Author Topic: Nuclear Family  (Read 13225 times)

readselerttoo

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #150 on: September 25, 2020, 07:39:49 PM »
Our catechism specifically addresses this issue under the 6th Commandment. The zeitgeist doesn’t form our teaching.

If they need to live together to find out if they want to be married, they are by definition not in a lifelong committed relationship.


And about half the people who marry, are not in a lifelong committed relationship, either. They just have some legal benefits given to married couples that other couples do not have.


Also, looking at the Large Catechism, there is this paragraph:

In the second place, you should also remember that it is not just an honorable walk of life but also a necessary one; it is solemnly commanded by God that in general both men and women of all walks of life, who have been created for it, shall be found in this walk of life. To be sure, there are some (albeit rare) exceptions whom God has especially exempted, in that some are unsuited for married life, or others God has released by a high, supernatural gift so that they can maintain chastity outside of marriage. Where nature functions as God implanted it, however, it is not possible to remain chaste outside of marriage; for flesh and blood remain flesh and blood, and natural inclinations and stimulations proceed unrestrained and unimpeded, as everyone observes and experiences. Therefore, to make it easier for people to avoid unchastity in some measure, God has established marriage, so that all may have their allotted portion and be satisfied with it – although here, too, God’s grace is still required to keep the heart pure.

Luther recognized that some people are not created for marriage. It has been the experience of some people I know who tried the traditional marriage, but they were not created for it. Their "natural inclinations and stimulations" were towards a same-sex partner. When that happens, I believe that Luther was right: for them "to avoid unchastity in some measure, God has established marriage." Same-sex marriages, like heterosexual marriages, help people "avoid unchastity in some measure."

But there is no such thing as a marital estate between same-sex partners.  There just isn’t.  Those who create such and convince a majority that even the highest court in the land agree with the nomenclature does not means that such estate exists in nature.


There certainly can be a "covenantal relationship" between same-sex partners. The Bible even talks about it.

Old or New Testament?  The estate of marriage is configuration in nature as opposed to contractual marriage.

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42404
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #151 on: September 25, 2020, 07:49:42 PM »
There certainly can be a "covenantal relationship" between same-sex partners. The Bible even talks about it.

No, it most certainly does not.  At least not in the sense of homosexual relations.  Of course, if you want to simply speak of covenants between members of the same sex regarding non-sexual relations (like business or politics or such), then of course it does. But that is clearly NOT what has been under discussion here, as you well know.


How are you so certain that David and Jonathan did not have a homosexual relationship? There is a lot of love expressed between the two (1 Samuel 18:1). Soon afterwards, Saul tries to get David to marry his oldest daughter, Merab. David refuses. When Saul learns that his younger daughter, Michal, loves David. He tries to get David to marry her. At first he refuses that, too. (Saul really wants David to die in battle, but he keeps defeating the Philistines.)


Could it be the Saul pushes his daughters towards David (and wants him dead) because he doesn't like the love relationship between David and his son, Jonathan?
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

James J Eivan

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #152 on: September 25, 2020, 07:52:52 PM »
There certainly can be a "covenantal relationship" between same-sex partners. The Bible even talks about it.

No, it most certainly does not.  At least not in the sense of homosexual relations.  Of course, if you want to simply speak of covenants between members of the same sex regarding non-sexual relations (like business or politics or such), then of course it does. But that is clearly NOT what has been under discussion here, as you well know.


How are you so certain that David and Jonathan did not have a homosexual relationship? There is a lot of love expressed between the two (1 Samuel 18:1). Soon afterwards, Saul tries to get David to marry his oldest daughter, Merab. David refuses. When Saul learns that his younger daughter, Michal, loves David. He tries to get David to marry her. At first he refuses that, too. (Saul really wants David to die in battle, but he keeps defeating the Philistines.)


Could it be the Saul pushes his daughters towards David (and wants him dead) because he doesn't like the love relationship between David and his son, Jonathan?
It’s rather doubtful… He was condemned for his relationship with Bathsheba ...  had his relationship with Jonathan been illicit he would’ve been condemned for that as well

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42404
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #153 on: September 25, 2020, 08:01:56 PM »

But … do the father and mother have to be married (having filled out and filed a state license) for it to be a nuclear family?

