moksha wrote: Some individuals progress quite well on their own, others need to be told when to jump and still others need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the more civil behaviors of the modern era.
If you get the duct tape, I'll go get Cog...
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
Thanks for posting. Most fundies sputter when you ask them what did Jesus have to say about gay people.
It's fun to watch.
I said in class the other week that my focus, my mission so to speak is cleaning my own house, and finding value in my neighbor, even when he tells me to my face he doesn't like or will not walk along my path. It ain't all about me. We were debating the compatibility of Christian theism with postmodernism.
Hi GIMR,
Does this absence of discussion imply that:
1) The subject of homosexuality was controversial with 1st C Jews.
2) The subject of homosexuality was not controversial with 1st C Jews.
Richard, it doesn't matter. What matters is whether or not you're willing to go to church one day but slander your neighbor the other six.
What would Jesus do?
Pastor said it very eloquently sunday, there are a whole bunch of people in church right now who are not saved, because they're still doing the same old hateful, sinful, evil things. That includes prejudice.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
GIMR wrote:Richard, it doesn't matter. What matters is whether or not you're willing to go to church one day but slander your neighbor the other six.
What would Jesus do?
Pastor said it very eloquently sunday, there are a whole bunch of people in church right now who are not saved, because they're still doing the same old hateful, sinful, evil things. That includes prejudice.
Does agreeing with the Old Testament and New Testament about the sinfulness homosexuality slander my neighbor? I think not.
GIMR wrote:Richard, it doesn't matter. What matters is whether or not you're willing to go to church one day but slander your neighbor the other six.
What would Jesus do?
Pastor said it very eloquently sunday, there are a whole bunch of people in church right now who are not saved, because they're still doing the same old hateful, sinful, evil things. That includes prejudice.
Does agreeing with the Old Testament and New Testament about the sinfulness homosexuality slander my neighbor? I think not.
Your job (as is mine and everyone else's) is to love your neighbor, nothing more, nothing less. That means you don't get to comment about his/her homosexuality at all. It's not your job to judge the sinfulness or lack thereof of your neighbor; check your commandments. You've overstepped your stewardship by commenting on your neighbor's sexuality at all.
Roger Morrison wrote:So says Anglican Prelate, speaking in Toronto... (bold added)
Reuters) - The spiritual leader of the world's 77 million Anglicans has said conservative Christians who cite the Bible to condemn homosexuality are misreading a key passage written by Saint Paul almost 2,000 years ago.
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, addressing theology students in Toronto, said an oft-quoted passage in Paul's Epistle to the Romans meant to warn Christians not to be self-righteous when they see others fall into sin.
His comments were an unusually open rebuff to conservative bishops, many of them from Africa, who have been citing the Bible to demand that pro-gay Anglican majorities in the United States and Canada be reined in or forced out of the Communion.
"Many current ways of reading miss the actual direction of the passage," Williams said on Monday, according to a text of his speech posted on the Anglican Church of Canada's Web site.
"Paul is making a primary point not about homosexuality but about the delusions of the supposedly law-abiding."
The worldwide Anglican Communion is near breaking point over homosexuality, with conservative clerics insisting the Bible forbids gay bishops or blessings for same-sex unions. Its U.S. branch, the Episcopal Church, named a gay bishop in 2003.
In fact, Williams also revealed on Tuesday that he had considered canceling the Anglicans' once-a-decade 2008 Lambeth Conference, which has the potential to become a flashpoint over homosexuality.
"Yes, we've already been considering that and the answer is no," he told the Anglican Church of Canada's Anglican Journal.
"We've been looking at whether the timing is right, but if we wait for the ideal time, we will wait more than just 18 months."
In the passage of Romans that Williams referred to in Monday's speech, Paul said people who forgot God's words fell into sin. "Men committed indecent acts with other men and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion," Paul wrote.
Williams said these lines were "for the majority of modern readers the most important single text in Scripture on the subject of homosexuality." But right after that passage, Paul warns readers not to condemn those who ignore God's word.
"At whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself," wrote Paul, the first-century apostle whose epistles, or letters, to early Christian communities elaborated many Church teachings.
NEITHER SIDE WINS
Williams said reinterpreting Paul's epistle as a warning against smug self-righteousness rather than homosexuality would favor neither side over the other in the bitter struggle that threatens to plunge the Anglican Communion into schism.
It would not help pro-gay liberals, he said, because Paul and his readers clearly agreed that homosexuality was "as obviously immoral as idol worship or disobedience to parents." This reading would also upset anti-gay conservatives, who have been "up to this point happily identifying with Paul's castigation of someone else," and challenge them to ask whether they were right to judge others, he added.
