UMC and homosexuality

[westtexas]

Elijah23, you have had much to say about the subject of homosexuality lately. This question is really directed to you since you attend a UMC congregation but I'd like to hear everyones opinions.
Last week in Tampa Fl. the UMC convention voted 61% to 39% to uphold their doctrine that homosexuality is "incompatible with Christian teaching". I agree with this vote. There's a major problem though for the churches in the U.S. in my view. 40% of the delegates at this convention were from the Philippines or Africa. EVERY delegate from these countries voted to uphold the doctrine as written. Had these delegates not been present, the delegates from the U.S., would have voted a staggering 2-1 in favor of openly gay clergy and in support of gay marriage. Is this the direction the UMC here in the U.S. is headed?

Any thoughts? Westtexas

 

[Pard]

Maybe one of my most favorite passages of scripture... Romans 1:17 through 32 (emphasis added by me):

For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “ But the righteous man shall live by faith.â€

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.​

 

[Milk-Drops]

I think its a reflexion on how the US has realize that being Gay dosen't come from worshiping Idols, but is a trait in some people. Africa and the Philippines are still drastically different culturally then the USA.

Oh Pard, you forgot to add that one section Paul mentioned above your quote that God made the people of Rome Gay after they pertook in Idol worship.

Here is the full text.
<sup class="versenum">21 </sup>For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. <sup class="versenum">22 </sup>Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools <sup class="versenum">23 </sup>and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
<sup class="versenum">24 </sup>Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. <sup class="versenum">25 </sup>They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
<sup class="versenum">26 </sup>Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. <sup class="versenum">27 </sup>In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

 

[Mike S]

I'm a Methodist as well, from birth, and have for more thaan 30 years worshipped in a majority black congregation. There are more traditional, conservative Christians in the UMC than most people recognize. Most of our national leadership, including the Bishops, are more liberal, but liberals have never been a majority. So, changing the Book of Discipline, and our position on homosexuality, has always been an uphill battle for them.

The issue has been brought up in General Conference every four years since 1972, always rejected, and this year was probably the last best chance for liberals to have their way, because changing demographics are working against them. African churches - very conservative - are growing rapidly, while American churches - more liberal - are declining in membership. The voting representation at the next General Conference in 2016 will be even more African and conservative than this year.

But, why worry about it? The United Methodist Church is a global church, not an American church. It won't be long before the average Methodist looks a lot less like a middle-aged white man in the American midwest, and a lot more like a black woman in Nigeria...and will be a whole lot more conservative in Christian theology.

 

[Pard]

Oh Pard, you forgot to add that one section Paul mentioned above your quote that God made the people of Rome Gay after they pertook in Idol worship.

Here is the full text.
<sup class="versenum">21 </sup>For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. <sup class="versenum">22 </sup>Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools <sup class="versenum">23 </sup>and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
<sup class="versenum">24 </sup>Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. <sup class="versenum">25 </sup>They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
<sup class="versenum">26 </sup>Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. <sup class="versenum">27 </sup>In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Perhaps you should have continued onwards in your previous pursuit of becoming a pastor, so that you would have gained the knowledge of the meaning "gave them over". Does it say "made"? No. It says "gave", He allowed this to happen. He allows you to sin, that doesn't mean He makes you sin. The thing about God is He loves you but He doesn't make you do what you don't want. Their choice to sin was their own and not some trickery of the devil and God understood it was their own desire to sin, and so He allowed them to sin and didn't try to protect them (as He would have if it were the devil's trick).

Nice try though. I'm fairly well read on that bit of scripture, but seriously nice try, never even heard someone try it before, although that could be because most people understand that gave and made are different words

 

[Milk-Drops]

Perhaps you should have continued onwards in your previous pursuit of becoming a pastor, so that you would have gained the knowledge of the meaning "gave them over".

I cut out the rest because its mostly just a diversion away from the fact that you got something wrong. Romans 1 starts out with Paul telling the Christians of Rome of how he came to visit them and teach them some things.
Paul states that God is self evident through Nature and then claims that because of this everyone knows God. This argument is actually pretty bad but we'll press on and leave that for another time.

Paul then says that since God is self evident, the people of Rome are fools because they claim they don't Believe in Paul's God. Then he attacks Roman Culture that is Polytheistic. He claims that because of this the Roman people were then given over to sin. God left them and cursed them with Sexual Immorality. Your argument is that "gave over" dosen't mean what the whole narrative says it means. Just like in the slavery thread where you tried to dance around that one as well.

Nice try though. I'm fairly well read on that bit of scripture, but seriously nice try, never even heard someone try it before, although that could be because most people understand that gave and made are different words

Actually I understand that Paul was talking about Idolatry and not Homosexuality, Because that is what the passage is about.

 

[westtexas]

I'm a Methodist as well,

The issue has been brought up in General Conference every four years since 1972, always rejected, and this year was probably the last best chance for liberals to have their way, because changing demographics are working against them. African churches - very conservative - are growing rapidly, while American churches - more liberal - are declining in membership. The voting representation at the next General Conference in 2016 will be even more African and conservative than this year.

