This Is How It Happened

February 23, 2006 - 6:34pm

Theology can only ever be simple thoughts from simple minds that are forever trapped in moments of time.

You want to know how it happened? I’ll tell you how it happened. I got tired. I couldn’t do it anymore. I fought an inward battle with orthodoxy for years and tried to figure out what the Bible has to say about this. I took six years of Greek, hoping the original language of the New Testament might shed some light. I got a Bachelor’s degree in religious studies and a Master of Divinity. I read everything I could find and talked to everyone I respected. But in the end, it all came down to this – I could not be orthodox in this matter. I could not. So I gave up and gave in. And the minute I did I felt a flood of cool relief, like water after forty days in the desert.

The moment of choice came, and I chose to stand with my friends. That’s the deal. That’s the way it happened. I wish I could tell you that my rigorous study finally unlocked the secrets of the New Testament’s scant witness on this matter, but it never did. For twenty years I asked this question of the Bible and never got a clear answer. Finally, I realized that I could wait on the Bible no longer.

I had to choose my place in the middle of uncertainty, ambiguity, and doubt. I had to make a choice. I had to stand on one side or the other. The bottom line is, I don’t give a damn what you think the Bible says. I’m not going to stand against my friends on this. I can’t. I cannot. I am unable to stand against them and not collapse from sorrow and despair.

Whatever this says about me, I willingly accept. You say this makes me a liberal? What does a label like that mean when laid alongside real living? You say I don’t respect the scriptures? It’s been years since I had the energy or the desire to argue about that with anyone. The truth is, I’m okay with any label you want to give me. Only I’m not going to stand against my friends. I’m not going to do it.

I’ll tell you what I told God on an evening that started out like any other, but ended up being the night of the choosing. That was the night I watched a video interview with Lewes Smedes, called “There’s a wideness to God’s mercy.”

“Dear God, I am unsure of what is right because there are people I respect on both sides of this issue. But I cannot stand against my friends and remain emotionally healthy. It will kill me to stand against them. I cannot do it. Forgive me for my weakness, my fear, my unwillingness to take chances, and for all the times when I have been wrong and believed the wrong things. I pray that you bless whatever goodness you find in me. You know my heart and my desire.”

There was darkness over the waters and over me for so long. There was no wideness to God’s mercy in those days. I did not know the way out of the darkness, so I chose the way that seemed right to me. Having chosen, I will not turn back now. It is finally done, after all these years.

rlp

For my brothers and sisters in Christ - Dave, Brian, Carol, Dylan, Tom, Don, Jeremy, Brenda, Lou Ann, and Julie R.

 

View the Lewis Smedes Video - "There's a Wideness to God's Mercy." 

Transcript of the Video. 

Submitted by Pascale Soleil on February 23, 2006 - 6:45pm.

Orthodoxy is so often wielded as a big bully club, to make sure that everyone conforms and falls in line. So that love in all its sloppiness doesn't get out of hand and confuse the minds of the "weak."

.

Or as a sorting mechanism to separate "us" from "them," because it's so very very important that no one ever mistake one of us for one of THEM.

.

Orthodoxy that is grounded in fear and anxiety cannot compete, in the end, with the profligate love of God. Nor are we ever more grounded in God than when we love without fear.

both2and: beyond binary

Submitted by iphy on February 23, 2006 - 7:01pm.

beautiful.
thank you.
me too.

---
the butter melts out of habit,
the toast isn't even warm.
---
http://www.ianua.org/

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 23, 2006 - 7:40pm.

Awesome post, real live preacher. Funny thing popped into my mind when reading this... I have a feeling that there are many, many Christians and Christian ministers who believe along the same lines regarding the issue of christian homosexuals, but these Christians and Christian ministers don't speak out about their beliefs for fear of the "liberal" (or whatever) label. In a sense, they're more in the closet than homosexuals are.

Love the blog...
Your old pal,
www.stinsononline.com

Submitted by Josh on February 23, 2006 - 8:16pm.

Thank you for standing. Not sure why this popped up on your radar for posting today, but somebody somewhere seems to have good timing.

I used to wonder in the desert over this one, especially because of it's personal import to me. I finally came to the understanding to get off the fence, stop dithering and get on with the life that God's provided, trusting him if I'm screwing things up royally. So far, no lightning bolts, but I did somehow receive a caring partner that I didn't deserve.

Compassion pours like water. Especially to those of us who wonder in the desert. Thanks for the water.

Pour on, Preacher.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 23, 2006 - 8:27pm.

Thanks for the link. I'm always amazed at what some folks pick out of the bible to rally around. So much seems to be about "we're righteous and they're wrong; let us show how righteous we are by condemning them." It's so sad. Because to me that seems like such a hollow faith.

--Shari

Submitted by visual-voice on February 23, 2006 - 8:41pm.

A bit of an interesting parallel in our posts today:
Beautiful Maleness.
The bible asks us to love, not condemn. We all crave to be loved, understood and accepted, and there's beauty to be found in that.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 23, 2006 - 8:49pm.

thanks, preacher!! I know you know where I stand on this one, and I, too, for years could not figure out why this was the ONE issue i had trouble resolving with my commitment to this spiritual path. After a long time, even walking away from my faith and feeling so empty, i returned but felt so alone in this until i first found your blog a few years ago. I felt in my heart it was wrong to reject gay friends and family members, no matter what my new christian friends told me. thank you thank you for STANDING UP, and giving hope to others!

janine

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 23, 2006 - 9:06pm.

thank you for posting this. as a queer christian who so often has felt rejected by the church i appreciate your words. they were a comfort to my soul tonight. thank you.

shannon
http://www.livejournal.com/users/divinemaddness

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 1:53am.

I have to respond to this one. My darling son who tried his hardest to find a place within the church, then found love from a man. He had a decision to make - be a Christian or accept his (as it turns out) bisexuality.

It broke my heart to realise that our young men, and I presume young women who we love, and have brought up to understand something of the love of Jesus, find they have to make a choice between following a life of faith, and coming to grips with their sexuality. Since then I have also experienced the same thing with a nephew and my step-son. All have decided they cannot be christians now.

The message being given by the church to these young men is that homosexuality makes you unacceptable to God - and I can't imagine anything that would make Jesus madder. It certainly makes me mad.

Janet

Submitted by Shayna on February 24, 2006 - 7:41pm.

