Beliefnet News

Beliefnet News


Despite Pro-Gay Moves, Episcopalians Remain Divided

posted by nsymmonds

ANAHEIM, Calif. — Russell Randle and J.P. Causey are both lawyers, both Virginians, and both longtime Episcopalians.
They have visited each other’s homes, served on church committees together, and when Randle wrote a book on environmental law, he sent a signed copy to Causey, his friend of 15 years.
But the two men, gathered here this week for their denomination’s General Convention, have sharp disagreements on some of the most prominent issues facing the Episcopal Church, particularly those related to human sexuality.
For instance, Causey voted for a resolution that allows gay men and lesbians to become bishops; Randle voted against it. “And we are still friends,” one of them wrote in a note sent from the floor of the House of Deputies, where they are among the 830 lay and clergy delegates voting on church policy.
The resolution that lifted a de facto ban on gay bishops passed by a nearly 3-to-1 margin on Tuesday (July 14), despite warnings that it would threaten unity with sister churches in the wider Anglican Communion.
But the resolution’s overwhelming margin of victory served clear notice that liberal Episcopalians are gaining ever more ground, especially since four dioceses and dozens of parishes seceded in recent years to form a conservative alternative to the Episcopal Church.
(Episcopal bishops are expected to take up a resolution on developing rites to bless same-sex unions, another move expected to anger other Anglicans, many of whom believe homosexuality is sinful and
unbiblical.)
The shift has been most keenly felt in the two men’s Virginia diocese, which has long been known as a place where liberals and conservatives can disagree without “marching off and denouncing each other,” said the Rev. Robert Prichard, a professor at Virginia Theological Seminary and a convention delegate.
Yet that elasticity has been tested, as 11 conservative parishes — including two large, historic churches — have seceded and joined the rival Anglican Church in North America. Like the Episcopal Church at large, the diocese has tilted to the left after the defections, according to some members.
Causey, 66, who has been a delegate to the last nine General Conventions, said that after decades of debate over homosexuality, it was time for the Episcopal Church to “get off the fence and move on.”
“It’s difficult for me to justify delaying further in moving forward in accepting the consecration of gay bishops who are suitably moral in their relationships,” said Causey, who lives in West Point, Va..
As for scriptural arguments against homosexuality, Causey said, “I am persuaded that that current understanding of homosexuality, and how it occurs and how relationships exist, is not descriptive of what the understanding was in Jesus’ time.”
Randle, who lives in Arlington, about 150 miles north of Causey, said he worries about the “serious strains” between Anglicans ever since openly gay Bishop V. Gene Robinson was elected in New Hampshire in 2003.
The 53-year-old Randle is an honorary lay canon in the Episcopal Church of the Sudan, where he has helped build the cathedral, organized relief efforts and used his legal acumen to review sanctions levied against Sudan’s secular leaders.
The Episcopal Church in the Sudan is critical to fighting government persecution and getting international aid to needy families — efforts that may be at risk as Episcopalians adopt evermore progressive policies on homosexuality, Randle said.
“They are under great pressure from the other African provinces to cut ties with the Episcopal Church over issues of sexuality,” Randle said. After Robinson’s consecration, several African provinces declared themselves out of communion with Episcopalians, refusing to even take relief aid from the U.S. church.
“If we care what our baptism means, we have to stand up for people in persecution,” Randle said. “For us to abandon them is the highest form of cowardice.”
Episcopalians were the driving force behind forming the Anglican Communion in the mid 1800s, said Prichard. But now, some are saying the communion has changed so much, particularly with the ascendance of conservative, powerful archbishops in Africa, they question whether to remain members.
Causey said he does not want to “compromise my beliefs on sexuality to be a part of a group that I’m not sure I want to be a part of.”
“They have beliefs and a polity and structure — namely, authoritarian bishops — that do not fit with my view of what an Episcopalian and Christian ought to be in the 21st century,” he said.
By DANIEL BURKE
c. 2009 Religion News Service
Copyright 2009 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(40)
post a comment
nnmns

posted July 15, 2009 at 7:17 pm


“After Robinson’s consecration, several African provinces declared themselves out of communion with Episcopalians, refusing to even take relief aid from the U.S. church.”
That is serious mental illness, brought on by bad religion.



