PDA

View Full Version : United Methodists Propose to Change ‘Church Law’ to Allow Homosexual Behavior



Angel4Truth
May 24th, 2015, 09:55 PM
United Methodists Propose to Change ‘Church Law’ to Allow Homosexual Behavior (http://christiannews.net/2015/05/23/united-methodists-propose-to-change-church-law-to-allow-homosexual-behavior/)


NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A panel within the leadership of the United Methodist Church has voted to submit a proposal to change the denomination’s law book to remove prohibitions against homosexual behavior and to allow clergy to officiate same-sex ceremonies.

The Connectional Table voted 26-10 on Monday to present the amended language during the 2016 General Conference, which would then place the matter up for another vote for official approval.

The adjustments would allow those who are open and practicing homosexuals to serve as clergy, and would remove any mention of homosexual behavior as being a violation of biblical laws or being “incompatible with Christian teachings.” Language would also be removed that prohibited clergy from officiating over same-sex ceremonies.

According to the United Methodist Reporter, the proposal serves as a “third way” and compromise over the differing opinions surrounding homosexual behavior, and would put an end to any church trials over the matter.

As previously reported, Pennsylvania minister Frank Schaeffer was defrocked in 2013 after he officiated a ceremony between his son and his son’s partner, and refused to agree not to “wed” homosexuals again since he has other children who identify as homosexual.

He was later reinstated as a council ruled that he should not have been stripped of his credentials solely because he refused to repent, and noted that the written penalty did not warn Schaefer that he would be defrocked for doing so.

“Our hope is that [the Table’s proposal] will provide an alternative for the General Conference to consider that helps strengthen the unity of the church and allows us to move forward together as a denomination so that we can focus on our mission,” said Table Chair Bishop Bruce Ough.

But some have expressed concern over the new proposal, stating that it weakens the standards of righteousness that pastors are meant to exemplify and uphold.

“If we’re going to condone the practice of homosexuality, what’s stopping us from allowing pastors to commit adultery without rebuke? Why not let drunken revilers lead kids church? Why not give greedy thieves and extortioners the responsibility for church finances?” asked Jennifer Leclaire of Charisma Magazine.

“The point is, practicing homosexuality is not the only sin the Bible calls out in this verse, as so many gay rights activists like to stress. So why does the sinful practice of homosexuality, then, get special protection?” she said.

Leclaire opined that if even just one sin is accepted among congregations, there’s no telling where it will lead.

“If we’re going to let our pastors engage in homosexuality at will, condone it and have the audacity to declare that it doesn’t contradict God’s will, what’s preventing us from throwing the Ten Commandments out of the window?” she asked. “Always keep in mind, a little leaven leavens the whole lump.”

“Pastors are supposed to ‘teach God’s people the difference between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean’ (Ezek. 44:23). Instead, far too many are calling evil good and good evil and exchanging darkness for light and light for darkness (Is. 5:20),” Leclaire noted. “We can’t just stand by and point fingers of disdain and watch. Join me in crying out that a wave of repentance will sweep the church—and the nation.”

Another church group caving to the world instead of following God.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~

Edit: Will be adding churches and church groups and pastors who cave on this issue - if you know of any, please add them to this thread.

Just added: - see this post in this thread: T.D. Jakes Comes Out for ‘Gay Rights’ and ‘LGBT Churches,’ Says Position is ‘Evolving’ http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4411589&postcount=89

Angel4Truth
May 25th, 2015, 04:11 PM
Church of England to consider 'transgender baptism' service (http://www.christiantoday.com/article/church.of.england.to.consider.transgender.baptism. service/54463.htm)


A "transgender baptism" service is to be considered by the Church of England for the first time.

The idea is to bless into God's family the new identities of Christians who have undergone gender transition.

The proposal was welcomed by the Church's most senior trans priest. Rev Rachel Mann, Rector of St Nicholas Burnage and a minor canon at Manchester Cathedral, told Christian Today: "Trans people feel powerfully called to be recognised in their 'chosen' name. An opportunity to be publicly introduced to God is therefore significant. I think this is what the proposed liturgy aims to do. It will be symbolically powerful. The extent to which it is [a form of] baptism will be debated by General Synod of course, but this liturgy is a welcome move to affirm Trans people."

There is no guarantee the proposal will succeed. It is in the form of a diocesan motion to the General Synod and needs to wait its turn to get debated on the floor. But it is certain to generate contention in a Church still struggling with its position on sexuality.

Rev Chris Newlands, vicar of Lancaster Priory, called for the change after he was approached by a young transgender person born a girl but transitioned to a boy seeking to be "re-baptised", the Guardian reports today. The vicar had at first thought the rule of one baptism sufficed, but changed his mind after discussing issues of identity with the young man.

He created a new service to affirm the original baptismal vows of the individual who was "introduced" to God with his new name and identity.

The motion, passed by Blackburn Diocese last month, states: "That this Synod, recognising the need for transgender people to be welcomed and affirmed in their parish church, call on the House of Bishops to consider whether some nationally commended liturgical materials might be prepared to mark a person's gender transition." ...... read more at link

And another one - changing their church into the world.

musterion
May 25th, 2015, 04:12 PM
So will almost every other Prot denomination before too awful long. Then the Mormons will follow suit, just to keep appearing to "fit in." I expect the Rome will get there before all the protties go over, though. Since even professing Bible believers are fading, they all need to start competing for them new demographics...queers, trannies, people who dress up like animals (I expect we'll live to see a service especially for them, with the "minister" dressed like a skunk), etc..........