When I read the post, and when I read your comment Janet, I started to think that maybe there was, after all, a place for me in the Church.
.
I thought, “Hey, isn’t it ironic that one of the biggest influences on my final decision to release my weakening grasp on my Christian faith was because I thought I could not be bi and be a Christian? And also because I thought I could not accept my gay family members and be a Christian? Maybe I was wrong…
.
But then I scrolled down and read some more posts, and I remembered what it was like to be bi in a Christian school and I remembered the conversations I had with Christians about my gay family members…
.
And I remembered that I do not want to be a Christian. Even if I have been missing God lately.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 25, 2006 - 8:04am.

don't judge god by his children. we christians are a flawed and sometimes awful people who have done, and do, terrible things.

the thing to remember is that there is no one kind of christian. not all christians are like the ones in your school, not all christians would treat you and your family the way you've previously been treated.

perhaps you don't want to be one of them - neither would i. but christians aren't just that, they're also kind, gracious, loyal, forgiving, open-minded and understanding. where i am sitting right now, to me, christians are all of those things. they're everything that people wanna be, they're deeply broken and flawed and they too mess up, but that's ok, because they're still following jesus above all.

if being a christian to you is something different, maybe you don't have to be that kind of christian. if you miss god, go back to him and stay with him. i don't know about the bible and homosexuality, but i know that god's love for you is stronger than any of our stupid fucked up human prejudice. be the kind of christian that loves without exception.

please please please don't give up on god because of what christians have done. he is perfect. we're really, really not.

Submitted by ameredisciple on February 25, 2006 - 3:32pm.

those are good words, better than any Ive left here...
“...you breathe your spiritual life into the atmosphere as you do your breath, and someone else breathes it in...and all live in it and receive from it according to their unfoldment.”
a mere disciple

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 26, 2006 - 6:04am.

sorry for your pain

"And I remembered that I do not want to be a Christian. Even if I have been missing God lately."

Being a Christian is being a follower of Jesus. Not narrow, sectarian and full of hate and condemnation.

If you are missing God - He knows it - and if you look up you'll see Him there, arms wide open and running to meet you. He meets you where you are, as you are - don't let anyone tell you that's not the case.

Some churches may be filled with people full of hate and condemnation - but God isn't like that.

I know this.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 26, 2006 - 9:14pm.

Shayna

Yup - if you counted how you were treated by Christians, then you probably would never want to be one: pity - yes, wrong (as you were treated badly) - yes, but true.

I wish, I wish, I wish that there is a place for you in the Church. But I know this much - there is a place for you in the Kingdom of God. I dunno what, I dunno why, I dunno how you fit, but I do know this - There is nothing you can be or do that makes you unacceptable to Him. He made you , he loves you, he accepts you. May His children learn to reflect His character more and more.

Bless you -
Janet

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 23, 2006 - 9:14pm.

I have a personal connection to your post and want to add a note from a parent's perspective. I think there are a lot of people who do not want to make judgements about this, but who are not comfortable embracing it either. When you find yourself in that place, do everything you can possibly think of to stay connected to that person you love. In my situation, I felt like my daughter and I were becoming distant with very little in common. I offered to come to her kindergarten class on Monday mornings to help with anything she might need. She began to see my respect for her as a teacher, and we began to enjoy talking about the children in her class. That was six years ago. There have been other ways since then that I have taken the initiative to show support for her. There is still some tension with all the dynamics of it, but our respect and love for each other is strong. I continue to look for ways to stay connected.

Submitted by The Token Catholic on February 23, 2006 - 9:34pm.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "orthodoxy" from the word "doxa," or joy? :) Think the Mother Angelicas and Pat Robertsons of the world forget that fact.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 5:39pm.

Sorry to be picky - "doxa" is an opinion, so orthodoxy is the correct opinion. It would be nice if it meant joy...

Sarah

Submitted by The Token Catholic on February 26, 2006 - 2:38am.

Well as my great-grandfather said, opinions are like @ssholes...everyone's got one. ;) I'll try to scrounge up where it was discussed in terms of joy.

Submitted by Anonymous User on March 1, 2006 - 2:23pm.

OK,actually doxa is Greek for glory and orthodoxy literally means: Right glory.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 23, 2006 - 9:43pm.

This is well-written stuff from the deep wells of your passion, RLP. I have often wondered how you arrived where you are from where you've come. This sheds a little bit of light. Of course, now we all want to know who your friends were and why you would have had to stand against them. :)

Submitted by rlp on February 23, 2006 - 10:27pm.

What do I mean by stand against them? Well certainly I'm never going to be a person who is cruel or hateful to homosexuals. I'm assuming you know that. At issue is the level of inclusion that homosexuals are allowed in Christian communities. There are many loving churches that are happy to have homosexuals attend and worship, but they exclude them from certain areas of service. Teaching Bible Study, being deacons, ministers, etc.
-
I'm in the minority in this, but I feel such exclusion is the equivalent of making them second class Christians. By not standing against them, I mean that I will be openly for inclusion. My church is not with me on this, not 100%. Our church does not have a Creed, so we have people with a variety of theological and political and philosophical views.
-
But I wish to affirm the validity of the faith of my friends, brothers and sisters in Christ who are homosexuals. That's what I mean by standing for them.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 3:12pm.

Gordon: Expansion of your thoughts about "open inclusion". Do you agree with the "conservative Christian view" that marriage is between a man and a woman only? Would you and/or your Church feel comfortable in marrying homosexual couples?
Hairspray

Submitted by rlp on February 24, 2006 - 3:44pm.

I'll say this. When I am the pastor of Covenant Baptist Church, there is a fine line between my prophetic calling to call us to truth, and my position as a brother in Christ reading the scriptures with all of the others. I'm not aware of anyone in our congregation who is hostile toward homosexuals or who would not welcome them into our midst. In fact, we have welcomed a number of homosexuals into our church over the years, though the exact nature of what that welcoming means has become an issue at least once.
-
But I think the majority of our congregation would be uncomfortable with a wedding ceremony for a homosexual couple in our church. This is the church I am called to serve, and one of my callings is to honor her and work with her.
-
As for me, if two people have chosen to live together and do so, the question of whether or the church has blessed the union is a small one. However, I am always very careful and cautious about anything that would cause unnecessary trauma to my church.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 26, 2006 - 11:35pm.

That's a delicately nuanced reply. Especially with a group like Covenant, where it is your covenant with each other that holds you together, I guess it has to be like that.

And I hope that if the time comes when something like this becomes a necessary trauma (as birth can be), you all will recognize it together.

Submitted by Clueless on February 23, 2006 - 9:46pm.

Preach it, brother! I'm in complete agreement with you, as are most of my friends.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 23, 2006 - 9:50pm.

