Sexuality Matters Concluded, Sort of

[navyman]

Just because you quote from Genesis doesn't mean you buy into the whole (modern) historicity argument.  I quote from Genesis all the time, but that doesn't mean I think the world was created in 4004 BC or that Adam and Eve were real people. 

To put it another way, if I quote a line from the Godfather, it doesn't mean that I think Don Corleone was a real person.

Sir, do you quote from the Godfather the same way you quote from the Bible?

Perhaps, were I writing a sermon on the strength of the family, I'd quote him before I would Dobson.
John Dornheim

As well as Spong, and others who would support the gay acceptance and ordination!

Don

[navyman]

That "study" seems more polemical than academic.

And is my friend above saying that because Jesus quoted from Genesis that that means that he was testifying to the historicity of Genesis?

The point is not merely that Jesus quotes from Genesis, but that He quotes it AS THE WORDS OF THE CREATOR. He says, "The Creator made them male and female AND SAID..." He also uses those very words of the Creator to make a point about marriage and how God ordained it to be even before the fall. He also (rather sarcastically but also appropriately since he is addressing the so called experts in the Scriptures) asks them if they'd even read it, which indicates He at least thinks that the plain meaning of the text is rather obvious. A man shall be united to his wife. Do gay unions designate which one is the husband and which is the wife? Because you can't have a "union" without a wife. Imagine if the Pharisees had responded the way gay marriage advocates respond today-- "well, that wasn't for our time..." or "obviously in the development of the JEPD tradition there are variances..." or "the text simply isn't clear on whether a man can be a wife or not..." My guess is that Jesus would not have engaged in polite dialogue. But that's just a guess, because not even the Pharisees would try it.


As the Son of God, he backed Scripture of his time 100%.  As the son of God he wouldn't and couldn't go against the teachings of the Father in heaven!

Don Whitbeck

[gesstree]

The issue isn't of course simply how many congregations will leave the ELCA but how much ministry will be wipped out and derailed because of the many individuals who will leave and how much energy will be spent arguing over the subject. My current congregation would probably stay but we'd loose many people who bring significant gifts and talents.

[Charles_Austin]

Someone writes:
My current congregation would probably stay but we'd loose many people who bring significant gifts and talents.

I comment:
There are those who say we are already losing many people with significant gifts and talents because of our current policies, and that we would gain people with significant gifts and talents if those policies were changed.

[revklak]

Someone writes:
My current congregation would probably stay but we'd loose many people who bring significant gifts and talents.

I comment:
There are those who say we are already losing many people with significant gifts and talents because of our current policies, and that we would gain people with significant gifts and talents if those policies were changed.

If we're just worried about the numbers game, then the question is: will there be enough gained to offset the losses.

If, like me, you feel the witness to the Truth will be distorted and even destroyed, then numbers don't matter at all.

The bottom line, after all, is souls saved (through Christ's Spirit, yes, not my work) and not how many sinners get a warm fuzzy from a Church that no longer in the business of pointing people to the truth, offering forgiveness, and leading them into real fellowship with their Savior.

[Maryland Brian]

There are those who say we are already losing many people with significant gifts and talents because of our current policies, and that we would gain people with significant gifts and talents if those policies were changed.

 All I ask is for one example of one denomination that has demonstrated a positive shift in new people that comes anywhere close to the number of people they've lost because they've changed their understanding of marriage and family.  One.  That's all I ask. 

Maryland Brian

[ptmccain]

Brian, apparently people are still trying to locate the actual location of this mythical church that grows when it throws out Scripture's teaching about homosexuality.

I'm hopeful you'll hear of one church that has grown when it ditched its historic position on this issue.

The United Church of Christ has given it a good effort, but to no avail.

[johannesdesilentio]

What scriptural teaching about homosexuality?   As has been demonstrated on this very thread, you don't have a biblical case!

[Charles_Austin]

The question:
I'm hopeful you'll hear of one church that has grown when it ditched its historic position on this issue.

My answer:
St. Francis Lutheran Church, San Francisco. And apparently a church in Atlanta. (But they would not say they "ditched" as in "threw away" a historic position, but rather enhanced their understanding.)

[Richard Johnson]

The question:
I'm hopeful you'll hear of one church that has grown when it ditched its historic position on this issue.

My answer:
St. Francis Lutheran Church, San Francisco.

Let's see, to say this with confidence one would have to:
(1) Know just when the congregation "ditched its historic position."
(2) Know the size of the congregation at that time.
(3) Know the size of the congregation today--this being particularly problematic, since the congregation is no longer in the ELCA and so there are no stats easily available.

So I guess, unless you have some additional information, I'd have to say: "not demonstrated"

[edoughty]

The question:
I'm hopeful you'll hear of one church that has grown when it ditched its historic position on this issue.

My answer:
St. Francis Lutheran Church, San Francisco.

Let's see, to say this with confidence one would have to:
(1) Know just when the congregation "ditched its historic position."
(2) Know the size of the congregation at that time.
(3) Know the size of the congregation today--this being particularly problematic, since the congregation is no longer in the ELCA and so there are no stats easily available.

So I guess, unless you have some additional information, I'd have to say: "not demonstrated"

Proving the opposite point suddenly seems equally difficult, I note.

Erik Doughty
Minneapolis, MN

[Charles_Austin]

How about looking at the Reconciled in Christ Congregations? I note that one in Rochester, Minn., has had a rather steady growth in membership in recent years.