Sexuality study - Status quo (mainly)

[IowaLutheran]

After a quick review of the recommendatiosn of the task force, it appears that the status quo is recommended, i.e., no blessing of gay unions, and nonmarried clergy are expected to remain celibate. It does imply that if a congregation does call a practicing homosexual, bishops should be given more discretion on how to deal with them.

[pastel]

What is this in reference to? The Methodists? The states governments? :confused:

[IowaLutheran]

In 2001, the ELCA commissioned a task force to study and make recommendatiosn on whether or not to bless gay unions and ordain practicing gay people. They just released their recommendations. Their recommendations are just that, recommendations, and not binding on the assembly which will vote this summer. As indicated in my earlier post, after a quick glance, it appears they are not promoting wholesale changes in the current practice. The only difference appears to be that synod bishops are given the discretion to not discipline a congregation for calling a practicing gay person.

[pastel]

In 2001, the ELCA commissioned a task force to study and make recommendatiosn on whether or not to bless gay unions and ordain practicing gay people. They just released their recommendations. Their recommendations are just that, recommendations, and not binding on the assembly which will vote this summer. As indicated in my earlier post, after a quick glance, it appears they are not promoting wholesale changes in the current practice. The only difference appears to be that synod bishops are given the discretion to not discipline a congregation for calling a practicing gay person.

Oh, I thought all of that was decided on long ago. I'm LCMS, and we do not have that controversy - yet anyway. I hope we never do. :(

[CrossWiseMag]

Check out the commentary (http://paulmccain.worldmagblog.com/paulmccain/) from Paul McCain, the pastor who is interim director of Concordia Publishing House.

Pastor McCain's blog also includes commentary from a faithful ELCA pastor (http://paulmccain.worldmagblog.com/paulmccain/archives/011938.html) who is fighting the good fight -- and unfortunately being routed.

[pastel]

Check out the commentary (http://paulmccain.worldmagblog.com/paulmccain/) from Paul McCain, the pastor who is interim director of Concordia Publishing House.

Pastor McCain's blog also includes commentary from a faithful ELCA pastor (http://paulmccain.worldmagblog.com/paulmccain/archives/011938.html) who is fighting the good fight -- and unfortunately being routed.

Interesting reading. Thanks for posting the links.

[sculpturegirl]

They'l likely just wait a few more years and try again :( I went to some of the meetings held at the church. Ug.

There is a call for single pastors to be celibate, but there seems to be no accountability for single parishoners. It is sad. My fiance' was raised Lutheran and his church NEVER discussed pre-marital sex or chastity. I have talked to the youth leader at our church about talking about sexual issues with the girls in the youth group. I am not an "official member" yet. I think I ought to be a member first. People go to church for guidance and sadly, too many Lutherans think that it is good to "mind your own business." No one here, of course. You all speak EXACTLY what is on your minds! :P

[pastel]

I think they locked this thread. I can't make any comment here. Trying ONE more time. :(

[pastel]

Okay, guess it went through that time. :)

[Rechtgläubig]

From a quick read of the document, it seems I was right:

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=10372490&postcount=2


Not that it's anything to be happy about. :(

[ByzantineDixie]

From a quick read of the document, it seems I was right:

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=10372490&postcount=2


Not that it's anything to be happy about. :(

Dang, Recht...what are you doing in this forum? With this gift of prophesy...perhaps you are better suited for Spiritfilled? :P

Just teasing...actually, a very insightful call on your part.-----R

[Rechtgläubig]

Dang, Recht...what are you doing in this forum? With this gift of prophesy...perhaps you are better suited for Spiritfilled? :P

Just teasing...actually, a very insightful call on your part.-----R

LOL Rose! You want more?


I see a trip to someplace nice sometime in your future.

[ByzantineDixie]

LOL Rose! You want more?


I see a trip to someplace nice sometime in your future.

Now this is starting to scare me...I know for a fact I did not tell you I was headed to Brazil the week after next....:eek:

Hey...since you are on this role, any ideas for lottery numbers? :P

Whoops...apologies to the OP for this derailment...:sorry:

Peace

Rose

[SPALATIN]

Now this is starting to scare me...I know for a fact I did not tell you I was headed to Brazil the week after next....:eek:

Hey...since you are on this role, any ideas for lottery numbers? :P

Whoops...apologies to the OP for this derailment...:sorry:

Peace

Rose

So where in Brazil are you going? I have been to Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. My mom and pop-law live in Manaus up on the Amazon river.

[ByzantineDixie]

So where in Brazil are you going? I have been to Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. My mom and pop-law live in Manaus up on the Amazon river.

Paulina...just outside of Campinas. I will fly in to Sao Paulo. It's a business trip, though. Nothing fun or exciting. I think it is cool that your inlaws are missionaries.

[SPALATIN]

Paulina...just outside of Campinas. I will fly in to Sao Paulo. It's a business trip, though. Nothing fun or exciting. I think it is cool that your inlaws are missionaries.

Yes, They are part of Mission Aviation Fellowship. They call their mission Asas de Soccorro which anglicized means "Wings of Help"

[ChiRho]

Um...I knew a girl from Sao Paulo once. Man, could she drink! Cutest little thing too! One time at a party, she did a keg stand for a full minute (without cheating and no vomiting!!!). I was so impressed. Carolina ??? somethin'...

Another night, she shot-gunned five beers in a row!

What a woman!

Sorry about the thread http://worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/comprose.gif


Pax Christi,

ChiRho

[SPALATIN]

Um...I knew a girl from Sao Paulo once. Man, could she drink! Cutest little thing too! One time at a party, she did a keg stand for a full minute (without cheating and no vomiting!!!). I was so impressed. Carolina ??? somethin'...

Another night, she shot-gunned five beers in a row!

What a woman!

Sorry about the thread http://worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/comprose.gif


Pax Christi,

ChiRho

Impressive and the reason you didn't hook up with the PLT is because. . .?

[Protoevangel]

The task force report changes more than it looks like. It is a roundabout "local option".