One of the things that bothers me most about "orthodoxy" within the SBC is that it's gotten so far out of hand it's frightening. There has been a complete regression from any sort of open-mindedness. Hell, at this point, the conservatives are attacking their own. When a church gets kicked out of the SBC simply for allowing a group of Christian homosexuals to meet in the same building, I'm sorry, that's scares me. And it's not just this one issue either. The SBC has now decided that new missionaries must sign an agreement that they will not use any "private prayer languages." So basically, they are completely disregarding one spiritual gift. That's why I've given up on them, and largely, the baptist denomination as a whole.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 26, 2006 - 6:08am.

The SBC has now decided that new missionaries must sign an agreement that they will not use any "private prayer languages."

:(
I haven't heard about this, but it is scary. We need to be open to God. In all things

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 28, 2006 - 10:41pm.

GO to BPNEWS.ORG - forgive me for not giving the URL to the article. There is a Q&A there with the president of the SBC International Mission Board. He professes to speaking a "private prayer language", but conveniently does not know what speaking in tongues really is.

As for the inclusion. Amen. Let love of all mankind abound. I simply ask us to not forget that sin is still sin. Homosexuality is clearly condemned in the Bible, but hatred of anyone who sins is hypocrisy.

Submitted by Roy on February 23, 2006 - 9:52pm.

Dear RLP,

Thank you for your beautiful writing and your beautiful heart.

Be well.

Roy Goodwin

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 23, 2006 - 10:56pm.

Odd, I thought you meant evolution or women preaching. I guess that just shows what is in my mind about the battle between the "orthodox" and the "liberal". I came to similar conclusions on those issues too, as well as on homosexuality (see, I did finally work it out!)

I agree that the mercy of God is much wider than generally preached, but don't you think that God works through us too - even us "liberals?" Could it be the very Spirit of God informing our feelings about these things? Faith has become so cerebral these days, but I think feelings and loyalties and relationships are important, and I believe Jesus did too.

Elizabby

Submitted by gregkendallball on February 23, 2006 - 11:06pm.

RLP,
Thank you. Thank you so much for directing me to Smede's article. It, and your writing, has helped me immensely.
~gkb
kendallball.net

Submitted by cwalton on February 23, 2006 - 11:38pm.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand why this is such an issue. I think that we are supposed to love everyone, blah, blah, blah, but it does seem like it should be OK to be able to say that some behaviors are not right and shouldn't be done. We all have our sins to deal with, but they are sins in deed.

I'd like to know what your definition of homosexuality is. I think there's a big difference between having urges and acting on those urges, whether it's cutting someone off in traffic or putting your body parts where they shouldn't be. I think it's OK, if not our resposibility, to treat people differently based on where they are in the journey. It's OK to say that some behavior is not as good as other behavior.

None of this has anything to do with loving people or condemning people. We shouldn't do that. That's a bad thing. But why is wrong to say that some behavior is wrong? Can't we separate that away from the hard core hateful actions of some people out there? I don't like labels like "liberal" or "homosexual" or "othodox". It takes all of the detail out of the conversation.

Isn't there something about the baby and the bath water?

...have mercy on me for my beliefs.

Submitted by spidey on February 24, 2006 - 1:25am.

do we then keep liars, workaholics, or the greedy and covetous out of ministry positions? we would have no ministers left! then you add the words from the sermon on the mount that say that hatred is the same as murder. well, good grief. the truth of the matter is that however we define sin is irrelevant. we all sin. we're all guilty. of course there are behaviors that are wrong, but be careful where you draw the line, or there will soon be no one left who is acceptible.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 1:27am.

Wow. **boggle** why this is such an issue? Suggestion, check out the link RLP pointed to. I think you'll see the point.

And if you're unaware of the homophobia that's rampant in our culture and in most churches...then I would dare to say you really are unaware. How much violence the homosexual community endures is beyond alarming. The only reason there's not more of an uproar over that is they're the "safe" peopel to trample on now.

I've had more than one friend beaten to within an inch of their life because they were gay.

The phrase "gay bashing" isn't just metaphorical.

It may be telling the way you wrote, "I think we are supposed to love everyone, blah, blah, blah..." almost as if that were a throw away line.

You might really look on how you managed to diminish what I find to be one of the crucial Christian tenants. Though maybe that's your part of the journey. To find a point where you really come to see that.

I almost want to ask what is so scary in your own house that you feel you must look outside to find what's wrong in others.

Then again, you may feel you have every right to caste the first stone.

--Shari

Submitted by SeanL on February 24, 2006 - 1:44am.

cwalton,

Regarding "having urges." Heterosexual Christians would gain a tiny bit of credibility on this subject instead of the zilch they already have if they once acknowledged what is completely obvious on a literal reading of the New Testament: Neither Jesus nor St. Paul really want you to "act on your urges" as a heterosexual (I write as if I assume you are one; forgive me if the assumption is false). It seems they both tolerate it because "it is better to marry than to burn." Better for breeders but not for me, huh?" Better for me to burn.

And as for the question "what is your definition of homosexuality." Who cares? It's like one white asking another, "What is your definition of what being black is all about?" Who cares? Only the homosexual gets to tell you what it is. You can define me as a heterosexual gone wrong or whatever you want, but if you do so, you simply reveal vast ignorance. You have to ask me. I (we) am the one who knows. Not (if you are straight) you.

-- SeanL

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 11:42am.

This is an interesting conversation...I guess I should provide some "credentials" such as having a brother who is gay, haveing worked with a number of people who are gay over the years, etc.

I think that we as human beings have an amazing ability to rationalize our behaviors to our own satisfaction. (I am responding to several comments here.) We throw rocks at liars, adulterers, gossips, etc. as a way of saying that we should not throw those same rocks at a homosexual. Interesting paradox.

We say that Jesus would be inclusive and welcoming of a homosexual (with which I agree)and ignore his direction to the woman caught in adultry..."go and don't continue in this sin."

Jesus was not afraid of the "S" word nor of "sinful" people. The "orthodox" of the time called him a friend of sinners, as if that were a horrible crime. Jesus accepted it as a compliment while not disputing the charge.

Admittedly, Jesus was/is better at sorting this stuff out than we are. He had/has the ability to love and accept while addressing the sin. That is certainly a difficult task for any of us to pull off.

I do agree that the "Church" (capitals intentional) has made people who committ certain sins the enemy, which is a painful and hurtful response. I do not in any way condone the behavior.

I just think that we give up too easily when we take any behavior (yes, I do believe there is a certain amount of choice, at least at the point of participation) and discount the scripture's clear description of such behavior as sin. I also believe it is too easy to make certain sin's "untouchable."

