News-Record.com

...as a Presbyterian, I don't like the amendment as currently worded.

as a former presbyterian and currently practicing satanist, i must demand that presbyterians pick up the ecclesiastical slack and put to death men who participate in such behavior, people who charge interest and any Jew who announces his apostacy, in accordance with the same book you condemn the behavior mentioned. Exclusion is the method of a washed up religion. Killing people you disagree with would show you mean business. Get your religious freak on completely or get out of the business.

In Leviticus, the Israelites were living under a theocracy (i.e. God was dwelling among the people and directly ruling over them). Today we live under the rule of man, following laws created by man. The fallen world today might think it's acceptable to live as homosexuals, but that does not change the fact that God said it is "detestable" (Leviticus 18:22). The apostle Paul warned us there would be times such as these: "For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear." (2 Timothy 4:3) Our liberal-minded, God-defying country screams "tolerance", but the fact remains that if God was directly ruling over our nation today, it is exceedingly unlikely that His stance on homosexuality would change. "He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind." (1 Samuel 15:29) "I the LORD do not change." (Malachi 3:6) And Jesus Himself said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." (Matthew 5:17-18) By the way, the "Law" refers to the rules God gave the Israelites, including those in Leviticus 18.

chucka-
Breathtakingly astute.

Chucka gets the response of the day award . . .

. . . BTW are Gays the new Blacks?

WJ, J Peterman: thanks(I think)....and now i bestow on huck the "Pharisee/Saducee" award. When the church stopped killing apostates and infidels and were confined by governments to just condemning the offenders' souls to eternal damnation, I got TF out of that mickey mouse club. If an offender isn't worth rubbing with tallow(to assure a nice slow burn) and cooking at the stake, he isn't worth excluding.

"BTW are Gays the new Blacks?"

Catholic: 4% (1937: 30%)
Black: 5% (1958: 63%, 1987: 21%)
Jewish: 6% (1937: 47%)
Baptist: 6%
Woman: 8%
Mormon: 17%
Muslim: 38%
Gay: 37% (1978: 74%)
Atheist: 48%

Taken from a poll in 2006 on "would you vote for a completely qualified president that is also...". These are NO answers. You can tell that Gays are more accepted than non-theists in America.

Sigh..........another "Bible literalist" They forget that those who divorce and remarry are committing adultery, that women must not speak in church, etc.

Question...why do you care if homosexuals are treated equally? If you follow Jesus, please follow his example.

Saw a funny bumper sticker the other day, not to do with gays but "religious" in nature ;--)

It read: "Jesus loves you. Everyone else thinks you are an asshole".

carol: that's another reason i left the church. women simply would not STFU. I showed them where it said for them to STFU. they didn't care...just like huck said...backsliders who turned their back on the baby rambo jesus...Dan, good report on a great bumpersticker...my favorite is "ask me about my vow of silence"

"..........another "Bible literalist""......................

just gotta hate it when the word of God goes against what you personally believe.........sigh

adultery, homosexuality,bestiality etc are sin - you choose to sin you must choose to accept its consequence.........

Buz, I will take my chances with my God, who is a God of love. If God is not a God of love, we are all screwed. The Word of God comes to me in that still small voice that tells me when I am doing wrong. It comes to me when I am at the end of my rope, and God takes over. I feel that our relationship with God is an individual thing, not subject to the judgment of man (or woman).

So, you do take the Bible literally? Is that correct? You take every word as it is written and never question its origins or translations?

So easy to be misled when you don’t take time to actually study the Bible and read the verses in proper context… Apparently what chucka doesn’t understand is that God’s rule regarding sin is this: one strike and you’re out. If we break even one of His commands, we face His punishment. And His punishment for sin is death. He doesn’t rank sins according to severity, but instead treats all sin the same. Whether we murder someone, steal, practice homosexuality, kill apostates and infidels, commit adultery, or any other sin, we must be punished. I have not met anyone who hasn’t sinned. The Bible tells us the only way to be redeemed of our sin is through faith in Jesus. It is not my duty to judge others, because I am not perfect myself. I am a sinner, just as the homosexual is a sinner. But once I am redeemed through faith in Jesus, I am to turn from my sin and not continue doing it. Jesus commands me to love everyone, even homosexuals or those who hate/persecute me. I am not to judge others, because I am just as guilty in God's eyes as the next person. But He certainly doesn’t intend for me promote the ordaining of homosexuals in the church. Homosexuality is clearly against God’s Word.

Carol’s comment about women not being able to speak in church (1 Corinthians 14:34) is also misleading. In Corinthian culture women were not allowed to confront men in public. The fact that they were being allowed to receive religious education was a remarkable step forward for women. Apparently some of the newly Christian women thought that their Christian freedom gave them the right to question the men in public worship and this was causing division in the church. Paul’s words were meant to promote unity in the church, not to teach about the women’s role in the church. As the culture changed, women’s right to speak in church changed.

And yes Carol, God is a God of love. He loved us enough to give us another chance even though we sinned. He could have simply wiped us from the face of the earth sent us all to hell as we deserve. But He instead sent His one and only son Jesus to die in our place. He’s our only hope – on our own, we could never earn our way back into God’s grace.

As the culture changed, women’s right to speak in church changed.

I agree. I truly believe that after much research and thought that the Bible was written by men, for the benefit of men.

newly Christian women thought that their Christian freedom gave them the right to question the men in public worship

What were they thinking?????

I am happy that you have found a faith in which you can put your trust. It is a wonderful feeling to know that you are right with God. I, too, have that feeling. I accept your beliefs, and I would ask that you accept mine.

