The CIC OT Zone's Official You're All Huge Idiots Religion Thread

[Preacher]

Question for the Christians on the board:

So, what do y'all think about the possible confirmation of the gay Episcopal bishop in New Hampshire?...

For that matter, what about similar controversies RE: gay marriage/openly gay clergy ordination in other denominations, such as Presbyterians & United Church of Christ?...

To me it's another sign of the fulfillment of Paul's warning in 2 Titus 3:1-9 (as if there weren't enough other signs already in other parts of our culture as it is, but this one involves the church itSELF, which is especially sobering...).

I have nothing against gays per se, any more than any other type of sinner (including me), but when this stuff can worm its way into the church itself, that's a very sad and scary thing. Moreover, unlike most sins, sexual ones are especially hard to overcome, because they often involve more than a momentary choice to sin (like me getting ticked at someone and flipping them the bird, which is a choice made in the heat of the moment), rather, they tend to involve an entire "lifestyle" of sin (Gay sex, pedophilia, bestiality, etc. etc.. ).

Anyway, discuss amongst yourselves...

 

[overmortal]

Gay ministers, eh? Being a Christian (even though I'm sure some of you doubt it), I'd have to say that a gay minister would be a pretty big joke.

As for denominations, I say "BAH!" Why separate ourselves into categories? Nearly everyone that I talk to about this subject agrees that being separated into denominations is a bad idea, but no one ever does anything about it. THAT'S that ticks me off.

What have I done about it? Simple. I am no longer a part of any denomination. Nor do I recognize denominational lines. If your doctrine is different, then we'll have to go to the Bible and study it out. I lost a girlfriend (who was a darned good prospect for a wife) because we were from different denominations. Screw all of that.

 

[ChrisReid]

I see great things in this thread's future.

I have a question for Christians out there.. Not really, it's just rhetorical I guess. It's creepy as hell when rance tells me I'm cute in #Wingnut, but I'm quite baffled about the whole gay thing these past few months. This gay bishop thing is an extension of the gay marriage and sodomy issues. I guess if your private church doesn't like gay people, then that's fine to not let gay people in, but do you guys really see a gay person as that different? The church and president's stance against gay marriage seems as absurd to me as not allowing african-american or islamic marriages to be recognized in the US. The idea that committment ceremonies are sufficient is a joke. We used to limit black people to committment ceremonies 150 years ago too. Almost "separate but equal" mentality that I'm quite sure will be quite overcome in the next few decades.

 

[Preacher]

I hear ya, guy.

However, ya gotta remember that it is *exactly* such controversies as these that have historically caused divisions within the church. It is expected that if this guy does get confirmed, there may be a split between the worldwide Anglican communion and the American branch of it, not to mention the more conservative elements of the American Episcopal church will prolly split from whoever supports this guy's ordination as well

If you have an entire denomination that lets such a serious error as this creep in among them, then it is only right and fitting that either you split from them, or else eject them from out of YOUR denomination: Either way, a "new" division within the church as a whole is birthed.

The real "crime" is when churches split over controversies that are far less important than this, and where the position of the Scriptures on the issue are far less clear. That's what kills me about this deal: The Scriptures couldn't be a whole lot more clear than they are that this is just plain WRONG, and yet somehow people manage to rationalize it. It absolutely boggles the mind....

 

[Bob McDob]

I don't really care about what any Church says about this. I do find it amusing that in his dissenting opinion to the Supreme Court over the Texas sodomy law, he claimed it would lead to bestiality, pedophilia and incest.

Well, as I understand it, bestiality IS already legal in Texas, and there's a law in West Virginia that makes it legal to sex any animal under 30 pounds or something like that. (On a related note, West Virginia has the highest case of sibling incest in the United States, but let's leave that alone now).

 

[Needaham45]

I'm a Catholic, but I consider myself more of Christian than Catholic. The church's stance on gays is one thing I just cannot agree with. I think that something like that isn't choice anymore than we chose to be straight. Some people are gay, but most are straight. That doesn't make it wrong. I feel like it's a cruelty to discriminate against people because they're different, especially if it's something they couldn't choose (and yes, I think that's exactly what the church is doing). I know in the Bible it clearly states that being gay is a terrible sin, but again, it's just one thing I can't agree with. Gay people are still people, and I think they shouldn't be treated any differently, by governmental or religious law.

 

[Bob McDob]

I know in the Bible it clearly states that being gay is a terrible sin, but again, it's just one thing I can't agree with.

Actually it says it is an "abomination", meaning ritually unclean for Jews, the same way eating pork is. Other things classified as abominations are women wearing men's clothing, I believe.

