20 ; John 14:15).
Troyg, (3)
“One more word needs special attention. "committing indecent acts" in Romans 1:27 is translated by the KJV as "working that which is unseemly". The Phillips translation goes far beyond the evidence and renders it as "shameful horrors!" The Greek word isaskemosunen and is formed of the word for "outer appearance" plus the negative particle. It speaks of the inner or hidden part or parts of the individual that are not ordinarily seen or know in public. “
The term ‘indecent’, askemosune, refers to that which is not normally seen in public because for it to be seen in public is shameful.
"Indecent in 1 COR 12:23 referred to the parts of the body that remain hidden but are necessary and receive honor.â€Â
You are changing the meaning. In 1 Cor 12:23, Askemon become eusemosune. In context, askemon would refer to those things that are either deformed or unseemly. When taken in context with Atimos, the word translated ‘less’, atimos askemon indicates without honor and indecent.
†1 COR 13:5 used the word to say that love does not behave "indecently". This word for "indecency" was used to translate Deuteronomy 24:1 into Greek to say that a man could divorce his wife if he "found some indecency in her". The religious teachers argued endlessly about what "some indecency" meant. Some said it was anything that displeased the husband. Others were more strict and said it could only refer to adultery. In Matthew 19:1-12, Jesus commented on Deut. 24: 1-4, but he did not define the term.â€Â
You are mistaken. The term translated ‘unchastity†and ‘immorality’ found in both Mt 5::32 and Mt 19:9 is Porneia. In context, this speaks to something that has to do with sex – indicating that if the husband divorces his wife for something other than porneia, he causes her to commit adultery. The only way he could NOT cause her to commit adultery (moicheuo in Greek) is if she had already committed it. Many religious leaders at the time allowed the ‘indecent’ to be anything the husband wanted, but Christ was more restrictive. Christ said if you commit adultery, then you are an adulterer. If you divorce a woman who has not committed adultery, then you cause her to become an adulterer. The only way for the woman to have committed adultery is to have any sexual activities condemned in Lev 18; 20; Dt 22 while married. Thus, porneia refers to various sexually illicit behavior; doing these things while married is what makes it constitute adultery.
Troyg, (2)
“The word "passions" in 1:26 is the same word used to speak of the suffering and death of Jesus in Acts 13 and does not mean what we mean by "passion" today. “
I disagree. The word used for “lust†in Rom 1:24 is actually epiqumia. This word means “desire, craving, longing, desire for what is forbidden, lust†It is used in many places in the New Testament, but not in Acts at all. The term ‘desire’ in Romans 1:27 is Orexis, and again means desire, longing, craving, lust, appetite. The word used for ‘passions’ in Rom 1:26 is Pathos, and means “whatever befalls one, whether it be sad or joyous - spec. a calamity, mishap, evil, affliction; a feeling which the mind suffers; an affliction of the mind, emotion, passion; passionate deed.“ Again, this word is used in various places in the New Testament, but never in Acts 13. To suggest these words are used to describe what happened to Jesus is to add to scripture. If you disagree, please provide scripture reference?
â€ÂEros is the Gk word for romantic, sexual love, but Eros is never used even once in the NT. "Passions" in Romans 1:26 probably refers to the frenzied state of mind that many ancient mystery cults induced in worshipers by means of wine, drugs, and music.â€Â
Again, that is supposition. Not all same-gender sex involved drugs, wine, or music – then or now. Given the context of the example, it would refer to the affliction of mind or passionate deed.
“We do not know the meaning of "burn" in 1:27, because Paul never used this particular word anywhere else, and it’s origin is uncertain. “
The term “burn†in Rom 1:27 is ekkaio. This means “to burn out; to set on fire; to be kindled, to burnâ€Â. Given the context, it would mean to lust, especially given the use of epiqumia and pathos in the previous sentences.
To suggest the meaning is not known is to ignore facts. Paul used three different terms to describe lust, desire, passion. He did so within four sentences. It should be clear to anyone not attempting to justify a desire or behavior what Paul meant: the sexual desire a person has.
â€ÂThe term "against nature" is also strange here, since exactly the same term is used by Paul in Romans 11:21-24 to speak of God acting "against nature" by including the Gentiles with the Jews in the family of God. "Against nature" was used to speak of something that was not done in the usual way, but did not necessarily mean that something "against nature" was evil, since God also "acted against nature".â€Â
It is not strange; the term means something that is not normally found in nature – against the normal way of things.
Troyg,
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus "(Galatians 3:28).
Yes, salvation is open to all who repent and believe. But the key is to change; this means you have to obey God.
John 14:15
If you love me, you will obey what I command.
“Romans 1:26-27 is part of Paul's vigorous denunciation of idolatrous religious worship and rituals. Read all of Romans 1:18 to 2:4 for the context of the versus. Romans 1:26-27 contains some words used only here by Paul. Familiar words are used here in unusual ways. The passage is very difficult to translate. “
Actually, its quite clear, when you look at the Greek.
“The argument is directed against some form of idolatry that would have been known to Paul's readers. To us, 2000 years later and in a totally different culture, the argument is very vague and indirect. Verse 25 is clearly a denunciation of idol worship, "For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshipped and served the creature and not the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen." Paul at no point in his writing dealt with same-sex orientation or the expression of love and affection between to people of the same sex who love each other. “
I agree the main thrust Romans 1 is speaking out against people who suppress the truth of God by their wickedness. The key to the passage is in verse 18.
1:18
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
Paul gave an example in Romans of idol worship. But in doing so, he made it quite clear the problem is exchanging the truth of God for a lie. Then he showed what happens when people exchange the truth of God for a lie. They get given over to shameful things.
If you will notice in Romans 2, Paul is not merely condemning pagan practices. He is actually writing to say that judging while doing the same things is wrong. His point was that if we sin, we will be judged for it – whether under the Law or apart from it. He merely used pagan practices to show what happens when people turn aside from the truth of God – this truth includes the existence of God and what He has said.
But Paul chose to use the example of homosexual sex as part of what happens when we exchange the truth of God for a lie. In doing so, He was quite clear about what God thinks of the action of same-gender sex.
"The religious teachers argued endlessly about what 'some indecency' meant. Some said it was anything that displeased the husband. Others were more strict and said it could only refer to adultery."
A key word here is "religious". Jesus said it was because ot the wickedness of their hearts that God allowed divorce. Therefore, the point is moot. Wickedness is wickedness.
Romans 1 is no where near word play. Sodomy is sodomy. It is a well defined word and is very clear in it's meaning.
"Then i can marry my goat!"
OK...so what happens if someone "got my goat"?
"none of these verses refer to homosexual orientation as it is understood today."
Ummm... todays definition still includes sexual interaction between same sex individuals, right? The greek word for unnatural in Romans means "against nature". The word sodomy is used which by definition in Websters is a homosexual act. So, YES, Romans directly addresses the act of homosexual behavior as defined today.
ok troyg , if you cant dazzle em with Brilliance , baffle em with bull cookies.
I never read such phony balogny manipulations in my whole life, and i read alot.
but hey, since the old has passed away as Paul said...
Then i can marry my goat! I know we will be very happy and have many little goatlings, and since Jesus didnt mention it 'specifically' its ok! And if we love each other it cant be spoken against as troyg has said many times.
Woohooo baby, i'm off to the chapel!
"Paul clearly taught throughout Romans, Galatians, and his other letters that Godâ??s freely given and all-inclusive love is for every person on earth."
troyg-you proceed from a false assumtion. In English we only have one word for love...'love'. The Greek has 4 words (the 4th is somewhat abstract and rarely used) for love. Paul does not teach "all-inclusive love" in the open context you are stating.
The "all-inclusive love" He which is in the Bible is the word agape which has not sexual context to it. Therefore, it does not apply to homosexuality. The word in I Corinthians 13:4 "Love is..." is the word agape which by definition is benevolence and charity.
Many Americans try to define the Bible from the English it is translated into. Every had a computer geek try to explain the ins and outs of your computer problem? :-) You have to understand the 'language' to understand the meaning....
Troyg,
I will address your dialog on Romans sometime today, there's a lot to address.
Troyg,
If we accept what God has done, then we need only believe - but if we believe, then we must obey.