report abuse
 

Mordred08

posted July 15, 2009 at 8:50 pm


“After Robinson’s consecration, several African provinces declared themselves out of communion with Episcopalians, refusing to even take relief aid from the U.S. church.”
Good. Why should the Episcopalians be sending aid to theocratic nations where some of their own members would likely be imprisoned or executed (which the Anglicans don’t seem to be losing any sleep over)?



report abuse
 

cknuck

posted July 15, 2009 at 9:01 pm


TEC is very small compared to the Anglican Church and now TEC is split/fractured. Homosexuals can flock to it and have their own denomination. As they move forward other homosexual theology will surface and fracture even more folk from the organization. The fact that there was a homosexual victor may indicate decrease in members or flight from the church to the point those who want homosexual leadership are all who are left./ If that is true TEC grows even smaller.



report abuse
 

Nate W

posted July 15, 2009 at 9:26 pm


You’re right about the relative size of the Episcopal Church, cknuck. About 2,000,000 people of the total of around 70,000,000 for the Anglican Communion worldwide. The only reason the US church is is important at all on the world scale is that it has a history of being a church for the upper classes in this country, and that means they’ve got a lot of financial clout compared the often poverty-stricken congregations in Africa. One of the best things the African churches could do to demonstrate the sincerity of their commitment was to refuse money from the Episcopalians, that is, to send a strong message to the Americans that their financial prosperity shouldn’t give them the power to do whatever they want without consequences. And that’s exactly the problem with the American Episcopal church, the morality of homosexuality aside: they think they can do whatever they want without reference to the rest of the Communion, which is a profoundly unecclesial, unchristian attitude. It’s Protestant individualism at its worst.



report abuse
 

Patrick

posted July 15, 2009 at 10:09 pm


For Christians, I think we do no one any good by not stating what God’s word makes clear. Homosexuality is sinful. Like all sinful things, one needs to repent and seek forgiveness through Christ, who died for all, so that all might live abundantly!
The Episcopal Church, by subverting the Word of God, is fulfilling prophesy: 2 Tim. 3:1-9 NKJV says concerning the last days-
“But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal,despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God. Having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away!
Christians MUST proclaim to all that the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. As Christians, we are to love the sinner, but hate the sin. The homosexual is engage in sin. He/she needs to repent and change. A person who accepts Christ into their heart becomes a new person. Does the mean that sin will be absent for their lives forever. Of course not. Christians sin all the time. But Christians have the saving power of Christ. For the Christian, “we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us…” Hebrews 12:1, NKJV
Christians’ must be a light in a fallen world. If we act like we are in the world, caught up with the logic of the world, and acting consistent with those who are not saved, and who are controlled by the world, then we lose our worth. We become like salt trodden underfoot. We are no different than the non-Christian. The Episcopal church, by following the World, is leading the world to Hell. The Episcopal church is not a Christian church, because it does not follow God’s word. In failing to follow God’s word, it fulfills prophecy.
In the meantime, those who are Christians need to share the love of Christ with love to all. Homosexuals are no worse sinners in God’s eye then anyone else. But sin is sin, and with Christ’s forgiveness, all are equally condemned! WE MUST speak the truth. Jesus died, and Jesue rose again. And Jesus is returning soon!
And the truth is that all who die, without Christ, are condemned. A person who is saved by Christ, will strive to let Christ control their actions and thoughts. That does not make a Christian perfect, but it does show that a Christian is seeking to do God’s will, rather than their own. For a Christian is bought with a price. And no longer serves themselves, but the Will of the person who paid the price…Christ, our Lord!
Here is what the Bible states about homosexuality.
1. God lists “homosexual offenders” among “the wicked” (1 Corinthians 6:9).
2. God lists “homosexual offenders” among those who He determines will “not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9).
3. Historically, homosexuality has incurred God’s destructive wrath upon an entire city (Gen. 19:4-5, 11-13).
4. God’s word defines the men of Sodom as “sinning greatly” because of their men having sex with men (Genesis 13:13; 19:5).
5. God calls Sodom’s sin “sexual perversion” (Jude 1:7). Societies that remain in perversion (Sodom, Rome…) are on the road to destruction.
6. God’s word identifies husband-wife relations as “natural relations” and homosexual relations as “unnatural ones” (Romans 1:26-27) and “perversion” (vs. 27).
7. God’s word also rebukes those who “approve of those who practice” homosexuality (Romans 1:32).
8. Jesus settled the marriage issue once for all, declaring that God had made them “male and female … a man … [and] his wife” (Matthew 19:4-5).



