How can any true Christian accept an Appointing of a gay bishop ?

[DarkSun]

No, Christians are not under the Mosaic Law.

No, the Bible is clear that homosexual practices are disgraceful and are not acceptable to God.

Without citing Mosaic law, could you please show where the Bible says that homosexual practices are disgraceful to God?
And could you please show where the Bible tells everyone that it's okay to judge another person, even if they were doing something unacceptable in God's eyes?
(Again, without citing Mosaic law.)

 

[kejos]

You're really good at reading into things that aren't even said. I didn't say it was wrong to say that stealing is wrong- I said that judging is wrong.

You wrote:

'Saying something is wrong or may be wrong isn't always judging or condemning.'

Even police officers arresting a person breaking the law would not be necessarily judging them; the officer would be doing his job.

Indeed he would.

 

[DarkSun]

You wrote:

'Saying something is wrong or may be wrong isn't always judging or condemning.'

What she meant is exactly the same as what you quoted.

 

[kejos]

What she meant is exactly the same as what you quoted.

Oh good.

 

[Reverend Rick]

It's telling when you stop discussing something and flatly tell your opponent that he/she is going to hell.

A Christian is not suppose to be judgemental, "Judge not lest ye be judged".

This is akin to shooting yourself in the foot. :rainbow1:

 

[kejos]

A Christian is not suppose to be judgemental, "Judge not lest ye be judged".

Oh dear. That dear old steam Bible. So dearly loved and grasped at- like a straw.

What it means is this: "Don't find fault, and criticise, otherwise fault may be found in you."

It does not mean, unfortunately for those with guilty consciences who wish to evade scrutiny, that moral judgments are to be suspended. Which is obvious, for those who can allow their eyes to stray beyond that ickle verse in Matthew.

Homosexuality is sinful, if the Bible God is as claimed. So either accept it, prove he is not as claimed, which has never yet been achieved, or go fishing.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Some argue in favor of homosexuality, claiming that Jesus never spoke against it. But is that really so? Jesus Christ declared that God’s Word is truth. (John 17:17) That means that he endorsed God’s view of homosexuality as described at Leviticus 18:22, which reads: “You must not lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable thing.” Jesus listed fornication and adultery among the “wicked things [that] issue forth from within and defile a man.” (Mark 7:21-23) The Greek word for fornication,
por·nei′a, is a broader term than that for adultery. It describes all forms of sexual relations outside lawful marriage, including homosexuality. (Jude 7) Jesus Christ also warned his followers not to tolerate any professed Christian teacher who minimizes the seriousness of fornication.—Revelation 1:1; 2:14, 20.

OK, could you please clarify something for me? Do you believe we are under the old covenant or the new one? When you quote Levitical law are you cherry picking?

How do you feel about eating shellfish or disrespectful children?

 

[kejos]

OK, could you please clarify something for me? Do you believe we are under the old covenant or the new one? When you quote Levitical law are you cherry picking?

How do you feel about eating shellfish or disrespectful children?

Both should be treated with suspicion, at best. Shellfish bought in an open market in a hot country? No, thank you.

Disrespectful children? You spare the rod, you spoil the child, which is official government policy in some Western countries. And what an awful mess has been the result, as predicted.

But in any case, these instructions were for Israelites, in Israel, at the time that they lived there. They were never for Egyptians or Hittites, Celts or the millions in the Indus Valley. What we now have is the gospel, and when homosexuals can show even the smallest sign that they live in obedience to that, it may be worth discussing the position of homosexuality in the church.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Oh dear. That dear old steam Bible. So dearly loved and grasped at- like a straw.

What it means is this: "Don't find fault, and criticise, otherwise fault may be found in you."

It does not mean, unfortunately for those with guilty consciences who wish to evade scrutiny, that moral judgments are to be suspended. Which is obvious, for those who can allow their eyes to stray beyond that ickle verse in Matthew.

Homosexuality is sinful, if the Bible God is as claimed. So either accept it, prove he is not as claimed, which has never yet been achieved, or go fishing.

How many churches are marrying people who have been divorced and allowing them to be church members while in the same breath are condemning homosexuals and pushing them away? Do you not see the hypocrisy?

 

[kejos]

How many churches are marrying people who have been divorced and allowing them to be church members while in the same breath are condemning homosexuals and pushing them away?

Not that many. Methodists, Anglicans/Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Congregationalists and others permit both homosexuals and divorcees. Baptists and Brethren tend to exclude both.