"This does nothing to settle the exegetical questions fiercely debated at the moment," Williams said.
But he said a "strictly theological reading of Scripture" would not allow a Christian to denounce others and not ask whether he or she were also somehow at fault. Williams warned of the danger of schism.
"The Communion has to face the fact that there is a division in our Church and it's getting deeper and more bitter," he said. "If the Anglican Church divides, everyone will lose."
Win or lose, the Anglican Church is demonstrating true Christian courage by putting forth the principle of "God" love for ALL. Which means NO ONE is excluded from receipt of "God" justice, human acceptance, and full unpredudiced participation in life... As I see it... What about You??? Warm regards, Roger
Roger,
Can you give me the chapter and verse from Romans?
Jersey Girl
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Jersey Girl, sorry, I can't find the Roman's quote...However, looking through the concordance there seems a lot in Pauls writings about the "wrong of judging".
I think that is what Williams has in mind. To judge/condemn is the greater sin. Whatever the 'sin' of the 'sinner' is, to judge that person is not in the human domain. THAT is in "God's" domain... Most "charitable"... Another of Paul's emphasis... (1Cor:1-13)
GIMR wrote:Richard, it doesn't matter. What matters is whether or not you're willing to go to church one day but slander your neighbor the other six.
What would Jesus do?
Pastor said it very eloquently sunday, there are a whole bunch of people in church right now who are not saved, because they're still doing the same old hateful, sinful, evil things. That includes prejudice.
Does agreeing with the Old Testament and New Testament about the sinfulness homosexuality slander my neighbor? I think not.
Your job (as is mine and everyone else's) is to love your neighbor, nothing more, nothing less. That means you don't get to comment about his/her homosexuality at all. It's not your job to judge the sinfulness or lack thereof of your neighbor; check your commandments. You've overstepped your stewardship by commenting on your neighbor's sexuality at all.
AMEN!
You see, Mr. Richard here, like many other legalistic Christians cannot be satisfied with simply worrying about what God things about them. We've been discussing this in class, with regards to postmodernism and how it relates to theology. I feel that some Christians need to feel special, and in order to do so, they have to stand on the pillar of having the right kind of faith. It's not enough to be humble, it's not enough to try to be good in your own right, you have to be THE RIGHT, and God's chosen to boot.
The Bible doesn't approve of this, and it's strange that Mr. Richard cannot see this. Apparently grace only works for those who confess Jesus with their mouths, but spend the rest of the time turning their hearts against others and trying to use God as an excuse.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
Roger Morrison wrote: Jersey Girl, sorry, I can't find the Roman's quote...However, looking through the concordance there seems a lot in Pauls writings about the "wrong of judging".
I think that is what Williams has in mind. To judge/condemn is the greater sin. Whatever the 'sin' of the 'sinner' is, to judge that person is not in the human domain. THAT is in "God's" domain... Most "charitable"... Another of Paul's emphasis... (1Cor:1-13)
GIMR, nice to read you again! Warm regards, Roger
Hey Roger, good to see you again!
It's so ironic that some of the most vitrolic Christians out there use Paul to justify their judgement, when he's saying the exact opposite of what they're doing.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
GIMR wrote:Richard, it doesn't matter. What matters is whether or not you're willing to go to church one day but slander your neighbor the other six.
What would Jesus do?
Pastor said it very eloquently sunday, there are a whole bunch of people in church right now who are not saved, because they're still doing the same old hateful, sinful, evil things. That includes prejudice.
Does agreeing with the Old Testament and New Testament about the sinfulness homosexuality slander my neighbor? I think not.
Your job (as is mine and everyone else's) is to love your neighbor, nothing more, nothing less. That means you don't get to comment about his/her homosexuality at all. It's not your job to judge the sinfulness or lack thereof of your neighbor; check your commandments. You've overstepped your stewardship by commenting on your neighbor's sexuality at all.
AMEN!
You see, Mr. Richard here, like many other legalistic Christians cannot be satisfied with simply worrying about what God things about them. We've been discussing this in class, with regards to postmodernism and how it relates to theology. I feel that some Christians need to feel special, and in order to do so, they have to stand on the pillar of having the right kind of faith. It's not enough to be humble, it's not enough to try to be good in your own right, you have to be THE RIGHT, and God's chosen to boot.
The Bible doesn't approve of this, and it's strange that Mr. Richard cannot see this. Apparently grace only works for those who confess Jesus with their mouths, but spend the rest of the time turning their hearts against others and trying to use God as an excuse.
Well, GIMR can call me legalistic, but I'm not allowed to cite the clear teachings of the New Testament. How the heck does GIMR know that I'm legalistic? Jesus told the woman caught in adultery to "go and sin no more". Isn't that commenting about her sexuality?