Started By
Message

re: Why have churches started allowing gay preachers?

Posted on 5/11/24 at 6:40 pm to
Posted by Prodigal Son
Member since May 2023
709 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 6:40 pm to
Before we get into this, I want to make it clear that God’s word says that ALL sexual immorality is a sin. And, that one who struggles with homosexuality is no less loved by God than one who struggles with heterosexual immorality- sexual relations outside the bond of marriage, adultery, pornography, etc. I am in no position (nor do I desire) to cast stones. My only intention is to defend what the Bible teaches- with reverence and respect. And a little humor to lighten the mood.

quote:

I am religious

Interesting choice of words. You know who else was religious? Pharisees.


quote:

don't believe being gay is a sin. Nor is it a choice.


Well, God’s word disagrees- strongly.

Genesis 2:24 - Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
From the very beginning, God’s plan was for one man, and one woman, to be joined together in the bonds of marriage.

Leviticus 18:22 ~ You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 20:13 ~ If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.
Bolded to show that this verse at least implies that the act in question is a free-will-decision

Romans 1:26-28 ~ For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

God’s word is very clear, that homosexuality and all other forms of sexual immorality are sinful- among many, many other things; things that, if we’re all being honest, we all have various areas in which we struggle- seemingly to no avail. More on that later.


quote:

many in the history of the church have taken a few phrases in the Bible out of context.

Sure. But, which ones are you referring to here? I would love to discuss this in more detail.

quote:

I read those phrases in the context of using sex, particularly gay sex, in a non-loving way and abusive way.

Ok. But, this is called eisegesis- which means an interpretation, especially of Scripture, that expresses the interpreter's own ideas, bias, or the like, rather than the meaning of the text.

quote:

There were many examples where men in power abused young boys and forced sex on them.

Right. What’s the easiest way to avoid such things? Follow God’s plan for heterosexual, monogamous marriages; and to abstain from all forms of sexual immorality.


quote:

This is the context that caused the men that wrote the Bible and the men that re-wrote the Bible lived in.

My friend, we could do a whole separate thread on this topic alone. Long story short- the Bible that we have today, is the same one they had then. Sure, there are some copyist errors, but absolutely nothing that changes any of the theology. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls bears this out.


quote:

I find it interesting that many take these verses as a cornerstone of their belief. If you are one of those, then why do you not emphasize the many other verses that you do not follow? Who here would stone their daughter to death if she has sex outside of marriage? Are adulterers put to death? Do you ever work on the Sabbath?

Wow. A lot to unpack there. And, I hope we get to do so. But, for now- do two wrongs make a right? Surely you don’t believe that one’s sin is justified by another’s?

quote:

These are not God's words, but were written by men and normally many years after the events or quotes from the original men that spoke them.

Now we’re getting somewhere. Again, there’s a lot to discuss here. But, if you don’t believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, then how can you call yourself a Christian? Oh, that’s right- you don’t. You’re “religious.”


quote:

Please share any comments where Jesus spoke against gay sex. I don't believe he ever did.

For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person. (Matthew 15:19–20 ESV)
I find it interesting that He led with “for out of the heart come…” This also signifies a free will decision. So, when the Old Testament clearly states that homosexuality is indeed a form of sexual immorality, Jesus affirms that all forms of sexual immorality defile a person- He is, in fact, condemning homosexuality.

Look, friend- I applaud your desire to reconcile the lost to Christ. It seems to me that you believe that you are acting out of love- and that’s commendable. But the Bible is very clear on homosexuality, but to coddle someone in their sins because of your unwillingness to fight the battle- is the opposite of love. I hope to continue this conversation with you, and anyone else who wants to participate, because there is so much more to say about much of what has been said.
Posted by Ric Flair
Charlotte
Member since Oct 2005
13681 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 6:45 pm to
quote:

I am a straight man, but don't believe beig gay is a sin.

I read those phrases in the context of using sex, particularly gay sex, in a non-loving way and abusive way.


Sounds like you got your Seminary degree either at the university of Sodom and Gomorrah.