 

[Napoleon]

Actually it says it is an "abomination", meaning ritually unclean for Jews, the same way eating pork is. Other things classified as abominations are women wearing men's clothing, I believe.

as well as touching a pig's skin (too bad for all you football players)

wearing clothes made of too different cloths (actually i think this is against mixing animal cloth and plant cloth, either way, most of us have worn such clothing at some point)

planting too different crops next to each other too is a sin

Dont forget that the bible also tells us that our children must be stoned for disobeying their parents regardless of the severity of their disobediance and the frequency of their disobediance.

 

[Wedge009]

What do I think? "Oh no! Here we go again!" We get enough of this from the media, who love to portray Christians as intolerant, conservative, homophobic freaks. I can't believe the people who claim that nowhere in the Bible does God condemn homosexuality - they must have made up their own bible.

I lost a girlfriend (who was a darned good prospect for a wife) because we were from different denominations. Screw all of that.

I don't really take notice of denominations. My dad is Anglican and my mum is Catholic but in the end we all worship the same God. Denominations only arise out of different opinions in doing things.

In any case, it's hard enough to find a girlfriend, let alone a Christian girlfriend, and even more harder to find a girlfriend in the same denomination! So you see my point, denominational differences should not matter at the core of worshipping Christ.

I guess if your private church doesn't like gay people, then that's fine to not let gay people in, but do you guys really see a gay person as that different?

It's not a matter of letting a gay person 'in', I would hope we welcome everyone because everyone needs help. But I disagree with ordaining homosexuals because priests are supposed to set an example to the people, even if they still struggle with sin themselves.

I'm a Catholic, but I consider myself more of Christian than Catholic.

Interesting that you consider Catholics separate from Christians...

I think that something like that isn't choice anymore than we chose to be straight. Some people are gay, but most are straight. That doesn't make it wrong.

I cannot believe that one's sexuality isn't a choice.

I feel like it's a cruelty to discriminate against people because they're different, especially if it's something they couldn't choose (and yes, I think that's exactly what the church is doing).

But it would be fair to discriminate against ordaining murderers and paedophiles as ministers, wouldn't it?

About various Old Testament laws such as stoning etc, many the things were fulfilled when God created the new covenant through Christ. Forgiveness ahead of punishment and things like that.

I'd love to elaborate, but I'm already late for class.

 

[Bob McDob]

Ooh, this is fun.

 

[Hobbie]

Well, I think that the Episcopal Church can do whatever they please, it is freedom of religion anyway. The government or anyone else for that matter shouldn't tell them what to do because it is their own personal business. Sorry, I am somewhat of a Libertarian, but if the government didn't interfere in these issues (No gay laws. Period.), then there really wouldn't even be a problem outside of the Episcopalians themselves. They have the right, as a private institution to determine the criteria upon which they select bishops, ministers, etc. Basically, it shouldn't matter whether being gay is morally, religiously, or ethically wrong or not, it is a violation of the Constitution to not allow these people to practice however they please.

 

[Worf]

Heh, sounds like the big rage going on in Canada now that the Pope has seen fit to damn all our politicians over gay marriages. (Of course, he failed to to do the same to all the bishops who well, did some rather disturbing "sexual relations" with children... ).

Ah religion, where gays are worse than pedophiles...

 

[Bob McDob]

I'm much less concerned with religion than the Bush administration's apparent desire to meld it with state. I mean, I was pretty apathetic about the Pledge of Allegience thing - nobody takes it seriously anyway and I haven't said it since sixth grade - but the administration's idea of outlawing gay marriage seems, honestly, petty. Is Bush claiming that Christians have some sort of monopoly on the idea of marriage, or that theirs is inherently better? (I'd prefer the entire marriage thing be abolished and replaced with common-law unions, anyway. Serves the same purpose without trying to legislate morality).

 

[TheFraix]

I'm not sure if I really want to get myself involve with such issues, like homosexuality and the like.

In my opinion, sex is a beautiful thing... it gives the human body the capable to experience wonderful sensations, and is also integral for mating processes.

But in homosexuality, it's like finding pleasure from outside the body's design.

...you know, using something in the way it's not suppose to be used...

like using a Broadsword to take out capship torpedoes...
(point: A Broadsword is too slow and clumsly for such task)

 

[TC]

Heh, sounds like the big rage going on in Canada now that the Pope has seen fit to damn all our politicians over gay marriages.

A couple of things wrong with this statement.

a) It wasn't the Pope, it was the Bishop of Calgary
b) It wasn't 'all our politicians', but rather Chretien, specifically.
c) He didn't damn him to hell, he said that he might be putting his eternal salvation in danger and that he was making a morally grave error.

The thing that the Pope has done is release a 12 page document that tries to dissuade governments from supporting gay marriage and suggesting that doing so is "gravely immoral".