Bright Raven
May 25th, 2015, 04:25 PM
Another denomination that does not believe the literal word of God.

jamie
May 25th, 2015, 05:21 PM
So is transgender a mental problem or a physical problem?

Someone said, "And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness." (Romans 8:10 NKJV)

If Paul is right about the body being dead then what is the problem with corrective surgery? In other words, God is after our mind not our body.

Paul also said, "For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit." (Romans 8:5 NKJV)

Does God care about the things of the flesh or does he care about living according to the Spirit?

Angel4Truth
May 25th, 2015, 05:27 PM
So is transgender a mental problem or a physical problem?

Irrelevant. This thread is about churches caving on what God has said is ok verses what the world says is ok. Please make a thread yourself if you wish to discuss the nature of transgenderism.

Granite
May 25th, 2015, 05:27 PM
When even the Catholics in Ireland realize they need to change their tune you realize it's over except for the mopping up operations.

Angel4Truth
May 25th, 2015, 05:28 PM
So will almost every other Prot denomination before too awful long. Then the Mormons will follow suit, just to keep appearing to "fit in." I expect the Rome will get there before all the protties go over, though. Since even professing Bible believers are fading, they all need to start competing for them new demographics...queers, trannies, people who dress up like animals (I expect we'll live to see a service especially for them, with the "minister" dressed like a skunk), etc..........

I cant see the southern baptists ever caving on this issue.

Angel4Truth
May 25th, 2015, 05:30 PM
When even the Catholics in Ireland realize they need to change their tune you realize it's over except for the mopping up operations.

Its nothing new that Catholics have sidestepped Gods word. Thats been happening a very long time.

Granite
May 25th, 2015, 05:33 PM
Well the Irish people are the ones you should be really annoyed with given recent news but yes, when the church there realizes how out of touch it is, it signals a bit of a wake up call.

Angel4Truth
May 25th, 2015, 05:46 PM
Well the Irish people are the ones you should be really annoyed with given recent news but yes, when the church there realizes how out of touch it is, it signals a bit of a wake up call.

Why should i be annoyed that cafeteria christians, are eating something else unhealthy off the buffet they pick and choose from themselves?

Ive known a long long time that most Catholics don't really believe what they say they do. Most (not all) "i used to be a christian" turned atheist are ex catholics from all those ive known.

By far that's the largest group of "ex-Christians" that Ive met. They say once they actually read the bible, they see it doesn't match what their church teaches. A great many catholic doesn't practice it either except on holidays, their "Christianity" is more "tradition" or infant baptism, but has nothing to do with actual faith.

jamie
May 25th, 2015, 05:50 PM
This thread is about churches...


What you don't seem to realize is that churches are people. I'm just not as judgmental about people as you are.

Angel4Truth
May 25th, 2015, 05:54 PM
What you don't seem to realize is that churches are people. I'm just not as judgmental about people as you are.

Please stop with the lame attempts to hijack the topic, this thread is clearly about church groups/denominations (you know that too which is why you cut off the quote) Make your own thread.

Granite
May 25th, 2015, 06:13 PM
Why should i be annoyed that cafeteria christians, are eating something else unhealthy off the buffet they pick and choose from themselves?

Say that to an Irishman's face, I dare ya.:chuckle:


Ive known a long long time that most Catholics don't really believe what they say they do. Most (not all) "i used to be a christian" turned atheist are ex catholics from all those ive known.

My experience differs but then again we probably swam in different streams.

About 83% of Ireland identifies as Catholic. Nice that you're willing to dismiss most of an entire country as indifferent and or milquetoast about their faith when it's likelier they decided to simply disagree on one issue--says nothing about how devout they are, really.

My people are northern Protestants, so maybe it's no skin off my nose.:cheers:

jamie
May 25th, 2015, 06:44 PM
Please stop with the lame attempts to hijack the topic, this thread is clearly about church groups/denominations (you know that too which is why you cut off the quote) Make your own thread.


You're the one who brought up the subject with regard to baptism. I just responded to what you posted and you don't have to be so defensive.

kmoney
May 25th, 2015, 07:36 PM
How is it a compromise? Looks like the pro-gay side got everything they would want. :idunno:

Granite
May 26th, 2015, 06:07 AM
How is it a compromise? Looks like the pro-gay side got everything they would want. :idunno:

To put it another way, "Most of the country made the right decision."

musterion
May 26th, 2015, 07:12 AM
I cant see the southern baptists ever caving on this issue.

Once upon a time I'd have agreed. They may take longer than the rest but with big baptists like Warren holding hands with Catholics, Oprah and Elton the sodomite, it'll happen. There may be a split before its over but it'll happen.

musterion
May 26th, 2015, 07:18 AM
Check this too. Old news but...

http://apprising.org/2010/02/05/southern-baptist-convention-embracing-the-emerging-church/

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 09:31 AM
Is bigotry and prejudice acceptable toward people outside our faith?

We all realize homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of God at Jesus' coming to establish his kingdom on earth. So does that mean we should denigrate them and express contempt for them? Is that what Jesus meant by loving your neighbor?