I’m guessing you ignore 1st Timothy 3:2 :

“must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;“

Posted by Ric Flair
Charlotte
Member since Oct 2005
13681 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 6:55 pm to
quote:

This is the context that caused the men that wrote the Bible and the men that re-wrote the Bible lived in.


quote:

These are not God's words, but were written by men and normally many years after the events or quotes from the original men that spoke them.


I believe the Bible to be the word of God. Although written by man, it was Divinely inspired.

Posted by Ric Flair
Charlotte
Member since Oct 2005
13681 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 7:02 pm to
quote:

Please share any comments where Jesus spoke against gay sex. I don't believe he ever did.


Jesus also didn’t speak out against masturbating to online porn while high on cocaine. Doesn’t mean that it’s not a sin.
Posted by tigersbh
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2005
10326 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 7:26 pm to
quote:

Why have churches started allowing gay preachers?


It’s just prophecy playing out. The great apostasy has started.

“Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;” - 2 Thessalonians? ?2?:?3? ?KJV??
Posted by STLDawg
The Lou
Member since Apr 2015
3755 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 7:28 pm to
Because the current generation defines their own reality, including what their holy texts say.
Posted by Jim Rockford
Member since May 2011
98335 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 7:32 pm to
Fun fact: There have always been gay preachers.
Posted by Honest Tune
Louisiana
Member since Dec 2011
15797 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 7:37 pm to
quote:

Fun fact: There have always been gay preachers.


From a classic Ray Wylie Hubbard tune…Conversation with the Devil:

He said, "Come on over here son, let me show you around
Over there's where we put the preachers, I never liked those clowns
They're always blaming me for everything wrong under the sun
It ain't that harder to do what's right, it's just maybe not as much fun
Then they walk around thinking they're better than me and you
And then they get caught in a motel room
Doing what they said not to do"
Posted by Dalosaqy
I can't quite re
Member since Dec 2007
12314 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 7:39 pm to
OMG, Say it ain't so! Gay men and women of faith!
This post was edited on 5/11/24 at 7:40 pm
Posted by OweO
Plaquemine, La
Member since Sep 2009
114040 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 7:53 pm to
There are a lot of preachers/priest who I am sure are far from perfect.. Personally, I don't think being gay is a sin because I don't think men decide they like to suck a dick just because. You have to have the urge or be turned on by those things to do it. So its not like they decide to be that way so... Humans are humans.. If you looking for the perfect person to preach to you on Sunday then you are shite out of luck
Posted by cssamerican
Member since Mar 2011
7137 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 8:32 pm to
quote:

How can they condone someone living in sin this way?


2 Timothy 4:3-4 For the time will come when people 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. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
Posted by cssamerican
Member since Mar 2011
7137 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 8:37 pm to
quote:

Personally, I don't think being gay is a sin because I don't think men decide they like to suck a dick just because. You have to have the urge or be turned on by those things to do it. So its not like they decide to be that way so... Humans are humans.. If you looking for the perfect person to preach to you on Sunday then you are shite out of luck

Is it a sin if a kleptomania steals? Of course, everyone has urges, just as everyone sins. To be Christian is to not give in the the urges of the flesh.

As far as preachers are concerned there are specific requirements outlined in the Bible for leadership positions within the church and a homosexual clearly would not meet those requirements.
This post was edited on 5/11/24 at 8:40 pm
Posted by Dandy Chiggins
Member since Jan 2021
508 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 9:20 pm to
I don’t support having skeletons in the closet; I wish no church had them;
But
Its in the closet because the general congregation would be appalled if they knew about it.
Now we’re flaunting the skeleton. It doesn’t have to be hidden anymore because the church supports things that once abhorred members.

Every single “slippery slope” argument we were made fun of for the last 50 years is come true…..
Posted by Midtiger farm
Member since Nov 2014
5060 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 9:38 pm to
quote:

preachers/priest who I am sure are far from perfect.. Personally, I don't think being gay is a sin because I don't think men decide they like to suck a dick just because. You have to have the urge or be turned on by those things to do it. So its not like they decide to be that way so... Humans are humans.. If you looking for the perfect person to preach to you on Sunday then you are shite out of luck