The religious nuts just kill me. If marriage is such a sacred thing to the anti gay people, why do they allow all the divorced people to just get a pass? Why are these people threatened by two people who love each other but don't look like them? It is bizarre behavior but then again, the moralists never make much sense. Gays do not threaten me, or my family. Whether they marry or not does not cheapen my marriage.

What really cheapens the institution of marriage are all those who divorce at the drop of a hat, remarry and then use EVERY justification in the world for it. "Oh we just couldn't get along... "She was just a crazy woman.." "We grew apart..."
Give me a break! If you condone that kind of cop out, how can a gay marriage bother you?!!
I don't care if you failed at marriage, but for heaven's sake, quit carping at gay people who want to dedicate themselves to another.

Kind of reminds me of the hypocrisy of the Nazi priest that the Catholic Church got to "say" he was sorry for saying there was no proof of a holocaust. Gotta love it when this guy believes in talking bushes, Noah's Ark, etc. totally on FAITH, but can't believe the proof of bones, bodies, crematoriums etc.
Religious nuts cause most of the wars, and those ranting about Gay people are our version of the Taliban.

Of course they also believe tax cuts, banning abortion, and putting mandatory prayer in school would fix the economy....!
God bless those nutcakes.

And please don't call me a "religious nut". I prefer Jesus freak!

I think it's important to differentiate here between a discussion of legalizing gay marriage and an independent religious organization's treatment of homosexuals. My opposition to the amendment has little to do with its stance on homosexuals. I'd accept them as elders, deacons, or pastors either as chaste or in a committed relationship (marriage).

I think huck makes a point he or she most likely didn't intend.

"As the culture changed, women’s right to speak in church changed."

'As the culture changed,' so has our understanding of homosexuality. It is not some sick aberration or perversion. Whatever the factors involved in making a person homosexual, it doesn't seem to be a conscious choice. The only choice made is to either deny the way one feels or accept it.

It might be useful to imagine the opposite situation. Imagine for a second that homosexuality is the accepted behavior, and that you either pretend to like people of the same sex, quell all urges for sexual interaction, or accept your heterosexuality at the expense of funny looks when in public with your partner or being told everyday that you are going to hell unless you get in line and do one of the first two options, among many other horrible things.

As I've never seen the Bible explicitly address committed homosexual relationships, I can only draw on other guidance the book offers. Jesus tells us to love everyone. Paul tells us that it is better to marry than to burn with passion. Why would this not also be true for homosexuals?

So, I have no problem accepting homosexuals in my church, but I still hope that the amendment fails simply because the language is too ambiguous.

Well, guess I'm going to hell. I'll be the one in the platinum throne with my name engraved on it. See y'all there!

Thanks for the lightened humor rescuechick after a rather serious (and sincere) post by rahrah and the multitude of Bible verses.

blah, blah, blah.i'm just waiting for the pro-homo lobby to tell the islamic world that they too must accept homosexuals as normal. heh! that'll be interesting huh?
and kinda sad is it not that a 12 y/o boy who has ants in his pants is deemed to have a disorder(adhd), but a man who'll sexually pleasure another man is to be considered normal.
end of times? you bet ya'.

rahrah, I don't know anyone else would understand this, but I know how I read it.
King James Bible:
Romans Chapter 1: 26-27
26 For this cause God gave them up into vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and recieving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

rahrah,

That's not at all my point. Men, not God, placed a restriction on women being able to speak in church in Corinth. When Corinthian culture changed and allowed women to speak, it was a change in man's restriction, not God's.

Jesus studied the Old Testament and upheld it. Yes, He wants us to love everyone. He wants us to love the sinner, but not the sin. Jesus did not directly mention homosexuality, but His quote in Matthew (see first post) would suggest that His views on homosexuality would be the same as God originally stated (that it's detestable). Jesus did state that marriage is to be between one man and one woman. He said, "'Haven't you read,' he replied, 'that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.'" (Matthew 19:4-6) Here Jesus, who is God, quoted directly from Genesis as literal history, confirming the validity of the Old Testament. And regarding homosexuality Paul said, "Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 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." (Romans 1:24-27) I'm quite certain, based on this quote, that Paul would not approve of homosexual marriage.

If an adulterer at my church repents of his sin and quits doing it, then seeks a position of leadership, I could support that. But if he continues to pursue his adulterous relationship, I could not support him in his pursuit of leadership within the church. In the same manner, the Presbyterian church is making a big mistake by voting to ordain gays.

In Romans, Paul clearly uses the word 'lust,' and not love. Matthew 19:4-6 is irrelevant to this issue. Jesus is essentially answering a question from the Pharisees about divorce or, in other words, about men who already have wives. Extending anywhere beyond that is dishonest.

Culturally, the Bible was written in a time when homosexuality was not understood and not accepted. We have moved much closer to understanding homosexuality and it's time that we begin to accept it. I know it's tiresome when people say it, but the Bible was written by men--humans limited in their understanding of the world. It is my opinion that, if Paul had known what we know today about homosexuality today, he would have been very accepting of committed homosexual relationships. Of course, I realize that this is only an opinion.

As a christian church this should not even be open to debate.The bible is clear in what is says about homosexuality.God's word doesn't change just because it doesn't suit your own beliefs and it is not something that is up for a vote.If you are a christian you believe that the bible is god's word and how he wants us to live.If you do not accept that then that is your choice but do not attempt to warp his message to suit your own beliefs.

funny thing is, God's word may not be God's word.

rahrah said

"funny thing is, God's word may not be God's word."

funny thing is, one day we'll find out.