Ok, Angel I'm ready for your next neg rep, fire away.

musterion
May 26th, 2015, 09:50 AM
God called homosexuality "detestable." Do you think He no longer finds it so?

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 12:33 PM
God called homosexuality "detestable." Do you think He no longer finds it so?


Detestable people will not enter God's kingdom when Christ appears to the world. Detestable people must wait until we teach them not to be detestable.

The bottom line is that people are people who are incomplete without the Holy Spirit. I'm surprised that you have not realized people without the Spirit are incomplete.

musterion
May 26th, 2015, 03:18 PM
Detestable people will not enter God's kingdom when Christ appears to the world. Detestable people must wait until we teach them not to be detestable.

You didn't answer the question. Does God still detest it or not?

And who is 'we'?

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 03:26 PM
You didn't answer the question. Does God still detest it or not?

And who is 'we'?


We are the bride of Christ, flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones. We serve as the priests of the Holy Spirit.

If fornication was not detestable it would not have been precluded by the apostles and elders at the Jerusalem conference.

Are you thinking fornication is just a homosexual behavior? If so, why?

musterion
May 26th, 2015, 03:55 PM
You didn't answer the question. Who is 'we'?

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 04:59 PM
You didn't answer the question. Who is 'we'?


We are the bride of Christ, flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones. We serve as the priests of the Holy Spirit.

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 05:02 PM
So is transgender a mental problem or a physical problem?

Someone said, "And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness." (Romans 8:10 NKJV)

If Paul is right about the body being dead then what is the problem with corrective surgery? In other words, God is after our mind not our body.

Paul also said, "For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit." (Romans 8:5 NKJV)

Does God care about the things of the flesh or does he care about living according to the Spirit?

You ask that as if living according to the Spirit includes mutilating your body because you cannot accept the gender that you were born with and celebrating your continuing in sins that are unto death.

Didn't John say Christians were not to pray for brothers that continued in sins that are unto death? (1 John 5:16)

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 05:04 PM
We are the bride of Christ, flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones. We serve as the priests of the Holy Spirit.

As priests of God, we are supposed to put a difference between holy and profane, clean and unclean, aren't we?


Ezekiel 22:26
26 Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane, neither have they shewed difference between the unclean and the clean, and have hid their eyes from my sabbaths, and I am profaned among them.

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 05:21 PM
As priests of God, we are supposed to put a difference between holy and profane, clean and unclean, aren't we?

Ezekiel 22:26
26 Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane, neither have they shewed difference between the unclean and the clean, and have hid their eyes from my sabbaths, and I am profaned among them.


Then he (Peter) said to them, "You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean." (Acts 10:28 NKJV)

It's not yet our time to judge other people. If someone is committing an unrighteous act we don't have to judge them, the Holy Spirit judges them according to God's word, i.e. scripture.

For one thing, sins committed in the mind may not show in the flesh, but yet they are still sins.

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 05:24 PM
Then he (Peter) said to them, "You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean." (Acts 10:28 NKJV)


Acts 11:18
18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

It is a shame that the homosexuals have refused the repentance unto life, which means that they are still dead in their sins.

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 05:27 PM
You ask that as if living according to the Spirit includes mutilating your body because you cannot accept the gender that you were born with and celebrating your continuing in sins that are unto death.


If a person is practicing a sin unto death he will die.


All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death. (1 John 5:17 NKJV)

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 05:31 PM
Acts 11:18
18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

It is a shame that the homosexuals have refused the repentance unto life, which means that they are still dead in their sins.


Yes, and the sex of the persons engaging in fornication is immaterial. Fornication is sin.

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 05:47 PM
If a person is practicing a sin unto death he will die.


All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death. (1 John 5:17 NKJV)
Homosexuality is listed as a sin unto death, as are a number of other sins.

Leviticus 20:13
13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

It should no more be named among Christians than the incestous adultery that Paul called out in the letters to the Corinthians, which was also a sin undo death.

1 Corinthians 5:1-2
1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.

Leviticus 20:11
11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

That man was put out of the church while he was an unrepentant sinner.

1 Corinthians 5:11
11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

But after he repented he was restored to fellowship.

2 Corinthians 2:6-8
6 Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.
7 So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.
8 Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.

You are making a claim that Christians are to welcome unrepentant sinners into their fellowships and let their sins remain upon them.

I am making the claim that Christians are not allow unrepentant sinners to be in their fellowship until they repent, but Christians are to welcome repentant sinners.

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 05:58 PM
You are making a claim that Christians are to welcome unrepentant sinners into their fellowships and let their sins remain upon them.


I didn't say anything like that.

God so loved the world (unbelievers) that he sent his only begotten Son that through him the world (unbelievers) might be saved. Not to remain in sin but to repent of sin and turn from it.


For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.
(Romans 8:13 NKJV)

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 06:04 PM
I didn't say anything like that.

God so loved the world (unbelievers) that he sent his only begotten Son that through him the world (unbelievers) might be saved. Not to remain in sin but to repent of sin and turn from it.


For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.
(Romans 8:13 NKJV)

Here is the title of the thread:
United Methodists Propose to Change ‘Church Law’ to Allow Homosexual Behavior

From your comments, I got the impression that you were supporting Homosexual behavior among church-goers.

I am glad we have come to an agreement that Homosexuals must repent of their deeds in order to receive life.