report abuse
 

Patrick

posted July 15, 2009 at 10:14 pm


Correction! (WITHOUT!!)
In the meantime, those who are Christians need to share the love of Christ with love to all. Homosexuals are no worse sinners in God’s eye then anyone else. But sin is sin, and withOUT Christ’s forgiveness, all are equally condemned! WE MUST speak the truth. Jesus died, and Jesue rose again. And Jesus is returning soon!



report abuse
 

cknuck

posted July 15, 2009 at 11:10 pm


The thing that compounds homosexuality is the fact that it is a purposeful, repeated, ongoing sin with no repentance as long as the activity continues and also it flaunts in the fact of God a rebellion against His design for man and woman.



report abuse
 

cknuck

posted July 15, 2009 at 11:11 pm


should be face fingers are too fast from taking notes all day at our conference



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 12:30 am


Patrick:
“1. God lists “homosexual offenders” among “the wicked” (1 Corinthians 6:9).
2. God lists “homosexual offenders” among those who He determines will “not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9).”
Let’s look at this.
1 Corinthians 6:9 – “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind”
So among those who shall not inherit the earth (and therefore aren’t to marry each other and may, according to some Christians, be hectored from pillar to post) are fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, effeminate people and people who “abuse themselves with mankind”. Yet you ignore the fornicators, the idolaters and the adulterers; perhaps because so many of them turn out to be religious leaders and Republican politicians and people much like you.
Now let’s talk about the effeminate. Not all of them are homosexuals and definitely not all homosexuals are effeminate, so that doesn’t describe homosexuals and thus doesn’t justify abusing homosexuals.
That leaves “abusers of themselves with mankind”. Maybe you think you know what that means, it’s not clear to me. A lot of women certainly abuse themselves with mankind in a variety of ways, just as several men abuse themselves with womenkind (if we are to interpret “mankind” as meaning men. It seems likely it means men and women but I leave that question to the scholars.
If “God” meant “men who abuse themselves with men and women who abuse themselves with women” “God” was surely capable of saying so, eh? Or does your god have a communication disability? Surely not! Once again there’s no reasonable evidence this refers to homosexuals. Certainly not enough to justify what’s been done to them even if you take the Bible seriously.
What is very clear here is that 1 Corinthians 6:9 does not provide any foundation for abusing homosexuals. It does, if one were inclined, provide a foundation for abusing fornicators, idolaters and adulterers but you people are giving them a pass while you abuse homosexuals over and over.
I think it’s time some of you think and then perhaps talk about why you do this rather than just spouting the same old trash over and over.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 12:41 am


Patrick:
“3. Historically, homosexuality has incurred God’s destructive wrath upon an entire city (Gen. 19:4-5, 11-13).”
Gen. 19:4-5 – 4 Now before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both old and young, all the people from every quarter, surrounded the house. And they called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally.”
Gen. 19:11-13 – And they struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they became weary trying to find the door. Then the men said to Lot, “Have you anyone else here? Son-in-law, your sons, your daughters, and whomever you have in the city—take them out of this place! For we will destroy this place, because the outcry against them has grown great before the face of the LORD, and the LORD has sent us to destroy it.”
Ok, so “God” is mad at Sodom. And they do sound like a foul bunch. But where’s the evidence your god wouldn’t have done the same thing if it had been a bunch of traveling women instead of men? It would have been at least as uncivil, maybe more so since pregnancies might have resulted.
There is no evidence here your god was ticked off about male on male. In fact male on male went on a lot of places then and your god seems to have held his fire.
No, once again this Biblical section offers no justification for harassing homosexuals.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 12:49 am