I love my brother with all my heart. Do I think that he lives in sin? Yes, I do. Do I wish that he could/would change his lifestyle (without the added burden of trying to be "normal") Yes. Do I believe that he loves Jesus as much as I do, Yes.

I choose to (try :)) respond like Jesus, loving people as best I can and welcoming anyone who is pursuing the relationship with God that we were created for, to the best of their ability.

On a societal/sociological note, I agree that there is a tension in society over this issue, but I find an equal amount of intolerance on both sides. The homophobic tendencies are obvious, but polar opposite are the attempts for force an acceptance of it as "normal" on those whose beliefs beliefs differ. There is an intential movement to normalize this along with a number of other "behaviors" that a pretty clearly called sin in scripture. So, neither side (extremes) are in a position to throw the proverbial stone.

Didn't mean to write this much and forgot to log in...sorry.
Mark

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 8:15am.

CWalton - First, I honor you for having the courage to express this point of view on this blog. Thank you. How else can we work this issue out as a society? Having said that, you repeatedly refer to homosexuality as a "behavior" as if it were a choice. Know deep in your heart it is not. It is no more a choice than the color of your hair. Those who are homosexual are living a life of who they are ... as God created them. I am utterly convinced if Jesus were to bless us again with His presence, His ministry would include embracing homosexuals with the same strength of conviction as he embraced the outcasts and shunned of the 1st century. DSpitko

Submitted by cwalton on February 24, 2006 - 1:43pm.

I didn't realize that I'd stir up this many comments. For the record, I am in fact hetero. I do have gay friends that I love very much (and some I don't love so much).

First, I advocate never throwing stones at anyone. Defining a behavior as wrong is not the same as beating someone until they are dead. It's different.

Yes, Jesus would embrace gay people today like he embraced the woman at the well. He would also say "Go and sin no more" like he did then.

I'm curious about homosexuality being defined as a behavior or something else. I have urges to kill people, but I don't. I have urges to do all kinds of things that I should not and I don't. Well, sometimes, I do...

It seems possible to be a celibate homosexual, just like it's possible to be a celibate hetero. There seems to be a larger identification, perhaps as a social group, perhaps as a personal choice, that someone says "I'm gay". That seems to be different than specific behaviors.

...and when I say "Love each other, blah, blah, blah", I mean "It is so obvious that we need to love each other all the time, in everything, that I don't even need to mention it. It's so not the issue." It actually is possisble to love someone while you define their behavior as wrong. Why is that so hard to understand? I hope everyone loves me and I know some of my behaviors are bad too.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 2:38pm.

But that is the point. Jesus told the woman at the well to change her behavior. But He did not tell her to stop being a woman and a Samaritan. What I glean from that biblical story is that Jesus reached a human being, a child of God, by rejecting the social mores of that time by sitting down and talking with a woman (Jewish men did not speak to women in public … the Torah said it was forbidden) who was a Samaritan (Jews had no dealings with Samaritans). In one fell swoop, Jesus broke through two barriers. By rejecting these barriers, eerily similar to the barriers of many of today’s Christians with regard to homosexuality, Jesus was able to preach his gospel of love and to tell her to sin no more because she had had many husbands.

Telling a homosexual to not act on their love for another human being (who happens to be the same sex) is the same as telling you, a heterosexual, to not act on your love for a person of the opposite sex. Homosexuality is not an “urge” (a term that implies thoughts of various strengths which cross our consciousness). It is who that person is.

I am old enough to remember the public schools trying to force left-handed children to write with their right hand. Why? Because it was believed that whether you were right handed or left handed was a choice … and we can’t have left handed children … they may become Communists. It’s laughable now … but people honestly believed that. Is being left-handed a behavior? I also remember Christians, while quoting the bible, proclaiming it was a sin for a white to marry a black. It is “unnatural”. Each to his/her own kind. Is it a sin if a white man and a black woman marry into a loving, caring relationship? DSpitko

Submitted by seebs on February 25, 2006 - 5:36pm.

Jesus said (to the woman taken in adultery, anyway) to go, and sin no more.

He did not say "sin no more or else..."

We will all sin from time to time, and I think the question of which behaviors God is telling someone to change is between them and God.

Submitted by fortynine on February 25, 2006 - 12:39am.

Heterosexuals may be celibate, but it's a choice; religion doesn't require lifelong celibacy except from people who have a vocation and take vows.

 
You're asking gay people to distrust and suppress involuntary lifelong inclinations and to forgo forever the joys and comforts of passion, marriage, and family which are the innocent outlets of those feelings for straight people.
 
Okay, to be fair, you think God is asking all that. My judgement tells me that homosexual and heterosexual love are alike in character. If one is virtuous, how can the other be sinful? How, lovingly, can you tell your gay friends their loves are less than yours? If a book says that God proscribes one of those loves, I'll believe that God has been misquoted, mistranslated, misunderstood, maligned, doesn't exist, or is mysterious.

Submitted by Dylan on February 24, 2006 - 1:08am.

I love you, brother -- we really do need to break bread (or better yet, tamales) in 'realspace' one of these days.

Blessings,

Dylan

Submitted by Joel_h on February 26, 2006 - 9:27pm.

Gordon, Dylan I love you both. Thanks be to God.

Submitted by spidey on February 24, 2006 - 1:16am.

rlp, here's another baptist who's come to that same conclusion... for the same reasons. i can't stand against my friends. thanks.

Submitted by SeanL on February 24, 2006 - 1:32am.

You know what is funny? Just today, as I was getting ready to read RLP, I found myself asking, "Hmmm, I wonder what he might think of me? If we met, would he be willing to shut up, unlike every Baptist I have ever met, and listen to the truth of my life? He writes so well; could he speak God's word to the real me?" And guess what I read? The answer to my questions is "yes." Thank you.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 3:48am.

I found your blog on February 18, 2003. Because of what you wrote on that day, you have become one of the major spiritual lights in my life, and I thank you for your powerful witness to the love of Christ. I, too, cannot stand against my friends--too many of them are far better Christians than I will ever be, and our Lord says that you will know the good tree by the fruit it produces.

Submitted by paigeb on February 24, 2006 - 3:49am.

Oops...forgot to log in. Thanks again, paigeb

Submitted by Lauren on February 24, 2006 - 6:24am.