As a public witness to their covenental commitment, of course. To an ELCA rostered minister Word and Sacrament, obviously not when it comes to the youth of their church.


So, like the covenantal commitment of love between Jonathan and David (1 Samuel 18:1; 20:8, 16-17; 23:18)?

Don't be ridiculous Brian.


So, you've never heard the interpretation that Jonathan and David were homosexual lovers? That's what so offended Jonathan's father, Saul, so that he wants David killed in battle; or at least married to one of his daughters?


We also have David singing after Jonathan's death: I grieve for you, my brother Jonathan! You were so dear to me! Your love was more amazing to me than the love of women. (2 Samuel 1:26 CEB).



One interpretation understands the love that is more amazing than the love of a woman was a homosexual relationship between homosexuals.


Another interpretation understands it to be a deep friendship without any sexual behaviors.


We have a report of the two kissing each other (1 Samuel 20:41). Again, that could be between lovers or between friends.


The direction of one's interpretation comes more from the interpreter than from the text. The text is ambiguous.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42404
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #154 on: September 25, 2020, 08:04:10 PM »
There certainly can be a "covenantal relationship" between same-sex partners. The Bible even talks about it.

No, it most certainly does not.  At least not in the sense of homosexual relations.  Of course, if you want to simply speak of covenants between members of the same sex regarding non-sexual relations (like business or politics or such), then of course it does. But that is clearly NOT what has been under discussion here, as you well know.


How are you so certain that David and Jonathan did not have a homosexual relationship? There is a lot of love expressed between the two (1 Samuel 18:1). Soon afterwards, Saul tries to get David to marry his oldest daughter, Merab. David refuses. When Saul learns that his younger daughter, Michal, loves David. He tries to get David to marry her. At first he refuses that, too. (Saul really wants David to die in battle, but he keeps defeating the Philistines.)


Could it be the Saul pushes his daughters towards David (and wants him dead) because he doesn't like the love relationship between David and his son, Jonathan?
It’s rather doubtful… He was condemned for his relationship with Bathsheba ...  had his relationship with Jonathan been illicit he would’ve been condemned for that as well


He was condemned for his relationship with Bathsheba because he had committed adultery with her. She was married to Uriah. Then David was condemned because he arranged for the murder of Uriah.


We also see that his relationship with Bathsheba was blessed by God when Solomon was born, whom God would raise up as the third king of the United Kingdom of Israel. God also gave him the gift of wisdom.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12134
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #155 on: September 25, 2020, 08:13:42 PM »

But … do the father and mother have to be married (having filled out and filed a state license) for it to be a nuclear family?

As a public witness to their covenental commitment, of course. To an ELCA rostered minister Word and Sacrament, obviously not when it comes to the youth of their church.


So, like the covenantal commitment of love between Jonathan and David (1 Samuel 18:1; 20:8, 16-17; 23:18)?

Don't be ridiculous Brian.


So, you've never heard the interpretation that Jonathan and David were homosexual lovers? That's what so offended Jonathan's father, Saul, so that he wants David killed in battle; or at least married to one of his daughters?


We also have David singing after Jonathan's death: I grieve for you, my brother Jonathan! You were so dear to me! Your love was more amazing to me than the love of women. (2 Samuel 1:26 CEB).



One interpretation understands the love that is more amazing than the love of a woman was a homosexual relationship between homosexuals.


Another interpretation understands it to be a deep friendship without any sexual behaviors.


We have a report of the two kissing each other (1 Samuel 20:41). Again, that could be between lovers or between friends.


The direction of one's interpretation comes more from the interpreter than from the text. The text is ambiguous.
Yet you keep pushing it as a homosexual relationship. I guess that indicates your bias in the matter. But gives me no reason to prefer you interpretation. Just because you prefer it and that would support your positions in no way obliges me or anyone else to agree or to take that as evidence of God's approval of homosexual relationships.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

D. Engebretson

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4335
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #156 on: September 25, 2020, 08:28:50 PM »

But … do the father and mother have to be married (having filled out and filed a state license) for it to be a nuclear family?