Patrick:
“4. God’s word defines the men of Sodom as “sinning greatly” because of their men having sex with men (Genesis 13:13; 19:5″
Genesis 13:13 – But the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinful against the LORD.
Gen 19:5 – And they called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally.”
Same comments. The deadly sin may well have been terminal incivility to guests in the town. What god in it’s right mind would allow that act to have been done to a band of traveling women, either? Nothing is specifically said there about men having sex with men. Wrong again, Patrick and the rest of you careless readers.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 12:53 am


Patrick:
“5. God calls Sodom’s sin “sexual perversion” (Jude 1:7). Societies that remain in perversion (Sodom, Rome…) are on the road to destruction.”
Jude 1:7 – as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Yes, they wanted to rape visitors. The “strange flesh” could refer to men on men but it could just as well refer to Sodomites on visitors. If your god wanted to make a point, once again he failed. Read more carefully, stop using wishful reading.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 1:13 am


Patrick:
“6. God’s word identifies husband-wife relations as “natural relations” and homosexual relations as “unnatural ones” (Romans 1:26-27) and “perversion” (vs. 27)”
For this we need a little context.
Romans 1:20-35 – For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
So “God” was upset that these people knew him but didn’t glorify him (vanity, anyone?) or thank him and turned his glory into an image. He therefore punished them by making them homosexuals and wicked, covetous, malicious, envious, murderous, and generally anything he could think of to make their lives miserable and people dislike them. Then having made them that way himself, he decided they deserved death.
This is absolutely a god I could never respect or worship; glad I don’t believe in it.
But let’s be clear here: the original sin was not giving “God” his props. He only used all those intermediate stages to work himself up to doing them in or convincing himself he wasn’t really doing it just because they disrespected him. The homosexuality was incidental and went along with the wickedness, murderousness, etc. etc. There is no evidence here, either, that your god hated homosexuality though there’s a suggestion he disliked it.
But if you are going to harass anyone based on this part of the Bible it should be people who know your god but don’t worship him hard enough. That was clearly the sin that brought all this on.
And the reading problems continue.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 1:18 am


Maybe this is why the RCC didn’t want people reading the Bible. If they could read it, they could know when they are being lied to and misled. Unfortunately a lot of the firmest believers still don’t read the Bible. Or can’t.
It’s late, I’m going to bed. Maybe someone else will finish this.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 7:47 am


Back to 1 Corinthians 6:9 – “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind”
In Nicholas Kristof’s NYT column today we find that a chemical in plastics, if ingested at the wrong time by pregnant women, might cause a technical (but sometimes serious) form of effeminacy. Now according to 1 Corinthians the effeminate shall not inherit the “Kingdom of God”. So, folks, does your god punish people for what leaches out of their mother’s water bottles?
And in your theology who is responsible for what leaches out of a bottle when? The manufacturer who, knowingly or unknowingly made it, the parents who knowingly or unknowingly used it, or “God” who you may have put in charge of the physical world?



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 10:48 am


Patrick:
“7. God’s word also rebukes those who “approve of those who practice” homosexuality (Romans 1:32).”
Romans 1:28-32 – And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
So looked at in context, again, those who deserve death are anyone “being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, [and/or] unmerciful”.
To pick out homosexuals from that giant crowd and harass only them would surely earn “God’s” contempt if only he existed. This only mentions homosexuality if it’s included in “sexual immorality” and in that case it’s grouped with the covetous, the malicious, the envious, the deceitful, the backbiters, the proud, the undiscerning and on and on. There’s most of the Republican Party in there and not a few Democrats.
So I charge you with blatant disregard for what the Bible says in your fevered attempt to condemn homosexuals.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 11:08 am


