ELCA changes stance on gay pastors

[FlaSoxxJim]

PA, I think that last response to me was really well reasoned and put together, and i appreciate the time you took to do that. And I think you and i arrive at the same critical upshot in discussing theses passages, namely, even if David and Jonathan had a sexual relationship it is but a mere footnote to the story.

 

And that's the point I hope to one day see extended well beyond this singular instance and to people in general. Sexual orientation and behavior is pretty much a footnote for all of us -- one small component of what makes us us. But so many people think it should be THE defining measure of a person's worth (not you, PA, and you know I've never sold you as short as your posts woud suggest).

 

You're the ond who knows the scriptures and can weak the numbers, but if out of the million verses in the Bible, why do the seven or eight alluding to homosexuality take on such prominence and inform the marching orders of anti-gay Christian extremism (which I do not equate with mainstream Christianity)? I assume it's because it appears to be a divine justification for the fear and hate that exists in these peoples' hearts.

[Texsox]

Jim,

 

While this wasn't directed at me, as usual, I will weigh in.

 

For those that believe, there are no small passages in the Bible. The word of God does not have to be repeated a set number of times before it has value. I do agree that some people will cherry pick verses to fit their view of the world. We do that in all areas of our lives, from politics to religion.

 

Next in this mix is the subject of witnessing, of bringing others to God. Each faith takes a different path with this, from those that will go door to door, to those with a more quiet approach. Of course, individuals take their own path as well. The most powerful example of that in my life was an incredible man I worked with who showed how much fun you could have and still look your Pastor in the eyes on Sunday. (Brian, thank you wherever you are, I miss you)

 

So now we have people of faith who read the Bible and want to put their faith to work and bring others to Jesus. Some even believe they are commanded to do so. Some will quietly lead a life that encourages others to follow and still others will stand on a street corner and preach. I'm personally uncomfortable with street corner sermons and think they turn off more than they help. For others, they try for the easy sell. Taking two extremes, would be easier to tell you your life could be a little happier if you started going to Church, but your already a nice person and I'm certain God will accept you just the way you are, or tell someone they are going to Hell and need to change? Some opt for the going to hell route. And what are some of the quickest ways for a one way ticket on the long black train? Certainly homosexuality has become the new Communism.

 

And people of faith are involved in many areas, and it's sad that a couple hot button topics steal all the press and form people's opinions. But each person gravitates to areas they are interested in. Human rights, abortion, capital punishment, living wage, health care, poverty, homosexuality, environment, immigration, etc. And every person will prioritize that list differently.

 

Does God really care if Michael is homosexual? That is a question that I have not invested any time or effort to understand. I choose to be involved in different areas. My hunch is he cares that Michael is leading a good Christian life, including attending Church.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Jim,

 

While this wasn't directed at me, as usual, I will weigh in.

 

For those that believe, there are no small passages in the Bible. The word of God does not have to be repeated a set number of times before it has value. I do agree that some people will cherry pick verses to fit their view of the world. We do that in all areas of our lives, from politics to religion.

 

If there are no small passages in the Bible, how do you square the omission and or subordination of the Deuterocanonicals and the so-called Biblical Apocrypha (including Tobit, Judith, Esdras portions of Esthera nd Daniel, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, Baruch, Maccabees and others) from various versions of the Bible?

 

Next in this mix is the subject of witnessing, of bringing others to God. Each faith takes a different path with this, from those that will go door to door, to those with a more quiet approach. Of course, individuals take their own path as well. The most powerful example of that in my life was an incredible man I worked with who showed how much fun you could have and still look your Pastor in the eyes on Sunday. (Brian, thank you wherever you are, I miss you)

 

So now we have people of faith who read the Bible and want to put their faith to work and bring others to Jesus. Some even believe they are commanded to do so. Some will quietly lead a life that encourages others to follow and still others will stand on a street corner and preach. I'm personally uncomfortable with street corner sermons and think they turn off more than they help. For others, they try for the easy sell. Taking two extremes, would be easier to tell you your life could be a little happier if you started going to Church, but your already a nice person and I'm certain God will accept you just the way you are, or tell someone they are going to Hell and need to change? Some opt for the going to hell route. And what are some of the quickest ways for a one way ticket on the long black train? Certainly homosexuality has become the new Communism.