Christ said in Matthew 22:36-40,
"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
And then Scripture also defines Love for God, - to obey God: 1 John 5:2-3
2 This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. 3 This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome.
To be a Christian involves following Christ - believing in Him and obeying God.
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!'
Luke 5:32
I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."
John 8:11b "... Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."
John 14:15
If you love me, you will obey what I command.
John 14:21
21 Whoever 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."
Paul taught the same: Acts 26:20,
First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and to the Gentiles also, I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds.
Peter taught the same: Acts 5:29,
Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
The author of Hebrew taught the same: Hebrews 5:9,
And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him.
John taught the same: 1 John 3:7-10,
Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work. No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother.
We must love GOD more than anything and anyone - including ourselves, and we must obey him.
troyg,
Yes, Romans 1:18-32 is mentioned in the context of idolatrous temple worship; however, this does not preclude Paul from using homosexual behavior as an example of depraved morality. Why does Paul not mention heterosexual temple prostitution here? It certainly is morally wrong as well. And your rationale for 'against nature' or 'unnatural' seems weak considering that the reason the term is used is specifically to contrast heterosexual relations with that of homosexual relations; i.e., even heterosexual relations in the context of temple prostitution is not called unnatural, but homosexual relations are. Even Plato, who approved of homosexual relations, admitted in his 'Laws' that homosexual intercourse was widely recognized as unnatural.
"... one must observe that, when the male body unites for procreation with the female, the pleasure that goes along with this is understood to be in accordance with nature, but that when male joins with male, or female with female, it is outside the bounds of nature." - Plate, Laws
troyg,
"The six Bible passages used against LGBT people are often incorrectly translated and used out of context."
Not at all. Rather, these passages are often incorrectly interpreted to justify the homosexual lifestyle. In fact, many pro-gay scholars readily admit that the Bible condemns homosexual act regardless of orientation; they just consider the Bible wrong in these matters, not the interpretations.
"The Bible in the original language never condems same-sex, romantic love as sin."
Neither does the Bible in the original language ever condemn adulterous, romantic love as sin; it just condemns adulterous behavior - period.
"The Bible gives positive support for same-sex, committed relationships in the stories of Ruth and Naomi in the book of Ruth, and David and Jonathan in 1 Sam 18-20 and 2 Sam 1."
This is one of those examples of how biblical passages are often incorrectly interpreted to justify the homosexual lifestyle. For the sake of brevity, here is just one commentary germane to this topic. http://www.apocalipsis.org/difficulties/JonathanandDavid.htm
"Jesus never mentioned homosexuality"
Jesus never mentions homosexuality explicitly, but He does mention it implicitly under the rubric of sexual immorality (porneia). Jesus also never explicitly mentions ephebophelia, pederasty, pedophilia, bestiality, incest, etc, so are we, based on your criterion that Jesus does not explicitly mention these, to consider them as morally licit?
"The Bible repeatedly demonstrates God's love, care, and acceptance of all outcast, rejected, misunderstood, and alienated people."
This does not equate to condoning and affirming someone in their sin.
"Only six or seven of the Bible's one million verses refer to same-sex behavior in any way, and none of these verses refer to homosexual orientation as it is understood today."
Not sure if you are exaggerating to make your percentages better, but there are only a little over 31,000 verses – hardly a million. But in any case, bestiality is mentioned even fewer times... so what does this prove?
troyg,
"Some well meaning Christians have attempted over the years to tell me my gayness is some kind if defect, something to turn from, something to shame (many more have valued the way God created me). Homosexuality is simply one of the numerous variables of our common and diverse humanity."
Same-sex attraction is a disordered orientation. To say that it is one of numerous variables of our common and diverse humanity does not preclude homosexuality from being a disordered condition.
"Sexual Orientation is not mentioned in the Bible."
No but same-sex behavior is mentioned and not in a favorable light, I might add.
"The original Bible languages of Hebrew and Greek have no words for 'homosexual', 'sex', or 'romantic love'."
Neither did English have a word for 'homosexual' until recent, so what does that prove? In Hebrew, it was common to use circumlocution to describe something for which a single term did not exist. The Hebrew did not have a word for uncle, so when being specific, rather than using the term for kinsmen, they would say father's brother. Or similarly, they did not have a word for cousin, so when being specific, they would say for example father's brother's son. So this of course did not mean that there was no such thing as a cousin, but merely that there was no single term to specifically declare as such. Similarly, Hebrew did not have a single term for homosexual or homosexual act. Rather, they would use the circumlocution man who lies with a male.
"The Bible nowhere says gay and lesbians can or should change their sexual orientation."
No, but the Bible condemns the behavior.
wbmoore - let's talk about Romans, part III
Paul was certainly aware of the variety of ways that the teachers interpreted the word "indecency" and he used I in a variety of ways himself. To read into "indecent acts" a whole world of homosexual ideas is to abandon the realities of objective academic study and to embark on useless and damaging speculation that cannot be supported by the meaning of the word or by Paul’s use of it elsewhere.
If Paul had intended to condemn homosexuals as the worst of all sinners, he certainly had the language skills to do a clearer job of it than emerges from Romans. The fact is that Paul nowhere condemned or mentioned romantic love and sexual relations between people of the same sex who love each other. Paul never commented on sexual orientation. As in the rest of the Bible, Paul nowhere even hinted hat lesbians and gay men can or should change their sexual orientation.
The use of Romans 1:26-27 against gay people turns out to be a blunt instrument to batter and wound people who were not intended in the original text. Paul clearly taught throughout Romans, Galatians, and his other letters that God’s freely given and all-inclusive love is for every person on earth. Notice what Paul said about judging others, "Therefore you are without excuse every one of you who passes judgment, for in that you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things†(Romans 2:1)."
wbmore - let's talk about Romans - Part II
The word "passions" in 1:26 is the same word used to speak of the suffering and death of Jesus in Acts 13 and does not mean what we mean by "passion" today. Eros is the Gk word for romantic, sexual love, but Eros is never used even once in the NT. "Passions" in Romans 1:26 probably refers to the frenzied state of mind that many ancient mystery cults induced in worshipers by means of wine, drugs, and music.
We do not know the meaning of "burn" in 1:27, because Paul never used this particular word anywhere else, and it’s origin is uncertain. The term "against nature" is also strange here, since exactly the same term is used by Paul in Romans 11:21-24 to speak of God acting "against nature" by including the Gentiles with the Jews in the family of God. "Against nature" was used to speak of something that was not done in the usual way, but did not necessarily mean that something "against nature" was evil, since God also "acted against nature".
One more word needs special attention. "committing indecent acts" in Romans 1:27 is translated by the KJV as "working that which is unseemly". The Phillips translation goes far beyond the evidence and renders it as "shameful horrors!" The Greek word isaskemosunen and is formed of the word for "outer appearance" plus the negative particle. It speaks of the inner or hidden part or parts of the individual that are not ordinarily seen or know in public. "Indecent in 1 COR 12:23 referred to the parts of the body that remain hidden but are necessary and receive honor. 1 COR 13:5 used the word to say that love does not behave "indecently".
This word for "indecency" was used to translate Deuteronomy 24:1 into Greek to say that a man could divorce his wife if he "found some indecency in her". The religious teachers argued endlessly about what "some indecency" meant. Some said it was anything that displeased the husband. Others were more strict and said it could only refer to adultery. In Matthew 19:1-12, Jesus commented on Deut. 24: 1-4, but he did not define the term.
wbmoore:
Okay, let's talk about Romans. It's pretty complicated, but I'd like to quote from Turlock's "Steps to Recovery from Bible Abuse" on this. I found it pretty helpful.
"The theme of the first 3 chapters of Romans is , "The gospel is the power of God for spiritual freedom (salvation) for all who believe" (RO 1:16). Paul showed that all people equally need and can have Jesus in their lives. Paul's gospel is inclusive, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus "(Galatians 3:28).
Romans 1:26-27 is part of Paul's vigorous denunciation of idolatrous religious worship and rituals. Read all of Romans 1:18 to 2:4 for the context of the versus.