As a public witness to their covenental commitment, of course. To an ELCA rostered minister Word and Sacrament, obviously not when it comes to the youth of their church.


So, like the covenantal commitment of love between Jonathan and David (1 Samuel 18:1; 20:8, 16-17; 23:18)?

Don't be ridiculous Brian.


So, you've never heard the interpretation that Jonathan and David were homosexual lovers? That's what so offended Jonathan's father, Saul, so that he wants David killed in battle; or at least married to one of his daughters?


We also have David singing after Jonathan's death: I grieve for you, my brother Jonathan! You were so dear to me! Your love was more amazing to me than the love of women. (2 Samuel 1:26 CEB).



One interpretation understands the love that is more amazing than the love of a woman was a homosexual relationship between homosexuals.


Another interpretation understands it to be a deep friendship without any sexual behaviors.


We have a report of the two kissing each other (1 Samuel 20:41). Again, that could be between lovers or between friends.


The direction of one's interpretation comes more from the interpreter than from the text. The text is ambiguous.

Seeing Jonathan and David as homosexual lovers is a clear case of reading into the text (eisegesis).  It also betrays a modern stereotype.  When we talk of two men expressing love for one another we quickly assume that it is a same-sex intimate relationship.  While we don't typically speak this way today (men expressing love for each other), there is no reason to jump to the assumption that their relationship was homosexual in nature if they did express themselves in this way in this ancient setting. 
Pastor Don Engebretson
St. Peter Lutheran Church of Polar (Antigo) WI

Tom Eckstein

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 664
  • Tom Eckstein
    • View Profile
    • Concordia Lutheran Church, Jamestown, ND
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #157 on: September 25, 2020, 08:35:11 PM »

But … do the father and mother have to be married (having filled out and filed a state license) for it to be a nuclear family?

As a public witness to their covenental commitment, of course. To an ELCA rostered minister Word and Sacrament, obviously not when it comes to the youth of their church.


So, like the covenantal commitment of love between Jonathan and David (1 Samuel 18:1; 20:8, 16-17; 23:18)?

Don't be ridiculous Brian.


So, you've never heard the interpretation that Jonathan and David were homosexual lovers? That's what so offended Jonathan's father, Saul, so that he wants David killed in battle; or at least married to one of his daughters?


We also have David singing after Jonathan's death: I grieve for you, my brother Jonathan! You were so dear to me! Your love was more amazing to me than the love of women. (2 Samuel 1:26 CEB).



One interpretation understands the love that is more amazing than the love of a woman was a homosexual relationship between homosexuals.


Another interpretation understands it to be a deep friendship without any sexual behaviors.


We have a report of the two kissing each other (1 Samuel 20:41). Again, that could be between lovers or between friends.


The direction of one's interpretation comes more from the interpreter than from the text. The text is ambiguous.

Brian, the fact is that the most highly respected PRO-gay bible scholars disagree with your nonsense view that David and Johnathan were homosexual lovers.  The texts re:  David and Jonathan are NOT ambiguous - especially when considered in the light of the wider context of Scripture where God ALWAYS condemns and NEVER condones same-sex relationships.  See the results of my research on this below: 

     The suggestion that King David and Jonathan (son of King Saul) might have been homosexual lovers is so strained beyond credibility that it would not be worth a response if it were not for the many people who have been misled by this erroneous notion. 
     
     One of the more popular proponents of a homosexual relationship between David and Jonathan is Tom Horner.  Referring to Old Testament characters, Horner says that the relationship between David and Jonathan is “the only example of an unabashed homosexual love of one well-known character for another.”   
     
     Many who share Horner’s opinion about David and Jonathan will usually, in support of their argument, quote these words of King David at the death of Jonathan:  “I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me.  Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women.” (2nd Samuel 1:26)  So, does this text of Scripture prove that David and Jonathan had a homosexual relationship?
     