 

[Wedge009]

In my opinion, sex is a beautiful thing... it gives the human body the capable to experience wonderful sensations, and is also integral for mating processes.

But in homosexuality, it's like finding pleasure from outside the body's design.

...you know, using something in the way it's not suppose to be used...

like using a Broadsword to take out capship torpedoes...
(point: A Broadsword is too slow and clumsly for such task)

Well said! With a WC reference too! But yes, I find the idea of homosexuality completely unnatural, clearly the parts don't line up properly. I've heard some argue that animals sometimes engage in homosexual behaviour, but I find that to be a petty excuse. People are supposed to be different from animals, with all the intelligence to make a choice that their sentience implies. Which again goes to my point that homosexuality is a choice, not 'genetics'. Not everything is genetics - one only needs to observe this from identical twins (essentially 'clones').

 

[TC]

clearly the parts don't line up properly.

It depends which parts you use!

 

[ChrisReid]

But it would be fair to discriminate against ordaining murderers and paedophiles as ministers, wouldn't it?

"Different" was a poor way to label homosexuals, because yeah, obviously you have to discriminate against some different people because different is such an incredibly broad statement. Destructive might be a better word, you can allow different people, as long as they're not destructive. Of course the most conservative people would label homosexuality as destructive to morality, and therein lies the debate. I'll end it and just say that's silly.

 

[Erkle]

Interesting that you consider Catholics separate from Christians...

I actually agree on the fact that Catholics are in a way different than Christians. I grew up Evangelical and am currently attending and will marry in October in a Congrgational Church. My mother is Catholic so I know some of their practices.

1. The Catholic Church at times worships Mary over Jesus, in my mind a form idoltry since Mary just brought Jesus into the world and was not set up herself for worship by God.

2. The strangest thing I know of is that in the past (middle ages) the Catholic Church preformed all services in Latin (and some still do) a language that most people of the time did not speak so they where not able to understand their worship.

3. The Catholic Church does not encourage praying on your own or confessing sins on your own. You have to go to Church and talk with their minister. Sounds to me that they think you need a middleman between you and God. Meaning you can not have a personal relationship with your own saivor?

There is more that I can go into if anyone wants.

Side note... what do people think of Mel Gibsons movie The Passion being termed anti-semetic because it protrays the Jews in a bad light?

My view... I think this is a load of horsesh*t. Jesus was a Jew. Jesus was killed by Jews. That is a historical fact. Jesus prayed to God his Father to forgive His tormentors because they did not know what they did. Therefore any self-respecting Christian who follows Jesus' teachings and believes in forgivness would harbor no ill feelings to the Jews. Not to mention the fact that if Jesus was not crucified, He would not have been able to be resurected thus dying for our sins. Sounds like they where only fulfilling prophecy to me. I think that any Jews who feel that this is a anti-semetic film, you may be right but tough. It is a accurate protrayl of what happened. I pray that any Jews out their will in the future come to a relationship with Jesus the Messiah.

Almost forgot. As for the homosexual aspect: I have gay friends, they are in relationships that are considered by me to be domestic partnerships. The Bible states in Genesis that God made Man and Women in His own image. Not man and man nor women and women. Look at what happend to the cities of Sodom and Gomorah and the man Lot and his family. The cities where overrun with sexual immorality. There was only one rightous family and that was Lots whose main concern was protecting his daughters from rape. An Angel came to visit the cities in the form of a man. While there several males in the cities tried to rape the Angel. This Angel was saved by Lot who in turn was advised to leave the sity. When he left, God destroyed the cities. Sounds like God does not like Homosexual unions to me.

As for President Bush standing by his beliefs. Bravo, we need more leaders like that. Someone who answers a higher calling. Don't forget that while there is a seperation of Church and State, that only means that the government would not interfear with the Church or dictate religion to the citizens. Remember this coutry (USA) was founded by people fleaing religious persecution in Europe. This contry (USA) was founded by leaders who had their vision in one hand and their Bibles in another.

Whew... ok the flames can begin

jim

 

[Napoleon]

Catholics arent separeate from christians, protestants are.

The vast majority of christians are either Roman Catholic or belong to sects that are much closer to catholicsm than to protestantism, protestants make up a very tiny minor minority of christians when compared to Roman Catholics (the first and true church founded by peter himself), Eastern Orthodox, Coptics, and Armenian Gregorians (armenians and coptics are neither larger than protestants but when combined with the two powerhouse groups of Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox groups make up the vast majority of christians)

Also considering that the protestant grouping is the newest of all the christian groups and thus based on later day interpretations of what the important christian guys want, rather than being formed BY apostles (St. Peter begining Holy Mother Church) and those who determined such basics as the concept of the trinity (decided sometime in the 5th or 6th century if i remember correctly).