The Task Force for ELCA Studies on Sexuality recommends that the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America continue under the standards regarding sexual conduct for rostered leaders as set forth in Vision and Expectations and Definitions and Guidelines for Discipline, but that, as a pastoral response to the deep divisions among us, this church may choose to refrain from disciplining those who in good conscience, and for the sake of outreach, ministry, and the commitment to continuing dialogue, call or approve partnered gay or lesbian candidates whom they believe to be otherwise in compliance with Vision and Expectations and to refrain from disciplining those rostered people so approved and called.

Let's (pretend) not (to) change anything...

[Phoebe]

I think I'm going to be sick.
This is just the report, right?

[pastel]

I have to wonder if people even read their Bibles anymore. :( :sigh:

[Protoevangel]

I think I'm going to be sick.
This is just the report, right?Yes, it's just the task force recommendations.

[revjpw]

I really wish that the ELCA would take the word "Lutheran" out of their name.

There is absolutely nothing about them that remotely resembles Lutheransim anymore.:cry: :sick:


DaRev

[sculpturegirl]

I really wish that the ELCA would take the word "Lutheran" out of their name.

There is absolutely nothing about them that remotely resembles Lutheransim anymore.:cry: :sick:


DaRev

AWWWWWWWW Come on, there are still Lutherans within the ELCA. You will find many true blue Lutherans in the pews, while the liberal leadership changes the church around them.

I am not sure what the future of the ELCA is, but either there will be a hemmorage of real Lutherans, as previously suggested -or- the church will become so ineffective both in the world and within Christianity that it will fall into obscurity. *sigh* Perhaps we need a Reformation within the church. Hmmm... can I find something around here to nail to the church door????:P

[Lutherrunner]

Hey.....this is starting to have a tone of ELCA bashing here.....:confused:

[sculpturegirl]

I am ELCA, for the time being.

[KagomeShuko]

I really wish that the ELCA would take the word "Lutheran" out of their name.

There is absolutely nothing about them that remotely resembles Lutheransim anymore.:cry: :sick:


DaRev
Hey, be nice! I'm ELCA and Lutheran!

[SPALATIN]

Please read the Forum rules. First of all we are all Christians first and foremost whether we agree with each other on certain points of doctrine or not. If you belong to a specific synod it is because the church you belong to is in agreement with those churches.

The word synod means to "walk along with" or "walk together" I don't hold any one person to be responsible for the actions of the synod. We should not be bashing the synod or saying that someone should drop the Lutheran from their name just because we don't agree with some of the "political" moves that the synod has taken.

I agree most with the LCMS, but I don't agree with everything the LCMS has passed in convention recently. There are many things that I know I disagree with the ELCA, but I am not a part of them and won't worry about they're doing because it doesn't effect me.

Therefore if you are not part of the ELCA you haven't any right to criticize those that are members. Same goes for the other synods. Please be civil here. We can debate the single issues, but we must not damage the relationships we do have in this house.

[IowaLutheran]

Yes, it's just the task force recommendations.

I bvelieve I read somewhere that a 2/3 majority at the assembly will be required to change current practice. Therefore, I highly doubt any faction will be able to obtain a change in current policy.

[revjpw]

AWWWWWWWW Come on, there are still Lutherans within the ELCA. You will find many true blue Lutherans in the pews, while the liberal leadership changes the church around them.

My comment was made out of frustration. I didn't mean to offend anyone.
It is true that the ELCA does have some confessional Lutherans still within it's ranks. I know a few of them. It must be very difficult for them, though.

I am not sure what the future of the ELCA is, but either there will be a hemmorage of real Lutherans, as previously suggested -or- the church will become so ineffective both in the world and within Christianity that it will fall into obscurity. *sigh* Perhaps we need a Reformation within the church. Hmmm... can I find something around here to nail to the church door????:P

How about nailing up Leviticus 18:22 for starters.


DaRev

[revjpw]

We should not be bashing the synod or saying that someone should drop the Lutheran from their name just because we don't agree with some of the "political" moves that the synod has taken.

Political??? They have basically torn pages out of Scripture and thrown them away. :(

I'll speak no more on this topic.



DaRev

[revjpw]

Therefore if you are not part of the ELCA you haven't any right to criticize those that are members.

I wasn't criticizing any members.


DaRev

[SPALATIN]

I wasn't criticizing any members.


DaRev

I didn't really say that you were, but we want to be careful how someone might take it. I think that you did say that they should take the Lutheran out of their synod name and some might have a problem with that. Just a precaution that is all. :)

[Zoomer]

There have been a number of articles in our local paper since the largest denomination in our county is ELCA. It's just making Lutherans look bad. Here's one article.... http://ydr.com/story/main/55361/.

What struck me was what one Pastor said at the end of the article...
“We have recognized that we see through a glass dimly,” he said. “. . . None of us have the answer. We can’t claim to know the heart of God. . . . We can only rely on the spiritual gifts we have been given in baptism to live out our faith.”

It just left me scratching my head because I alway thought we had the Bible for answers.

[SPALATIN]

There have been a number of articles in our local paper since the largest denomination in our county is ELCA. It's just making Lutherans look bad. Here's one article.... http://ydr.com/story/main/55361/.

What struck me was what one Pastor said at the end of the article...
“We have recognized that we see through a glass dimly,” he said. “. . . None of us have the answer. We can’t claim to know the heart of God. . . . We can only rely on the spiritual gifts we have been given in baptism to live out our faith.”

It just left me scratching my head because I alway thought we had the Bible for answers.

If all Lutheranism is judged because of what one synod is approving or disapproving what does that say about the world? Quite frankly I think that the other synods should come out with a statement that clearly states that they either agree or disagree with this issue. That would give everyone a look at Lutheranism in the full light.

Considering who is running the LCMS at the moment we won't be seeing anything from them to rock the boat. My only hope is that the WELS and ELS make a printed statement condemning this action in hopes of persuading those in the ELCA to vote against this suggestion at their convention.