     Many have written fine refutations of the idea that David and Jonathan were homosexual lovers.   In fact, even pro-gay scholar Martti Nissinen says the following:  “Nothing indicates that David and Jonathan slept together ‘as one sleeps with a woman.’ Neither of the men are described as having problems in their heterosexual sex life … The story of David and Jonathan was being told at the time when the Holiness Code with its commands and prohibitions of sexual contact between males regulated the Israelites’ sexual morality.”   With that understood, I offer the following additional responses to the idea that David and Jonathan were homosexual lovers.
     
     First, even if we grant the unlikely possibility that David and Jonathan were homosexual lovers, this would in no way change the fact that Scripture clearly condemns even consensual homosexual behavior.  When reading Holy Scripture, one must distinguish between PRESCRIPTIVE texts (commands intended for ALL people of ALL times and places) and DESCRIPTIVE texts (portions of Scripture that relate events in history).   
     
     Simply put, just because Holy Scripture describes an event in history does not mean that God thereby condones or affirms that event.  For example, Scripture describes how the men of Sodom threatened homosexual gang rape against Lot’s guests.  But Scripture in no way condones this behavior!  In the same way, even if David and Jonathan were homosexual lovers (and all the evidence shows that they were NOT!) this does not mean that God affirmed their behavior.  In fact, as we learned from our study of the creation account in Genesis as well as the sexual prohibitions in Leviticus chapters 18 and 20, God would have condemned such homosexual behavior between David and Jonathan.
     
     Second, as noted in the above quote from Martti Nissinen, “The story of David and Jonathan was being told at the time when the Holiness Code with its commands and prohibitions of sexual contact between males regulated the Israelites’ sexual morality.”  In other words, David himself would have acknowledged that homosexual behavior was sinful!  When King David was guilty of adultery (by having sex with the WIFE of another man), he confessed his sin after being rebuked by the prophet Nathan.   However, in no place do we find that the prophet Nathan ever rebukes David for his homosexual behavior.  If David had been guilty of homosexual behavior, then surely the prophet Nathan, who rebuked David for his heterosexual adultery (based on Leviticus 18:20), would also have rebuked David for his homosexual behavior with Jonathan (based on Leviticus 18:22).
     
     Third, when 2nd Samuel 1:26 tells us that Jonathan’s love for David was “more wonderful than that of women” this in no way implies a homosexual relationship.  In fact, the wider context of 1st and 2nd Samuel proves the opposite!  David had several wives,  and yet his relationship with some of them was less than ideal.  In contrast, the brotherly love between David and Jonathan was sacrificial and unconditional.  Jonathan sacrificed so much to be loyal to David, whom he knew was God’s chosen one to be king over Israel in place of his evil father, King Saul.  Jonathan was willing to be loyal to David even though this resulted in a tense relationship between him and his father, Saul.  The Hebrew word ahad is used to describe the “love” that David and Jonathan had for each other.  The same Hebrew word is used to describe the love that all Israel had for David (see 1st Samuel 18:16).  The Hebrew word ahad in these and similar contexts has the meaning of the Greek word  philía which describes a dedicated brotherly or family love (unlike the Greek word érōs which describes romantic or sexual love).
     
     Finally, one other place that some try to find a homosexual relationship between David and Jonathan is 1st Samuel 20:41b, which reads:  “Then they kissed each other and wept together – but David wept the most.”  How do we respond to this text?  First, the wider context of 1st Samuel 20:41b has nothing to do with a sexual situaiton!  In addition, the fact that David and Jonathan “kissed each other” has nothing to do with homosexual behavior when one considers that in the culture of that time it was perfectly natural for heterosexual men to express affection for each other via non-sexual kissing.  Even pro-gay scholar Martti Nissinen acknowledges this when he writes:  “Modern readers probably see homoeroticism in the story of David and Jonathan more easily than did the ancients.  In the contemporary Western world, men’s mutual expressions of feelings are more restricted than they were in the biblical world.  Men’s homosociability apparently was not part of the sexual taboo in the biblical world any more than it is in today’s Christian and Islamic cultures around the Mediterranean … The relationship of David and Jonathan can be taken as an example of ancient oriental homosociability, which permits even intimate feelings to be expressed.”
     
