Should a Christian attend a gay wedding ?

[ralliann]

They also say something about loving God with all your heart, mind, and strength. Don't forget that part.

It is also our enemies are members of our own household. Our most loved ones at times.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I don't believe that the Church collectively, or Christians individually, are called to impose Christian beliefs and standards into wider society. And I believe we do our mission a great deal of harm when we try, because then the wider society sees - quite correctly - that we are about controlling them, not loving them. Even if we could enforce a particular practice of marriage, it wouldn't save one single additional soul, because keeping "the rules" isn't what matters. The kingdom of God is not a matter of forcing conformity to a moral code, but a matter of inviting people into willing participation in God's transformation of themselves, their community, and ultimately all of creation.

So, as far as marriage goes, we mind our own business, and don't try to control what others do. But if we, the Church, can be effective as a sign and instrument of the reign of God, that will attract people into the kingdom without us needing to enforce anything.

The word "impose" is carefully crafted to imply that someone is being forced against their will to observe our faith. In reality everyone who believes something will inevitably inflect their believes into their culture. That is the nature of belief, walking in the light of your belief, and showing forth the fruits of your faith. If someone does not do this, it is simply evidence that they actually do not believe what they claim they believe, or are actively denying their faith so as to please non-believers. People can read your post and tell exactly what you do and do not believe. It is not about trying to impose, it is about walking in the light of what you believe and not denying it. The world will read these weak rationalizations and simply deduce that the beliefs you may hold do not hold enough of or any sway on your life and testimony, and so are worthless. Or they are afraid of being rejected because of His name, His word, or His righteousness.
Bottom line, nobody is impressed by half way, half hearted, virtual denials. It is just evidence that they really do not believe what they claim, and have either self interest or want to be accepted by the world more than by God.

 

[Benjamin Müller]

Lol. I leave for a few hours and there's 5 more pages to the thread.

I remember the family story when great grandpa walked around the side of the house and saw a ladder leading up to the second story bedroom: his sister's bedroom. Lo and behold he found the delivery man in bed with his sister. This was around 1910 or so. They got married of course, but her father didn't attend the wedding; he had to plant oats that day.

Despite his duly noted disapproval of the wedding, his daughter still came to visit. Their relationship wasn't mortally fractured. In fact she came back home often to recount her marital woes to her sister-in-law.

-

Regardless of the circumstance, there have been bad marriages in the past and there will be in the future. In the past, they were willing to show their disapproval and, you know what, the world and relationships didn't end because of it.

The problem with the world is that they turned the black and white laws of the bible into a 'complex landscape'. Man created these complex landscapes to avoid offending others. God's laws are not complex. They are what they are.

Numbers 25 recounts what happens when we get involved in worldly entanglements. Whether it is eating sacrifices to gods or a gay wedding, you do not make a covenant with the people of the world.

Christians need to stick to their guns. Any offense made is often short-lived anyway.

 

[ralliann]

I don't believe that the Church collectively, or Christians individually, are called to impose Christian beliefs and standards into wider society. And I believe we do our mission a great deal of harm when we try, because then the wider society sees - quite correctly - that we are about controlling them, not loving them. Even if we could enforce a particular practice of marriage, it wouldn't save one single additional soul, because keeping "the rules" isn't what matters. The kingdom of God is not a matter of forcing conformity to a moral code, but a matter of inviting people into willing participation in God's transformation of themselves, their community, and ultimately all of creation.

So, as far as marriage goes, we mind our own business, and don't try to control what others do. But if we, the Church, can be effective as a sign and instrument of the reign of God, that will attract people into the kingdom without us needing to enforce anything.

I don't believe that the Church collectively, or Christians individually, are called to impose Christian beliefs and standards into wider society.

Hold on. It is the other way around. To refuse "civil union" between "partners", is leading to imposing these terms on us which are Christian. We are losing our religious liberties. There is no other reason that I can see, that a civil union is refused. Just like gender pronouns are being imposed on us. Civil union denies them no such privileges, but lead to our loss of them.

they And I believe we do our mission a great deal of harm when we try, because then the wider society sees - quite correctly - that we are about controlling them, not loving them. Even if we could enforce a particular practice of marriage, it wouldn't save one single additional soul, because keeping "the rules" isn't what matters. The kingdom of God is not a matter of forcing conformity to a moral code, but a matter of inviting people into willing participation in God's transformation of themselves, their community, and ultimately all of creation.