Scott

[pastel]

As long as the Bible says what it says, and churches or synods try to go against that, then there will be division.

Of course, this is an obvious statement. What I don't understand is why these people that want to change the church do not understand this. Would it be for the money that would come into their churches if openly practicing gays were allowed in? I say it all comes down to the dollar is the reason for this proposed change. Bad idea.

[Lutherrunner]

As long as the Bible says what it says, and churches or synods try to go against that, then there will be division.

Of course, this is an obvious statement. What I don't understand is why these people that want to change the church do not understand this. Would it be for the money that would come into their churches if openly practicing gays were allowed in? I say it all comes down to the dollar is the reason for this proposed change. Bad idea.

I don't think it's the money at all....but that's just my opinion.....it's about accepting all of God's children....

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh.htm

[revjpw]

I don't think it's the money at all....but that's just my opinion.....it's about accepting all of God's children....

But do God's true children openly and blatantly and unrepentantly defy and deny God's commands? Answer: No!

This trend in the ELCA is not God pleasing in the least. And we know this because He has told us what is pleasing to Him in His Word.



DaRev

[revjpw]

Considering who is running the LCMS at the moment we won't be seeing anything from them to rock the boat.

I wouldn't be to sure of that statement. The LCMS has already made statements against gay unions and in support of a Constitutional amendment. I'm sure that a statement of some sort is forthcoming.


(...and I said that I wasn't going to speak to this issue anymore.:blush: :doh: )


DaRev

[Lutherrunner]

But do God's true children openly and blatantly and unrepentantly defy and deny God's commands? Answer: No!

This trend in the ELCA is not God pleasing in the least. And we know this because He has told us what is pleasing to Him in His Word.



DaRev

Drinkin', gamblin', drugs, fornicatin', coveting, keepin' up with the Jones, lying, cheating........homosexuality........???????

[pastel]

Drinkin', gamblin', drugs, fornicatin', coveting, keepin' up with the Jones, lying, cheating........homosexuality........???????

Along with bank robbery. Sin is sin...you can't be a bank robber and be a member of our church. Same with all other sins. If it is repented, that is fine. Come to church and commune with us. If it is unrepentant sin, come and worship, but work on repentance, please.

[SPALATIN]

I wouldn't be to sure of that statement. The LCMS has already made statements against gay unions and in support of a Constitutional amendment. I'm sure that a statement of some sort is forthcoming.


(...and I said that I wasn't going to speak to this issue anymore.:blush: :doh: )


DaRev

I am not expecting GK to put forward any blatant statement other than to refer people to the LCMS.org link on where the LCMS stands regarding this issue. He has roots in the JF movement which also has ELCA members and Bishop Hanson was a guest at the LCMS convention this past July. Look for GK to be a guest at their convention as well. The JF movement wants desperately to open things up between the 2 synods.

[Lutherrunner]

Along with bank robbery. Sin is sin...you can't be a bank robber and be a member of our church. Same with all other sins. If it is repented, that is fine. Come to church and commune with us. If it is unrepentant sin, come and worship, but work on repentance, please.

Well, that's kinda what I'm sayin'......how do we minister to sinners? Heck, I'm one of the worst ones.....

[Lutherrunner]

I am not expecting GK to put forward any blatant statement other than to refer people to the LCMS.org link on where the LCMS stands regarding this issue. He has roots in the JF movement which also has ELCA members and Bishop Hanson was a guest at the LCMS convention this past July. Look for GK to be a guest at their convention as well. The JF movement wants desperately to open things up between the 2 synods.

There ya go with those acronyms again....what is JF...GK....???

(and I thought we are bad with acronyms in the public school with ARDs, and IEPs and BIPs.......LD, ED, MR, OHI.....)

[pastel]

Well, that's kinda what I'm sayin'......how do we minister to sinners? Heck, I'm one of the worst ones.....

Exactly! But there are certain types of them that want the church to put an "okay" on that type of behavior, and to in fact ordain them to be able preach to us, without bothering to repent from what is clearly wrong in the Bible.

And I'm one of the worst sinners too....but still, repentance is necessary.

[sculpturegirl]

I don't think it's the money at all....but that's just my opinion.....it's about accepting all of God's children....

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh.htm

I agree- it isn't about money at all. In fact, by accepting such measures churches are lOSING members and alienating themselves from other church bodies within their own denomination. It is, essentially, ecclesiastical suicide!

I think that liberal rhetoric is so powerful that when people, even siting scripture, make negative reference to homosexuality all of the sudden they are labeled angry, judgmental bigots who know nothing of the love of God. That is how I felt when I spoke out against it at a church meeting. I felt that everyone was glaring at me thinking such horrible things. "How can she be so unloving and exclusive?" "Look, she uses the Bible to discriminate." "Jesus loves everyone."

It sort of reminds me of Jesus in the desert. Satan used scripture to tempt him. SCRIPTURE!

[pastel]

I agree- it isn't about money at all. In fact, by accepting such measures churches are lOSING members and alienating themselves from other church bodies within their own denomination. It is, essentially, ecclesiastical suicide!

I think that liberal rhetoric is so powerful that when people, even siting scripture, make negative reference to homosexuality all of the sudden they are labeled angry, judgmental bigots who know nothing of the love of God. That is how I felt when I spoke out against it at a church meeting. I felt that everyone was glaring at me thinking such horrible things. "How can she be so unloving and exclusive?" "Look, she uses the Bible to discriminate." "Jesus loves everyone."

It sort of reminds me of Jesus in the desert. Satan used scripture to tempt him. SCRIPTURE!

You are a brave soul! Certainly God loves gays as much as anyone else, but no one wants to admit it is a sin which needs repentance. Then they lie about "being born with it" or something. So sad to be deluded like that, but God knows our sinfulness in full, and there is no extra special excuse for some sin over others. Sin is sin.

If there was any kind of excuse such as that in truth, God would have said so.

[Jim47]

Homo-sexuals like common adulters and all other sins have taken an all to common "modern view" of acceptance and that it is O/k and they are not accountable for their sins.