Ahhh orthoxodoxy -- is there really such a thing? I used to claim there was. Can't anymore. I'm now partial (just barely) to the notion of "concensual Christianity" -- those tenets of the faith that virtually all Christ-followers believe. Consensual Christian beliefs fill just mite-size thimble -- just a mustard seed's worth. But then as far as I can tell, Jesus never tried to circumscribe the faith. Instead he beckoned, "Don't be afraid, just believe" (Mark 5).

Lauren

Submitted by the Weary Pilgrim on February 24, 2006 - 6:29am.

Hi Gordon, I was reflecting and writing on almost the same thing this morning, twisting the gem and seeing it in a different light. Your words are as beautifully illuminating as always. Peace...Ron+

Submitted by dont eat alone on February 24, 2006 - 7:08am.

Gordon,

If I stand before God and God says, "why did you let so many people into the church?" I live with that judgment. For God to say, "Why did you keep closing the door when I was pushing it open?" is something I could not live with.

Peace
Milton

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 8:01am.

thank you for this post. so is it sin ?

Submitted by KansasBob on February 24, 2006 - 8:21am.

Regarding "Theology can only ever be simple thoughts from simple minds that are forever trapped in moments of time." That is because faith is of the heart and not of the head. We should often deep six our theology and our deep thinking (which I think you did) and begin to love each other. We should be led by the Spirit and not by our theologocal minds.

Submitted by SeanL on February 26, 2006 - 2:43am.

Dear KansasBob,

As much as I might agree with the conclusions you would probably reach, I must differ with you. I would be nervous of saying that "faith is in the heart, not the head." First, because all heresy begins this way. "Ooh, it can't be both this and that. I have to pick one or the other. Jesus can't be God and Man. I have to pick. God can't be one and many. I have to pick. The Bible can't be human and divine. I have to pick. Faith can't be heart and soul. I have to pick." The Christian Faith is always about a dichotomy between two seeming opposites. Just about always, the Christian answer is to hold both sides at the same time. God & Man. Human & Divine. One & Many. Head & Heart.

Secondly, I am very reluctant to say that the mind which God created me with, the mind he gave (it seems) exclusively to us humans, is a bad idea. I may not always use it properly, but I don't want to insult God by telling him to stuff his gift and the nature he created me to bear. "Sorry, God, is was a cute idea, but for anything important, I'll just use my lizard brain."

-- SeanL

Submitted by Sparky on March 1, 2006 - 12:15pm.

Your ideas of christianity consisting of dichomiites reminded me of a great proffessor I had the honor of taking classes from in seminary. To paraphrase his statements Christianity is pulled on in several directions which creates tension. It is only with this tension thta the great tent of Christianity stands and gives Shelter to the weary.

Submitted by kevinjbowman on February 24, 2006 - 8:47am.

I have said it before and will again. It is easier to attack the sexual sin of 3% of the population than the far greater problem that was prevelant in the entire church. This makes people feel like they are dealing with the problem of sin, instead of dealing with their personal problem of sin.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 26, 2006 - 10:49am.

Exactly. Well said.

Submitted by WonderSheep on February 24, 2006 - 9:14am.

Chalk me up as another one of those "Wait, which group is he talking about?" people, Preacher-man. A little hopeful that you weren't talking about 'those people like me' again. But we all know I'm suffering from a little bit of spiritual burnout in that area, anyway. So much so that I've spent countless hours wondering if the reason I was elected to the church council at my progressive, inclusive church was because I'm young, because I'm ethnic, because I'm a sexual minority (even though they'd need really good gaydar to figure it out), or because I've got gifts that they've noticed and think I can use to help spread the Gospel in such a ministry.

Praise God, I think I'm finally in a church that picks me for leadership because of my gifts, not how many bonus points I'd get them in the Equality Awards!

______________________
SWS
Ecclesiastes 7:13

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 25, 2006 - 6:15pm.

Sheep,
That was priceless.
Cynthia/OldPoet
...another one at Gordon's church who stands.

Submitted by TheEdge on February 24, 2006 - 9:29am.

I am a minority on this site I think. I am one of those horrible Bible believing Christians that is willing to accept the idea that God gave us the Bible as His Word (which is how Christ referred to it many times). I came to a point in my life where this same issue was fought and for 24 years I could be called a liberal who let Scripture be a very loose guide in my life. The Orthodox side won me over for a multitude of reasons. But perhaps the biggest revelations came to me as I asked myself some very hard questions. Do I believe God is all powerful? Yes. Could he have left the Bible in the hands of imperfect beings but manage to communicate his complete authority in a perfect manner? Yes. Am I willing to obey any and all of His guidelines for my life, even if I stand alone? Yes. Even if his rules defy my own moral code, political correctness, and my friends? Yes. Even if certain scripture alienates me, calls me out, or demands a subservient role? Yes. I say this not as a badge of honor and certainly not to slam Christians that fall on the other side of this issue. If anyone can understand both sides, it is me...since I have spent time in both camps. Frankly, I no longer care about proving to people that the Bible is inerrant. I just want good Christian fellowship and believe the most important issues are the two commands Christ gave. To Love the Lord and to love thy neighbor. Peace.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 25, 2006 - 9:52pm.

There was no bible for Christ to refer to as "His Word", at least no new testament. And just who was it to decided which books would be included in the Cannon, and based on what criteria? Give me a break...

Submitted by seebs on February 25, 2006 - 11:02pm.

You are substantially mistaken. Christ did not refer to the Bible as the Word, because Christ was not an idolator.

The Word is God. In fact, Christ is the Word; see John 1. What has happened here is you have mistaken the map for the territory; the book about God for God. Christ is the Word; the Bible is a book about the Word.

If you read carefully, you will find that every reference with a capital W is to the Person of the Trinity; Scripture and prophecy are the word of the Lord, but not the Word. In Greek, the distinction is between logos and graphe, roughly.

Submitted by Perseus on February 24, 2006 - 9:44am.

Here's what settled it for me. The passage (sorry,I don't know which book, chapter or verses) where the Pharisees come to Jesus and ask him to settle their argument about which brother a woman would be married to in heaven if she became a widow and remarried a man's brother after his death. As I recall, Jesus kind of shook his head and said, "what are you doing arguing about this? That's not what's important." I think Jesus would shake his head at all of us, endlessly parsing doctrines and precedents, when he has already given us the commandment to love.

RLP, for the first time ever you kind of irked me, by describing being called "a liberal" as a distasteful label. Particularly in a post about the liberality of God, the wideness in his mercy. Cause that is just precisely what liberal means to me. That there is a wideness in my politics, that doesn't just look to get for me and mine. A willingness to face the truth that peace is not just a pretty word for Sunday School, but Christ's living legacy for us. I looked up the word liberal in an unabridged dictionary, just to make sure, and found: generous, abundant, open-hearted, noble ...