Romans 1:26-27 contains some words used only here by Paul. Familiar words are used here in unusual ways. The passage is very difficult to translate. The argument is directed against some form of idolatry that would have been known to Paul's readers. To us, 2000 years later and in a totally different culture, the argument is very vague and indirect.
Verse 25 is clearly a denunciation of idol worship, "For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshipped and served the creature and not the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen." Paul at no point in his writing dealt with same-sex orientation or the expression of love and affection between to people of the same sex who love each other.
Paul wrote Romans from Corinth, the second largest city in the empire and the crossroads of world trade and culture. Pausanius observed at about the same time as Paul that there were over 1000 religions in Corinth. The most prominent were the fertility cult of Aphrodite, worship of Apollo, and the Delphi Oracle, which was across the bay from Corinth. Paul's readers would have been aware of the religious climate from which he wrote Romans and would have understood Paul a lot better than we do.
wbmoore- sure. It was a response to believer's earlier comments:
Well, I would turn to Genesis 2:21-25
Because the text says it is "natural" that a man and a woman come together to create a new life, some people think this means gay or lesbian couples are "unnatural" They read this interpretation into the text, even though the text is silent about all kinds of relationships
that don't lead to having children:
- couples who are unable to have children
- couples who are too old to have children
- couples who choose not to have children
- people who are single (I may need to do a little more studying on the Biblical citations referring to singleness you refer to)
Are these relationships (or lack of relationships)"unnatural" There's nothing said here that condemns or approves the love that people of the same sex have for each other.
But, moreover, I really base my faith on Matt. 26: "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: :Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: "Love your neighbor as yourself." All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
I wish the person who flags something could unflag it.
troyg, sorry.
Troy, I accidently flagged you.
please post again. I thought I was deleting a post of mine that was not saying what I wanted it to say
troyg,
"Only six or seven of the Bible's one million verses refer to same-sex behavior in any way, and none of these verses refer to homosexual orientation as it is understood today."
There's a lot to cover in what God had to give us for the manual of life. One verse should be sufficient, but if he touches on immoral sex more than once, we need to REALLY pay attention, because its important enough to mention more than once.
While the concept of orientation was not discussed, same-gender sex certainly was.
"I invite all to a more prayerful, thoughtful, and caring understanding of God's diverse humanity."
Brother, I have and do pray concerning this. I love you guys. I've been there. So have my wife. We understand the desire for same-gender folks. We also understand what God's word says. We also know that God can deliver us from such things. Maybe not when we want it, and maybe not when we want it. It might take work. It might take surrender. It might take a better understanding of God's word. Who knows what it will take, as I think we are each different and respond differently. But God knows. An if you continue to seek Him and believe Him, He will give you what you need, and not more than you can handle.
Romans is clear what God thinks about homosexual sex. In Romans 1, God calls sex between men or between women sexual impurity, degrading, shameful, unnatural, indecent, and perversion, and something that ought not to be done.
By putting one's desires above God’s one places oneself, a created creature, in the place of God in one's life. By refusing to accept what God has said about homosexual sex being a sin, one refuses to honor God. By ignoring His word, one is ungodly, and suppressing the truth. By saying that one's thoughts on the subject are more important that God’s thoughts on it, one exchanges the truth of God for one's own thoughts.
One must start with the word of God and reconcile our experiences to it, not the other way around. We must understand God loves us (which I think you guys know). We must understand God is all powerful, and all knowing, and holy and righteous (again, I think you guys know this). We must also understand the Bible is intended to be our manual of life, and when we try to ignore or explain away what the Bible says, we endanger ourselves. It opens us up to walking in sin.
troyg,
"Sexual Orientation is not mentioned in the Bible. The original Bible languages of Hebrew and Greek have no words for "homosexual" , "sex", or "romantic love". The Bible nowhere says gay and lesbians can or should change their sexual orientation."
No, but it is clear what is meant when, in Romans 1, God calls sex between men or between women sexual impurity, degrading, shameful, unnatural, indecent, and perversion, and something that ought not to be done.
"The six Bible passages used against LGBT people are often incorrectly translated and used out of context."
I suppose it is out of context to say that Paul was not speaking to people's sexual activities when he wrote Romans?
"The Bible in the original language never condems same-sex, romantic love as sin. "
It condemns same-gender sex.
"The Bible gives positive support for same-sex, committed relationships in the stories of Ruth and Naomi in the book of Ruth, and David and Jonathan in 1 Sam 18-20 and 2 Sam 1."
Now THERE is reading out of context. These stories are about two men who loved each other like brothers, and the love of a daughter-in-law for her mother-in-law when both had just lost their husbands. They have nothing to do with sex between same-gender folks. They would have been stoned to death if that had been the case, not memorialized in the word of God as something good.
"Jesus never mentioned homosexuality"
He mentioned immoral sex, as defined in the Law, and that includes homosexual sex.
Note that in Romans 3:20, God said we learn what sin is because of the Law. If you recall, Leviticus 18 defines sexual acts God considers sin, which includes homosexual sex. So, since that is part of the Law, and the Law teaches us what sin is, then yes, God still considers those things to be sin.
Romans 3:20
20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.
"The Bible repeatedly demonstrates God's love, care, and acceptance of all outcast, rejected, misunderstood, and alienated people."
God loves everyone. Even liars and murderers. But they will not inherit the kingdom of God if they continue in their lifestyles of sin. They must repent and believe, and they must leave their sins behind.
troyg,
"Thank you for your thoughtful responses to many comments here."
You're welcome. I hope the homosexuals on this site realize at least a few of the conservative Christians who believe the word of God teaches against homosexual sex really do love you. We want what is best for you. Few of us truly have prejudice against homosexuals. We simply see the rod of God teaching something that homosexual sex flies in the face of. We know that to continue a life of sin is to reject Christ, even if you think otherwise. We do not want you to be wrong about what God calls sin, because it is of extreme importance. This is why we speak out.
"God created me to be gay."
I hear what you're saying, but I think the interpretation is wrong. The reason is, unlike you, I think the Bible is quite clear about what God thinks about homosexuality. To reject it, by saying God created you that way, is to reject Christ.
But even if I am wrong about whether God created you gay, God is quite clear about homosexual sex being wrong, case in point Romans 1. So even if God DID create you gay, you would have the responsibility to not respond to sinful desires. Even if God DID create you gay, you do not know it was so he could not release you from it so He could show His glory through deliverance, case in point the blind man John 9:1-4. Even if God DID create you gay, that is not to say that the sins of the Father are not passed down to the third and fourth generation - it may by that something your ancestors did has caused you to be born gay. Or it may simply be something in infancy or while still in the womb. This does not mean it was God or that it was something desirable (I am NOT saying you are not desirable, simply speaking to the issue of being born gay).
" He and I have walked closely together my entire life."
I pray he does, but I fear if you keep rejecting His word, He will not continue to do so, much like what happened to those in Romans 1.
" Meeting my lifemate, my soulmate, my same-sex partner was a complete miracle and I know it was at God's hands. God blesses John and I with two beautiful children (twins, now 13 monts old and walking). Some well meaning Christians have attempted over the years to tell me my gayness is some kind if defect, something to turn from, something to shame (many more have valued the way God created me). Homosexuality is simply one of the numerous variables of our common and diverse humanity. "
It sounds like you have had what we consider love in different forms. But this does not necessarily mean they came from God. Even pagans (and I am NOT calling you pagan) find love from mates and children. That is not the test of whether something is from God. The test is whether it lines up with Scripture, and Romans 1 calls it wrong.
mike2685 and troyg, as much as you both say that the Bible does not specifically condemn the homosexual lifestyle or the sexual practices of that lifestyle, still you can find no scripture to support it either and yet marriage of one man to one women along with singleness is spoken to throughout the whole of God's Word and even Christ Himself spoke to the heterosexual concept of marriage. And while you both know I do not see as you perverse and sick people still I find no scripture to support your lifestyle in the Word of God. And we know that these practices were indeed going on during biblical times and yet the scriptures are silent. If this lifestyle is a normal lifestyle why do we not find any scripture that endorses or condones it? And that being the case how do you from a biblical perspective justify the sexual practices of the homosexual lifestyle?