Patrick:
“8. Jesus settled the marriage issue once for all, declaring that God had made them “male and female … a man … [and] his wife” (Matthew 19:4-5).”
Matthew 19:1-8 -Now it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these sayings, that He departed from Galilee and came to the region of Judea beyond the Jordan. And great multitudes followed Him, and He healed them there.
The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?”
And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”
He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.
This is about divorce you ninny! He’s saying people shouldn’t get divorced! The happenstance mention of “male and female” is probably saying that “God” wanted people to get married so he went to the extra effort of making women, knowing most men wouldn’t care to marry another man.
Clearly it’s far more a statement in favor of marriage than against homosexual marriage. If “He” didn’t want same sex marriages surely “He” would have said so specifically, and that clearly didn’t happen.
Some of you people are astonishing in your willingness to twist the words of the Bible you claim to adore in order to get power or to harass one group of people or another.
Others of you are astonishing in your willingness to not check what you are told when, in this case, it’s so easy. It’s not rocket science to read and think about the Bible. Heck I’m an atheist who’s never read several of these parts before but of all the parts of the Bible Patrick claims license him and his ilk to harass homosexuals, none make that case and the ones which touch on it also can be read to license harassing large numbers of other people whom Patrick and his ilk choose to leave alone.
This Biblical crusade against homosexuals is a sham and is shameful. Nothing more.



report abuse
 

Henrietta22

posted July 16, 2009 at 3:50 pm


Wow! You’ve said it all nnmns. The Fundamentalists: for Theocracy, and the King-dom won’t read it though they’ve heard it all before, and they’ve made up their minds.



report abuse
 

cknuck

posted July 16, 2009 at 8:14 pm


nnmns you are the ninny here because Jesus is quoting O.T. text to prove a point about marriage (one man one woman) and the seriousness of marriage, (one man one woman) I love it when a atheist tries to argue scripture a living Word that it takes the Holy Spirit understand because you simply are out of your element. When so-called Christians get excited about the interpretation of the living Word by a atheist then that is sad H22 it is sad a atheist with no sense of what it means can lead your charge then you should give your faith a serious look.



report abuse
 

cknuck

posted July 16, 2009 at 8:33 pm


nnmns quote “So I charge you with blatant disregard for what the Bible says in your fevered attempt to condemn homosexuals.”
Romans 1:28-32 – And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
nnmns do you see yourself in the list?
nnmns you have so little understanding of the Bible why would you enter a argument about something you cannot possibly understand. What do you think about the book of Hosea.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 16, 2009 at 9:42 pm


cknuck: ” I love it when a atheist tries to argue scripture a living Word that it takes the Holy Spirit understand because you simply are out of your element.”
Oh, so your god wrote a book to tell us how to lead our lives that most people can’t read. Clever! Well, I can read English and that’s pretty plain English and I can tell you it’s not about condemning homosexuals.
cknuck: “Romans 1:28-32 – And even as they … practice them.”
cknuck, look up and you’ll find I quoted Romans 1:20-35, which contains Romans 1:28-32.. And here’s what I said about them:

So “God” was upset that these people knew him but didn’t glorify him (vanity, anyone?) or thank him and turned his glory into an image. He therefore punished them by making them homosexuals and wicked, covetous, malicious, envious, murderous, and generally anything he could think of to make their lives miserable and people dislike them. Then having made them that way himself, he decided they deserved death.

But let’s be clear here: the original sin was [in] not giving “God” his props. He only used all those intermediate stages to work himself up to doing them in or convincing himself he wasn’t really doing it just because they disrespected him. The homosexuality was incidental and went along with the wickedness, murderousness, etc. etc. There is no evidence here, either, that your god hated homosexuality though there’s a suggestion he disliked it.

But if you are going to harass anyone based on this part of the Bible it should be people who know your god but don’t worship him hard enough. That was clearly the sin that brought all this on.