So, as far as marriage goes, we mind our own business, and don't try to control what others do. But if we, the Church, can be effective as a sign and instrument of the reign of God, that will attract people into the kingdom without us needing to enforce anything.

You can continue to support to enforce definitions on others, "Marriage", "Wedding" , that's all I see here. Agreeing with the rules of the world, which takes away our religious liberty?

 

[Divide]

As Christians, we are supposed to hold each other to account regarding God's word. This is love, being honest with each other. If you feel condemned or judged, try putting yourself in a gay person's place one time. States are busy legislating against their rights and churches seem to single out their sins above any other.

I don't know about that. I think it seems like it, but that is not so. The reason it seems like it is because gays are actively seking a louder voice and to legitimize it as normal, so they have everyone talking about it and go owie they attacked me whenever someone disagrees with them. They play the victim card and talk about political correctness and hassle the moderators, make it ok!

They are not being singled out. They are calling attention to themselves...and anyone who doesnt agree is disparaged in some way for it.

 

[Brihaha]

Ok, but whether it's to defeat a temptation to drink, or a resistance to do so, it's a far cry from embracing it as "who you are", and then publicly celebrating it. The equivalent to a gay "marriage" would be going to an AA meeting and announcing that you're throwing a drinking party at your house tonight, and everyone is invited. Those who refuse to come will be seen as hateful and judgemental.

Obviously, you don't associate with people who attend AA. Does that sort of thing occur in your church? People in AA have compassion and understanding. We understand we all have the same issues. There is no heirarchy of drunkenness sins.

Just an aside. How long sober?

I haven't had a drink since December 12th 1995 praise God.

 

[Strong in Him]

You did? WHere? I thought you said that many gays are born like that so it is not their fault?

Like, God created some to be gay. That's laughable nonsense! Show me where you said it was the result of sin and not being born like that...

No, God made all people in his image.
The fall messed everything up, including sexuality. So people are born now with disabilities and congenital abnormalities. Some are born being attracted to people of the same sex. It doesn't mean God planned it that way. He didn't plan, either, for babies to be born with Down's syndrome or hydrocephalus - but some are.

 

[Divide]

I don't believe that the Church collectively, or Christians individually, are called to impose Christian beliefs and standards into wider society.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isnt that code talk for spread the Gospel Message? So I think it is clear that we have been charged to do this thing.

You say it like it's a bad thing, why? These Christians on this forum didn't follow you into a gay bar and stand hassling and preaching over your dinner n drinks. You came here to Christian Territory! Yes mamn, truth is spoken here still.

 

[ralliann]

I haven't had a drink since December 12th 1995 praise God.

My late husband quit drinking in the late seventies. I did not know him that way. He told me once that he tried drinking with the guys after work. He found himself leaving the bar with them, but going to another bar on his own where he knew none knew him. Finally, said to himself, "what are you doing?" So he really stopped. He died in 2019. He stayed sober for about 40 years to the day he died. Kudos to you.
Concerning aa, everyone's different. He said he couldn't keep going. It would have drove him to drink.
But if God has handed that for you, PRAISE GOD FOR IT.

 

[Divide]

• 4 minutes ago
• New
• Add bookmark
• #347

You did? WHere? I thought you said that many gays are born like that so it is not their fault?

Like, God created some to be gay. That's laughable nonsense! Show me where you said it was the result of sin and not being born like that...
Click to expand...

No, God made all people in his image.
The fall messed everything up, including sexuality. So people are born now with disabilities and congenital abnormalities. Some are born being attracted to people of the same sex. It doesn't mean God planned it that way. He didn't plan, either, for babies to be born with Down's syndrome or hydrocephalus - but some are.

Ahh! I see. I guess I did miss that you had posted that. This thread just wont stop, lol.

Ok, so you agree that this is a spiritual problem and perhaps we have some generational curses going on also. Good. After all, the thing that Jesus seemed to do the most of in scripture was to cast out evil spirits and demons. Again, this could be a spirit of Lust. Maybe granpad was gay so your kid turns up gay...

Is not Jesus the name above all names? Is there anything too powerful for God? In fact, Jesus said He gave us all authority over evil spirits to cast them out in His name. Did anyone happen to even try to cast out the generational possession of a the spirit of lust from the kid. Probably not. Hmmm.

This is a real spiritual war. They are not playing games here. This is real war. How can you believe in God, whom you can not see, and not take the spiritual thing for real because you can't see it yet?

You see, the gays are not the enemy of Christians, or the trans people. They are our Brothers and Sisters on this earth and need our help and prayers because they have been deceived by the enemy. We wrestle not against flesh and bones but against principalities and powers, the rulers of the dark world.

You are not a bystander to this war! You are the Lord's Boots on the ground here. Ok, so you woke up with amnesia and they reprogrammed you with lies. You must pray it through and shake it off.

 

[Aldebaran]

Obviously, you don't associate with people who attend AA. Does that sort of thing occur in your church? People in AA have compassion and understanding. We understand we all have the same issues. There is no heirarchy of drunkenness sins.

You seem to have misunderstood what I was saying. I was pointing out the differences between an AA meeting and what happens there to what people are expected to think/feel about gay "marriage", and what it would be like at an AA meeting if people at an AA meeting used the same reasoning as those promoting acceptance of homosexual "marriage".
The differences in reality is that alcoholics at AA seek to distance themselves from their addiction to alcohol.
Those who preach tolerance/acceptance/embrace of homosexual "marriage" don't see homosexuality as a vice, but something to celebrate. I'm pretty sure you don't celebrate alcoholism at AA meetings.

 

[Brihaha]

My late husband quit drinking in the late seventies. I did not know him that way. He told me once that he tried drinking with the guys after work. He found himself leaving the bar with them, but going to another bar on his own where he knew none knew him. Finally, said to himself, "what are you doing?" So he really stopped. He died in 2019. He stayed sober for about 40 years to the day he died. Kudos to you.
Concerning aa, everyone's different. He said he couldn't keep going. It would have drove him to drink.
But if God has handed that for you, PRAISE GOD FOR IT.

I appreciate your reply. I understand how your husband felt. I don't need to attend the meetings every week. In fact, after I was comfortable in sobriety I only go now when I feel triggers coming on. Which isn't very often now. I wouldn't even have known my grandkids had I kept drinking. God carried me for years just like that Footprints prayer. Faith is a blessing.

 

[Brihaha]

You seem to have misunderstood what I was saying. I was pointing out the differences between an AA meeting and what happens there to what people are expected to think/feel about gay "marriage", and what it would be like at an AA meeting if people at an AA meeting used the same reasoning as those promoting acceptance of homosexual "marriage".
The differences in reality is that alcoholics at AA seek to distance themselves from their addiction to alcohol.
Those who preach tolerance/acceptance/embrace of homosexual "marriage" don't see homosexuality as a vice, but something to celebrate. I'm pretty sure you don't celebrate alcoholism at AA meetings.

Maybe I did misunderstand you. This is likely because I don't take anything you say seriously any longer. My apologies.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Gagnon points to 1 Cor 5 as a response. I agree but lets use the whole thing not just up to verse 9... how about verse 10?

Indeed - folks need to get their head around this.

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges[ those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”

 

[Carl Emerson]

I have made a point earlier in the thread that has had no response.

If we agree God is Just - how could He order gay's to be killed when they couldn't help their behaviour?

Does not this fact dismiss the claim that sexual orientation is beyond the human will ?

This being the case sin is sin and some sins are more serious than others.

And don't get me wrong - I am well aware that there but for the grace of God go I... There are powerful deceptive Spirits ready to take anyone captive and in our own strength we are toast.

 

[Paidiske]

What? What's the choice? To not defile the conscience of another?

I think you've misunderstood me. I am saying that there is a choice, to attend a same-sex wedding or not, and that Christians are free to go or not in good conscience. I am arguing against the position being put forward by some, that it is automatically wrong to go. I am not saying anything about people who feel convicted not to go; only saying they ought not to condemn those who don't have the same conviction.

The word "impose" is carefully crafted to imply that someone is being forced against their will to observe our faith.

Which is what the situation would be, if we required everyone to abide by Christian marital norms.

It is just evidence that they really do not believe what they claim, and have either self interest or want to be accepted by the world more than by God.