The human rights court has whatever power that the people bestow upon it, whether good or bad, or right or wrong. The Scriptures have whatever power God places on it, whether man accepts it or not...for man will accept it in the end.
igh-
I only speak my truth as God has revealed Himself to me.
hmmmm someone gave my questions a thumbs up
troyg and mike2685, do you support human rights courts to have the authority to edit, and suppress this type of discussion, and even to fine and imprison anyone who would debate and discuss at this level gays acceptance by God in commited loving marriages to say its wrong? Would you force re-interpretation on all verses in the Bible to reflect your interpretations in all Churchs in USA or be brought under the Authority of a Human Rights Court for Trial?
"Only six or seven of the Bible's one million verses refer to same-sex behavior in any way, and none of these verses refer to homosexual orientation as it is understood today.
"
Homosexual behaviour is homosexual behaviour it does not change
"Sexual Orientation is not mentioned in the Bible"
does not need to use sexual orientation...he made man a helper which was female because it was not good for man to be alone..tells us not to lay with a man as with a woman. and many more scripture refering to marriage as a man and woman relaationship
"The Bible gives positive support for same-sex, committed relationships in the stories of Ruth and Naomi in the book of Ruth, and David and Jonathan in 1 Sam 18-20 and 2 Sam 1."
these were not gay relationships.. one is brotherly Love while the other is affection for a mother in law to which her husband just died.
"The original Bible languages of Hebrew and Greek have no words for "homosexual" , "sex", or "romantic love"."
Again there may not be a direct translation but the meaning is the same.. If God wanted to make an exception he would have done so, he is not to small to not think of it.
Mike2685,
"Oh, yes Irenaeus, after I'm done using and abusing my boyfriend's soul, I'm going to move onto my stepmother, that Paul really knew what he was talking about, thank goodness I have you to keep me on the "straight" and narrow."
My goodness... Calm down! Let's be coherent in this. Are you saying that Paul should not have admonished this person?
Wbmoore-
Thank you for your thoughtful responses to many comments here. You said:
"I became a Christian. All of these things have caused people to find reasons to be prejudiced against me. But that does not make me buckle under to people who are wanting to purposefully blind themselves to the truth, when to allow them to do so without saying something would make me culpable before God."
Let me share a little of my witness to you. God created me to be gay. He and I have walked closely together my entire life. Meeting my lifemate, my soulmate, my same-sex partner was a complete miracle and I know it was at God's hands. God blesses John and I with two beautiful children (twins, now 13 monts old and walking). Some well meaning Christians have attempted over the years to tell me my gayness is some kind if defect, something to turn from, something to shame (many more have valued the way God created me). Homosexuality is simply one of the numerous variables of our common and diverse humanity.
To be sure:
Sexual Orientation is not mentioned in the Bible.
The original Bible languages of Hebrew and Greek have no words for "homosexual" , "sex", or "romantic love".
The Bible nowhere says gay and lesbians can or should change their sexual orientation.
The six Bible passages used against LGBT people are often incorrectly translated and used out of context.
The Bible in the original language never condems same-sex, romantic love as sin.
The Bible gives positive support for same-sex, committed relationships in the stories of Ruth and Naomi in the book of Ruth, and David and Jonathan in 1 Sam 18-20 and 2 Sam 1.
Jesus never mentioned homosexuality
The Bible repeatedly demonstrates God's love, care, and acceptance of all outcast, rejected, misunderstood, and alienated people.
Only six or seven of the Bible's one million verses refer to same-sex behavior in any way, and none of these verses refer to homosexual orientation as it is understood today.
I invite all to a more prayerful, thoughtful, and caring understanding of God's diverse humanity.
Oh, yes Irenaeus, after I'm done using and abusing my boyfriend's soul, I'm going to move onto my stepmother, that Paul really knew what he was talking about, thank goodness I have you to keep me on the "straight" and narrow.
Mike2685, "I know plenty of straight people who moved in together before six months." And that could be the reason that over 75% of people who marry after cohabitating wind up getting divorced. I don't think anyone is questioning your love for your partner only that after only six months you're just beginning to find out who each other truly is and that a real relationship based on either phileo or agape love takes several years to develop. My wife and I have been married for over 33 years and in the past 10 years we've learned things about each other we never knew or shared before. All that some are saying to you is there are some answers to issues in life and relationships that because of your age and the limited time of your relationship you don't have the answer to. It's like your sharing answers to issues in the way you hope they will be or the way you hope you will respond when you come face to face with these issues as opposed to having really dealt with these issues. But your responses are no different than I get from a lot of young adults who I have counseled with both as individuals and couples.
Mike2685,
"shut up, again, you don't know anything about my relationship"
I'm sure similar was said by a certain member of the Church in Corinth when Paul admonished him for his inappropriate relationship with his stepmother.
thepenitent, shut up, again, you don't know anything abot my relationship, and I know plenty of straight people who have moved in together before 6 months. There isn't a set amount of time before you fall in love with someone, and you really are speaking from the depths of your own mind, not with any sort of authority. Im sure you'd like everyone on here to bow down to you and agree that you're so smart, but its not going to happen so long as you pretend to know about other people than they do.
"Interesting how gays are unable to discern the difference between love and lust. And unless they repent they never will."
OK...how does that separate gays from straight? If you've been around here any length of time you know I don't agree with the gay lifestyle to put it mildly. Still, we must look at things objectively. Don't the straight people have the same issue?
Mikey, 6 months may be considered a long term relationship in gayville but in the real world it's closer to a one night stand. Certainly not long enough to get past eros to agape.
thepenitent, interesting how you feel yourself so superior to everyone else you don't even know that you can make judgment calls about the kind of people they are. I know the difference between love and lust just fine, thanks.
wb, like you it amazes me how gracious a God we serve as well as how He is not only able and willing to save us, but willing to use us for His glory and work in spite of our pasts and even take our pasts and use them to help us better minister to others. Be blessed as you continue to serve Him, believer.
troyg,
"Actually, irenaeus, Jesus spoke Aramaic. So he actually didn't use the word "pornea". That is a term attributed to him by later generations, correct?"
Scholars have shown that the region in which Jesus grew up was a multi-cultural and multi-lingual area, much like most of Europe - with many Greek speaking Gentiles within walking distance of Nazareth. Aramaic or Hebrew would have been the everyday language of the day (research shows both are possibilities). Greek would have definitely been spoke as the trade language of the day. The Talmud was in Hebrew and Greek, so either might have been possible. Latin might have been needed for interaction with Roman soldiers.
So, Jesus and his disciples probably would have spoken Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and possibly Latin. Its also likely that he would have used one language with his disciples, unless He was speaking to the Roman Centurion or some Gentiles. But even so, I know from experience that multi-lingual people often switch languages while speaking with other multi-lingual people.
There is no telling if any particular book in the New Testament was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek. Its most likely that the books of the New Testament were written in either Hebrew or Greek.
But even so, there is no reason to think God is not powerful enough to ensure the message He wants to be delivered is what was written and translated.
Believer, I alway hesitate to speak certain things until I feel God wants me to do so. It has to be when He's ready. I usually shock people when I give my testimony on at least one area. And yes, Gof is worthy of praise, and would be even if He had NOT delivered me from the many sins I've lived. God is good regardless of how I think or feel about Him and regardless if he is my gimme-god (gives me what I want when I want it).
I love God and its great He's so gracious.
irenaeus,
yes indeed! The good Lord has saved me! I have been washed and purified, justified and saved by the Holy Spirit! I give Him praise for what I have come out of of and into!
troyg ,
The statement was made by Mike2685 that we should take the plank out of our eyes, so I wanted it to be clear that the plank is out of my eye, which is why I said I am not gay.
Then you said, "rationalizing your predjudice toward modern gay spiritual people by citing ancient scripture", to which I gave some of my testimony showing how I am not prejudiced because both my wife and I have been there and done that.
Then you said, "When you make a statement like "I'm not gay, so I can see clearly." That is communiticating that all gay people cannot see clearly." Actually, it is communicating that gays who claim that God did not call homosexuality a sin have a speck in their eye. It is not prejudice to call someone on a sin, nor to acknowledge truth. You may not like it and may not be familiar with it, but its love in truth.