So you need to read a little more and see the context and understand what’s going on.
People have died to make the Bible available for us to read, and you want to tell us we can’t read it because we haven’t been through your indoctrination. That is pathetic.



report abuse
 

cknuck

posted July 16, 2009 at 10:53 pm


No what is pathetic is that at a glance you claim to have enough knowledge to preach atheism from a biblical perspective, read what the bible says about homosexuality and claim it is just incidental just a casual mention. Sounds like a good atheist sermon to lead people into sin without regret. You only make a point of why so many concerned Christians do focus on the sin of homosexuality because people like you try to convince people to just continue to sin in such a way after nnmns and others like him has said it is not a sin. So unlike many other sins it is a sin of purposeful repetition without consideration of repentance.



report abuse
 

Henrietta22

posted July 16, 2009 at 11:32 pm


Cknuck, I have to confess I didn’t read all of nnmns explanation as his wisdom explains each scripture verse. I don’t have to. I know friend nnmns doesn’t believe in God, but he has a heart and a brain that I have no doubt God has given him and he uses his intellect from his brain with good logic. God has given us all brains and hearts on this place to comment and with all your well meaning interpretation I feel you’re wrong in your wisdom even if you think the Holy Spirit has given you the right interpretation. Now why do I, because God does not give us GLBT children to kick around and have you and others like you to put down and accuse them of sin. Do not be afraid to use the brain and logic given to you by God. Some of you put down wisdom because of a bible verse again. Perhaps we should just close Universities, spend the money we save to put our children through college?



report abuse
 

cknuck

posted July 17, 2009 at 12:20 am


H22 your assumption that I don’t use my brains or logic God has given me only goes to show how little you use yours. I haven’t kicked a homosexual around ever. It is not abusive to tell the truth the only thing you got right is that “you “feel” that I am wrong. You have arrived to your conclusion by feeling.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 17, 2009 at 3:58 am


cknuck: “No what is pathetic is that at a glance you claim to have enough knowledge to preach atheism from a biblical perspective, read what the bible says about homosexuality and claim it is just incidental just a casual mention.”
I did not preach atheism from a Biblical perspective above. I made the occasional comment that was clearly atheistic but those came from my mind and experiences. What I did do was take on a temporary Christian perspective, read the Bible uncritically, and judge what it said.
And I didn’t claim “homosexuality” was incidental, a casual mention. I did speculate the “made them male and female” phrase you love so much was incidental to talking about the need to stay married and why “God” created women so most men would have someone to happily marry. A little humor there, since without women there’d be no men to marry anyone.
What I’ve mentioned a few times is that homosexuality showed up unequivocally in the Bible in a very few places and it wasn’t favorably received but in each of those places it was there with several other groups no more favorably received. And I pointed out you and your ilk harass homosexuals at every opportunity but do not harass those others, e.g. the covetous, the malicious, the envious, the deceitful, the backbiters, the proud, the undiscerning and on and on.
Why aren’t you urging that the covetous not be able to get married? The proud? You were silent on the malicious all the time they were attacking President Clinton! You approve of the backbiters in the Republican party! No, cknuck you and your ilk reserve your wrath for only the homosexuals out of all those groups and you manage your Bible quotes so as to try to lose mention of those other groups.
If the god of the Bible existed he might well be pretty upset with you. I’d say you’re lucky he doesn’t.



report abuse
 

JohnQ

posted July 17, 2009 at 9:13 am


nnmns-
Thanks for putting in all the effort to make so many outstanding posts.
They may or may not have an effect some of the other posters on this thread…but, they certainly balance things out for anyone who may read over the thread….but, be to inhibited to post. Specifically, lesbian/gay youth.
Peace!



report abuse
 

cknuck

posted July 17, 2009 at 11:26 am


nnmns when the clinton story comes up I will comment on it, but common sense given this is about TEC and homosexuality so I should be commenting on the topic; make sense? I got to ask because you make me wonder about you that you would think I should be talking about something else here. Or is that the only way you can defend you position by pointing in other directions, I remember I used to do that to my foster brother when I got in trouble, “well what about him” that’s just lame.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 17, 2009 at 11:36 am


JohnQ, thanks. I hope it helps.



report abuse
 

GodsCountry

posted July 17, 2009 at 10:12 pm


Someone once said, “No, once again this Biblical section offers no justification for harassing homosexuals.”
Someone is shamefully out of their depth.
Arguing against God, using God’s own Word, when one doesn’t believe in God from the git go is, well, ridiculous.
Absurdity upon absurdity…



report abuse
 

GodsCountry

posted July 17, 2009 at 10:17 pm


There is, within these posts, absolutely no evidence of harassment.
Harassed truth, perhaps.
BHO believes rhetoric will save the country from calamity. But, in the end, it’s all rhetoric…like charges of harassment.
I don’t trust BHO or anyone else attempting to make rhetoric do the work of truth.