Do you not see the hypocrisy?

I see the hypocrisy of the CoE, that allows incumbents, even senior clerics, to be homosexual, but not bishops.

 

[sojourner]

Oh dear. That dear old steam Bible. So dearly loved and grasped at- like a straw.

What it means is this: "Don't find fault, and criticise, otherwise fault may be found in you."

It does not mean, unfortunately for those with guilty consciences who wish to evade scrutiny, that moral judgments are to be suspended. Which is obvious, for those who can allow their eyes to stray beyond that ickle verse in Matthew.

Homosexuality is sinful, if the Bible God is as claimed. So either accept it, prove he is not as claimed, which has never yet been achieved, or go fishing.

I haven't seen dancing this good on "Dancing With the Stars..."

 

[sojourner]

Both should be treated with suspicion, at best. Shellfish bought in an open market in a hot country? No, thank you.

Disrespectful children? You spare the rod, you spoil the child, which is official government policy in some Western countries. And what an awful mess has been the result, as predicted.

But in any case, these instructions were for Israelites, in Israel, at the time that they lived there. They were never for Egyptians or Hittites, Celts or the millions in the Indus Valley. What we now have is the gospel, and when homosexuals can show even the smallest sign that they live in obedience to that, it may be worth discussing the position of homosexuality in the church.

Then why do you quote them as if they were "for Americans, in America, at the time that they lived there?" If your position here is correct, what difference would either Leviticus or Paul have for post-modern Americans??? (BTW "the Gospel" mentions homosexuality not one single time... Just FYI...)

 

[kejos]

Then why do you quote them as if they were "for Americans, in America, at the time that they lived there?"

I don't. There have never been instructions for Americans, native or otherwise, to sacrifice bulls and goats etc., to Jehovah. Afaik, anyway.

If your position here is correct, what difference would either Leviticus or Paul have for post-modern Americans???

Leviticus confirms the sinfulness of Sodom and Gomorrah (if that needs confirming); Paul and Peter confirm the the same thing. (What 'post-modern' signifies, heaven only knows!)

(BTW "the Gospel" mentions homosexuality not one single time... Just FYI...)

Even if that were true, the CoE takes account of the whole Bible.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Not that many. Methodists, Anglicans/Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Congregationalists and others permit both homosexuals and divorcees. Baptists and Brethren tend to exclude both.

Baptists: Divorce and remarriage, southern baptist churches, divorce and remarriage

 

[kejos]

Baptists: Divorce and remarriage, southern baptist churches, divorce and remarriage

'You will find that many Southern Baptists believe that once you are divorced you should never marry again or hold a leadership position in the church.'

Southern Baptists are of course disregarded by most Baptists worldwide anyway.

 

[Smoke]

Oh dear. That dear old steam Bible. So dearly loved and grasped at- like a straw.

What it means is this: "Don't find fault, and criticise, otherwise fault may be found in you."

You're in deep **** no matter how you word it.

Homosexuality is sinful, if the Bible God is as claimed. So either accept it, prove he is not as claimed, which has never yet been achieved, or go fishing.

Let's suppose that homosexuality is sinful. So what? If homosexuals cannot be Christians, then you cannot be a Christian, either. Lying and hypocrisy are sinful, and yet you don't think being a habitual and unrepentant liar and hypocrite excludes you from the church -- and that is, unsurprisingly, yet another example of your hypocrisy.

 

[Reverend Rick]

yet another example of your hypocrisy.

Actually his last example.

 

[sojourner]

I don't. There have never been instructions for Americans, native or otherwise, to sacrifice bulls and goats etc., to Jehovah. Afaik, anyway.

Beside the point. You're evading. You said that Levitican law pertained only to ancient Hebrews. My point was that, if that's the case, why do you spout Leviticus in defense of your position that homosexuality is wrong for post-modern American bishops?

Leviticus confirms the sinfulness of Sodom and Gomorrah (if that needs confirming);

The overriding sin of Sodom wasn't its sexual depravity -- it was its gross neglect of hospitality.

Paul and Peter confirm the the same thing. (What 'post-modern' signifies, heaven only knows!)

The gross neglect of hospitality? OK.

Even if that were true, the CoE takes account of the whole Bible.

But you specified "Gospel" -- not "the whole Bible."

 

[DarkSun]

Why did he get banned? I was enjoying reading this. :sad:

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Why did he get banned? I was enjoying reading this. :sad:

I'm guessing that he was just another sock puppet for one of our neighborhood trolls.