Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Completely untrue. Paul also preached repentance. Have you read 1 and 2 Timothy? Titus? 1 and 2 Corinthians? Galatians? He thoroughly chastises churches that are engaging in sinful behavior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinivanDriver
There's that selectivity again, mostly likely based on these two verses:
1 Corinthians 14:34,35.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn of ‘83
Regarding your first paragraph, Jesus spoke to a wide audience, whereas Paul’s mission was to the Church, ie believers in Christ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein
Be careful throwing that I Corinthians 1:17 stuff around on this board. Kate might be reading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Repentance as typically used in the current dogma is the wrong connotation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterbeard
Paul and Jesus have major differences in their ministries, Jesus proclaimed repentance, baptism, and belief, repentance being paramount.
Textbook thread hijacking.
Take it to the Politics and Controversies Forum!
The OP inquired regarding churches that were LGTBQ friendly, not to hear your views questioning or defending their integrity or of those who identify as LGBTQ.
The internet is full of venom against the LGTBQ community and bringing it into a forum where someone inquires about wanting to further explore religious faith is beyond the pail, even for the best "Christians".
Suicide rates for LGBTQ youth is 2.5 times higher than heterosexual youth with nearly 50% age 12-20 having seriously considered suicide.
In other words, please think before you spew any vitriol on the internet and who may wind up reading it.
The OP inquired regarding churches that were LGTBQ friendly, not to hear your views questioning or defending their integrity or of those who identify as LGBTQ.
The internet is full of venom against the LGTBQ community and bringing it into a forum where someone inquires about wanting to further explore religious faith is beyond the pail, even for the best "Christians".
Suicide rates for LGBTQ youth is 2.5 times higher than heterosexual youth with nearly 50% age 12-20 having seriously considered suicide.
In other words, please think before you spew any vitriol on the internet and who may wind up reading it.
Me, I'm going to go with the loving God that recognizes that the mores of nomadic patriarchal tribespeople of 2000-3000 years ago might not apply to everyone, everywhere. Christ's central message does. Let's focus on that.
Me, I'm going to go with the loving God that recognizes that the mores of nomadic patriarchal tribespeople of 2000-3000 years ago might not apply to everyone, everywhere. Christ's central message does. Let's focus on that.
That central message is agape love because God IS agape love. That is what should identify and characterize Christians, NOT ancient scriptural mores.
I realize that this thread is not intended as a platform for debating 'Homosexuality and the Bible' - we already have a thread for that topic - but it IS a fact that the churches who oppose the alleged 'gay lifestyle' DO get this notion from scripture. So, it is relative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie"
Yet, you constantly argue for it.
That anyone would feel the need to inquire as to what churches are accepting of gay folks would also bring to attention THE REASON WHY most churches are not accepting of gay folks ...hence a 'deviation' to the Bible and ITS apparent condemnation of gay folks. Therefore, it's obvious that interpretations of specific Bible texts that created this particular issue in the first place would be brought into this discussion. There may be members or visitors to this site who don't know the history behind this particular topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
I have already mentioned that, as much as my knowledge on scripture takes me, all references to male/male sexual practices in the Bible reference pagan temple prostitution and not 'homosexuality per se' since any such definition was not known to the ancient Bible writers. Is there anyone who can prove me wrong on this interpretation of the Bible references to male/male sex ...that it solely refers to idolatry and nothing other? I can hardly resurrect the other thread just to ask this question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie"
That is wrong, and it has been clearly shown to be wrong. You are continuing to promote a lie.
What is wrong? What lie am I promoting? That Paul is referencing idolatry when he refers to male/male sex practices? Don't just say this and then cut and run. Show me where I'm wrong and that I am lying.
I have on a number of occasions dissected the texts to which you persistently use to condemn homosexuality per se and I have arrived at 'idolatry' each and every time. Back in Paul's day 'homosexuality' as defined to be a normal sexual orientation for some WAS UNKNOWN! How many times must this be said? Even today (3/1/2024) YOU, BF, don't know (or you choose to ignore) this fact! So how the heck would the ancients have known?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie"
Maybe you believe it to be true, I don't know. But you've bought into a false idea and are promoting it.
I don't know if you are seriously ignorant of the Bible references (there are ONLY two or three in the entire Bible!) that refer to male/male sex or whether you're simply digging in your heels just for the sake of it, but either way you will run into those who must dismiss your beliefs on this issue based on what really do appear to be biblical facts.
If it makes you feel any better, BF, HAD Paul known that homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation for some, he likely would have personally thought it to have been 'icky', just as you do. Then again, Paul just may have been gay himself. It DOES happen!
What I have noticed in recent times is that fewer Christians seem to be using the Leviticus texts with which to condemn homosexuality and rather prefer to use the two or three male/male sex prohibitions from the New Testament's Paul to condemn homosexuality. Perhaps they are now beginning to realize that the commands of the barbaric God of the Old Testament don't hold too much appeal - i.e., death by stoning! - for most Christians nowadays. We DO seem to be progressing in SOME areas at least.
There's that selectivity again, mostly likely based on these two verses:
Actually, it's called reading it in context.
Quote:
1 Corinthians 14:34,35
34 Women[f] should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
But the people who love to quote that seem to forget the rest of the passage:
36 Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37 If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. 38 But if anyone ignores this, they will themselves be ignored.[h] 39 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.
Verses 36-39 serve to rebut verses 34-35. The very fact that he is encouraging women to speak in verse 39 is the complete opposite of what he says in the passages you seem to favor. In fact, in some translations of that part of Corinthians, verse 36 actually starts with the question What? As in 'Are you serious, guys?' In other words, the entire intent of this passage is intended as a rebuke to the Corinthians, not as laying down some rule of the church.
That passage does not invalidate the standards for a pastor or elder.
Quote:
Need further proof?
Romans 16:1I
I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae.
This verse has been subject to some skullduggery over time. For example, some translations like to substitute the word 'helper' for 'deacon.' And others try to perform a little sleight of hand by using the term 'deaconness' even though that term doesn't appear in classical Greek until at least the Sixth Century.
But the earliest manuscripts we have of Paul's letter to the Romans indeed uses the term 'deacon,' which is truly odd if Paul is against women serving as clergy. What's more, that entire point of the letter is to introduce Phoebe to the Romans and expects the Christian community there to do what she asks. It is part of fulfilling his mission to raise funds for the Christian community in Jerusalem, as noted in Romans 15.
There is zero evidence that Phoebe or any woman held the office of deacon or elder. No matter how you translate the word "servant"
Quote:
Then there's this from Galatians 3:26-29
26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Yes. In Christ, we are all equal. Again, nothing on the qualifications for pastor or elder.
Quote:
Or Acts 21, where the four daughters of Phillip who prophesied without any evident criticism from the author. Or Anna in Luke 2, who was a prophet in the temple who was one of the very first to recognize and proclaim the divinity of Christ.
And, by the way, there's archeological proof as well, with paintings and sculptures in some of the earliest church depicting women as clergy, standing at the altar, providing Eucharist, and otherwise participating as officiants in early services.
Again...women prophesying says nothing about the office of pastor/elder.
Let's talk apples to apples and try to avoid ripping passages out of context, ok?
The OP inquired regarding churches that were LGTBQ friendly, not to hear your views questioning or defending their integrity or of those who identify as LGBTQ.
OK? I didn't bring it up.
Quote:
The internet is full of venom against the LGTBQ community and bringing it into a forum where someone inquires about wanting to further explore religious faith is beyond the pail, even for the best "Christians".
I certainly have not been spewing any venom. But I refuse to be attacked without defending myself.
Quote:
Suicide rates for LGBTQ youth is 2.5 times higher than heterosexual youth with nearly 50% age 12-20 having seriously considered suicide.
So we should ignore what the Bible says on a religious message board?
Quote:
In other words, please think before you spew any vitriol on the internet and who may wind up reading it.
Please be ready to give that same consideration to those you disagree with.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