Then you said, " Welcome to predjudice and bigotry." I've grown up with prejudice all my life. My parents were white and Mexican - neither group liked me. I was homosexual. I was a witch. I became a Christian. All of these things have caused people to find reasons to be prejudiced against me. But that does not make me buckle under to people who are wanting to purposefully blind themselves to the truth, when to allow them to do so without saying something would make me culpable before God.
Interesting how gays are unable to discern the difference between love and lust. And unless they repent they never will.
"Clearly, you do not believe Jesus' statement when he says not to fear him who can destroy the body, but rather, fear him who can destroy both body and soul in Gehenna."
Who truely does? Both the bishop and Osama have turned their backs on the teaching of their 'holy book' and gone out on their own with their own 'interpretation'. Both fully believe they are right.
Mankinds biggest mistake is always the same. Ignore God and do what you want. It started with a piece of fruit and it hasn't stopped.
You either believe the Bible or you are simply using it to your own ends. It really is a simple book to understand!
troyg,
"He brought my partner and I together and blessed our union."
says who? He certainly does not bless your homosexual behavior between you and your partner, as He cannot deceive Himself or contradict His word.
Now He certainly loves you both, and desires you to repent and come to the knowledge of the truth. He certainly loves you so much that He died on the cross to atone for your sins. He certainly loves you so much that He longs for you to respond in faithful obedience to Him, for you to deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow Him. troyg, He loves you so much, but He will not condone or affirm you in your sins.
mike2685,
"Thepenitent, if you really think the bishop is worse than Osama, you have some soul searching to do my friend. I laughed HEARTILY at your reply, thanks for that!!"
Clearly, you do not believe Jesus' statement when he says not to fear him who can destroy the body, but rather, fear him who can destroy both body and soul in Gehenna.
troyg its easy to understand.
Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? "
The nature of God cannot change. Who he is, what he does, what he loves and what he hates. God does not stoop to the ways of man to achieve that thing he has determined he will do. God is Righteous, He does not lie, manipulate, deceive or manuever; that is mans nature. Man has a fallen sin nature God does not.
Now if robinson was a Born Again Believer he would be indwelt with the Holy Spirit convicting him of sin to turn from it and walk Righteously. Even now the Holy Spirit works on all people Saved and unsaved to convict them of sin.
John 16:7 "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
John 16:9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
John 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
John 16:11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
Now robinson's example of how to achieve what you want is passed down on all who support him, they will use this to 'get' whatever they are after!! Dont think they will not, they follow others examples and in this case they will stoop to the ways of man and forsake God. Man is depraved, and will be so selfish in the end times that crime will be rampant and Love will be only a faint memory.
Matthew 24:12 "And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold."
That is the effect of selfish behaviour.
Robinson leads many to Damnation and serves the flesh and the ruler of this world. it is obvious by the way he does things and what it produces. He manuevers leads many after him to follow his example.
2Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
2Pe 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
2Pe 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
All of 2Peter is a good read on this.
Thepenitent, if you really think the bishop is worse than Osama, you have some soul searching to do my friend. I laughed HEARTILY at your reply, thanks for that!!
"...and Gene Robinson is a hero"
... and Gene Robinson is a morally bankrupt and deluded individual; i.e., one who obstinately persists in manifest grave sin.
troyg,
"I don't believe gay people are depraved. God created me gay, he blessed me as being gay, he calls me to witness as a gay person. He brought my partner and I together and blessed our union, he gave us beautiful children. God created me to be gay, and to paraphase the kid's song, God doesn't make junk."
I never said that gay people are depraved; homosexual acts, however, are. Scripture calls homosexual behavior as acts against nature, shameful lusts, shameless acts, perversity. And same-sex attraction is not a blessing, just as any other disordered orientation is not a blessing. A person who is predisposed to alcoholism, or predisposed to fits of rage, or predisposed to sexual attraction to pre-pubescent blonde girls is not a blessing.
...and Gene Robinson is a hero.
irenaeus-
I don't believe gay people are depraved. God created me gay, he blessed me as being gay, he calls me to witness as a gay person. He brought my partner and I together and blessed our union, he gave us beautiful children. God created me to be gay, and to paraphase the kid's song, God doesn't make junk.
troyg,
"- says who?"
the context... otherwise, how could those who do not believe perish? How could those who do evil rise to condemnation? Otherwise, how could there be those to whom Christ says, "Depart from me you cursed into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels...?" Or how could those of Sodom and Gomorrah serve as an example by undergoing punishment of eternal fire? Or how could there be those who will be judged by the words Christ has spoken and condemn them on the last day? etc. etc.
Perhaps, when scripture uses the word 'all,' you believe it to mean each and every last individual, to which I could just as well respond - says who?
troyg,
"I don't believe that two spiritual men or two spiritual women who love each other deeply are the same as pedophelia, ephebophelia, incest, pederasty, bestiality, prostitution, orgies, etc. I honestly don't think Jesus thought much about orgies."
With regard to ephebophelia or pederasty - so a man and a post-pubescent boy cannot love each other?
With regards to incest – a man and his sister cannot love each other? What about a man and his step-mother?
With regards to bestiality – a man and his sheep cannot love each other?
With regard to orgies – several men and several women cannot all love each other?
"Christ speaks to me about love and acceptance:"
Yes he does, but He never uses love and acceptance as a cover for condoning or affirming someone in their sin.
"Many here are so quick to condemn Gene Robinson that they don't actually listen to what he really says."
What he says is immaterial, especially if what he is saying is an attempt to justify and rationalize his depraved lifestyle. And what's worse is that this is coming from a professed believer. I can't imagine Paul coddling a proclaimed believer who was obstinately and manifestly sinning in a grave manner because he thought that he could not judge the man's behavior. Perhaps in your opinion, Paul should simply have listened to what the man had to say and not have publicly called to the carpet a member of the Corinthian Church for sleeping with his stepmother. After all, "judge not lest ye be judged," right? Wrong! Paul wrote: "I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with immoral men... not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed... not even to eat with such a one... Is it not those inside the church who you are to judge? God judges those outside. Drive out the wicked person from among you."
irenaeus said:
"...Often when scripture uses the word 'all,' it does not mean each and every last individual. Rather, it can mean 'all that respond to his grace and invitation,' or 'all who believe,' or 'all who repent,' or 'at least one from every group,' or 'available and efficient for all, but not necessarily efficacious for all,' etc..."
- says who?
troyg,
"I would offer these:
The Lord is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love. The Lord is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made. All you have made will praise you, O Lord. Psalm 145: 8-10
I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men dream dreams, your young men will see visions. Joel 2:28
All mankind will see God's salvation. Luke 3:6
When I am lifted up, I will draw all men to myself. John 12:32
I did not come to judge the world, but to save it. John 12:47
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 1 Cornth 15:22"
Clearly, you are attempting to provide a universalist view since you do not even attempt to provide a balanced view. Often when scripture uses the word 'all,' it does not mean each and every last individual. Rather, it can mean 'all that respond to his grace and invitation,' or 'all who believe,' or 'all who repent,' or 'at least one from every group,' or 'available and efficient for all, but not necessarily efficacious for all,' etc. And while Jesus did not come to judge the world (meaning that was not the purpose of His first advent), Jesus clearly states that he will later judge the world.
irenaeus said:
"troyg: You never answered the question. If you want to say that since Jesus did not list out distinctive sexual sins, thus He did not condemn specific sexual sins, or now claim that the actual Aramaic intention and meaning are lost in Greek, then are you also going to suggest that Jesus did not and would not condemn pedophelia, ephebophelia, incest, pederasty, bestiality, prostitution, orgies, etc? After all, if 'porneia' or its Aramaic equivalent does not cover these also, then to be consistent, you have to allow for the possibility for these to be morally licit as well."
I don't believe that two spiritual men or two spiritual women who love each other deeply are the same as pedophelia, ephebophelia, incest, pederasty, bestiality, prostitution, orgies, etc. I honestly don't think Jesus thought much about orgies.
Christ speaks to me about love and acceptance:
Matt. 26 36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[b] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[c] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
Many here are so quick to condemn Gene Robinson that they don't actually listen to what he really says. Much like the Pharisees were so quick to condemn Jesus. But there are many of us Christians out here trying to win love, acceptance, and respect for all people, as opposed to getting rid of the orgies.