Angel4Truth
May 26th, 2015, 06:14 PM
Here is the title of the thread:
United Methodists Propose to Change ‘Church Law’ to Allow Homosexual Behavior

From your comments, I got the impression that you were supporting Homosexual behavior among church-goers.

I am glad we have come to an agreement that Homosexuals must repent of their deeds in order to receive life.

:thumb:

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 06:15 PM
1 Corinthians 5:11
11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

I am making the claim that Christians are not allow unrepentant sinners to be in their fellowship until they repent, but Christians are to welcome repentant sinners.


Jesus ate with unrepentant sinners.


When Jesus heard it He said to them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." (Mark 2:17 NKJV)

Angel4Truth
May 26th, 2015, 06:16 PM
Jesus ate with unrepentant sinners.


When Jesus heard it He said to them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." (Mark 2:17 NKJV)

And then told them to sin no more. He didnt say your sin is ok and will now be acceptable and that He didnt think it was sin anymore. Do you have anything to say about the actual topic yet or do you intend to continue to troll?

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 06:18 PM
Jesus ate with unrepentant sinners.
The only unrepentant sinners that Jesus ate with were the Pharisees.

Matthew 23:13
13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
But He gave His disciples instructions on what to do when they came across unrepentant sinners.

Matthew 10:11-14
11 And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
12 And when ye come into an house, salute it.
13 And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.
14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 06:41 PM
Here is the title of the thread:
United Methodists Propose to Change ‘Church Law’ to Allow Homosexual Behavior

From your comments, I got the impression that you were supporting Homosexual behavior among church-goers.

I am glad we have come to an agreement that Homosexuals must repent of their deeds in order to receive life.


I am speaking against bigotry and prejudice.

Homosexuals are no different in nature than heterosexuals who can also sin.

If the Methodists choose not to discriminate that is fine with me. For one thing I am not a Methodist so whatever they choose to do is not my business and I am not going to criticize them for not discriminating. There are already plenty of people who discriminate.

This thread proves that.

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 06:45 PM
The only unrepentant sinners that Jesus ate with were the Pharisees.


Actually, it was the Pharisees who complained.


And when the scribes and Pharisees saw Him eating with the tax collectors and sinners, they said to His disciples, “How is it that He eats and drinks with tax collectors and sinners?” (Mark 2:16 NKJV)

Not all sinners in Jesus' day were Pharisees.

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 06:50 PM
Do you have anything to say about the actual topic yet or do you intend to continue to troll?


Everything I posted is about the Methodists or anyone else not discriminating. If a congregation discriminates against one group of people where does it stop?

The problem as I see it is your unwillingness to dialogue.

Sealeaf
May 26th, 2015, 07:01 PM
I notice that everyone quotes the OT against homosexuality. Why not quote what Jesus said about it?

jamie
May 26th, 2015, 07:04 PM
Ok, I probably should never have said anything. It should be obvious to everyone that I don't know much about this Bible stuff.

And that's okay, patience is an aspect of God's Spirit. But then so is gentleness. I don't give neg reps because I don't consider that as being gentle.

But then I don't know much about Bible stuff and you guys have not helped me learn.

What I'm hearing is that we should love our neighbor unless we can find some excuse for not doing so.

:wave:

Angel4Truth
May 26th, 2015, 07:12 PM
I notice that everyone quotes the OT against homosexuality. Why not quote what Jesus said about it?

Jesus said if a man cannot handle marriage between a man and a woman as He created it, then they are to remain celibate - see matthew chapter 19.

Marriage - its purpose and definition was made clear.

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 10:00 PM
I am speaking against bigotry and prejudice.
No, you are not, you just have been fooled into believing that you are.

You are speaking against condemnation of unrepentant sin.

If a man is having sex with his father's wife, Paul's condemnation of him for his unrepentant sin is not bigotry and prejudice.
There is no respect of persons with God.
He will judge all, whether they are rich or poor, for their sins with the same standard that He wrote into His Law and gave to Moses.

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 10:01 PM
Not all sinners in Jesus' day were Pharisees.
The unrepentant sinners that Jesus ate with were Pharisees.

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 10:02 PM
I notice that everyone quotes the OT against homosexuality. Why not quote what Jesus said about it?
Okay.

Matthew 5:18-19
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

genuineoriginal
May 26th, 2015, 10:05 PM
Ok, I probably should never have said anything. It should be obvious to everyone that I don't know much about this Bible stuff.

And that's okay, patience is an aspect of God's Spirit. But then so is gentleness. I don't give neg reps because I don't consider that as being gentle.

But then I don't know much about Bible stuff and you guys have not helped me learn.

What I'm hearing is that we should love our neighbor unless we can find some excuse for not doing so.

:wave:
Read the first of these verses.

Leviticus 19:17-18
17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord.
Not condemning the sin of homosexuality is hating the homosexual straight to hell, whether you call it non-discrimination, anti-bigotry, or some other term.

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 05:46 AM
No, you are not, you just have been fooled into believing that you are.

You are speaking against condemnation of unrepentant sin.

If a man is having sex with his father's wife, Paul's condemnation of him for his unrepentant sin is not bigotry and prejudice.
There is no respect of persons with God.
He will judge all, whether they are rich or poor, for their sins with the same standard that He wrote into His Law and gave to Moses.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

Paul wrote, "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, 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."
(1 Corinthians 5:4-5 NKJV)

This man was part of the Corinthian congregation.