I was pretty old before I had even heard what hono-sexual meant and back then they were asshamed of their sins, just as were those who committed adultery, but now days its not onlt accepted as normal but applauded and we (the general public) make all kinds of excuses as to why people are this way.

What they fail to consider is that God hasen't changed, its still sin and not forgiven unless repented for. Satan has done a first class job of decieving the modern generation. :sigh:

[revjpw]

I am not expecting GK to put forward any blatant statement other than to refer people to the LCMS.org link on where the LCMS stands regarding this issue. He has roots in the JF movement which also has ELCA members and Bishop Hanson was a guest at the LCMS convention this past July. Look for GK to be a guest at their convention as well. The JF movement wants desperately to open things up between the 2 synods.

Well, Jerry Keischnick has already taken a stance in opposition to the ELCA when he stated that women will not be ordained in the Missouri Synod and that gay marriage is also out.


DaRev

[revjpw]

It sort of reminds me of Jesus in the desert. Satan used scripture to tempt him. SCRIPTURE!

Excellent point!!!

[filosofer]

There ya go with those acronyms again....what is JF...GK....???


JF = Jesus First (para church group that is trying to set the direction for the LCMS - see below for LCMS)

GK = Gerald Kieschnick (president of the LCMS)

LCMS = Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod

Synod = SYN hODOS (Greek: "walking together")

"walking together" = part of the dating phase for Lutherans

dating phase for Lutherans = UNKNOWN!

:P

[ChiRho]

Drinkin', gamblin', drugs, fornicatin', coveting, keepin' up with the Jones, lying, cheating........homosexuality........???????


Let me guess, pick the one that doesnt belong? They are all sins except for...



Drinkin'! That was an easy one.

Your link is appalling! :sick:

Pax Christi,

ChiRho

[pastel]

Temptations to Sin

Matthew 18:6-8
"If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were fastened around your neck and you were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of stumbling blocks! Occasions for stumbling are bound to come, but woe to the one by whom the stumbling block comes!

"If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away; for it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than to have two hands or two feet and to be thrown into eternal fire. " NRSV

In other words, it is a serious offense to cause others to stumble and fall.

[filosofer]

I was pretty old before I had even heard what hono-sexual meant and back then they were asshamed of their sins,


And I thought puns were limited to the "More Fuel for Filo" thread!

[ChiRho]

Homo-sexuals like common adulters and all other sins have taken an all to common "modern view" of acceptance and that it is O/k and they are not accountable for their sins.

I was pretty old before I had even heard what hono-sexual meant and back then they were asshamed of their sins, just as were those who committed adultery, but now days its not onlt accepted as normal but applauded and we (the general public) make all kinds of excuses as to why people are this way.

What they fail to consider is that God hasen't changed, its still sin and not forgiven unless repented for. Satan has done a first class job of decieving the modern generation. :sigh:


I still dont know what hono-sexual means! :P

[Lutherrunner]

Your link is appalling! :sick:

Pax Christi,

ChiRho

Appaling?.....it merely shows various sides of the situation, in a very neutral, non-judgemental tone.....

[Lutherrunner]

Then they lie about "being born with it" or something.

Well, it's pretty obvious that you don't think gays are born like they are. That is your opinion, but mine is the opposite. I don't think there is proof for either of us yet, but most gays report feeling different from a very early age. For you to say they are "lying" seems quite judgemental and not very Christ like....that doesn't sound like you...:scratch:

[ChiRho]

Appaling?.....it merely shows various sides of the situation, in a very neutral, non-judgemental tone.....


False. The website presents Holy Scripture filtered through the lense of political correctness and sinful modern agenda to arrive at a "neutral, non-judgemental" result. :sigh:



Pax Christi,

ChiRho

[filosofer]

Well, it's pretty obvious that you don't think gays are born like they are. That is your opinion, but mine is the opposite. I don't think there is proof for either of us yet, but most gays report feeling different from a very early age. For you to say they are "lying" seems quite judgemental and not very Christ like....that doesn't sound like you...:scratch:

Just to be clear: we are to judge the sin, but we can't judge the heart. The connection of the sin and the "lie" comes from Romans 1.

[ChiRho]

You are a brave soul! Certainly God loves gays as much as anyone else, but no one wants to admit it is a sin which needs repentance. Then they lie about "being born with it" or something. So sad to be deluded like that, but God knows our sinfulness in full, and there is no extra special excuse for some sin over others. Sin is sin.

If there was any kind of excuse such as that in truth, God would have said so.

I concur, with one slight twist. I do not believe that homosexuals are born that way, but even if somehow, scientist were to confirm that homosexuals were born gay, it wouldnt make a single difference. I am born a liar and an adulterer and a murderer...all are perversions of who I am called to be. So even if a sinner was born with wicked and unhealthy lusts for another of the same sex, it is still a sin and must be avoided. Absolutely, one cannot continue with a sinful sexual relationship, as St. Paul warns us in Corinthians, and still pretend to keep their faith in Christ...just as I could not fornicate with my girlfriend and expect to keep my faith. Marriage, between men and women, is the only acceptable place to engage in blameless sexual acts.



Pax Christi,

ChiRho

[Lutherrunner]

False. The website presents Holy Scripture filtered through the lense of political correctness and sinful modern agenda to arrive at a "neutral, non-judgemental" result. :sigh:



Pax Christi,

ChiRho

But the website explains that the views are from various religious philosophies. It just describes them. It doesn't advocate any one of them. It didn't take sides.

Here is one of the headings:

"Various groups' interpretations of this verse:"



another quote:

"Unfortunately, there is no consensus on the meaning of this verse. Many people tend to select that interpretation that most closely reinforces their initial beliefs about the Bible and homosexual behavior."

yet again:

"Which is the correct translation? Obviously, it is important for a student of the Bible to resolve exactly what behavior is forbidden: is it:"


The page ends with no conclusion....I do not see the authors as taking any side....it just explains what the various arguements are out there.....surely you want to know what the "other side" is thinking so that you can dispute them? So why is that appalling?......I understand that to you, homosexuality is appalling...but why is the website that I posted appalling, when it simply tries to show all sides of the story.

[pastel]

Well, it's pretty obvious that you don't think gays are born like they are. That is your opinion, but mine is the opposite. I don't think there is proof for either of us yet, but most gays report feeling different from a very early age. For you to say they are "lying" seems quite judgemental and not very Christ like....that doesn't sound like you...:scratch:

The so-called scientists were who I was referring to that were lying about being born that way.

So I'm judgmental? You mean we can all sin and it's okay? God will forgive? We just keep on being our sinful selves? That is being judgmental if I say that God wants us to repent? Yes, I guess you do have me wrong then... :scratch:

[Protoevangel]

Well, it's pretty obvious that you don't think gays are born like they are. That is your opinion, but mine is the opposite. I don't think there is proof for either of us yet, but most gays report feeling different from a very early age. For you to say they are "lying" seems quite judgemental and not very Christ like....that doesn't sound like you...:scratch:

Well, I for one have no problem with the idea that there are factors outside of the homosexual’s influence that contribute to their propensity to the sinful behavior in question. I certainly know that there are sinful urges in me that I cannot eliminate in myself. I remember sexual urges as early as fourth grade; they very well may have been there much earlier. If I lived the way I feel I was born, I would have more sexual partners than Solomon had wives.

You see, the possibility that some people may have irrepressible attraction for people of their own sex is not a all a challenge to the fact that the behavior in question is clearly and unambiguously cited as sinful in God’s very Word. We are all affected by sin; none of us can be righteous in our own strength. True, God loves all of his children. That in no way gives his children the right to ignore or outright scorn His Holy Word.

[Lutherrunner]

The so-called scientists were who I was referring to that were lying about being born that way.

So I'm judgmental? You mean we can all sin and it's okay? God will forgive? We just keep on being our sinful selves? That is being judgmental if I say that God wants us to repent? Yes, I guess you do have me wrong then... :scratch::

You are accusing people of lying when you merely disagree with them. I didn't say anything at all about it being a sin or not or if God wants us to repent or not. Stick to one point at a time. The so-called scientists and/or the homosexuals themselves are theorizing that they are born that way. Theorizing is different than lying. I suppose they could be lying. Maybe they all really know that they aren't born like that and they just all agreed to make up that story.

[•Amadeus•]

Well, it's pretty obvious that you don't think gays are born like they are. That is your opinion, but mine is the opposite. I don't think there is proof for either of us yet, but most gays report feeling different from a very early age. For you to say they are "lying" seems quite judgemental and not very Christ like....that doesn't sound like you...:scratch:

Got a question for you, because this is very confusing to me, I must admit, and since you are confident of your position on this.

If you feel gays are born that way, cannot help being that way (and I do not know if they are or not), then why did God destroy Sodom and Gomorrah? If these people were victims of the genes God gave them, why this punishment? I don't understand this up against the controversies of today.

I am just searching for answers...not trying to be controversial, I hope :help:

[Lutherrunner]

Got a question for you, because this is very confusing to me, I must admit, and since you are confident of your position on this.

If you feel gays are born that way, cannot help being that way (and I do not know if they are or not), then why did God destroy Sodom and Gomorrah? If these people were victims of the genes God gave them, why this punishment? I don't understand this up against the controversies of today.

I am just searching for answers...not trying to be controversial, I hope :help:

Oh gosh, I honestly don't know. I am not a biblical scholar by any means, and I hope nobody here thinks I present myself as such. I am fairly new and came here with a ton of questions myself.

Let's just say that I am confident in my feeling, but by no means have any proof. It is just my feeling, my opinion. I won't argue beyond that. If science can tell us someday, then so be it. Right now it is just a hunch from people I talk to and work with. I am a school psychologist and I have seen young children with effeminate traits, and sexual identity issues at an age way before hormones kick in where they would even think of sex. I've seen them teased, belittled and physically attacked. My heart aches and my Christian upbringing just makes me feel that something isn't right and that they don't choose such a difficult life. At least not all of them. I am struggling with this and with the scriptures that address this issue. I hope you all don't think I'm being difficult, as this weighs heavy on my heart.

[Protoevangel]

I am a school psychologist and I have seen young children with effeminate traits, and sexual identity issues at an age way before hormones kick in where they would even think of sex. I've seen them teased, belittled and physically attacked.Hi Lutherrunner, :wave:

Just for the sake of conversation, do you think the children who teased, belittled and physically attacked the effeminate children are just as much at the mercy of being "born that way" as the ones they attacked? If they indeed are prone to their behavior by being "born that way", does that justify their action?

[•Amadeus•]

I concur, with one slight twist. I do not believe that homosexuals are born that way, but even if somehow, scientist were to confirm that homosexuals were born gay, it wouldnt make a single difference. I am born a liar and an adulterer and a murderer...all are perversions of who I am called to be. So even if a sinner was born with wicked and unhealthy lusts for another of the same sex, it is still a sin and must be avoided. Absolutely, one cannot continue with a sinful sexual relationship, as St. Paul warns us in Corinthians, and still pretend to keep their faith in Christ...just as I could not fornicate with my girlfriend and expect to keep my faith. Marriage, between men and women, is the only acceptable place to engage in blameless sexual acts.



Pax Christi,

ChiRho

Excellent post, ChiRho.... this rather helps me to understand. We all have our propensities. I just have to wonder why this controversy exists if one sin isn't worse than another. I'm too new at this to understand yet, but am working on this problem. Thanks.

I'm full of questions at this point. :confused:

Pray for me.

[pastel]

Oh gosh, I honestly don't know. I am not a biblical scholar by any means, and I hope nobody here thinks I present myself as such. I am fairly new and came here with a ton of questions myself.