Ok now let's tackle the mess below by igh:
"lets talk frankly troyg,
When God sent Jesus did he instruct his son to go against his very nature to get what he was after?"
I have no idea what that means.
"Now look at robinson he follows his nature and does not turn away from it, manuevering, to capture the minds and hearts of all willing to listen to his false doctrine.
Now God cannot change and robison cannot change except to give his life to Christ then he will receive a New Spirit and a new heart and mind conformed into the image of Christ Jesus. Born Again."
I believe it is up to God to judge. And not you. How can you claim to know this man's soul? Only God can do that. Shame on you.
"All robinson does is to spread his false doctrine and lead many to damnation, that is his nature."
You also claim to know his "nature". Again, I believe only God know our true natures.
"Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:"..and the others....
I would offer these:
The Lord is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love. The Lord is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made. All you have made will praise you, O Lord. Psalm 145: 8-10
I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men dream dreams, your young men will see visions. Joel 2:28
All mankind will see God's salvation. Luke 3:6
When I am lifted up, I will draw all men to myself. John 12:32
I did not come to judge the world, but to save it. John 12:47
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 1 Cornth 15:22
troyg,
You never answered the question. If you want to say that since Jesus did not list out distinctive sexual sins, thus He did not condemn specific sexual sins, or now claim that the actual Aramaic intention and meaning are lost in Greek, then are you also going to suggest that Jesus did not and would not condemn pedophelia, ephebophelia, incest, pederasty, bestiality, prostitution, orgies, etc? After all, if 'porneia' or its Aramaic equivalent does not cover these also, then to be consistent, you have to allow for the possibility for these to be morally licit as well.
troyg,
"Actually, irenaeus, Jesus spoke Aramaic. So he actually didn't use the word "pornea". That is a term attributed to him by later generations, correct?"
While Jesus more than likely spoke Aramaic to his disciples, this does not mean that the inspired authors failed to translate using the appropriate Greek word.
Wbmore said:
"Oh, by the way, its real hard for someone to accuse me of being prejudiced against homosexuals, since I used to have homosexual sex as a teenager with a couple of different guys, and my wife used to be a lesbian. So please, be sure of what you claim before you speak."
When you make a statement like "I'm not gay, so I can see clearly." That is communiticating that all gay people cannot see clearly. Welcome to predjudice and bigotry. It doesn't matter who you've slept with.
troyg,
"..who exactly, used this word to encompass all the sexual acts prohibited in the Old Testament?"
"Jesus did."
Actually, irenaeus, Jesus spoke Aramaic. So he actually didn't use the word "pornea". That is a term attributed to him by later generations, correct?
Whoa! wbmoore, Praise God that you have been delivered. How sweet 1 Cor 6:11 must be to you - and all of us who by faith repentantly approach so great a Savior.
troyg,
"..who exactly, used this word to encompass all the sexual acts prohibited in the Old Testament?"
Jesus did. Now if you want to say that since Jesus did not list out distinctive sexual sins, thus He did not condemn specific sexual sins, then are you also going to suggest that Jesus did not and would not condemn pedophelia, ephebophelia, incest, pederasty, bestiality, prostitution, orgies, etc. After all, if 'porneia' does not cover these also, then to be consistent, you have to allow for the possibility for these to be morally licit as well.
Jesus used to word "pornea" to encompass all the OT sexual sins - in both Matthew and Mark. Jesus most certainly condemned homosexuality. He also said marriage is for a male and female.
Mikey boy, Robinson left his wife and kids. It's a matter of public record and he has admitted as much. So there is no need to talk to them. And yes, Robinson is worse than Osama. Osama isn't leading thousands of Christians to eternal damnation. Osama can only hurt a Christian's mortal body - The evil Robinson is condemning thousands for eternity. All just to pursue his fleshy perversions. Selling his soul pretty cheap.
wbmoore said
"The verses I quoted all have the Greek word 'pornea', which in the English translations are the words 'sexual immorality', 'immorality', and 'fornication'. Tis word was used to encompass all the sexual acts prohibited in the Old Testament, including homosexual sex. So yes, those verses DO mention homosexual sex."
..who exactly, used this word to encompass all the sexual acts prohibited in the Old Testament?
wb, I appreciate your honesty of you and your wife's background, to be honest I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one who went through some of the struggles I went through. Oh but isn't God so good to deliver us and free us from so much excess garbage and make us into His children and use us for His glory when we let Him.
troyg,
Either the Bible was written by God or it wasn't. If it wasn't then there's o need for you to worry about it. If it was, then you need to pay attention to what God said.
Mike,
:) you made me laugh! ) You're funny. :) LOL thanks for the grins.
Man, you're ok in my book. I think you're wrong, but you're ok.
Oh, by the way, its real hard for someone to accuse me of being prejudiced against homosexuals, since I used to have homosexual sex as a teenager with a couple of different guys, and my wife used to be a lesbian. So please, be sure of what you claim before you speak.
troyg,
The verses I quoted all have the Greek word 'pornea', which in the English translations are the words 'sexual immorality', 'immorality', and 'fornication'. Tis word was used to encompass all the sexual acts prohibited in the Old Testament, including homosexual sex. So yes, those verses DO mention homosexual sex.
Well thanks for the update WB, I'll be sure we just cuddle next time. Thepenitent...he is the epidome of wickedness and evil? Really? Compared to Osama Bin Laden, this guy is so bad? And have you spoken to his wife and kids? Unless you have, you're going on pure hearsay and bearing false witness against your neighbor, Tisk Tisk, stop the sinning, please!
lets talk frankly troyg,
When God sent Jesus did he instruct his son to go against his very nature to get what he was after? And what was Jesus after? Why did the Father send him? To Save the Lost sheep and bring them home. Did Jesus lie, manipulate, manuever, to get disciples? Jesus spoke the TRUTH, LIVED A RIGHTEOUS LIFE, AND DIED FALSELY CONDEMNED FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD.
Now look at robinson he follows his nature and does not turn away from it, manuevering, to capture the minds and hearts of all willing to listen to his false doctrine.
Now God cannot change and robison cannot change except to give his life to Christ then he will receive a New Spirit and a new heart and mind conformed into the image of Christ Jesus. Born Again.
All robinson does is to spread his false doctrine and lead many to damnation, that is his nature.
Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Mat 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Mat 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
Mat 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Mat 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
troyg,
"You both seem to rationalizing your predjudice toward modern gay spiritual people by citing ancient scripture, mostly rooting back to Leviticus 18. Wbmore, none of the NT scriptures you cite say absolutely anything about homosexuality."
As for Rev. Mel White, could you quote a more heterodox person? Why do you qualify the statements from scripture on homosexuality with 'as we understand it today?' And how is it that 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10 is not valid for the Christian today? And how is it that arsenokoite is being defined by my prejudice? On the contrary, there are a number of gay Christians who have studied this, now live celibate lives, and have publicly announced the error of the pro-gay community in attempting to obsure the meaning because they have discovered that this is the real meaning of the word and that the challenges offered by the pro-gay community do not hold up to scrutiny.
...UNLESS you are using it to rationalize your PERSONAL view that the gay lifestyle is morally licit. It has nothing to do with God. Let's be honest.
igh writes:
"then why violate the rules of the Anglican/Espicopalian communion? if you are Godly, why go against your church?"
...because the rules of the Anglican/Episcopalian communion are wrong. Christ commands us to pursue justice for all people.
"God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him." John 3:17
This "man" is the epitome of evil and wickedness. The classic wolf in sheep's clothing. He left his wife and kids to pursue perverted lust with his boyfriend. He is also reveling in destroying the once great Anglican communion. Is there any doubt the last word he will ever hear are, "I never knew ye."
robinson said:
"My goal is to talk about my own life and journey in Christ in such a way that those who are listening will perceive that the God I know in my own life is the same God they know in THEIR lives," he said. "Then we can wrestle with the faithful differences we have in interpreting that God's will for us and for God's church."
then why violate the rules of the Anglican/Espicopalian communion? if you are Godly, why go against your church?
these are the ways they want to pass down to everyone else, getting what you want by games, lying, manipulating and being self absorbed is the 'spirit' of his God.