Mark, just so you know, it is not my intention to talk negatively about the Methodist Church. I used this vote to talk about the state of Christianity here in the U.S. but your post brings up even more questions to me about the Methodist Church here in the U.S.. I know you feel homosexuality is un-biblical just as I do. I didn't realize y'all (I attend a Baptist church) have had this same vote for the last 40 years. But do you not see a problem when ANY church feels it necessary to even take such a vote? Especially every 4 years for 40 years? Has Christianity here in the west become so politically correct that we feel it necessary to take such a vote which obviously violates the Word of God? That's the point I'm attempting to get across.
Westtexas

 

[Mike S]

Mark, just so you know, it is not my intention to talk negatively about the Methodist Church. I used this vote to talk about the state of Christianity here in the U.S. but your post brings up even more questions to me about the Methodist Church here in the U.S.. I know you feel homosexuality is un-biblical just as I do. I didn't realize y'all (I attend a Baptist church) have had this same vote for the last 40 years. But do you not see a problem when ANY church feels it necessary to even take such a vote? Especially every 4 years for 40 years? Has Christianity here in the west become so politically correct that we feel it necessary to take such a vote which obviously violates the Word of God? That's the point I'm attempting to get across.
Westtexas

Yes, Christianity in the West has come to this. I see it as a natural progression in a secular world, something to be resisted and defeated by traditional Christians. You may be familiar with John Wesley's quote:

"I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power. And this undoubtedly will be the case unless they hold fast both the doctrine, spirit, and discipline with which they first set out.â€

This has already happened in Europe, and is happening in America. Liberals will do with the Bible what they already do with the U.S. Constitution; consider it a "living document" that can be endlessly reinterpreted to mean whatever they want it to mean, at any particular moment. This is what is happening in the UMC, and what I believe will eventually happen in every denomination, and why we have very active "Confessing Movements" to revitalize the churches.

But, I'm serious about not worrying. The UMC is a global church, part of the larger universal church, and God will ensure it stands against the gates of hell.

 

[Pard]

I cut out the rest because its mostly just a diversion away from the fact that you got something wrong. Romans 1 starts out with Paul telling the Christians of Rome of how he came to visit them and teach them some things.
Paul states that God is self evident through Nature and then claims that because of this everyone knows God. This argument is actually pretty bad but we'll press on and leave that for another time.

Paul then says that since God is self evident, the people of Rome are fools because they claim they don't Believe in Paul's God. Then he attacks Roman Culture that is Polytheistic. He claims that because of this the Roman people were then given over to sin. God left them and cursed them with Sexual Immorality. Your argument is that "gave over" dosen't mean what the whole narrative says it means. Just like in the slavery thread where you tried to dance around that one as well.

I didn't dance around anything. I choose not to discuss that with you any longer, just as I am not going to discuss this with you. I don't care to discuss scripture with unbelievers at this time, except to help them come to Christ. And you'll prattle on and go for it, about how that's because I am wrong and won't admit it or blah blah blah, but it isn't and others on here may know why because I did say why in the Christian only thread. I merely don't feel that at my currently level of maturity in Christ that I want to take up an argument with an unbeliever because it leads me down the wrong path, and this already has, as I am rather ashamed of how I ended my previous post to you. Probably don't understand that either, but that's OK, maybe you will someday. We can only pray, right?

What I will say is that you should go read some commentaries on the matter of this scripture because they are pretty good at discussing this. I think there are some free ones available online. I have just consulted a few commentaries to make sure my interpretation was the same, and it is. I can actually direct you to some if you'd like... But like I said, I'm not going to argue.

 

[reba]

I didn't dance around anything. I choose not to discuss that with you any longer, just as I am not going to discuss this with you. I don't care to discuss scripture with unbelievers at this time, except to help them come to Christ. And you'll prattle on and go for it, about how that's because I am wrong and won't admit it or blah blah blah, but it isn't and others on here may know why because I did say why in the Christian only thread. I merely don't feel that at my currently level of maturity in Christ that I want to take up an argument with an unbeliever because it leads me down the wrong path, and this already has, as I am rather ashamed of how I ended my previous post to you. Probably don't understand that either, but that's OK, maybe you will someday. We can only pray, right?

What I will say is that you should go read some commentaries on the matter of this scripture because they are pretty good at discussing this. I think there are some free ones available online. I have just consulted a few commentaries to make sure my interpretation was the same, and it is. I can actually direct you to some if you'd like... But like I said, I'm not going to argue.

Nice post Pard . Does my heart good to see young folks growing the the LORD!

 

[Milk-Drops]

I didn't dance around anything.

Yeah you did. YOu claimed a certain verse didn't exist. I posted it. You ran away and Mike deleted my posts because supposedly the Bible is Anti Bible. When it shows that your argument is wrong.

I choose not to discuss that with you any longer, just as I am not going to discuss this with you. I don't care to discuss scripture with unbelievers at this time, except to help them come to Christ. And you'll prattle on and go for it, about how that's because I am wrong and won't admit it or blah blah blah, but it isn't and others on here may know why because I did say why in the Christian only thread. I merely don't feel that at my currently level of maturity in Christ that I want to take up an argument with an unbeliever because it leads me down the wrong path, and this already has, as I am rather ashamed of how I ended my previous post to you. Probably don't understand that either, but that's OK, maybe you will someday. We can only pray, right?

No, I know exactly what you mean by maturity in Christ. Its learning how to block out and ignore any criticism or logic holes in the Bible. The Bible is not God. Why is it considered mature to ignore this fact? The Bible was written during a time when the Church was being constructed. These are the writings of men about God concieved by the Catholic Church. An organizaiton this site seems to be against. I don't worship a book. I also don't consider it mature learn how to ignore that it is a book with flaws and the opinions of men.

What I will say is that you should go read some commentaries on the matter of this scripture because they are pretty good at discussing this. I think there are some free ones available online. I have just consulted a few commentaries to make sure my interpretation was the same, and it is. I can actually direct you to some if you'd like... But like I said, I'm not going to argue.

Yeah, I have. The scripture is about Idolatry. It clarifies it in its first few lines.

I would love to hear the commentary that says worshiping an Idol = Gays are anti Christian.

 

[Christ_empowered]

Homosexual behavior is a result (partly, at least) of rejecting God and choosing other things (especially self) as objects of worship. That's where Romans 1 comes in. I think I've posted a number of times that homosexual behavior and narcissistic traits tend to go hand-in-hand. Making an idol of Self, instead of obeying the 1 true God and His laws, leads to all kinds of trouble, homosexual behavior included.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20063233

 

[Pard]

Homosexual behavior is a result (partly, at least) of rejecting God and choosing other things (especially self) as objects of worship. That's where Romans 1 comes in. I think I've posted a number of times that homosexual behavior and narcissistic traits tend to go hand-in-hand. Making an idol of Self, instead of obeying the 1 true God and His laws, leads to all kinds of trouble, homosexual behavior included.

 

[handy]

I cut out the rest because its mostly just a diversion away from the fact that you got something wrong. Romans 1 starts out with Paul telling the Christians of Rome of how he came to visit them and teach them some things.
Paul states that God is self evident through Nature and then claims that because of this everyone knows God. This argument is actually pretty bad but we'll press on and leave that for another time.

Paul then says that since God is self evident, the people of Rome are fools because they claim they don't Believe in Paul's God. Then he attacks Roman Culture that is Polytheistic. He claims that because of this the Roman people were then given over to sin. God left them and cursed them with Sexual Immorality. Your argument is that "gave over" dosen't mean what the whole narrative says it means. Just like in the slavery thread where you tried to dance around that one as well.

It's interesting how you are interpreting this passage, Meatballsub. You say that Romans 1 starts out with Paul telling the Christians of Rome of how he came to visit them and teach them some things. Romans 1 actually starts out with Paul thanking the Roman Christians, how he prays that he can come to visit them for he longs to see them and to impart a spiritual gift to them and that he and the Roman Christians can encourage each other through each one's faith and that he may obtain "fruit" (in a spiritual sense) from them.

I find it interesting. When you say that "Paul telling the Christians of Rome of how he came to visit them and teach them some things." It makes it sound as if Paul is a condescending know it all. When I reads through the first 15 verses of Romans, I see a man pouring out his love and respect for these people he has heard so much about, and yet hasn't met.

Then you say that Paul calls the people of Rome fools and attacks their culture...

What Paul is actually teaching is how the wrath of God will fall upon all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who <sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;#cen-NASB-27949AK&quot; title=&quot;See cross-reference AK&quot;>AK</a>)"></sup>suppress the truth in unrighteousness... not the people of Rome, but mankind in general. As a matter of fact, if Paul addresses any of his harsher remarks here to a specific people, it's not the unbelievers of Rome, but rather the Jews who reject God, but yet stand in judgement against others... see Romans 2:1-11.

I have to ask... are you reading the texts carefully?

 

[westtexas]

Yes, Christianity in the West has come to this. I see it as a natural progression in a secular world, something to be resisted and defeated by traditional Christians.

Mark, I believe that while there will always be bible-believing Christians in every denomination that the traditional Christians here in the U.S. are currently losing the war due to political correctness. It's just not correct anymore to say "God says........". We may hurt someones feelings. Take a look at the ELCA or the Presbyterian Church or the U.S. vote in the UMC. I believe that we, as Christians here in the U.S., need to get on our knees and seriously pray 2 Chron. 7:14.
I agree with the second part of your post here though that the larger universal church will always stand because our Lord has promised it.

God bless, Westtexas

But, I'm serious about not worrying. The UMC is a global church, part of the larger universal church, and God will ensure it stands against the gates of hell

 

[Pard]

Mark, I believe that while there will always be bible-believing Christians in every denomination that the traditional Christians here in the U.S. are currently losing the war due to political correctness. It's just not correct anymore to say "God says........". We may hurt someones feelings. Take a look at the ELCA or the Presbyterian Church or the U.S. vote in the UMC. I believe that we, as Christians here in the U.S., need to get on our knees and seriously pray 2 Chron. 7:14.
I agree with the second part of your post here though that the larger universal church will always stand because our Lord has promised it.

God bless, Westtexas

Agreed.