Let's just say that I am confident in my feeling, but by no means have any proof. It is just my feeling, my opinion. I won't argue beyond that. If science can tell us someday, then so be it. Right now it is just a hunch from people I talk to and work with. I am a school psychologist and I have seen young children with effeminate traits, and sexual identity issues at an age way before hormones kick in where they would even think of sex. I've seen them teased, belittled and physically attacked. My heart aches and my Christian upbringing just makes me feel that something isn't right and that they don't choose such a difficult life. At least not all of them. I am struggling with this and with the scriptures that address this issue. I hope you all don't think I'm being difficult, as this weighs heavy on my heart.

I see where you are coming from. However, let me tell you about my cousin. We grew up together. Her dad beat her mom, viciously. Regularly. This beautiful girl with black hair and beautiful doe eyes, smart, imaginative, grew up to be a lesbian. Was she born this way? No, her dad terrified her into thinking being a woman was to be vulnerable to beatings. She's a lesbian with tatoos, piercings, and black leather. My dad passed away. She was at his funeral. I walked up to her and gave her a big hug, just as she was saying, "you don't have to hug me if you mind how I look" ... I held her tighter. I said, "Of course I don't mind." I don't. I love this girl, now a woman. I pray for her. Her mom passed away. I hugged her again at her mother's funeral, tears streaming down her face. She's a human being, made in God's image.

Gay people are not to be hated. They are to be loved. They are doing wrong in God's sight, just as any of us who sin.

If you love them, tell them what God wants them to do. Above all pray for them. If you do not love them, tell them what they do is okay, and that God doesn't care. Then watch them be judged with the rest of the unrepentant sinners. That is true hatred...just not caring.

[Jim47]

Gay people are not to be hated. They are to be loved. They are doing wrong in God's sight, just as any of us who sin.

If you love them, tell them what God wants them to do. Above all pray for them. If you do not love them, tell them what they do is okay, and that God doesn't care. Then watch them be judged with the rest of the unrepentant sinners. That is true hatred...just not caring.


I think what you said pretty well sums up what our responcibility is as Christians and the way we are to react to them, and I will confess that I have had some trouble in showing love to gays. Perhaps this is because I was approached by one when I was in the service (Army) and I could see that he bore no shame in what he was doing. I know not all of them are proud of their sins and I pray that God would help them in their struggles just as I need God's help in my struggles with sin.

[Phoebe]

My oppinion is that someone who is knowingly living in a perpetual state of unrepented sin should not be leading a flock.



(I'm guessing I may need to clarify this at a later time- words escape me at this point)

[SPALATIN]

Well, Jerry Keischnick has already taken a stance in opposition to the ELCA when he stated that women will not be ordained in the Missouri Synod and that gay marriage is also out.


DaRev

I'm not saying that we are going to go ELCA all the way, but there are many in the LCMS who feel the synod needs to get with the times and let women be ordained. The Jesus First and DayStar groups are the two most notorious groups and are branded by the conservative confessionals as very liberal. Just because the President has said this doesn't meant that he isn't secretly for ordaining women or a few other liberalizations of synod policies. I am very skeptical when in comes to the Synod President (SP) and don't trust his motives very much.

Another group of which the conservatives are wary is the PLI or Pastoral Leadership Institute. The claim is that the PLI teaches methods that lend themselves to the Church Growth Movement (CGM).

I am not here to say that these groups are good or bad, but just how they are viewed by the conservative confessionals in the LCMS.

[Lutherrunner]

Hi Lutherrunner, :wave:

Just for the sake of conversation, do you think the children who teased, belittled and physically attacked the effeminate children are just as much at the mercy of being "born that way" as the ones they attacked? If they indeed are prone to their behavior by being "born that way", does that justify their action?

Good question. I can't help but think of Nelson, the bully on the Simpsons!

The few kids that initiate the bullying may have some pathology. A common term is a conduct disorder who then becomes a sociopath if they continue their ways to adulthood. There is a lot of debate whether that temperment trait or personality has some biological roots or not, but there certainly a lot of sociological factors that play into conduct disorders, such as violent and abusive and controlling role models, school failure and so on. In the school system we try to seperate those kids from the kids with a true psychiatric disorder such as depression and/or anxiety who really need understanding and treatment, (but we still don't excuse their behavior).

The other thing is peer pressure and mobbing.....it never fails to surprise me how many normally appearing decent kids join in on the teasing that normally wouldn't initiate it. That makes me sad. We have been working on bullying programs lately. You also have to realize that a lot of the kids who engaged in horrendous crimes to society, such as Columbine, were victims of bullying.

Well, now I'm rambling, but I have to get to work so I'm not even sure if I answered your question, but it is really a big and broad question that could go off in a lot of different directions.

[SPALATIN]

I concur, with one slight twist. I do not believe that homosexuals are born that way, but even if somehow, scientist were to confirm that homosexuals were born gay, it wouldnt make a single difference. I am born a liar and an adulterer and a murderer...all are perversions of who I am called to be. So even if a sinner was born with wicked and unhealthy lusts for another of the same sex, it is still a sin and must be avoided. Absolutely, one cannot continue with a sinful sexual relationship, as St. Paul warns us in Corinthians, and still pretend to keep their faith in Christ...just as I could not fornicate with my girlfriend and expect to keep my faith. Marriage, between men and women, is the only acceptable place to engage in blameless sexual acts.



Pax Christi,

ChiRho

I believe that we are born into sin. Even if we are Baptized we still may have an inclination towards a particular sin even from early on. If one recognizes this as sin they can pray and get help from God to fight the temptation.

If one does not recognize it as sin they will most likely give in to the sin and consider it a valid lifestyle. I agree with ChiRho's definition here.

[ChiRho]

I'm not saying that we are going to go ELCA all the way, but there are many in the LCMS who feel the synod needs to get with the times and let women be ordained. The Jesus First and DayStar groups are the two most notorious groups and are branded by the conservative confessionals as very liberal. Just because the President has said this doesn't meant that he isn't secretly for ordaining women or a few other liberalizations of synod policies. I am very skeptical when in comes to the Synod President (SP) and don't trust his motives very much.

