LGBT clergy are threatening to divide the United Methodist Church

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Jul 20, 2018
1,290
170
143
77539
#21
Jesus was inclusive... I don't know why it is so hard for religious leader to be as well.
Allowing someone to worship is different than accepting their psychotic beliefs or giving them authority to be a pastor, deacon, teacher, etc. It's no different than not condoning alcoholism but still allowing alcoholics to come and worship.
 
May 31, 2007
781
130
1,593
Edmond, OK
#22
I would say that access to information and the free movement of ideas is destroying Christianity.

Churches and religion has historically ruled and kept control by limiting the access to information, embracing mob mentality and shutting down views in contradictory to their teachings and history.

People are just tired of the hypocrisy of organized religion and things like the internet, TV and social media are finally pointing these things out.

There are plenty of people who believe in the love and compassion of Christ, but organized religion 'complex interpretations' of this 'simple message' is starting to piss a lot of people off.

Money is going to be the biggest changer of organized religion. Whoever has the most money will win.
That just seems like a long winded way of agreeing with me that these groups don’t like what these churches represent and are out to destroy them (or fundamentally change them which is the same thing).

And I don’t think the change in information availability has anything to do with it. It’s the changes in society that makes this possible.
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
7,094
3,535
743
49
#23
Jesus was inclusive... I don't know why it is so hard for religious leader to be as well.
Allowing someone to worship is different than accepting their psychotic beliefs or giving them authority to be a pastor, deacon, teacher, etc. It's no different than not condoning alcoholism but still allowing alcoholics to come and worship.
And actually the definition of worship is the gathering of believers, giving worship to God. So while people who are seeking God are welcome they should understand the meaning of the service and that it is for God, not the person.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

bleedinorange

Federal Marshal
Jan 11, 2010
15,801
29,952
743
In Pokey's head
#24
It's anything but simple. Church members have invested tens of thousands of dollars into buildings and programs over the years. If their church leaves, or if they leave, they will likely have to start over and raise funds all over again. Many EPC churches (notably Kirk of the Hills Tulsa) have gone thru this exact scenario in recent years.
Yes, it is simple just not inconsequential. Been involved w my Methodist church for over 35 years. Well aware. If people leave it will be their choice to do so with all the implicit consequences. Having only 2 options makes it simple for me. Didn't say it wouldn't be disquieting, but lots of adult choices are. Besides, the $ put in churches over the years along with the apportionment to their respective Conventions is paid by choice with the understanding it implies no obligation to the giver. People making principled choices don't generally place a dollar value on their choice. Ergo, principled.
 

bleedinorange

Federal Marshal
Jan 11, 2010
15,801
29,952
743
In Pokey's head
#25
I would say that access to information and the free movement of ideas is destroying Christianity.

Churches and religion has historically ruled and kept control by limiting the access to information, embracing mob mentality and shutting down views in contradictory to their teachings and history.

People are just tired of the hypocrisy of organized religion and things like the internet, TV and social media are finally pointing these things out.

There are plenty of people who believe in the love and compassion of Christ, but organized religion 'complex interpretations' of this 'simple message' is starting to piss a lot of people off.

Money is going to be the biggest changer of organized religion. Whoever has the most money will win.
No.

https://www.christianheadlines.com/...ans-are-exiting-liberal-churches-1333899.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...hriving/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.306ad916e194

These articles throw shade on most of your silly postulations. What a poorly informed loon you are.
 
May 21, 2007
483
212
1,593
Tulsa, OK
#29
Thanks for the name calling, not sure why that was called for by okie-dookie.

These articles are interesting but hard to form a complete conclusion. For one, they use percentages to prove facts. 10% could be 1 person or 100 persons. I don't know what the beginning was to form their % conclusions.

The Washington post article was take from Ontario only so hard to form a conclusion as a whole and had the same % problem.

Also, the articles don't have age demographics. I could be a bunch of 75-80 years olds that die in the next 2-5 years so the results of the article will switch right back.

The article are just facts, which are useful, but draw no conclusions as to why? If we knew why we could see if those increases were temporary or sustainable.

It doesn't shock me that the more conservative religions are consolidating (there was some examples of conversion to Catholicism),

Logic would tell us that as religions become more liberal, their population's fracture, conservatives may join other religions (pumping up those conservative numbers) and the fractured religion will shrink as conservatives leave.

Liberal are probably not lining up to join any church as older churches have left a bad taste in their mouths (pun intended).

It is just a numbers game but makes for interesting math. I guess I could go read the study, but since the articles didn't address it in the first place my guess that it probably not good science.