     Simply put, there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that David and Jonathan were homosexual lovers.  Those who want to suggest such a relationship are forcing their views on the text of Holy Scripture.  The love that David and Jonathan had for each other was a non-sexual, sacrificial friendship between two men.  In view of this, Robert Gagnon writes:  “Some companions destroy each other ‘but there is a lover/friend … who sticks closer than a brother’ (Prov. 18:24).  David and Jonathan had the latter type of relationship and it was one which was completely asexual.”

 
« Last Edit: September 25, 2020, 08:43:30 PM by Tom Eckstein »
I'm an LCMS Pastor in Jamestown, ND.

B Hughes

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #158 on: September 25, 2020, 09:31:57 PM »

Yet you keep pushing it as a homosexual relationship. I guess that indicates your bias in the matter. But gives me no reason to prefer you interpretation. Just because you prefer it and that would support your positions in no way obliges me or anyone else to agree or to take that as evidence of God's approval of homosexual relationships.

Brian is old school ELCA. His church is no longer interested in this debate as they've moved on to non celibate unmarried clergy and celebrating multiple partnered households. Having only needed 11 years to reach these conclusions the next decade should be fascinating.

James J Eivan

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #159 on: September 25, 2020, 09:36:27 PM »
There certainly can be a "covenantal relationship" between same-sex partners. The Bible even talks about it.
No, it most certainly does not.  At least not in the sense of homosexual relations.  Of course, if you want to simply speak of covenants between members of the same sex regarding non-sexual relations (like business or politics or such), then of course it does. But that is clearly NOT what has been under discussion here, as you well know.

How are you so certain that David and Jonathan did not have a homosexual relationship? There is a lot of love expressed between the two (1 Samuel 18:1). Soon afterwards, Saul tries to get David to marry his oldest daughter, Merab. David refuses. When Saul learns that his younger daughter, Michal, loves David. He tries to get David to marry her. At first he refuses that, too. (Saul really wants David to die in battle, but he keeps defeating the Philistines.)

Could it be the Saul pushes his daughters towards David (and wants him dead) because he doesn't like the love relationship between David and his son, Jonathan?
It’s rather doubtful… He was condemned for his relationship with Bathsheba ...  had his relationship with Jonathan been illicit he would’ve been condemned for that as well

He was condemned for his relationship with Bathsheba because he had committed adultery with her. She was married to Uriah. Then David was condemned because he arranged for the murder of Uriah.

We also see that his relationship with Bathsheba was blessed by God when Solomon was born, whom God would raise up as the third king of the United Kingdom of Israel. God also gave him the gift of wisdom.
Oh yes ... he really blessed the relationship with Bathsheba ... the result of that illicit relationship ... a child that died at a rather early age.

Furthermore ... you continue to move the goalposts ... in the above exchange ... instigated by you ... same sex homosexual activity was the topic ... up until you mysteriously failed to address my comment on Jonathan and David in a feigned effort to praise the David/Bathsheba affair.

Perhaps in retirement, this forum can teach you to FOCUS  rather than continuously moving the goal posts.

Richard Johnson

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10358
  • Create in me a clean heart, O God.
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #160 on: September 25, 2020, 10:12:15 PM »
There certainly can be a "covenantal relationship" between same-sex partners. The Bible even talks about it.

No, it most certainly does not.  At least not in the sense of homosexual relations.  Of course, if you want to simply speak of covenants between members of the same sex regarding non-sexual relations (like business or politics or such), then of course it does. But that is clearly NOT what has been under discussion here, as you well know.


How are you so certain that David and Jonathan did not have a homosexual relationship? There is a lot of love expressed between the two (1 Samuel 18:1). Soon afterwards, Saul tries to get David to marry his oldest daughter, Merab. David refuses. When Saul learns that his younger daughter, Michal, loves David. He tries to get David to marry her. At first he refuses that, too. (Saul really wants David to die in battle, but he keeps defeating the Philistines.)


Could it be the Saul pushes his daughters towards David (and wants him dead) because he doesn't like the love relationship between David and his son, Jonathan?