Another group of which the conservatives are wary is the PLI or Pastoral Leadership Institute. The claim is that the PLI teaches methods that lend themselves to the Church Growth Movement (CGM).

I am not here to say that these groups are good or bad, but just how they are viewed by the conservative confessionals in the LCMS.

Scott,

If yer gonna take a swing, swing all the way! If your wrong atleast your consistently wrong! ;)


Pax Christi,

ChiRho

[Lutherrunner]

My oppinion is that someone who is knowingly living in a perpetual state of unrepented sin should not be leading a flock.



(I'm guessing I may need to clarify this at a later time- words escape me at this point)

At the present time, I think I am inclined along this opinion also. I guess that would be like having an unmarried pastor having hetro sleepovers.

[ChiRho]

I concur, with one slight twist. I do not believe that homosexuals are born that way, but even if somehow, scientist were to confirm that homosexuals were born gay, it wouldnt make a single difference. I am born a liar and an adulterer and a murderer...all are perversions of who I am called to be. So even if a sinner was born with wicked and unhealthy lusts for another of the same sex, it is still a sin and must be avoided. Absolutely, one cannot continue with a sinful sexual relationship, as St. Paul warns us in Corinthians, and still pretend to keep their faith in Christ...just as I could not fornicate with my girlfriend and expect to keep my faith. Marriage, between men and women, is the only acceptable place to engage in blameless sexual acts.



Pax Christi,

ChiRho

Yeah, what he said! I agree too! :P

[revjpw]

I'm not saying that we are going to go ELCA all the way, but there are many in the LCMS who feel the synod needs to get with the times and let women be ordained.

But Scripture clearly teaches that God does not give the duties of the pastoral office to women. Any attempt to circumvent the Scriptures in the LCMS will lead to an all out conflict. The same attempt to circumvent the Word of God in the ELCA is welcomed with open arms. Big difference.

Another group of which the conservatives are wary is the PLI or Pastoral Leadership Institute. The claim is that the PLI teaches methods that lend themselves to the Church Growth Movement (CGM).
I am not here to say that these groups are good or bad, but just how they are viewed by the conservative confessionals in the LCMS.

Those who speak as such about PLI simply do not know what PLI is. It has nothing to do with the CGM. It is leadership training.


DaRev

[SPALATIN]

But Scripture clearly teaches that God does not give the duties of the pastoral office to women. Any attempt to circumvent the Scriptures in the LCMS will lead to an all out conflict. The same attempt to circumvent the Word of God in the ELCA is welcomed with open arms. Big difference.

Yes, scripture teaches that, but there are many from the Seminex days who came back to the LCMS that still hold to a Historical-Critical method of interpreting scripture which is more in line with the ELCA than with Walther. And you are correct that there will be a conflict in the LCMS when this happens.



Those who speak as such about PLI simply do not know what PLI is. It has nothing to do with the CGM. It is leadership training.


DaRev


You are correct in that PLI is Leadership training, but as I said many conservatives feel that the leadership principles being taught by the PLI reflect a Church Growth attitude. That the reason for the training is to bring more people into the church by CGM methods. I only know of one person involved in it and even he said that many conservatives would consider PLI to be a liberal organization even if they were not. It is all perceptions here not necessarily the truth or what I believe.

The Perception of the conservatives is that Jesus First is for the liberalization of the LCMS. There are even ELCA members in the JF movement. Many know that the SP Kieschnick proferred votes from representatives in these groups.

[pastel]

Just to be clear: we are to judge the sin, but we can't judge the heart. The connection of the sin and the "lie" comes from Romans 1.


Yes, Romans 1 . . . more Christians should read that chapter, and be ashamed of themselves.

Here is another one:

I Timothy 4:1-2

"But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared by their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from food which God has created gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth." NASB

[Protoevangel]

Good question. I can't help but think of Nelson, the bully on the Simpsons!

The few kids that initiate the bullying may have some pathology. A common term is a conduct disorder who then becomes a sociopath if they continue their ways to adulthood. There is a lot of debate whether that temperment trait or personality has some biological roots or not, but there certainly a lot of sociological factors that play into conduct disorders, such as violent and abusive and controlling role models, school failure and so on. In the school system we try to seperate those kids from the kids with a true psychiatric disorder such as depression and/or anxiety who really need understanding and treatment, (but we still don't excuse their behavior).

The other thing is peer pressure and mobbing.....it never fails to surprise me how many normally appearing decent kids join in on the teasing that normally wouldn't initiate it. That makes me sad. We have been working on bullying programs lately. You also have to realize that a lot of the kids who engaged in horrendous crimes to society, such as Columbine, were victims of bullying.

Well, now I'm rambling, but I have to get to work so I'm not even sure if I answered your question, but it is really a big and broad question that could go off in a lot of different directions.Hi LR,

You are right, it is a big and broad question; in no way do I intend to trivialize it. The question is at least as complex as the question as to whether or not a person is predisposed to homosexuality at birth. I would be prone to think that some of the same sociological factors are also as widespread in the formation of homosexuality as it is in bullying, at least for some.

Regardless of what the reason for the behavior is, the heterosexual, the homosexual, the bully and the victim must all be loved and respected. They all... we all... need Christ first, Christ alone. No one can make themselves more righteous or more acceptable by stopping a behavior, because the abandonment of the behavior and every aspect of their lives are still inundated with impure and sinful motivation. Nonetheless, it is not for the church to call that behavior acceptable or normative. That is my only point.

Martin Luther said that understanding the Gospel is like a drunken man trying to ride a horse; you will always tipping off to one side or the other.
The two errors that the sides of the horse represent are a.) legalism or moralism and b.) relativism or hedonism.

(EDIT: Below, I am referring to the debate in general, not the discussion we are having.)
In this debate I see a lot on both extremes. But the Gospel rejects both our relativism and all of our attempts to earn our way into God's favor. To walk in the Gospel is to turn from self-justification of all sorts and to rely exclusively on Jesus and His works. The Gospel tells us that we are more flawed and sinful than we ever dared believe; the Gospel tells us also, that we are more loved and accepted than we ever dared hope.