 

And people of faith are involved in many areas, and it's sad that a couple hot button topics steal all the press and form people's opinions. But each person gravitates to areas they are interested in. Human rights, abortion, capital punishment, living wage, health care, poverty, homosexuality, environment, immigration, etc. And every person will prioritize that list differently.

 

Does God really care if Michael is homosexual? That is a question that I have not invested any time or effort to understand. I choose to be involved in different areas. My hunch is he cares that Michael is leading a good Christian life, including attending Church.

 

I'm, obviously, less suited to discuss the living, practicing, heeding-the-calling, aspects of faith. But I think you're assessment is quite good.

[sox4lifeinPA]

If there are no small passages in the Bible, how do you square the omission and or subordination of the Deuterocanonicals and the so-called Biblical Apocrypha (including Tobit, Judith, Esdras portions of Esthera nd Daniel, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, Baruch, Maccabees and others) from various versions of the Bible?

I'm, obviously, less suited to discuss the living, practicing, heeding-the-calling, aspects of faith. But I think you're assessment is quite good.

 

Here's more or less how canonization of books in the bible works for most protestants. Each book must meet all 4 requirements:

 

1. Apostolic Origin — attributed to and based on the preaching/teaching of the first-generation apostles (or their close companions).

 

2. Universal Acceptance — acknowledged by all major Christian communities in the ancient world (by the end of the fourth century).

 

3. Liturgical Use — read publicly when early Christian communities gathered for the Lord's Supper (their weekly worship services).

 

4. Consistent Message — containing a theological outlook similar or complementary to other accepted Christian writings.

 

(note: there are many books not included in the bible that satisfy 2-3 of these and are interesting reads.)

[Texsox]

If there are no small passages in the Bible, how do you square the omission and or subordination of the Deuterocanonicals and the so-called Biblical Apocrypha (including Tobit, Judith, Esdras portions of Esthera nd Daniel, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, Baruch, Maccabees and others) from various versions of the Bible?

 

 

 

I'm, obviously, less suited to discuss the living, practicing, heeding-the-calling, aspects of faith. But I think you're assessment is quite good.

 

I think PA responded better than I can on this subject. My hunch is also, too small for the Bible?

 

I think we all walk our faith, even those without faith. Of course, we all have faith. The simplest example I give is we have faith that that driver in the oncoming traffic will not swerve and hit us.

[kapkomet]

You will probably be very surprised by this, but here it goes. I am actually not against giving homosexuals the same rights and considerations that heterosexual couples receive from a government marriage or civil union. What I am against is my church blessing that as a Christian marriage since I do not see it as fulfilling what God had ordained. I would say that there are many Christians not making the distinction between the government they live under and the rights provided by it and the church's power that they live under.

 

After saying this, we are told to live under the laws of the land we live in, and we need to respect those around us. I see church ordained marriage as different from state marriage. One is a religious thing, the other is not. As such I do not see why we should be pushing those beliefs on the state. Something such as stealing though (as an example), is not a religious thing that is separate from the state. If we see that not being addressed, we do need to push on that.

I haven't made my way through the rest of this thread yet, but that is EXACTLY what I think and nice job of putting it down so eloquently.

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

I haven't made my way through the rest of this thread yet, but that is EXACTLY what I think and nice job of putting it down so eloquently.

 

just wait, it gets good:)

[FlaSoxxJim]

just wait, it gets good:)

 

 

That it does.

 

I still get choked up over that one scene in Brokeback Gilboa Mountain when Jonathan turns to David and says, "I wish I knew how to quit Jew."

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

That it does.

 

I still get choked up over that one scene in Brokeback Gilboa Mountain when Jonathan turns to David and says, "I wish I knew how to quit Jew."

 

 

 

if they were irish, they would have f-ed the sheep instead of each other....

[FlaSoxxJim]

if they were irish, they would have f-ed the sheep instead of each other....

 

Aye, and then the line would'a been, "I wish I knew how to quit ewe."

 

[kapkomet]

Aye, and then the line would'a been, "I wish I knew how to quit ewe."

 

That was bad. Just bad.

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

That was bad. Just bad.

 

 

 

you mean... BBBBBBAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad.

[southsideirish71]

if they were irish, they would have f-ed the sheep instead of each other....

 

 

Its not our fault, they dress like sluts.

 

[Texsox]

Its not our fault, they dress like sluts.

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

 

 

I would love to see the google search Irish did to find that gem....

 

who would do that to a sheep?!?!!?

[Texsox]

I would love to see the google search Irish did to find that gem....

 

who would do that to a sheep?!?!!?

 

It's standard wallpaper on a Mac

[Yossarian]

Then to you it is also pretty clear that it's OK to sell your daughter into slavery (Exodus 21:7), and it's OK to own slaves as long as you buy them from a neighboring nation (Leviticus 25:44), and that you can of course kill your neighbor if you find he has been working on the Sabbath (Exodus 35:2).

 

Likewise, you're crystal clear about it being better for you to give your daughter up to be raped if it keeps two men from sinning by lying together (Genesis 19:1-9 - a personal favorite of mine).

 

If you are clear about all of these things, and a boatload of others taken right from the Bible, then you are somewhat of a misanthrope in modern society. If you only think God's word as recorded in the Bible is only eternally binding when it condones bigotry against gays but less so regarding these other ancient dictates, then certainly you are in good company. But your interpretation of the Bible and which of God's laws should be heeded nonetheless remains distressingly selective.

The poster took the bait, and thus results your clever retort. For me this passage answers the question.

 

But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.2Now early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people came to Him; and He sat down and taught them. 3Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, 4they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. 5Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?” 6This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear.7So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” 8And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. 9Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, “Woman, where are those accusers of yours? Has no one condemned you?”11She said, “No one, Lord.”

And Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.

 

The draconian punishments of the Old Testament are no longer in effect, and it is not for us to condemn, but still we must "go and sin no more". If adultery is not OK, then I have to think that the policy certain mainline denominations are taking is in serious error, and not in keeping with Christian teachings. People are free to believe or not as they see fit, but Christianity like all other religions has rules and boundaries. It may not be the feel good answer, but real religion like good Bourbon should be strong.

 

 

[FlaSoxxJim]

The poster took the bait, and thus results your clever retort. For me this passage answers the question.

 

But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.2Now early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people came to Him; and He sat down and taught them. 3Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, 4they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. 5Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?” 6This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear.7So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” 8And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. 9Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, “Woman, where are those accusers of yours? Has no one condemned you?”11She said, “No one, Lord.”

And Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.

 

The draconian punishments of the Old Testament are no longer in effect, and it is not for us to condemn, but still we must "go and sin no more". If adultery is not OK, then I have to think that the policy certain mainline denominations are taking is in serious error, and not in keeping with Christian teachings. People are free to believe or not as they see fit, but Christianity like all other religions has rules and boundaries. It may not be the feel good answer, but real religion like good Bourbon should be strong.

 

I think you have it exactly right, at least as far as I had been taught. JC turned the vengefulness of the OT on its ear when he boiled it down to: love God and love each other. If you are equating homosexuality with adultery, though, you've lost me.

 

Even so, your point that it is not for us to judge is at the heart of the matter. That the gospels do not cite Jesus as ever commenting on homosexuality (as opposed to adultery, for example) suggests that being gay and being accepting of gay community members doesn't keep anybody from being able to love God and each other.

 

[kapkomet]

I think you have it exactly right, at least as far as I had been taught. JC turned the vengefulness of the OT on its ear when he boiled it down to: love God and love each other. If you are equating homosexuality with adultery, though, you've lost me.

 

Even so, your point that it is not for us to judge is at the heart of the matter. That the gospels do not cite Jesus as ever commenting on homosexuality (as opposed to adultery, for example) suggests that being gay and being accepting of gay community members doesn't keep anybody from being able to love God and each other.

I don't think we are to judge... those who say "XYZ activity is going to make you go to hell" are flipping these verses on their ear... we are to love one another... and we are not the judge, only to pass on grace to those who sin. It may be my opinion that XYZ offense is sinful, but I certainly don't condemn that person for their actions or their beliefs.

 

(Except those George Bush haters, because you all are going to hell... because you're judging... ) I keeed I keeed... )