As an ELCA pastor, I apologize for Brian's delusions.
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

Steven W Bohler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3635
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #161 on: September 25, 2020, 10:32:37 PM »
There certainly can be a "covenantal relationship" between same-sex partners. The Bible even talks about it.

No, it most certainly does not.  At least not in the sense of homosexual relations.  Of course, if you want to simply speak of covenants between members of the same sex regarding non-sexual relations (like business or politics or such), then of course it does. But that is clearly NOT what has been under discussion here, as you well know.


How are you so certain that David and Jonathan did not have a homosexual relationship? There is a lot of love expressed between the two (1 Samuel 18:1). Soon afterwards, Saul tries to get David to marry his oldest daughter, Merab. David refuses. When Saul learns that his younger daughter, Michal, loves David. He tries to get David to marry her. At first he refuses that, too. (Saul really wants David to die in battle, but he keeps defeating the Philistines.)


Could it be the Saul pushes his daughters towards David (and wants him dead) because he doesn't like the love relationship between David and his son, Jonathan?

As an ELCA pastor, I apologize for Brian's delusions.

Thank you.  I mean that most sincerely.  And I again express my sorrow for those who heard their pastor teach such wicked rubbish.

James J Eivan

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #162 on: September 25, 2020, 11:18:10 PM »
There certainly can be a "covenantal relationship" between same-sex partners. The Bible even talks about it.

No, it most certainly does not.  At least not in the sense of homosexual relations.  Of course, if you want to simply speak of covenants between members of the same sex regarding non-sexual relations (like business or politics or such), then of course it does. But that is clearly NOT what has been under discussion here, as you well know.


How are you so certain that David and Jonathan did not have a homosexual relationship? There is a lot of love expressed between the two (1 Samuel 18:1). Soon afterwards, Saul tries to get David to marry his oldest daughter, Merab. David refuses. When Saul learns that his younger daughter, Michal, loves David. He tries to get David to marry her. At first he refuses that, too. (Saul really wants David to die in battle, but he keeps defeating the Philistines.)


Could it be the Saul pushes his daughters towards David (and wants him dead) because he doesn't like the love relationship between David and his son, Jonathan?

As an ELCA pastor, I apologize for Brian's delusions.

Thank you.  I mean that most sincerely.  And I again express my sorrow for those who heard their pastor teach such wicked rubbish.
Thank you as well ... perhaps the most valuable information this forum can impart is that the confession of of the Stoffregen/Austin coalition is considerably further left and much more progressive than most other ELCA forum members.  My apologies if I fail to acknowledge this fact when posts reference the ELCA.

It’s encouraging that despite other differences, most ELCA forum members still acknowledge the God instituted life long man/woman marriage in the garden, that baptism is in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, that abortion is the murder of innocent unborn, and that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life ... and that no one comes to the Father except through Christ ... to name a few doctrines sadly not confessed by all.

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12943
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #163 on: September 26, 2020, 12:35:24 AM »
No answers to my questions, Pastor Bohler?  You who are so persistent in seeking answers from others ought to be eager to provide answers posed to your distinguished self.
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Now in Minnesota. Twice-vaccinated.

B Hughes

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #164 on: September 26, 2020, 07:05:37 AM »
Supposing I were a "seeker," living with my girlfriend and considering marriage. I tell you that I believe the above things, then ask "Am I, Pastor Bohler, a Christian? Can I, Pastor Bohler, be a Lutheran?"
What is your answer?

Like Brian S you are referring to "cutting edge" debates of old. Your church has moved on to other areas of social evolution. If you approached an ELCA pastor with two girl friends and asked if your relationship could be blessed as a marriage then we'd be current. Your DC Synod Bishop is in favor of Polyamory so I'm sure she would be open to her pastors doing so. Is she a Lutheran? If you approached a recent graduate of LSTC with your girlfriend and questioned whether you should bother getting married because you are "naked and unashamed",  would the pastor have any positive Lutheran reasons as answers?

Your church really should abandon questions about marriage as you have no credibility as Lutherans to give a response.