The Methodist organization decided not to discriminate against a certain group of people who were not members of the Methodist organization.

Two totally different scenarios.

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 05:48 AM
The unrepentant sinners that Jesus ate with were Pharisees.


What verse?

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 05:55 AM
Read the first of these verses.

Leviticus 19:17-18
17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord.


Do you adhere to everything in the obsolete Law of Moses?

The Mosaic law had a different priesthood than the NT congregations of God. The Hebrews' priesthood descended from Aaron of the tribe of Levi. Jesus didn't.

Granite
May 27th, 2015, 06:32 AM
The unrepentant sinners that Jesus ate with were Pharisees.

Oh, really. Each and every time?

Not much of a scriptural case can be made for this ridiculous claim at all.

One or perhaps two Pharisees invited him to supper. Usually the carpenter was found with the very "sinners" the Pharisees sneered at. Some things never change.

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 07:57 AM
Usually the carpenter was found with the very "sinners" the Pharisees sneered at. Some things never change.


:thumb: So true.

Spiritual Pharisees are alive and well today.

genuineoriginal
May 27th, 2015, 08:38 AM
You're comparing apples and oranges.

Paul wrote, "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, 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."
(1 Corinthians 5:4-5 NKJV)

This man was part of the Corinthian congregation.

The Methodist organization decided not to discriminate against a certain group of people who were not members of the Methodist organization.

Two totally different scenarios.
From the article in the OP:
"The adjustments would allow those who are open and practicing homosexuals to serve as clergy, and would remove any mention of homosexual behavior as being a violation of biblical laws or being “incompatible with Christian teachings.” Language would also be removed that prohibited clergy from officiating over same-sex ceremonies."

Based on this, it appears that the Methodist organization is actively celebrating that they have members that are acting in complete violation of God's Law, they are even making those unrepentant sinners the clergy of the Methodist organization.

It appears that the Corinthians were no where near as corrupt as the Methodists are today.

genuineoriginal
May 27th, 2015, 08:39 AM
Oh, really. Each and every time?

Not much of a scriptural case can be made for this ridiculous claim at all.

One or perhaps two Pharisees invited him to supper. Usually the carpenter was found with the very "sinners" the Pharisees sneered at. Some things never change.

The sinners that the Pharisees sneered at repented of their sins, according to the text.
The Pharisees were unrepentant sinners.

Big difference.

genuineoriginal
May 27th, 2015, 08:40 AM
Do you adhere to everything in the obsolete Law of Moses?

Do you think Moses invented it, or do you think that it came from the mouth of God Himself?

Think carefully before you answer, your salvation could depend on you getting it right.

Granite
May 27th, 2015, 08:41 AM
The sinners that the Pharisees sneered at repented of their sins, according to the text.
The Pharisees were unrepentant sinners.

Big difference.

"The unrepentant sinners that Jesus ate with were Pharisees" has little or no scriptural basis at all--there are one, maybe two exceptions. You got this wrong. Own it and move on.

kiwimacahau
May 27th, 2015, 09:08 AM
Homosexuality is no more inherently sinful than heterosexuality.

User Name
May 27th, 2015, 09:12 AM
I expect the Rome will get there before all the protties go over, though.

Vatican says Ireland gay marriage vote is 'defeat for humanity' (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/26/vatican-ireland-gay-marriage-referendum-vote-defeat-for-humanity)

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 09:21 AM
Think carefully before you answer, your salvation could depend on you getting it right.


Hyperbole at its finest.

:rotfl:

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 09:27 AM
Do you think Moses invented it, or do you think that it came from the mouth of God Himself?


Because of a lack of faith the Holy Spirit gave Israel instructions for loving God and neighbor.


What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made... (Galatians 3:19 NKJV)

If the Seed has come then the Mosaic law is no longer needed. The Torah precludes Jesus from being a priest. That is unacceptable.

kmoney
May 27th, 2015, 04:39 PM
To put it another way, "Most of the country made the right decision."

I wasn't trying to comment on the decision's rightness, just that it doesn't seem like a compromise. What else could they want on the pro-gay side? If that's a compromise I'd hate to think what would have happened if the pro-gay side got their way completely. :eek:

Angel4Truth
May 27th, 2015, 04:42 PM
I wasn't trying to comment on the decision's rightness, just that it doesn't seem like a compromise. What else could they want on the pro-gay side? If that's a compromise I'd hate to think what would have happened if the pro-gay side got their way completely. :eek:

1) There would be no marriage other than gay marriage
2) There would be absolutely no teachings or voiced opinions about homosexuality
3) all bibles would be rewritten to remove "hate speech" against gays
4) All who disagree would be removed from the church, lose their business be forced into diversity training and or jail.

kmoney
May 27th, 2015, 04:48 PM
Is bigotry and prejudice acceptable toward people outside our faith?

This isn't about people who are outside the faith. At least not just that.

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 05:07 PM
This isn't about people who are outside the faith. At least not just that.


Fornicators are not outside the church? You're kidding, right?

If they were believers they wouldn't be indifferent to scripture.

kmoney
May 27th, 2015, 05:08 PM
Fornicators are not outside the church? You're kidding, right?

They are allowing open homosexuals to be clergy. Clergy aren't outside the church.

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 05:31 PM
They are allowing open homosexuals to be clergy. Clergy aren't outside the church.


Is that according to you or according to scripture?

Credentialed or not fornicators are fornicators are fornicators, etc.

Angel4Truth
May 27th, 2015, 05:53 PM
Fornicators are not outside the church? You're kidding, right?

If they were believers they wouldn't be indifferent to scripture.

You still dont understand what this thread about do you, or you just dont care.

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 06:27 PM
You still dont understand what this thread about do you...


This thread is about a church group caving to the world instead of following God.



Another church group caving to the world instead of following God.

Angel4Truth
May 27th, 2015, 06:28 PM
This thread is about a church group caving to the world instead of following God.

yes, denominations, and you are talking about those outside the church.

Ktoyou
May 27th, 2015, 06:39 PM
So is transgender a mental problem or a physical problem?

Someone said, "And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness." (Romans 8:10 NKJV)

If Paul is right about the body being dead then what is the problem with corrective surgery? In other words, God is after our mind not our body.

Paul also said, "For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit." (Romans 8:5 NKJV)

Does God care about the things of the flesh or does he care about living according to the Spirit?

This is two-sided; those who were mislabeled, in that respect by anomaly, is not matter, but those who need a body identity seem pretty fleshy to me?

Ktoyou
May 27th, 2015, 06:42 PM
The United Methodist Church has always been liberal. As the Anglican church has always been political.

jamie
May 27th, 2015, 06:47 PM
yes, denominations, and you are talking about those outside the church.

A denomination that rejects scripture is not a congregation of Jesus Christ.


And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. (John 12:47 NKJV)

The Methodists obviously do not believe Jesus' word and Jesus does not judge them.

My point all along is that if Jesus is not judging those who do not believe then why should we. Fornicators are simply not part of Jesus' congregation. (period)

Ktoyou
May 27th, 2015, 07:31 PM
I am speaking against bigotry and prejudice.

Homosexuals are no different in nature than heterosexuals who can also sin.

If the Methodists choose not to discriminate that is fine with me. For one thing I am not a Methodist so whatever they choose to do is not my business and I am not going to criticize them for not discriminating. There are already plenty of people who discriminate.

This thread proves that.

I think you have been taken in too much by secular ideology of human moral superiority?

Granite
May 28th, 2015, 05:52 AM
1) There would be no marriage other than gay marriage
2) There would be absolutely no teachings or voiced opinions about homosexuality
3) all bibles would be rewritten to remove "hate speech" against gays
4) All who disagree would be removed from the church, lose their business be forced into diversity training and or jail.

Sooooooooo it looks like you were in a mood.:chuckle:

Dan Emanuel
May 28th, 2015, 11:01 AM
So will almost every other Prot denomination before too awful long.I don't know that its this dire, but perhaps.

Then the Mormons will follow suitI doubt it, but perhaps.

just to keep appearing to "fit in."Do Mormon's do that? I didn't know.... My impression of Mormon's has always been that they don't care to fit in, and that their just fine with that.

I expect the Rome will get there before all the protties go over, though.You mean Peter? No way.

Since even professing Bible believers are fading, they all need to start competing for them new demographics...queers, trannies, people who dress up like animals (I expect we'll live to see a service especially for them, with the "minister" dressed like a skunk), etc..........Not out of Peter. No way.


Daniel

Dan Emanuel
May 28th, 2015, 11:03 AM
How is it a compromise? Looks like the pro-gay side got everything they would want. :idunno:Yeah, I agree with you. What more could they want?


Daniel

Dan Emanuel
May 28th, 2015, 11:06 AM
God called homosexuality "detestable." Do you think He no longer finds it so?As He does all sin, yes, definitely.


Daniel

Dan Emanuel
May 28th, 2015, 11:07 AM
Yes, and the sex of the persons engaging in fornication is immaterial. Fornication is sin.I agree.


Daniel

Dan Emanuel
May 28th, 2015, 11:12 AM
From the article in the OP:
"The adjustments would allow those who are open and practicing homosexuals to serve as clergy, and would remove any mention of homosexual behavior as being a violation of biblical laws or being “incompatible with Christian teachings.” Language would also be removed that prohibited clergy from officiating over same-sex ceremonies."

Based on this, it appears that the Methodist organization is actively celebrating that they have members that are acting in complete violation of God's Law, they are even making those unrepentant sinners the clergy of the Methodist organization.

It appears that the Corinthians were no where near as corrupt as the Methodists are today.I agree, and I further note that Peter is not corrupt in this issue at all.


Daniel

Dan Emanuel
May 28th, 2015, 11:14 AM
Homosexuality is no more inherently sinful than heterosexuality.I think Jamie clarified for us that we're really talking about fornication --homosexual or heterosexual. A homosexual who does not fornicate is no more sinning than a heterosexual who also does not fornicate.


Daniel

Dan Emanuel
May 28th, 2015, 11:15 AM
Vatican says Ireland gay marriage vote is 'defeat for humanity' (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/26/vatican-ireland-gay-marriage-referendum-vote-defeat-for-humanity)Of course Peter did.


Daniel

Dan Emanuel
May 28th, 2015, 11:17 AM
1) There would be no marriage other than gay marriage
2) There would be absolutely no teachings or voiced opinions about homosexuality
3) all bibles would be rewritten to remove "hate speech" against gays
4) All who disagree would be removed from the church, lose their business be forced into diversity training and or jail.Wow, so I guess they're is a silver lining to this cloud afterall. At least its not that bad.