[ByzantineDixie]

Just because the President has said this doesn't meant that he isn't secretly for ordaining women or a few other liberalizations of synod policies. I am very skeptical when in comes to the Synod President (SP) and don't trust his motives very much.



Someone's been spending too much time at LutherQuest! :P What in the world makes you think this man "secretly" favors the ordination of women? I heard him speak in one of the most liberal districts in the nation and heard him flat out reject this...no wavering, no maybe laters. I am not saying there are not other issues--but I have can find no evidence that JK has some secret plot going.

Hey Scotty...forgive me, I just couldn't let this go. I still think there are plenty of concerns regarding the LCMS...this just isn't one of them.

:hug: Rose

[SPALATIN]

Someone's been spending too much time at LutherQuest! :P What in the world makes you think this man "secretly" favors the ordination of women? I heard him speak in one of the most liberal districts in the nation and heard him flat out reject this...no wavering, no maybe laters. I am not saying there are not other issues--but I have can find no evidence that JK has some secret plot going.

Hey Scotty...forgive me, I just couldn't let this go. I still think there are plenty of concerns regarding the LCMS...this just isn't one of them.

:hug: Rose

Rose,

As mad as I can become regarding some of their posts there I still do go there daily. I don't know if I am sadistic or masochistic by doing so. Maybe a little of both.:D

I think GK is more politician than he is theologian or former minister. He tells any specific audience what they want to hear. I think that even the liberals would have expected him to say something against the ordination of women, howsomeever, he caters to the liberal groups more than he does to the Conservative confessionals.


Mostly it is just instinct or intuition regarding him. The last election he won in July showed that he didn't have as overwhelming a victory as he would have liked, but still had the Jesus First and Daystar groups campaigning for him. It may not be the overwhelming problem of the Synod at this point but I don't trust him. He seems to be a slippery character to me. Mind you this is only my opinion of him based on what I hear from others. I may never get to know him personally and base a true opinion of him, but I can look at his record and see what programs he is pushing. The main one is Ablaze which low and behold is about numbers and wreaks of CGM.

[CrossWiseMag]

I've heard a theory on this that makes pretty good sense. It caused me to re-think my position on the political upheaval in the LCMS. The theory goes like this:

The LCMS is under attack from two sides, not just one. The liberal faction is, as always, still pushing for women's ordination, and eventually would like the LCMS to look a lot like ELCA. Gerald Keischnick is *not* a part of this faction.

Rather, GK is a part of the "modern American evangelical" wing of the LCMS. This group embraces the pragmatic, generic Protestant ecumenism that we see in the mega-churches. GK has said himself that he is "not a theologian." This group draws very little distinction between Lutheranism and modern American evangelicalism. In fact, this group seems a little jealous of modern American evangelicalism.

The "confessionals" in the LCMS have spent so many years fighting the growth of liberalism in the synod -- and rightly so -- that they didn't notice the Good Ol' Boy network of Church Growth Evangelicalism coming in the back door. Now that both of these world-views have gained a foothold in the LCMS, they have begun to work together in areas where they share common ground. This isn't even necessarily a conscious effort, worked out in a smoke-filled room somewhere. It is just the way the political landscape has been shaped.

The common ground of liberalism and generic American Protestantism includes less attention to doctrinal matters, ostensibly for the sake of "mission." The common ground does not include ordination of women. But each group is using the other to achieve the defeat of distinctive, historic Lutheranism in the LCMS. Once that common "enemy" is defeated, it's anybody's guess whether liberalism or generic Protestantism will prevail.

[SPALATIN]

I've heard a theory on this that makes pretty good sense. It caused me to re-think my position on the political upheaval in the LCMS. The theory goes like this:

The LCMS is under attack from two sides, not just one. The liberal faction is, as always, still pushing for women's ordination, and eventually would like the LCMS to look a lot like ELCA. Gerald Keischnick is *not* a part of this faction.

Rather, GK is a part of the "modern American evangelical" wing of the LCMS. This group embraces the pragmatic, generic Protestant ecumenism that we see in the mega-churches. GK has said himself that he is "not a theologian." This group draws very little distinction between Lutheranism and modern American evangelicalism. In fact, this group seems a little jealous of modern American evangelicalism.

The "confessionals" in the LCMS have spent so many years fighting the growth of liberalism in the synod -- and rightly so -- that they didn't notice the Good Ol' Boy network of Church Growth Evangelicalism coming in the back door. Now that both of these world-views have gained a foothold in the LCMS, they have begun to work together in areas where they share common ground. This isn't even necessarily a conscious effort, worked out in a smoke-filled room somewhere. It is just the way the political landscape has been shaped.

The common ground of liberalism and generic American Protestantism includes less attention to doctrinal matters, ostensibly for the sake of "mission." The common ground does not include ordination of women. But each group is using the other to achieve the defeat of distinctive, historic Lutheranism in the LCMS. Once that common "enemy" is defeated, it's anybody's guess whether liberalism or generic Protestantism will prevail.

And both you and I know from what we see on LQ that the Conservatives often fight each other and are not on the same page which gives the Liberals and the moderate evangelicals more power.

[ChiRho]

I read this the other day. I doubt that it means anything, but it is a bit strange!




President Kieschnick's vision for the LCMS is entitled "One mission, One message, one people," while part of the initiative of the Ablaze program has to do with "Igniting Events". Ironically, the United Methodist Church also has incorporated very similar terminology and emphases with it's "Open hearts, open minds, open doors" and "Igniting Ministry" initiatives.

Webpage (http://crisisinthelcms.org/pli_quickfacts.htm)

[revjpw]

GK has said himself that he is "not a theologian."

Then what business does he have being the president of the LCMS???:confused: :scratch:

Is that the payoff of his Springfield seminary education??:confused: :scratch:



DaRev

[pastel]

Yeah, what he said! I agree too! :P

It is so good that you agree with yourself, ChiRho! :P

Few people can make that claim, including myself. :help: