re: United Methodist Church votes to allow gay marriage and gay clergy

All men who advocate, if you even advocate pro homosexuality or abortion, you have n shot at going to Heaven after judgment unless you repent of those barbaric agenda, PERIOD. God will not be mocked. There is a reason on 5 of the 10 virgin brides make the Marriage. Out of 2 billion "Christians" 1 billion are fake.

quote:

---

No need. Simply look up the myriad of Bible verses in which the term Rock is used. It’s always talking about God or Christ.

---

Until Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter, which means "Rock".

so now they fall like the northern baptists, lutherans, presbyterians(one of them after the split), episcopalians, etc. wow

can any of these clowns read scripture in the OT and NT against this?

WTF is wrong with these people?

I have no clue what the UMC’s end goal is as a church body. Getting wrapped up in political ideology is going to only end in the church falling apart. They may have some top leadership that thinks it sounds awesome; however, the average church member is not interested and the leadership of UMC are just pushing the average member away.

quote:

---

“This morning I cried … because a fight I’ve been in for so long found justice,” Pastor Matt Patrick wrote in a post on X. “We are no longer [saying] that being gay is a sin …and no longer ban LGBTQ from serving as ministers … Praise be to God.”

---

This is heresy.

As a Methodist, I left my church a year ago or so when the refused to allow the congregation to vote on whether to split or not. The church was leaning liberal already.

quote:

---

If it isn't the 'preacher' or the 'priest' then it is the 'youth minister' or the 'music minister' or some other homosexual predator scurrying around looking for the next kid to molest. Its fricking sick and no way in hell would I allow my kids in that environment. No thanks.

---

With all due respect, this just seems like a severely misinformed and pessimistic excuse to not entertain any kind of church life.

quote:

---

While it is indeed wrong and some in the church did not react to it correctly (and frankly tried to cover it up), it doesn’t delegitimize the entire organization.

---

Anybody have the latest stats on the number of former UMC churches that have bugged out (disaffiliated)?

"I can't fathom attending any 'church' these days all of them are infiltrated with homosexuals"

I wouldn't let something like that keep me out of church. Every church is filled with sinners, that's the point. Every single person has fallen short. You don't take well people to the hospital, and for a similar reason this is why you attend church. Is we were all perfect, there wouldn't be a need for it.
The problem is not that there are homosexuals in the church. Actually that is where they need to be. The issue is that when a church gets up and blatantly flaunts the sinful nature of man, accepts it and pronounces a blessing of forgiveness on those who are sinning, it is an abomination to God. Man does not get to decide what is and isn't sin. The Bible is clear on that, and Paul warned churches of this early on in the Christian church. They are leading their congregation to the gates of Hell. The Bible tells us, as Jesus said, to love our neighbor. We should do that. But to love someone is to not let them run out in front of car willingly to be killed, or to allow them to continue down a road of sin that leads to destruction. Our mission is to love them, not to judge them, but to tell them the truth, and to attempt to persuade them that repentance and turning away from the sin requires strength and courage, but is worth it in the end.

quote:

---

Until Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter, which means "Rock".

---

The grammar suggests that Jesus is talking about something else other than Peter. He doesn’t say “and on you I will build my church” but “on this rock”. Jesus was talking to Peter directly but “this rock” doesn’t appear to be Peter based on the grammar, which is why many—like Augustine—believe Jesus was talking about Peter’s confession (that Jesus is the Christ, the son of the living God) or Christ Himself as the rock.

But even if one would take Peter to be the rock Jesus was referring to, it doesn’t follow that Peter’s primacy extended to his successors. History teaches that the bishop of Rome was not seen as the “head of the church” as Catholics believe today until hundreds of years after the death of the last apostle. And the NT books don’t teach directly or by example that Peter had the functional role that Rome teaches.

quote:

---

Protestants are just people who couldn't hack it at being Catholic. So they went out and made up their own rules to suit their selfish needs.

---

Go back to your Mary worship and leave the Christianity to those of us who actually try to follow Biblical teachings.