report abuse
 

GodsCountry

posted July 17, 2009 at 10:20 pm


…nor should anyone else.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 18, 2009 at 8:06 am


Take your meds, GC



report abuse
 

GodsCountry

posted July 18, 2009 at 1:38 pm


Why not a firing squad? That’s a very good way to rid the population of dissenters.
God loves justice.
Justice is found only through God and following God’s “rules”.
There is joy in knowing justice.
The farther “churches” like this and other secularists move society away from God, the less likely justice will prevail.
Facing a firing squad or taking mandatory “meds” is not justice.
It’s not even love.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 18, 2009 at 4:03 pm


Ah, so someone has told you you have to take your meds. You should, you know, for your own good.



report abuse
 

GodsCountry

posted July 19, 2009 at 1:29 pm


The liberal will present any rhetorical device possible, including straw-men, deflection, deception, outright lies and personal attacks.
Lacking substance, they may justify just about anything with simple twists and turns of empty rhetoric – including normalizing homosexuality to the extent that church leaders are allowed to practice that abhorrent practice.
Pretty neat trick, that.
But it will be only those lead astray by liberal “thought” who will be affected by this. Those who know truth will simply continue to tell the lost what they need to hear.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 19, 2009 at 2:17 pm


A little conviction of having knowledge is a dangerous thing.



report abuse
 

Henrietta22

posted July 19, 2009 at 3:05 pm


They have voted to be able to add a blessing for Gays marrying in TEC.



report abuse
 

GodsCountry

posted July 19, 2009 at 9:00 pm


…lies are dangerous. Knowledge is good. Conviction is good.
If one is right…



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted July 20, 2009 at 1:19 pm


But conviction you are right is bad when you are wrong. And despite your conviction there’s no (zero) evidence you are right.



report abuse
 

GodsCountry

posted July 21, 2009 at 7:21 pm


Powerful argument.
Ill try it;
No, you are wrong.
The audacity.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

Hispanics turning evangelical, Jews secular
Worship service attendance is up in New York City, but down among young adult Jews, according to recent studies. On the other hand, fewer Spanish-speaking teens are attending Catholic mass, but more are showing up at Evangelical churches. [caption id="attachment_12343" align="alignleft" width="48

posted 3:10:30pm Nov. 05, 2013 | read full post »

Billy Graham: I know where I'm going
“Daddy thinks the Lord will allow him to live to 95,” said Franklin Graham recently. It was not a prophecy but a hope, Franklin explained, that he would live to see the beginning of a Christian re

posted 10:02:01am Oct. 24, 2013 | read full post »

Are All These Christians' Complaints of Persecution Just So Much Empty Whining?
The headlines are alarming: “Catholic-Owned Company Wins Religious Freedom Court Decision,” “Death Toll Rises to 65 in Boko Haram Attack on Students,” “Little Sisters Catholic Charity Victimized By Obamacare,” “Christians Sought Out, Murdered in the Kenyan Mall Massacre,” “Judicial

posted 2:41:26am Oct. 07, 2013 | read full post »

How can Christians defend themselves against today's random violence?
So, a crazed gunman opens fire and you’re caught in the middle. How can you survive? Heroes come in all sorts of packages. And they wield all sorts of defensive weapons. Such as guns and Jesus. Sometimes both at the same time. [caption id="attachment_12246" align="alignleft" width="480"] Ant

posted 2:53:48pm Sep. 27, 2013 | read full post »

Does Sunday Morning Church Really Need All This Glitter, Showmanship and Gimmickry?
What’s wrong with church today? Are we in danger of turning worship into a flashy concert? Of watering down the message so nobody is offended? Of forgetting the simplicity of the Gospel? I grew up with a preacher’s kid. He was a fake following in the footsteps of his flimflamming father who d

posted 11:26:20am Sep. 20, 2013 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.