Not at all. I am very clear, though, that while I am free to hold my convictions, it is wrong for me to attempt to make others live in accord with them.

We are losing our religious liberties. ..Civil union denies them no such privileges, but lead to our loss of them.

What have you lost? The right to define marriage according to your own religious beliefs? Is that a reasonable expectation in a secular, pluralist society?

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isnt that code talk for spread the Gospel Message?

No, it is not. Proclaiming the good news, and enforcing conformity to a moral code, are two completely different activities and approaches to the world. In fact, to some degree I'd say they're mutually exclusive; you can't put your foot on someone else's neck and expect them to believe what you bring is good news.

You say it like it's a bad thing, why? These Christians on this forum didn't follow you into a gay bar and stand hassling and preaching over your dinner n drinks. You came here to Christian Territory!

I say it's a bad thing to misuse power to control non-Christians because I deal with the consequences every day. Genuine mission is made much harder when people have experience of Christians behaving badly.

(And for the record, I've never been to a gay bar, and where I stand is no less "Christian territory" - good grief! - than anyone else here).

If we agree God is Just - how could He order gay's to be killed when they couldn't help their behaviour?

Actually, Carl, you've had a response, but you've ignored it. Being gay is not a behaviour. Various sexual behaviours are condemned, but not the orientation.

 

[Chuckrob]

If the people involved have rejected God's free gift of eternal life, that is far more of an abomination to him.
I don't feel I would necessarily be celebrating it - just as I don't believe that my non Christian family members celebrated the vows that they made before God when they married/their children were baptised.

It might be more of a bad witness to say, "no, I'm staying away and will not celebrate your sin", than it would be to go along and pray for them.

The Apostle Paul indicated that a Christian should take a stand against the spiritual wickedness of the world. Going to an abomination and celebrating it with the sinners is not taking that stand, but failing to be a true witness of God's holiness. Taking a stand against spiritual wickedness is not always fun, but conveys the true position that GOD has commanded us to make. Going along with the world is not making a stand against the evil wedding day. So what, if you offend those so spiritually wicked that do not care about GOD.

12 Because we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.

14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;

15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;

16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith you shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.

17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints; (Eph. 6:12-18)

 

[Carl Emerson]

Actually, Carl, you've had a response, but you've ignored it. Being gay is not a behaviour. Various sexual behaviours are condemned, but not the orientation.

Your comment does not process the valid point I am making.

I have always claimed that alleged orientation is in fact temptation.

I don't buy into being born with a desire for the same sex.

 

[ralliann]

Indeed - folks need to get their head around this.

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges[ those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”

How do we apply this to most of what goes on today?

I think you've misunderstood me. I am saying that there is a choice, to attend a same-sex wedding or not, and that Christians are free to go or not in good conscience. I am arguing against the position being put forward by some, that it is automatically wrong to go. I am not saying anything about people who feel convicted not to go; only saying they ought not to condemn those who don't have the same conviction.

Which is what the situation would be, if we required everyone to abide by Christian marital norms.

Not at all. I am very clear, though, that while I am free to hold my convictions, it is wrong for me to attempt to make others live in accord with them.

What have you lost? The right to define marriage according to your own religious beliefs? Is that a reasonable expectation in a secular, pluralist society?


No, it is not. Proclaiming the good news, and enforcing conformity to a moral code, are two completely different activities and approaches to the world. In fact, to some degree I'd say they're mutually exclusive; you can't put your foot on someone else's neck and expect them to believe what you bring is good news.

I say it's a bad thing to misuse power to control non-Christians because I deal with the consequences every day. Genuine mission is made much harder when people have experience of Christians behaving badly.

(And for the record, I've never been to a gay bar, and where I stand is no less "Christian territory" - good grief! - than anyone else here).

Actually, Carl, you've had a response, but you've ignored it. Being gay is not a behaviour. Various sexual behaviours are condemned, but not the orientation.

Is that also what you say about gender pronouns? That is what I am talking about. Losing our rights to speak and walk according to our faith. What the world does Is not the issue here. It is what church leadership is teaching. Christians businesses have already suffered due to this stuff.

 

[Carl Emerson]

How do we apply this to most of what goes on today?

We don't and that is the problem.

We baptise folk who are in relationships unmarried.