History will show that Gene Robinson is not only a great spiritual leader for our times, but a prophet who will help Christians turn away from their persistent fixation on judgement and condemnation to love, caring, and acceptance of people who were previously despised. There is no greater tribute to who Christ really is.
irenaeus and wbmoore
You both seem to rationalizing your predjudice toward modern gay spiritual people by citing ancient scripture, mostly rooting back to Leviticus 18. Wbmore, none of the NT scriptures you cite say absolutely anything about homosexuality.
A great quote from Rev. Mel White:
"Leviticus is a holiness code written 3,000 years ago. This code includes many of the outdated sexual laws we mentioned earlier, and a lot more. It also includes prohibitions against round haircuts, tattoos, working on the Sabbath, wearing garments of mixed fabrics, eating pork or shellfish, getting your fortune told,and even playing with the skin of a pig. (There goes football!)
I'm convinced those passages say nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today. Hereâ??s why. Consider this single Bible passage that was used for centuries to condemn masturbation: â??He spilled his seed on the ground... And the thing which Onan did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also" (Genesis 38:9-10). For Jewish writers of Scripture, a man sleeping with another man was an abomination. But it was also an abomination (and one worthy of death) to masturbate or even to interrupt coitus (to halt sex with your spouse before ejaculation as an act of birth control). Why were these sexual practices considered abominations by Scripture writers in these ancient times? Because the Hebrew pre-scientific understanding was that the male semen contained the whole of life. With no knowledge of eggs and ovulation, it was assumed that the manâ??s sperm contained the whole child and that the woman provided only the incubating space. Therefore, the spilling of semen without possibility of having
a child was considered murder. The Jews were a small tribe struggling to populate a country.
They were outnumbered by their enemy. You can see why these ancient people felt it was an abomination to risk â??wastingâ?? even a single child. But the passage says nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today."
...UNLESS you are using it to rationalize your PERSONAL fear and condemnation of gay people. It has nothing to do with God. Let's be honest.
James,
To confess is the word you had in mind: exomologeo, from the root homo-logeo, literally to say the same.
james, to repent means to turn away from something and I've been taught that to confess means to agree with God about our sin. To see our sin as God sees our sin. But as you said the Bible clearly teaches that if we see a brother or sister committing sin were to go to them and encourage them to turn from their sin and turn back to God.
the greek word i believe for repent actually means to call it the same as God would. Which means we are to call sins as they are said in the Bible. Could someone who has the capability to check this out do so. I remember this being discussed in church. So believer hit this one out of the ballpark, for we are commanded to lead our brothers to repent of their sins.
Mike, you never commented on my post about homosexual sex harming both parties involved, so I thought I'd post it again and ask you to comment.
According to the Bible, when homosexuals have sex together, they are harming themselves and each other.
1 Corinthians 6:18-20 (NASB)
Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? 20 For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.
The word for immorality is transliterated porneia. This is the same word Christ used.
It has been translated as fornication, but includes all illicit sex.
Mt 5:32
but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the cause of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Mt 15:19
For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.
Mt 19:9
And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.
Mk 7:21
For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries,
It refers to illicit sex - that which is prohibits in the Old Testament.
Definition:
1. illicit sexual intercourse
a. adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
b. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
c. sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,
2. metaph. the worship of idols
a. of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols
It is specifically NOT adultery, which is transliterated moicao.
Additionally, because homosexual sex is a sin, you are causing your brother to stumble when you participate in it.
1 Cor 10:31-32
31 So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. 32 Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God
So, according to the Bible, when a homosexual has sex with another homosexual, he is hurting himself and his partner. If you love someone, you will not cause someone to sin.
The term 'arsenokoitai' used in I Cor 6:9 and I Tim 1:10 is considered by many scholars to be derived from the Greek translation of Lev 18:22 and 20:13 -
meta arsenos ou koimethese koiten gynaikos
("with a man do not lie [as one] lies with a woman")
hos an koimethe meta arsenos koiten gynaikos
("whoever lies with a man [as one] lies with a woman")
Notice, especially in the second verse (Lev 20:13), where 'arsenos' and 'koiten' appear next to each other. There is no mistake understanding what Paul meant by the term 'arsenokoitai.'
I can't conceive of a stronger condemnation of homosexual acts than Paul uses in the chapter one of Romans. Paul was not referring to the Temple of Diana because that is in Ephesus which is on a different continent than Corinth. duhhhhh.
I don't believe there was any temple prostitution going on in Corinth during Paul's time. Historically speaking, I seem to recall reading somewhere that temple prostitution did occure, but this was a couple of centuries earlier.
troyg,
"'Paul is clearly referring to any gay behavior...' So you were there, you talked to him?"
So you were there, you talked to Paul to determine that he was not talking about homosexual acts?
feetxxxl, said:
"it is interesting that the anti-gay faction cannot merely make a simple statement about sin, but instead have interlace their understanding with condemnantion and judgment.
is this because their position and understanding cannot stand on its own?
but..........isnt that the definition of truth? "
Stop and think feetxxxl, Jesus did not have sin, we are called as the Body of Christ Jesus to remove sinners from amongst us to bring forth a Righteous Judgment on there behaviour. The Church of God cannot tolerate unrepentive sinners, it must carefully weigh the evidence, bring forth an accusation and try them before the church and then cast forth an verdict. Simple and what God does.
What is Righteous is shown to be from God by what it produces.
Luke 7:35 "But wisdom is justified of all her children."
Someone brought up the judging thing again. So let's deal with 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.
Matthew 7:5: 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.
I'm not gay, so I can see clearly.
This is a repost that I think applies here:
I knew a woman who loved a man who was married. She stopped the relationship before it got further out of hand.
I know a woman who thought herself lesbian. She no longer believes this and is happily married - she is my wife.
Just because we think something is, does not make it so. Just because something seems like it will never change does not mean it will stay the same. Just because someone loves does not mean it should be pursued.
James Reynolds
"God gives up on no one, but he does leave them to thier own devices so that they can come to the lowest of lows so that they will repent and reconcile their relationship with Christ"
Amen, Brother Reynolds...Hammer meet head of nail!
feet and tyrog, so if we call sin sin as God does we are being judgemental, but if you say we are being judgemental for calling sin sin you are not being judgemental? Plus any one who is truly concerned about another individual will take the time to warn them about the possible if not probable consequences of their behavior. And reality is that all sin has consequences.
I read his book
Gene Robinson be not deceived God is not mocked, you are sowing to the flesh and you are going to reap corruption. You are controlled by satan and his demons.
Paul wrote the letter to Corinthe to show the Church and its members were notto engage in that type of behaviour for the were redeemed and transform by Christ's death, that is why he said so were some of you. Meaning they no longer are and it is expected for them not to go back to their former way of life.
God gives up on no one, but he does leave them to thier own devices so that they can come to the lowest of lows so that they will repent and reconcile their relationship with Christ
"Those calling for my resignation seem to be under the impression that if Gene Robinson went away, that all would go back to being 'like it was,' whatever that was! Does ANYONE think that if I resigned, this issue would go away?!" New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson said Wednesday in his blog.
NO. But you'd be saving your denomination from the stain of your sin.
"We are not going away, as much as some would like us to," Robinson added, referring to gays and lesbians.
Of course you're not. That's what arrogant sin does to a person. It disregards God's Word in favor of its own exaltation. That's what makes it sin. It is a clinch-fisted defiance of God. And Mr Robinson will pay dearly when he and his supporters stand before the Holy One of heaven one day. There won't be committees and up-or-down votes in that holy moment when He stands before the One whose eyes are like fire.
thepenitent says
"Paul is clearly referring to any gay behavior..." So you were there, you talked to him?
Paul told Christians to act like him. Boy you should actually read the Bible before you argue it.
it is interesting that the anti-gay faction cannot merely make a simple statement about sin, but instead have interlace their understanding with condemnantion and judgment.
is this because their position and understanding cannot stand on its own?
but..........isnt that the definition of truth?
and, penitent, I don't believe you're quite on the same level as Paul, so I wouldn't going around deciding who God has and hasn't given up on. It really isn't your place, just because Paul did.
Paul is clearly referring to any gay behavior. He calls it perverted and and shameful. He wrote the letter from Corinth. There is no basis at all to assume he is referring to temple prostitutes. That's just you trying to rationalize your behavior.
Paul is writing this letter to Rome after his missionary tour of the Mediterranean. On his journey Paul had seen great temples built to honor Aphrodite, Diana, and other fertility gods and goddesses of sex and passion instead of the one true God the apostle honors. Apparently, these priests and priestesses engaged in some odd sexual behaviors -- including castrating themselves, carrying on drunken sexual orgies, and even having sex with young temple prostitutes (male and female) -- all to honor the gods of sex and pleasure.
Getting to know a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender person of faith will help you realize that it is unreasonable (and unjust) to compare our love for each other to the rituals of the priests and priestesses who pranced around the statues of Aphrodite and Diana.
You'll also note that Romans 2 begins with "Therefore, [referring to Romans 1], you have no excuse, whoever you are, when you judge others; for in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself..." Even after he describes the disturbing practices he has seen, Paul warns us that judging others is God's business, not ours.
In addition, Paul calls homosexuality "perversion", so again, I'm in good company.
Jesus said he "hated" false doctrine so I'm in good company.
You ought to read chapter one of Romans, three times it says God gave them over. You've never read the Bible have you?
....and referring to the ECUSA as a "perverted freak show" is not hateful?
I can't conceive of stronger language against homosexualilty that that contained in scripture. Reasonable people can't disagree on this, only people with an agenda.
It is my understanding that God gives up no one, and I can't imagine that if he did, you'd be the first to know. You might want to watch your tongue.
Robinson is the chief attraction in the perverted freak show that is ECUSA. God certainly gave him up......
FreeInChrist says
"Likewise, standing by and saying 'well I know the Bible says it's wrong, but I really just think we'll all be ok in the end' is both uncaring and willfully ignorant."
As we have seen time and time again, even on discussion postings to the Christian Post, reasonable Christians can disagree on interpretations of ancient scripture. No one is saying "I know the Bible says it's wrong". Various interpretations of ancient text are not clear on homosexuality..at all. I think what is hateful is to bar a fully ordained bishop from a 10 year international gathering. In my reading of the Bible, I never saw Christ "bar" people from anything.
John, they're also supporting many, many gay men and women who have been flat out ostracized and given up on by too many of "God's People" AKA Christians telling them they are not fit to follow in the footsteps of the Lord. This bishop brings tremendous hope, and he most certainly it doing many good works. Its a shame people can't look past that and focus only on what they decide is his biggest sin. Matthew 7:5: 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.
troyg - It is hardly bigotry to inform someone that their lifestly is out of line with God's will. The truly hateful thing would be to allow someone to continue, blinders firmly in place, on the path to destruction while secretly thinking 'they'll get theirs someday'. Likewise, standing by and saying 'well I know the Bible says it's wrong, but I really just think we'll all be ok in the end' is both uncaring and willfully ignorant. You call it judging, the Bible tells us, as seen in the post from 'The Watch' below, that we are to call attention to such error in the life of a brother 'that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus'.
chicago24 - Regarding which Bishop was in the wrong, reading the post from 'The Watch' below makes it quite clear, through Scripture nonetheless. Asking others not to disagree with you, when you disagree with Scripture, is to ask them to join you in your choice to disobey God's Word.
Christ forgives all who desire His mercy enough to recognize their own faults, of which we all have many, repent, and allow Him to conform us to His image. Please recognize that it is not about getting your way; it is about following Him.
Believer-
I don't know why God needs to judge anybody, looks like He can just rely on you!
While I don't believe Bishop Robinson's relationship with his partner is immoral, if the rules of the church prohibit co-habitation, then he should find a more gay-friendly church to shepherd.
Meanwhile, the Archbishop of Sudan, Rev. Dr. Daniel Deng Bul's actions are awfully devisive and think he's way out of line to initiate such a split in the church.
Both Bishops should be dealt with by a governing body.
troyg, you're right Jesus is still speaking today calling all sinners like Robinson to repent before it's everlastingly too late!
John10, I lived in Vermont for four years and I know that most people have no clue as to what the real Vermonters and you folks in New Hampshire really think. Most I knew were very conservative but very respectful of the views and privacy of others, but to say they are behind this man or to say Vermonters were in favor of same-sex unions is a joke. It may be true of the flatlanders but not so for real Vermonters and New Hampshire folks.
Gene Robinson is a hero to many, many Christians. He stands for justice and God's all-inclusive love. He challenges the bigotry and arrogance of the established church in the same way Christ challenged the Pharisees. God is still speaking today, He didn't stop speaking with the ancient scriptures. We pray every day that God continue to give Gene Robinson and his partner strength to continue to bravely confront the hatred and bigotry of those who would tear apart this denomination.
The Bishop says, "Everyone seems to forget that I am not here representing myself, but rather all the people of the Diocese of New Hampshire, with whom it is my privilege to minister in Christ's name. They have called me to minister with them as their Bishop, and suggestions that I resign ignore the vows that I have taken to serve my flock in New Hampshire."
He seems to be under the impression that ALL the Episcopalians in New Hampshire are solidly behind him. This couldn't be further from the truth. I am from New Hampshire and I, along with MANY others, are most unhappy that he is "leading the flock." I, for one, do not consider him to be my bishop. My main objection is that the gay lifestyle, according to the Centers for Disease Control, cuts short the average life of a homosexual male by 20 years. I saw this happen many, many times in New York City where I worked for 28 years. His elevation to Bishop sends a loud and clear message that the Episcopal Church is sanctioning a lifestyle that continues to kill myriad numbers of young and middle age men in the prime of their lives.
"We are not going away, as much as some would like us to," Robinson added, referring to gays and lesbians."
Judgement day may tell a different story. As I understand it, all unsaved sinners will 'go away'. I hope he figures it out before then.
What is next, Mr Robinson? A golden calf on the altar?
He didn't have any problem ignoring the marriage vows he took with his first wife. Those perverts have a pretty selective sense of duty, doncha think?
"ignore the vows that I have taken "
Is this not what he is already doing when he ignores the vows he made in ordination?
He is supposed to "have affirmed and declared [his] belief in the faith which is revealed in the Holy Scriptures".
This faith includes not sinning, nor causing others to sin.
Some of the promises made in Anglican priest ordination include:
"Do you accept the Holy Scriptures as revealing all things necessary for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ? "
This includes the need to not live a life of sin.
"Will you faithfully minister the doctrine and sacraments of Christ as the Church of England has received them, so that the people committed to your charge may be defended against error and flourish in the faith?
Instead of defending against error, he is leading them into error.
"Will you endeavour to fashion your own life and that of your household according to the way of Christ, that you may be a pattern and example to Christ’s people?"
The fashion of life should be that described in the word of God, and that does NOT include homosexual sin.
It looks to me that this person is ignoring the vows he has taken, and using it as an excuse to do what He wants.
It' time to go Mr. Gene Robinson!
Your leadership is unrecognized by the theologically biblical churches of the world.
Your defiant public stance is akin to thumbing your nose at the face of God.
Please take great care and thought of the negative consequences of your actions, on the personal spiritual and eclesiastical levels.
God will hold each person (myself included) accountable accordingly.
This arrogant man's hubris is tearing apart one of the largest denominations on earth. He is an apostate and he's causing terrible damage to the church. God will not deal kindly with him, I suspect.
I don't believe ANYONE ever said that if Robinson resigned the problem would go away. He didn't elect himself to the post, he had help. So Robinson is right.
There are plenty of wolves/demons in the church to raise ruckus. A healthy church knows how to confront, rebuke, and caste-out scripturally. Most churches I've seen and been a part of have no clue or have no confidence to execute Matthew 18 because of being afraid of offending or "hurting" someones feelings or not wanting to cause a stir. Slowly, the wolves work their way through the system and up through the ranks much like a snake through grass -as is the case of the Anglican Church
1 Corinthians 5
Immorality Defiles the Church
1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentilesâ€â€that a man has his father’s wife! 2 And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
6 Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? 7 Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
Immorality Must Be Judged
9 I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 10 Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortionerâ€â€not even to eat with such a person.
12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.â€Â