Submitted by rlp on February 24, 2006 - 2:18pm.

I didn't say that. I said I do not care what label I am given. People in my faith community would call me a liberal. I don't care. I don't care enough about those labels to be either happy or sad about it. You read distasteful because that is a distasteful label to those who give it.
-
But not to me.

Submitted by Perseus on February 24, 2006 - 6:01pm.

Well, you're right. you didn't say that. I'm sorry I got huffy.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 26, 2006 - 6:18am.

This was wonderful to read. A misunderstanding, corrected and sorted out. We need more of this in church and out of it too.

Loved your idea what God gives and does liberally :) A new nuance in the meaning. Tx

Submitted by Karebear on February 24, 2006 - 10:08am.

To this comment, TheEdge: "I am one of those horrible Bible believing Christians that is willing to accept the idea that God gave us the Bible as His Word (which is how Christ referred to it many times)."

Funny thing is, the "Bible," as we know it, did not exist when Jesus walked the earth. The process of canonization - picking and choosing which Scripture gets to be "In" and which is "Out" - happened centuries later. (Oh yeah, how many women or uneducated or non-clergy or poor do you think got to be in on THAT conversation?) You know the Song of Songs and the book of Esther? Those books almost didn't "make the cut." (The book of Esther never even mentions God...check it out for yourself.) When Jesus was talking about the Word, He had to have been talking about something other than the leather-bound, NRSV or NIV or KJV or whatever-V Bible.

Fact is, it's scary to believe your what's in your heart over words on a page. The Bible, lifted to the level of inerrancy, is a comforting thing. Heck, what do we need God for if we already have the rulebook written out for us? Why do we need prayer? If it's as clear as you seem to think, why do we need theologians or clergy or teachers or scholars to talk about it? Why does it need interpretation? Oh, and is the Bible more perfect in English? In Greek? In Hebrew? And how, as an English-speaking woman from the 20th-21st centuries, am I ever to get to the most perfect translation?

Thank you, but I'd rather use the Bible as a loose guide, recognizing its IMperfect nature, and question and doubt its authorship once in awhile. Makes for some good conversations with God, on my knees.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 10:08am.

Gordon, it's Chuck Nolan.

I stand with you, and your friends, and mine. I cannot believe that a loving God would create people as they are and not love them for being what he has created them to be.

Submitted by cwalton on February 24, 2006 - 1:54pm.

He does love all of us, as we are, as he created us. We are all sinners. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

That doesn't mean it's not sin. I just means that he loves us while we were yet sinners.

Sorry to get all religous on you there, but that's what it says and I don't understand why that doesn't make sense. That's what grace is for, for our personal sin.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 10:08am.

It's a new experience for a Finnish-pentecostal-red-neck to be in the minority on this issue, but I must go with TheEdge & cwalton. I've always wondered isn't it possible to have real fellowship without making sin acceptable? I have great fellowship with my friend who's addicted to porn even though I don't accept his addiction.

Submitted by Erin on March 11, 2006 - 9:08am.

I would think a Finnish pentecostal would be in a pretty tiny minority in general! :) Aren't most of y'all some variety of Lutheran?

Submitted by TheEdge on February 24, 2006 - 10:28am.

Karebear,
You do not bring up any points that I myself have not considered in this journey. I will reiterate that my goal is not to prove the Bible to you. You are a Christian and that is enough for me. But if you sincerely want answers to how I made this leap and what evidence convinced me, we can go round and round with it if you want. My decision did not come lightly. I think it is much easier to be on your side of the issue and wish I could join the ranks. But I won't. I do find it a bit ironic that all of the liberal, loving people are responding to mine and other opposing views with such harshness and close-mindedness. Lastly, I have posted a letter from me to my parents on my blogsite that inadvertently addresses this issue. So Karebear, if you want a glimpse into some of my journey and reasons for my conclusions click on my name above to see my profile. My profile has a link to my blog if you wish to have a look.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 2:49pm.

Karebear - 1st Corinthians 14: 33 – 35:

“As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.”

Do you believe this is the word of God?

DSpitko

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 2:51pm.

Sorry - the post above is directed to TheEdge.
DSpitko

Submitted by TheEdge on February 28, 2006 - 2:43pm.

The letter is titled At the Crossroads. I have had a few confused people ask me where to find it since I make no reference and add new posts a few times per week.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 10:58am.

So many students (college) struggle with how to approach homosexuality on a faith level, and all too often we fall to the extreme or to the liberal.. I personally chose the third option.. Which is to love them, treasure who they are as people, and let God be God in the end. If it his will for them not to join in eternity, then it is his will. I don't pretend to know the mind of God.. I refuse to play God, or to be his judge on Earth. Thank you for this.
Requiringpilgrim

Submitted by ameredisciple on February 24, 2006 - 11:08am.

Well a couple of things I guess....

Do people here believe that homosexuality is a choice, or rather you were born that way? Im probably not phrasing that question right...

-

Anyway, Im not a bible scholar but I will give my thoughts on this issue. And I havent really taken a side, because on one side, who am I to judge, but on the other, I'm not sure that I would want the young children of my congregation to be exposed to homosexuality until they can fully understand why we, as a congregation, decided to give them positions like deacons or worship leaders. I would not want the children of my congregation to think that homosexuality is ok, and that we accept it (it being homosexuality and not homosexuals). Because it is most definatly not ok, and I will accept that person with open arms, but not their sin. Love the person, hate the sin.

-

When thinking of this scenario, another one popped into my head. Would we be willing to give alcoholics, specifically ones that are open about their addiction and not trying to change, positions such as deacons and worship leaders? Or would we give the position of youth minister to a man or woman who was openly addicted to porn and not trying to change?

-

At this moment, I think where I stand on this issue (and it will most likely change; Im not sure if I invest much in this)is this: I will openly accept homosexuals into my church, just as I would alcoholics or people addicted to porn. Im not sure if I would agree that they hold positions of leadership until they can confess their sin and set themselves on a course to drive away their addiction. And the minute that happened, I would be more that happy to have a homosexual worship leader or a alcoholic deacon or a youth minister who is addicted to porn, but not until they set themselves on a course to stop their addiction. They might have relapses and fall back into their addiction for a period, but as long as they strive to stop the addiction and admit their wrong doing, Im ok with this. They dont need to confess in front of anybody, God is the only one needed. Arent we all instructed to strive to live a perfect life? None of us will, but shouldn't we strive for one?

“...you breathe your spiritual life into the atmosphere as you do your breath, and someone else breathes it in...and all live in it and receive from it according to their unfoldment.”
a mere disciple

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 11:28am.

Ameredisciple, homosexuality must not be equated with porn addiction or alcoholism. Homosexuality is a way of being in the world, just as heterosexuality is. You can be addicted to sex as a heterosexual, or homosexual, but there's nothing wrong with either way of being--just the addiction.

Submitted by ameredisciple on February 24, 2006 - 11:55am.

I believe we have come to a disagreement then, which is perfectly fine, my annonymous friend. I believe that people choose to be homosexual (and by all means I would like to know if you dont and why) just like people choose what qualities attract them in another individual.
-
I know Paul talks about homosexuality being a sin, but the homosexuality that we are talkig about, (I gather that is the type where there is exclusivity and honor and respect and genuine love in the relationship of two people of the same gender.) do we all believe its a sin?
-amd
“...you breathe your spiritual life into the atmosphere as you do your breath, and someone else breathes it in...and all live in it and receive from it according to their unfoldment.”
a mere disciple

Submitted by Keith on February 24, 2006 - 1:07pm.

Ameredisciple, I'm responding to your comment, but everything here isn't aimed at you. I ended up following a couple of tangents.
.
Unless you're using some definition of "choice" that isn't quite the general understanding of the term, I think it's a really basic error to believe anyone chooses what qualities attract them to another individual. We're attracted when we're attracted, and in my experience, there's nothing conscious about it.
.
We may choose to ignore that attraction, or to make conscious choices, but that's a separate issue. Attraction itself is not conscious.
.
The reconfigurations of word meanings (such as "choice") and pretzel-shaped hairsplitting ("homosexuality vs. homosexuals") that often infuse this issue--particularly in the context of religion--look exactly like rationalization to me. I don't believe anyone on the anti-homosexual side of the issue is starting with the Bible and trying to understand it. It seems to me that the initiating impulse is a belief about homosexuality. Only after that impulse flares does anyone reach for the Bible.
.
I could be wrong. But that's how it looks to me.
.
My belief is that homosexuality and heterosexuality are both natural and no big deal; I also believe people who think homosexuality is bad/wrong/unnatural are simply serving their own agendas. Sometimes those agendas amount to nothing more than lack of experience and fear of the unknown; other times, I think political and financial ends are being served.
.
To echo RLP, I stand with my friends. If God doesn't like my protecting his beloved creations, he doesn't deserve us in the first place.

Submitted by ameredisciple on February 24, 2006 - 5:03pm.

My use of the word choice is just that; one person can define what things they like and dont like. It isnt a concious thing in the way that choosing what colored clothes to wear for the day is. I believe this choice is a conscious thing that is based on your own doctrine or tradition of belief. I choose not to spend friday nights getting drunk or drinking heavily, even though getting drunk or drinking heavily is alot of fun, and that I might enjoy it more than other acts. I choose to date a girl who has a sense of modesty even though I might be more attracted to a girl dressed less modesty. Even though each of these (getting drunk and a girl who dresses less modestly) are more attractive, I do not choose them because I do not think them right. And it is at this point where I believe that many of the people here and I will disagree, which is fine. I am very much the stoic christian. With that said I would like to note that I am a christian first, and a stoic second.
-
As for starting with the bible, I would direct you to the passages I talk about in another one of my comments here:
-
Matthew 19:4 - "Haven't you read, he replied, that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female."
-
Genesis 2:24 - "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh."
-
also see:
-
Romans 1:27 - "In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
The key for me here is not lust, but abandon natural relations with women.
-
Leviticus 19:22 - "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."
-
I would just like to say again that Im not condeming anyone at all. Homosexuals and heterosexuals alike will get into heaven only if they belive in the grace of God through Christ. God is willing to meet you wherever you lie with your beliefs, He is very much a God of love. I just dont agree with some things people practice, which is fine. I can still respect them though, and ask that you respect me as well (thank you very much for the respect you have given me thus far) even though I am the minority.
-amd
“...you breathe your spiritual life into the atmosphere as you do your breath, and someone else breathes it in...and all live in it and receive from it according to their unfoldment.”
a mere disciple

Submitted by Keith on February 24, 2006 - 6:15pm.

I'm not sure I agree that you're in the minority; after all, this is Real Live Preacher, and you're Christian, and I'm not.
.
That aside...
.
You're still drawing parallels between vices and homosexuality. Although I respect your right to believe whatever you want, the belief itself seems entirely arbitrary. Biblical passages don't make it seem any less so, as the Bible isn't any kind of final word for me. To me, it's just another religion's holy book, with all the benefits and drawbacks that implies for our species.
.
I think this is one of the greatest failings of an old religion: it can't correct its errors. Orthodoxy that this easily causes hatred, fear, and suffering is a major flaw in any religion. If there is a God (and I have no strong feelings either way), I hope he's not that kind of a creep.
.
And yes, I do think people invented religion. It's the only explanation I can see for such a tangled mess that makes any sense; and all these terribly difficult questions become terribly simple once you put aside the need to believe in things that don't make any sense. "How do we reconcile homosexuality with Christianity" reduces quite quickly to: "There's nothing wrong with homosexuality in the first place."

Submitted by ameredisciple on February 24, 2006 - 11:06pm.

Well first off I didnt know you weren't a christian, or else I wouldnt have referenced any bible passages because thats fallacious. my bad...
-
By minority I meant people who oppose homosexuality to those who dont.
-
I never meant to give the impression I had a cure for homosexuality, or that homosexuals are going to hell (if you believe in a hell). I didnt mean to give the impression that christianity is the solution to homosexuality. Screw christianity dude... Its not about christianity, or any of these insignificant doctrines that go along with it. One of the problems with christians (or atleast the ones I spend my time with) is that, once put in the same room, we can start to discuss all the stuff that really doesnt matter. I made the false assumption that most people here (mainly the people I have been trading posts with) were really christian, which was a mistake. Sorry dude, this isnt about christianity at all. Its about God, and Him wanting to have a relationship with you, and Him wanting to forgive you, just like He wants to forgive me and have a relationship with me... Sorry if I made myself look holy or something, Im most definatly not... Im sorry if you have been turned off to christianity, or God, by me... I really am... that wasnt my goal by any means... Im sorry for everyone who has turned you off to christianity... Im sorry for christians who murder in "the name of God." Im sorry if I made this seem like a big deal... Cus its not what its all about.... Its really not... Its not what Im all about... Not at all...
-
So I believe that homosexuality is a sin, and whether its a disease or a choice or not even a sin at all, it doesnt matter... If I knew I wouldve had this response, I wouldve kept my mouth shut... I think its time I stopped talking about this, seems to be the cause of some issues. And I doubt that the words that I say are going to change the opinion of anyone who reads them, so Im gonna take a step back...
-
Gordon,
Im sorry this happened. This was never the point at all. Geez dude... I guess Im probably not on your christmas card list this year.
-amd
“...you breathe your spiritual life into the atmosphere as you do your breath, and someone else breathes it in...and all live in it and receive from it according to their unfoldment.”
a mere disciple

Submitted by Keith on February 26, 2006 - 12:00pm.

I haven't been turned off of anything by you--don't worry about that.
.
If you're still willing to keep the conversation going, I do have some thoughts about what you wrote (tangential ones, as usual). One thing I noticed is this:
.
this isnt about christianity at all. Its about God, and Him wanting to have a relationship with you, and Him wanting to forgive you, just like He wants to forgive me and have a relationship with me
.
I think I understand what you're saying, but as I understand these things, that's a Christian God you just described. The whole forgiveness thing (that's a technical term *g*) is, as I understand it, specific to the various Christian religions. My study has been pretty casual, so it's possible I'm just ignorant on the subject; but I can't think of another religion that focuses on sin and forgiveness the way Christianity does.
.
If I knew I wouldve had this response, I wouldve kept my mouth shut
.
Well, obviously, that's your decision, but I always like more talk between those who see things differently, not less. It's really the only way we can learn anything that isn't represented within our immediate spheres of influence.
.
It's also one of the main things that attracts me to this site. Where else can I find this kind of conversation?

Submitted by ameredisciple on February 27, 2006 - 1:15am.

When I say "if I knew I wouldve had this response" I didnt mean this was a negative response from anyone, just that the message of christianity (in my opinion) hasn't been communicated here very well (by me espicially). Whether homosexuality is a sin or not is not the core message that I want to communicate; its that as a christian, I believe that homosexual or hetereosexaul or both, the only way to heaven is through Christ Jesus. And as a christian, I should be (Im not always) willing to put my secondary beliefs aside and love and serve everyone. Now ethics and morality have their place in the proper context and circles, but I think it is very easy for the christian message to be given and received as secondary to christian morals and ethics - which are two different things.
-
I just dont like my view of christian morals to be taken out of place (or given out of place in this example). The whole crux of christianity is that Christ died for you, and without that, christianity is no different than any modern day system of ethics.
-
But I will stil continue, and you are right, I was describing a christian God, that is specifically the God that I believe in.
-
I can't think of another religion that focuses on sin and forgiveness the way Christianity does.
-
And I think that is what seperates Chritianity (seperation isnt always good - i think it can leave the impression that "either you are or you arent") from all other religions (no matter what the mormons say), is that, despite denominations, all christians still believe that Christ is the Son of God and that He died for the sins of the world. There is only one way to be a christian.
-
I love this type of conversation as well, I eat it up.
-
ALL OF THAT BEING SAID...........
-
What are your notions on God (anything goes as long as its honest)?
-
-amd
“...you breathe your spiritual life into the atmosphere as you do your breath, and someone else breathes it in...and all live in it and receive from it according to their unfoldment.”
a mere disciple

Submitted by Keith on March 3, 2006 - 12:13pm.

What are your notions on God (anything goes as long as its honest)?

If you mean "thoughts about a creator," this universe was set into motion by something greater than I can comprehend. I see no reason to rule out sentience and sapience.

If you mean "thoughts about religious notions of God," I think they're all human-invented and 100% self-serving.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 2:53pm.

I object!

As a gay man, I have not chosen who I am. My life would be a lot easier if I weren't gay. God made me this way, I can't comprehend why God would then condemn me to hell for merely being what he made me.

Submitted by Anonymous User on February 24, 2006 - 7:50pm.

While things are better than they used to be, homosexuals are still mocked, discriminated against, attacked, and sometimes killed for their homosexuality. It is particularly hard on teenagers - at that stage in life, social acceptance is particularly important to kids, and their peers are often too concerned with their own status in the pack to be gentle with the 'outsider'. So why would anybody 'choose' to be homosexual, if it was just as natural for them to be heterosexual?

Submitted by Sparky on March 1, 2006 - 12:35pm.

I hope this doesn't sound mean, but someone told me about this question and it helped me with the whole choice thing. You say homosexuals choose their orientation so When did you choose to be heterosexual?

Submitted by Josh on February 24, 2006 - 12:30pm.

I'm curious about your reaction to the concerns noted in RLP's link to the discussion regarding divorcees who remarry - would you allow them positions of authority in the church as well? And would you not allow your children to know about them?
No stones - just trying to understand better.
Peace.

Submitted by ameredisciple on February 24, 2006 - 1:39pm.

Divorce is "a whole 'nother animal," as my high school calculus teacher used to say. Frankly, I think that a good portion of the people who get married shouldnt be getting married, I believe they are rushing into it (not to look down upon people who get married in a short period of time after meeting someone. But some people out there just make bad decisions). Then I believe that a good portion of the people getting divorced are giving up.
-
To be honest I didnt watch the video, but I read trough most of the transcript. Let me cover what I think is grounds for divorce first, I look toward the words of Jesus in Matthew 19:9 "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultry." The key there is marital unfaithfulness. I believe abandonment qualifies as well as repeated relations with another woman or man. I believe abuse is another example. So if this happens to a person and a divorce happens as a result, the person can remarry without committing adultry. If the man or woman dies in a marriage, I believe that the widow is no longer held by the vows since the other person has passed away and can therefore remarry. As far as your question, I have the privelege of saying that I dont know anybody who has been in multiple marriages looking to take a position of leadership in the church. Maybe Im naive because of it, but I consider it somewhat of a blessing. So I guess I dont have a solid answer to your question, sorry. The part I disagree with though, is not about homosexuals holding position in the church, but with homosexuality in general. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression earlier.
-
As for my beliefs on homosexuality I go a few versus previous to the one I just cited. Matthew 19:4 "Haven't you read, he replied, that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female." The text Jesus was referring to is believed to be Genesis 2:24 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." To me man and wife is interpreted as male and female. But some people interpret man and wife as roles played in a marriage, regardless of gender. But to each his own.
“...you breathe your spiritual life into the atmosphere as you do your breath, and someone else breathes it in...and all live in it and receive from it according to their unfoldment.”
a mere disciple