Being gay isn’t a sin - acting on your gay urges is - just like heterosexual pre-marital sex is a sin
Celebrating living a gay life is a sin
There are celibate same sex attracted individuals that live within the church’s teachings
This post was edited on 5/11/24 at 9:40 pm
Posted by Rust Cohle
Baton rouge
Member since Mar 2014
1968 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 10:13 pm to
The Bible does not address homosexuality because homosexuality is a reference to a sexual orientation. And sexual orientation is a modern concept that developed in the 19th century. This is not to say there was no such thing as same sex intercourse anciently, but they organized their understanding of humn sexuality and their rationales for what was going on and what was appropriate and inappropriate in much different ways. So when we say homosexuality, we're referring to a conceptual framework that did not exist anciently. So the Bible does not address homosexuality because the concept didn't exist. The Bible does address acts of same -sex intercourse and the bible does prohibit and condemn them.

Now, I think the primary manifestation of these acts was probably in cultic acts and prostitution and things like that. But certainly the condemnations of it extend to other manifestations of it. Now, when we look at the rationales for why these things were inappropriate, when we look at their understanding of what was going on with same sex intercourse anciently, where it was coming from and these kinds of things, the rationales and the ethical frameworks are entirely outdated and have absolutely no relevance to us today.

If we try to leverage the Bible to suggest that these prohibitions and condemnations are relevant to today, we must strip them from their historical and ethical and conceptual settings. And that does injustice to the text in order to do injustice to people today. So people want to take prohibitions on tattoos, the endorsement of slavery and the endorsement of polygamy and try to rationalize them away by suggesting that they are products of an outdated society, or that was the way things were anciently. Great! But you have to be consistent about that. So people who leverage the Bible to try to prohibit or condemn same -sex intercourse today are doing so not because the text indicates that's what we have to do today. It's overwhelming that they're being influenced by their identity politics because opposition to same -sex intercourse has become such a powerful and central identity marker for conservative brands, particularly of Christianity, particularly right -wing authoritarian Christianity. So anyone trying to leverage the Bible to prohibit and condemn same -sex intercourse today is only doing because it serves their identity politics, and not because the Bible requires it.
Posted by Prodigal Son
Member since May 2023
709 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 10:45 pm to
quote:

The Bible does not address homosexuality

Have you read it? It absolutely addresses homosexuality.

quote:

And sexual orientation is a modern concept that developed in the 19th century

Wut

quote:

This is not to say there was no such thing as same sex intercourse anciently, but they organized their understanding of humn sexuality and their rationales for what was going on and what was appropriate and inappropriate in much different ways.

Really? So two dudes banging was somehow different then? I’m not following your logic here.

quote:

So when we say homosexuality, we're referring to a conceptual framework that did not exist anciently

No. When we say homosexuality, we’re saying exactly the same thing they were saying- two dudes banging. You can try to “re-imagine” whatever you want, but it doesn’t change anything other than your perception.

quote:

So the Bible does not address homosexuality because the concept didn't exist

That is some serious mental gymnastics there.

quote:

The Bible does address acts of same -sex intercourse and the bible does prohibit and condemn them.

Right. So, the Bible condemns homosexuality. Good night.
Posted by Champagne
Already Conquered USA.
Member since Oct 2007
48499 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 11:40 pm to
quote:

The Bible does not address homosexuality because homosexuality is a reference to a sexual orientation. And sexual orientation is a modern concept that developed in the 19th century. This is not to say there was no such thing as same sex intercourse anciently, but they organized their understanding of humn sexuality and their rationales for what was going on and what was appropriate and inappropriate in much different ways. So when we say homosexuality, we're referring to a conceptual framework that did not exist anciently. So the Bible does not address homosexuality because the concept didn't exist. The Bible does address acts of same -sex intercourse and the bible does prohibit and condemn them.

Now, I think the primary manifestation of these acts was probably in cultic acts and prostitution and things like that. But certainly the condemnations of it extend to other manifestations of it. Now, when we look at the rationales for why these things were inappropriate, when we look at their understanding of what was going on with same sex intercourse anciently, where it was coming from and these kinds of things, the rationales and the ethical frameworks are entirely outdated and have absolutely no relevance to us today.