Oh wait... i found it. The statistician is bias as all get out. "Shiflett takes his reader through some of the most salient statistical trends and wonders aloud why liberal churches and denominations seem steadfastly determined to follow a path that will lead to their own destruction." This smacks of religious propaganda.

Here is some more... "The more liberal Protestant denominations have been losing members by the thousands since the 1960s, with the Episcopal Church USA having lost fully one half of its members over the period." 1,000.... 2,000.... 3,000.... 4,000??????

If I am a "uninformed loon" because i don't believe everything on the internet, well 'uninformed loon' i am.
 
Feb 11, 2007
4,097
1,883
1,743
Oklahoma City
#31
Thanks for the name calling, not sure why that was called for by okie-dookie.

These articles are interesting but hard to form a complete conclusion. For one, they use percentages to prove facts. 10% could be 1 person or 100 persons. I don't know what the beginning was to form their % conclusions.

The Washington post article was take from Ontario only so hard to form a conclusion as a whole and had the same % problem.

Also, the articles don't have age demographics. I could be a bunch of 75-80 years olds that die in the next 2-5 years so the results of the article will switch right back.

The article are just facts, which are useful, but draw no conclusions as to why? If we knew why we could see if those increases were temporary or sustainable.

It doesn't shock me that the more conservative religions are consolidating (there was some examples of conversion to Catholicism),

Logic would tell us that as religions become more liberal, their population's fracture, conservatives may join other religions (pumping up those conservative numbers) and the fractured religion will shrink as conservatives leave.

Liberal are probably not lining up to join any church as older churches have left a bad taste in their mouths (pun intended).

It is just a numbers game but makes for interesting math. I guess I could go read the study, but since the articles didn't address it in the first place my guess that it probably not good science.

Oh wait... i found it. The statistician is bias as all get out. "Shiflett takes his reader through some of the most salient statistical trends and wonders aloud why liberal churches and denominations seem steadfastly determined to follow a path that will lead to their own destruction." This smacks of religious propaganda.

Here is some more... "The more liberal Protestant denominations have been losing members by the thousands since the 1960s, with the Episcopal Church USA having lost fully one half of its members over the period." 1,000.... 2,000.... 3,000.... 4,000??????

If I am a "uninformed loon" because i don't believe everything on the internet, well 'uninformed loon' i am.
Cowboy...I have come to believe that all of us, knowing it or not, are on a lifelong search for the basic essence of all things. That basic essence we call God. Some search in churches and in those who call themselves Christians but going away disappointed by the Christian hypocrisy. I fully understand their disappointment. But I have found that there is a God...and I am not him. I have found my selfish self-serving ways leads to my own destruction. But there is an escape... and it rests in finding God's only son sent to save us from our own destruction. When you find him, you will finally know it was what you searching for all your life.


t
 

snuffy

Free Harambe!
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Feb 28, 2007
31,803
29,137
1,743
Oklahoma
#33
It's kind of sad when the African delegation has to tell the US group the correct interpretation of the bible.
This is the reason I am in favor of the one church plan. One group from a continent that has always opposed being gay to the point of putting people to death is swaying a decision for 12+ people, rather than let each church and congregation decide for themselves.
I don't believe I should force churches in Africa to bend to my will any more than my church on Oklahoma should bend to theirs.
 
Feb 11, 2007
4,097
1,883
1,743
Oklahoma City
#34
This is the reason I am in favor of the one church plan. One group from a continent that has always opposed being gay to the point of putting people to death is swaying a decision for 12+ people, rather than let each church and congregation decide for themselves.
I don't believe I should force churches in Africa to bend to my will any more than my church on Oklahoma should bend to theirs.
This from NPR: "
Leaders of the United Methodist Church have rejected the "One Church" plan, a measure that would have eased restrictions on gay clergy and same-sex marriages, with delegates twice voting against it at a special session of the church's General Conference.

The One Church plan would have allowed individual churches to decide how they handle issues of same-sex weddings and the sexuality of their clergy. It seemed doomed on Monday, when only the rival "Traditional" plan received enough votes to reach a final vote today.

Backers of the One Church plan presented it again on Tuesday by making a minority report to the meeting of nearly 1,000 delegates from churches and regional conferences worldwide. Supporters of the One Church plan again fell short, after asking delegates to substitute it for the Traditional plan in today's final vote..."
 

bleedinorange

Federal Marshal
Jan 11, 2010
15,801
29,952
743
In Pokey's head
#35
The "Traditional" plan has passed by a reported vote of 438-384. This not only rejects homosexual clergy and same sex marriage but it tightens the penalties for violators and strengthens the language in the ban.