Daniel

Angel4Truth
May 28th, 2015, 05:49 PM
A denomination that rejects scripture is not a congregation of Jesus Christ.



Very good, you are finally getting the point.

Town Heretic
May 28th, 2015, 06:13 PM
Another denomination that does not believe the literal word of God.
No, just some within it. The end result, if there are sufficient numbers, will be a splitting up of the denomination. It's happened before. Sad to see a church failing to uphold its own truth, but that's one reason my church left the Presbyterian fold it was a part of not too long ago.

Angel4Truth
May 30th, 2015, 12:30 AM
I wasn't trying to comment on the decision's rightness, just that it doesn't seem like a compromise. What else could they want on the pro-gay side? If that's a compromise I'd hate to think what would have happened if the pro-gay side got their way completely. :eek:


1) There would be no marriage other than gay marriage
2) There would be absolutely no teachings or voiced opinions about homosexuality
3) all bibles would be rewritten to remove "hate speech" against gays
4) All who disagree would be removed from the church, lose their business be forced into diversity training and or jail.


Sooooooooo it looks like you were in a mood.:chuckle:

Mood? No, just what it looks like they want now. Examples (of many)

#1)Why cant gay people ban straight marriage? (https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110212211745AAfxry0)

#2)Pastor faces lawsuit for preaching against homosexuality (http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/anti-gay-pastor-facing-federal-lawsuit-for-crimes-against-humanity.html)

#3 ‘Gay’ Activist’s Call for Churches to Be Forced to Take Homosexuality Off ‘Sin List’ Draws Concerns (http://christiannews.net/2015/05/27/gay-activists-call-for-churches-to-be-forced-to-take-homosexuality-off-sin-list-draws-concerns/)

#4) Cakes by Melissa 135,000 fine and shut down (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/24/ore-panel-proposes-135k-fine-sweet-cakes-melissa/?page=all) (i could post examples for this # all day long and you know it

Wasnt it just 5 years or so ago that the gays said we just want to be left alone and would never try to force you to agree or go along with it?

:think:

musterion
May 30th, 2015, 06:39 AM
Trying to reason with Granite is like trying to reason with granite.

Angel4Truth
August 9th, 2015, 01:58 PM
Another well known pastor comes out in support of gay rights and churches.

T.D. Jakes Comes Out for ‘Gay Rights’ and ‘LGBT Churches,’ Says Position is ‘Evolving’ (http://christiannews.net/2015/08/07/t-d-jakes-comes-out-for-gay-marriage-and-lgbt-churches-says-position-is-evolving/)


Megachurch leader and author T.D. Jakes says that homosexuals should attend congregations that affirm their lifestyle and that politics do not need to reflect biblical ethics, adding that his position on homosexuality is both “evolved and evolving.”

During an interview with the Huffington Post on Monday, Jakes was asked by a viewer if he believes that homosexuals and the black church can co-exist.

“Absolutely… I think it is going to be diverse from church to church. Every church has a different opinion on the issue and every gay person is different,” he replied. “And I think that to speak that the church—the black church, the white church or any kind of church you wanna call it—are all the same, is totally not true.”

Jakes said that he thinks homosexuals should find congregations that affirm their lifestyle.

“LGBT’s of different types and sorts have to find a place of worship that reflects what your views are and what you believe like anyone else,” he outlined.

“The church should have the right to have its own convictions and values; if you don’t like those convictions and values [and] you totally disagree with it, don’t try to change my house, move into your own … and find somebody who gets what you get about faith,” Jakes added.

He said that the issue of homosexuality is “complex.”

“Paul spends a lot of time wrestling back and forth, trying to understand should a woman wear a head covering, should you cut your hair,” Jakes stated. “I mean, they grappled back then and we’re grappling now because we’re humans and we are flawed and we’re not God.”

“Once you understand you’re not God, you leave yourself an ‘out’ clause to grow,” he said.

When asked if his position on homosexuality has “evolved,” Jakes agreed that it has.

“Evolved and evolving,” he replied. “I think that where I am is to better understand we, the church, bought into the myth that this is a Christian nation.”

Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states must legalize same-sex “marriage,” igniting a battle between the Church and State over the issue. In his comments on Monday, Jakes advocated for the separation of Church and State, which would allow for “all types of people” to have whatever rights they desire despite biblical prohibitions. He said that politics don’t need to be based on Christianity.

“[O]nce you get past [thinking America is a Christian nation] … Once you begin to understand that democracy—that a republic actually—is designed to be an overarching system to protect our unique nuances, then we no longer look for public policy to reflect biblical ethics,” Jakes explained.

“If we can divide—or what you would call separation of Church and State—then we can dwell together more effectively because atheists, agnostics, Jews, all types of people, Muslims, pay into the government. The government then cannot reflect one particular view over another just because we’re the dominant group of religious people in [this] country because those numbers are changing every day,” he asserted. “We need a neutralized government that protects our right to disagree with one another and agree with one another.”