If we try to leverage the Bible to suggest that these prohibitions and condemnations are relevant to today, we must strip them from their historical and ethical and conceptual settings. And that does injustice to the text in order to do injustice to people today. So people want to take prohibitions on tattoos, the endorsement of slavery and the endorsement of polygamy and try to rationalize them away by suggesting that they are products of an outdated society, or that was the way things were anciently. Great! But you have to be consistent about that. So people who leverage the Bible to try to prohibit or condemn same -sex intercourse today are doing so not because the text indicates that's what we have to do today. It's overwhelming that they're being influenced by their identity politics because opposition to same -sex intercourse has become such a powerful and central identity marker for conservative brands, particularly of Christianity, particularly right -wing authoritarian Christianity. So anyone trying to leverage the Bible to prohibit and condemn same -sex intercourse today is only doing because it serves their identity politics, and not because the Bible requires it.


Thank you very much for explaining how a mainstream Protestant denomination that has Bible Alone and Faith Alone as core beliefs could interpret the Bible to allow Gay Sex and Gay Preachers. I don't know if this is the Official United Methodist analysis or not, but, you are certainly the first to take a shot at it and I applaud you for trying.

I do wish that we could find a United Methodist person around here to give us the "Official" Methodist analysis on how this idea works in the context of Bible Alone.

But more importantly, thanks for taking the time to explain it. You did indeed articulate a reasonable analysis of how this new idea might be explained in the context of Bible Alone. I expect that your analysis is very close to the UMC's analysis.
This post was edited on 5/11/24 at 11:42 pm
Posted by Champagne
Already Conquered USA.
Member since Oct 2007
48499 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 11:49 pm to
quote:

So, the Bible condemns homosexuality.


No, you don't understand his analysis. He argues that the Bible condemns some same sex sexual activity, but, not the kind of same- sex sexual activity that exists in a loving Gay Marriage.

If the United Methodist view is the same, then that denomination could declare that the Holy Spirit guided them to this more accurate insight into what the Bible says on these issues.


But, I would be very interested to see whether the Official United Methodist analysis is anywhere near as cogent as our poster here, and, as you point out, our poster's analysis is not by any means irrefutable.

I'm not going to comment on how "Bible Alone" leads to these kinds of problems, because what I'm after here in this thread is to read an Official UMC analysis of this new interpretation of Scripture. We have already discussed "Bible Alone" in a dozen other threads. No need to do so here.
Posted by Rust Cohle
Baton rouge
Member since Mar 2014
1968 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 11:53 pm to
Champagne, I appreciate the good will! This was a quote from Dan McClellan. I didn’t mention the name because it could cause bias and be dismissive. His slogan is data over dogma, and is points out the difference between scripture and theology. I’m not sure of the Methodist position.

To prodigal- while his delineation of homosexuality and same sex intercourse may seem semantical,(although definitionally one can be homosexual and not engage in same sex acts) his point is that their way of life and culture is alien to us.

I think it’s hard to deny his point about one sin being magnified while others are minimized, and it being due to identity politics, and structuring of power.

Many will quote Levitican prescriptions to support their beliefs, but not only do they cherry pick prescriptions from that book, they only adopt half of a prescription and dont follow trough and support their execution? Or do you? Do you think same sex actors should be executed?

We can’t superimpose this type of culture on our own and create meaning. Sure we can learn from history, but we are modernity washing it if we pretend we were like them.

Women were property back then, premarital sex prescriptions were about tainting the fathers property. That’s why if you raped a woman you could pay dad 50 scheckles, and y’all would be square. And this is how they treated their sisters, daughters. When it came to others outside the tribe and slaves, the laws literally did not apply. It was not seen to be extramarital to have sex with your slave(possibly male slaves also).

There was a system of hierarchy that just isn’t comprehended today, (it was men, then way way down the list it was property-women, children then slaves all grouped together)and some say that same sex acts were forbidden not because it was not fruit bearing, or contradictory to the sanctimony of marriage, but because it wasn’t right for a man to be in a submissive position, and supported by the idea that a woman should not be on top, in a dominant manner.
Posted by Tchefuncte Tiger
Bat'n Rudge
Member since Oct 2004
57344 posts
Posted on 5/12/24 at 6:52 am to
Satan.
Jump to page
Page First 8 9 10 11 12 13
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 10 of 13Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram