I was reading the paper this morning about the new Archbishop Nolan in NY, and one of the first things out of his mouth was that he would oppose in any way shape or form any attempt to legalize gay marriage in NY.
Now, I know that being gay is against the Christian beliefs, so I know why you'd oppose it. My question is this....
If a person is gay, doesn't it stand to figure that the person is no longer a Christian? I've heard it said many times, "you can't be gay and be Christian."
If this is true, then why does the church have a problem with gay marriage? It's not Christians who are gay and trying to marry, so isn't this in the strictest sense imposing their will upon those of other faiths?
I've heard the argument that marriage is a Christian ritual, but isn't that a tad presumptuous? Couples have been uniting LONG before there was Christianity, so when did it become strictly a Christian notion?
I'm not being condescending, I'm just curious as to why Christians feel they own the patent on marriage.
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.
Page 1 of 3
-
-
Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box
First of all good questions, well asked, thank you.
BEING Gay is not strictly against the beliefs of Christianity for most Christians. Some would (and will here I am sure) disagree with me but the self understanding of sexual identity is not intrinsically a sin. ACTING on the behavior is where the sin happens. So if your are unmarried (gay or straight) the Church's official position is you are to be chaste
While that does get said a lot, the folks who say it, in my opinion, are wrong. Let me step back a moment and give a little background. Within my tradition and I believe for most of Christianity we understand Christians to be "simul eustis est peccator" that is we are at the same time saint and sinner. It is a mistake to assume, either inside or outside the Christian faith, that because a person is a Christian they are sinless.
One is a Christian by a free gift of God in Christ worked out in us by the presence and work of the Holy Spirit; not by what one does or does not do. Conversely our sin does not exclude us from God's love and forgiveness.
Thus there are many gay folks who still see themselves as Christians and who I at least would recognize as such.
Where the rub happens is we are taught that repentance involves turning from repetitive sin and especailly away from public sin which would bring disrepute upon the Church and another's relationship with God. It is here in the public nature and unrepentant nature of some sins that more emphasis gets laid.
Personally I am amazed regularly how sins involving sexuality get such big play when sins of greed, etc. get a lot more play in the Bible and are often ignored in the public.
On the historical/political side is a nuance of this country. In Europe all marriages are a product of the state. Everyone is married at "the court house". Then those who chose (and for many years that was nearly everyone) would cross the town square and have their marriages blessed in a ceremony in the church.
In America those functions have been merged. I am actually licensed by the Secretary of State in Ohio to perform marriages on behalf of the state. In other states the law reads that ordained clergy are authorized (and in some places required) to sign licenses issued by the county courts.
The church has been brought into the civil realm of doing the state's job. It makes for a testy issue where by virtue of being in the state's "employ" the church is being asked to do things it does not want to do.
Pastors in Ohio who would support gay marriage have stopped signing the licenses and are demanding a move towards a European model. Frankly for lots of reasons I would support that attempt.
I have practiced civil disobediance of the marriage laws in the past, performing religious services for folks without a state license when getting married legally would radivcally diminish a person's income (speciafically loss iof retirement income among the elderly).
I hope this answers some of your questions.late again, Ducken, The Rev and 4 others like this. -
I'm confused.
That and this one:
emeraldfin likes this. -
-
Does the news not report that (because that would indeed make sense if that is the case)? -
Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box
Now this may seem shocking to all of you but I don't have a problem with some form of civil union for same sex couples. I would not perform one but there is a legitimate civil rights issue on estate transferal etc. that gay couples should be entitled to. I may disagree with them but I think they should be treated fairly.late again, mullingan, Pagan and 2 others like this. -
Have to say, its greatly re-freshing to hear a person with a strong belief in Christianity say that. That type of attitude has sadly been lost on many Christians, but its good to hear that some dont adopt a narrow minded attitude towards homosexuals, they may not share the same values but they should not be condemned either.
Something worth mentioning also is that, according to the Bible and the teachings of Jesus is that sex is A) for procreation and B) a gift for married couples and a sign of love between a man and a women. So from what I have been lead to believe is that if a couple do not tick those two boxes, but yet act out on their desires they are commiting a sin. So basically sex before marriage is as great a sin as homosexuality. Unfortunetly I do not know my Bible as well as I could but I'm sure Ohio or someone else with a good command of scripture could rattle off verses from Genesis that outline Gods intention for man and woman regarding sexual ehtics and behaviour.
For homosexuals that means a life of celibacy, as it goes against Gods plan for humans according to the Bible. If they do not act out on their urges then they do not commit a sin. That unfortunetly has to be the way. Its the same for a straight person. If they do not get married then they must remain celibate until they do.Ohiophinphan likes this. -
I disagree with your premise Ohiophin, when a council of men decided to overthrow any sense of what "Hath God said..." then Christianity is reduced to opinion only, the "next" council can then overturn the previous one and so on and so forth and thusly reduce any idea of the possibility of a separation from God via one's own actions.
As for "can a homosexual be a Christian"?
Scripture would say "no", personally, and I'm thankful for it, we are not to judge another's Salvation, that is between the individual and the Lord, actions do speak, but we look at things through human eyes, not through the Lord's eyes, he knows hearts far better then "we" ever could so perhaps the Lord will say "yes", that is my hope anyway.
As for Civil Unions, I can't support them from a Christian worldview as that is a sort of endorsement of behaviour, that said, Caeser will do what Caeser will do, "our" battle as it were is with powers and principalities and not with the local courthouse clerk or state legislature. -
I want to know exactly how being gay is bad for the community or hurts the community in any way....thats my question for this thread.
Isn't gluttony a sin? How come you dont fight to limit the amount of chocolate bars a person can buy? Why is being gay such a bad sin you are willing to fight against it, but not others?Fin D and Ohiophinphan like this. -
Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box
Regarding the question of whether you can be gay and Christian we seem to disagree somewhat. I guess in that regard I would ask a couple of questions; do you accept the concept of "saint and sinner" for Christians? If so, then would you say a greedy person can be a Christian? or a fat person? or???? Are there certain behaviors you would identify as beyond the pall?
If you don't accept "saint and sinner" then are you contending that salvation is ultimately in our hands or God's hands? Do we have to add something to the cross for it to become effective in our lives?
All of the above have a place under the big tent that is Christianity so I am trying to get a sense of what your positions are before I try to make a logical answer.
Finally on the civil union issue, our positions aren't that different. As I said, I would not perform a service for a same sex couple and would agree that chastity is the only Biblical answer outside of marriage. Given that there are gay coiuples trying to be faithful, they should be accorded the same protections under the law that everyone else has. In the Kingdom of the left hand (the realm of the world) justice is the key Christian virtue.Fin D likes this. -
Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box
Regarding the harm issue, this becomes more of an answer for the church. Others will have different opinions but my answer would be that anything which concentrates that much energy on something other than our relationship with God and others is harmful to society and ultimately to a person's own relationships. The commercialization of sex, rampant promiscuity, and the rest of the sexual sins would be things that in my opinion and I believe in the opinion of the church woulkd draw people away from "loftier" pursuits. -
Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box
Regarding the second bolded sentence, thank you. The vast majority of the world is straight and it becomes very easy for that majority to point their fingers at gays and say, "be chaste" while not heeding the sanctions on their own behavior.emeraldfin likes this. -
I'm doomed. :lol:dolphindebby, Ohiophinphan and emeraldfin like this. -
Bet it was totally worth it though dude!!! -
-
Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box
Come on, ol' buddy, I knew your were doomed long before you put that image (which I will now need counseling to remove) in my brain!
:wink2:unluckyluciano and Pagan like this. -
-
Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box
dolphindebby and Pagan like this. -
-
Once again, Pagan raises the bar on civil discourse. :up:
I know what I believe on gay marriage, but I wish the church would spend more time bringing people to Christ and less time convicting of sin: that's the Holy Spirit's job.dolphindebby, SICK, Ohiophinphan and 1 other person like this. -
Are we to be renewed day by day in increasing closeness with God, or is there is no effect in our Faith it being merely ritual and tradition?
Or does Justice require Obedience first?
If I had my way, a Eusebian Universalism would be outstanding, alas, it's not so Ohiophin and that being the case, I must speak. -
Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box
Padre, I must be especially dense today because I simply can not follow what you are trying to say to me, I am sorry.
-
-
-
I'm sorry for being so ignorant about this, but does the bible say anything about divorce? Like is divorce a sin, or not allowed? (because of the whole "til death do you part" thing)
Because I would think that'd be a far bigger straw than gay marriage if divorce is indeed a sin or whatever. -
The bible says that God hates divorce.(Malachi 2:16)
It also says, what God has joined together, let man not seperate.
It also says (Matthew 19:9) Jesus said, "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." What most people don't know is that the the bible uses different words in greek and hebrew but when its translated into english it only uses one word...divorce.
in one instance the bible uses the word divorce meaning separation.
In another instance the bible uses the word divorce meaning a separation with papers (legally binding divorce). in the verse that says "if a man or woman divorces their spouse and remarries another person, they have committed adultery", it's using the word meaning "separates". In other words its saying if a man or woman separates with their spouse and then marries someone else, they've committed adultery b/c they're still married to the person they seperated with. Because it wasn't a legal divorce with papers!
it should also be noted that the "sexual immorality" in this verse....
(Matthew 19:9) Jesus said, "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." ..... is the greek word pornea which means a long list of things that have to do with marrital unfaithfulness. there's no mistake that the root word for the greek word is the word porn aka pornography. Jesus gives this "sexual immorality/pornea" as a reason for divorce being permissable.