Jakes had visited the Huffington Post to discuss his new book on “destiny.” The interview focused on motivational subject matter in following one’s dreams and passions as opposed to the eternal destiny of the soul.

eddie17
August 9th, 2015, 02:00 PM
Oh no,thats awful,the word of God is no good to them it seems.

aikido7
August 9th, 2015, 02:09 PM
United Methodists Propose to Change ‘Church Law’ to Allow Homosexual Behavior (http://christiannews.net/2015/05/23/united-methodists-propose-to-change-church-law-to-allow-homosexual-behavior/)



Another church group caving to the world instead of following God.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~

Edit: Will be adding churches and church groups and pastors who cave on this issue - if you know of any, please add them to this thread.

Just added: - see this post in this thread: T.D. Jakes Comes Out for ‘Gay Rights’ and ‘LGBT Churches,’ Says Position is ‘Evolving’ http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4411589&postcount=89Even the gospels bent to the world.

From Paul to the Book of Revelations, the text clearly shows the influence of different ideas and theologies as Christianity developed.

This fact seems a surprise to most traditional Christians. And fundamentalists of every stripe reject it outright.

But it is a fact of history that things change. And they sometimes end up the opposite of those earlier events.

Angel4Truth
August 11th, 2015, 03:40 PM
Another well known pastor comes out in support of gay rights and churches.

T.D. Jakes Comes Out for ‘Gay Rights’ and ‘LGBT Churches,’ Says Position is ‘Evolving’ (http://christiannews.net/2015/08/07/t-d-jakes-comes-out-for-gay-marriage-and-lgbt-churches-says-position-is-evolving/)

Update, TD Jakes says that huffington post lied about what he said.

Bishop T.D. Jakes Says He Has Not 'Evolved' on Homosexuality and Does Not 'Endorse' Gay Marriage
The Potter's House Pastor Clarifies Positions After HuffPost Live Interview Prompts Confusion Among Some (http://www.christianpost.com/news/bishop-t-d-jakes-says-he-has-not-evolved-on-homosexuality-and-does-not-endorse-gay-marriage-142427/)


Jakes took to his Facebook account on Sunday to blast a news report that suggested his HuffPost Live appearance indicated that his opinion of homosexuality was both "evolved and evolving" and that the Dallas, Texas, minister had "come out for gay rights and LGBT churches."

"Do not take everything you read online or hear repeated as truth. When asked about the 'black church' and its role in ministering to gay people, I briefly mentioned (we were running out of time) the word 'evolved and evolving' regarding my approach over the 39 years of my ministry to gay people who choose to come to our services," Jakes said in his Facebook post. "I simply meant that my method is evolving — not my message. I was SHOCKED to read that this was manipulated in a subsequent article to say I endorsed same sex [sic] marriage! My position on the subject has been steadfast and rooted in scripture [sic]."

Jakes, 58, concluded: "For the record, I do not endorse same sex [sic] marriage but I respect the rights that this country affords those that disagree with me."

Angel4Truth
September 15th, 2015, 08:14 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3212938/Man-proposes-boyfriend-Texas-Methodist-Church-prohibits-gay-marriage-gets-standing-ovation-congregation.html

The First United Methodist Church of Austin - the entire congregation celebrated as a gay stood on the altar of the church and proposed to his boyfriend - even though The United Methodist Church forbids same-sex ceremonies from being conducted in Methodist churches or by Methodist ministers.

Another church in bed with the the world.

Town Heretic
September 15th, 2015, 08:46 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3212938/Man-proposes-boyfriend-Texas-Methodist-Church-prohibits-gay-marriage-gets-standing-ovation-congregation.html

The First United Methodist Church of Austin - the entire congregation celebrated as a gay stood on the altar of the church and proposed to his boyfriend - even though The United Methodist Church forbids same-sex ceremonies from being conducted in Methodist churches or by Methodist ministers.

Another church in bed with the the world.
Just some of it. Same thing has happened to a number of churches in this country. Our Presbyterian church split over it, leaving the PSCU to join with the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC).

turbosixx
September 15th, 2015, 09:52 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3212938/Man-proposes-boyfriend-Texas-Methodist-Church-prohibits-gay-marriage-gets-standing-ovation-congregation.html

The First United Methodist Church of Austin - the entire congregation celebrated as a gay stood on the altar of the church and proposed to his boyfriend - even though The United Methodist Church forbids same-sex ceremonies from being conducted in Methodist churches or by Methodist ministers.

Another church in bed with the the world.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if what most everyone on here claims is true then there should be no problem. Once we believe there is nothing we can do to be or stay saved.

Acts 16:31 They said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household."

genuineoriginal
September 16th, 2015, 09:44 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if what most everyone on here claims is true then there should be no problem. Once we believe there is nothing we can do to be or stay saved.

Acts 16:31 They said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household."
God has not changed His mind on what constitutes sin nor has God changed His demands that His people live according to His standards of righteousness.

Christian Liberty
September 16th, 2015, 10:54 AM
Just some of it. Same thing has happened to a number of churches in this country. Our Presbyterian church split over it, leaving the PSCU to join with the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC).


The PCUSA is totally apostate and the EPC is not far behind. These are terrible Presbyterian denominations. The PCA, OPC, and RPCNA are far better from what I can tell (a few smaller, more explicitly theonomic ones as well that are really solid.)

meshak
September 16th, 2015, 12:30 PM
Most churches accommodate the world. The most infamous one is approving to join the military and engaging in war for their members.

There is nothing new under the sun.

Their standards are the same as the world.