ICorinthians 7:15 also gives another reason for divorce. It talks about trying to save a marriage if possible, but it says .."But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. But God has called us to peace."
The bible states that God had a divorce (with papers) with Isreal. you can find references to this in jer 3:8 Isiah 50:1 and Hosea 2:2. Of course God did this under the principle found in I Cor 7:15 and Matthew 19:9. Isreal was unfaithul to God and Isreal (the unbeliever) left God, there for God divorced Isreal with papers (legally binding divorce). Then God made himself available to anyone, that's why salvation is available to anyone.
So to sum it all up. God doesn't like divorce. He doesn't want it to happen, he wants us to work it out if at all possible, but he does give us a few reasons where divorce is permissable. But i would say if you have a divorce for any reason other than the exceptions that God gives us, than in that case divorce is a sin. But it's also not a sin if you try to work it out but your spouse wants to leave anyway and/or if your spouse is unfaithful or commits sexual immorality.
i hope i didn't confuse you. feel free to ask questions.Ohiophinphan, dolphindebby, Stitches and 1 other person like this. -
You pretty much sum it up with the answer you gave, that there is hugely conflicting verses in the Bible about divorce. This for me is a reason why I have very little faith in Sacred Scripture. Its amazing how different the NT accounts dealing with divorce are. Heres an example.
Matthew 5:31-32:
"It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery."
Yet another account of the Sermon on the Mount and based on the same conversation states..........
Mark 10:2-12:
"And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him...And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery."
Its very clear to me that one of these authors has changed what Jesus actually said to suit his beliefs. For me that is a very scary prospect that we could be adopting what we think are the words of Jesus, yet are the views of someone else. -
-
I think the one thing that is clear is that the bible we see was subject to the interpretations of previous authors and translators. And that the Roman Catholic church and other denominations have further made their own interpretations, many arriving at different conclusions.
Obviously, people and churches can have their own opinions, but the claim that anything is absolutely God's law is questionable at best.Stitches likes this. -
-
[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery[/ame]
There have been many other interpretations both legal and cultural throughout history. It just goes back to the point that any of these absolute positions are really just individual interpretations and opinions.Fin D likes this. -
31"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.'[a] 32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.
The first time the word divorce appears it means "put away" (seperated) and certificated of divorce (legal divorce) but the second time the word divorce appears it only means "put away" (seperated).
So Jesus is just saying if you and your wife get seperated and you marry someone else, you've committed adultery b/c you're really still married to the person you seperated with b/c it wasn't a legal divorce with papers.
But back to your point about the 2 verses sounding different, i see them as the same thing. one of the verses throws in an explanation for which word "divorce" was being used.....with papers. I believe matthew was written to the jews thats why it says it has been said that if you have a divorce you must give a wriiten document for the divorce b/c that was the law given to them by moses. the other scripture from mark leaves that out b/c his audience doesn't know the law of moses. i believe mark was writting to the gentiles. the gentiles had a common practice of "putting away" thier spouse without papers.
the 2 verses were on 2 different occassions. the one in matthew was a teaching of jesus' from the sermon on the mount. the one from mark was when jesus was being questioned by the pharisee's then later the dicsciples asked him questions about the same thing. the pharisee's were trying to trap him by saying is it lawful for a man to divorce "put away" his wife. jesus answered by telling them the law of moses which was to "put away" and have papers (divorce). later on jesus was explaining this to the disciples by going further into detail about if you just divorce "put away" your wife, you're really still married to her, therefor if you marry someone else you're committing adultery.
-
also; i'm going to hell. -
but one things for sure, God's against it in the old testament and the new testament. he says its an abomination.
maybe that wasn't a problem at the time and he never addressed it until it was a problem. just like we create new laws anytime someone does something wrong that the law doesn't cover. it's clear from the beggining (genesis) that God intended man to be with a woman. romans 1 also points out that God makes his view on this subject clear through creation. have you seen any gay animals? lol. well some animals will hump anything. lol -
mullingan likes this.
-
Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box
Before someone chimes in on the trouble with translations, let me say something. Among the world's major religions only Christianity strives to put the sacred texts into the language of the people. An observant Jew still needs to learn Hebrew. a Moslem Arabic, and so on. Christianity from its inception (Jesus spoke Aramaic but the NT is written in koine Greek) sought to bring God's word to people in their everyday tounge.
Yes it has trouble as language evolves but the alternative is saying you can not speak to God in your own language and that to me would be worse. -
One things for sure, jesus always took things to the next level. he's said things like (paraphrased)"you've heard it said, don't commit adultery. But i tell you that anyone who has lusted after another woman has committed adultery in his heart." -
i'm definitely going to hell.
Page 1 of 3
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.