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.

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
7,305
3,585
743
49
#61
Actually I’ve seen both. I know friends who very obviously were gay from the second they existed for whatever reason, lack of testosterone, too much estrogen, too much testosterone.....who knows the reasons? But they are very clearly different from the beginning. However I also have seen people who were just deviant, who will have sex with anything that moves and have no discipline with regard to their lusts.

More frequently I’ve seen people who were environmentally gay. People who had traumatic damaging childhood experiences and were not loved properly, had an abusive overbearing parent of the opposite sex or just were thrust into circumstances where they felt totally unloved and the only love they received at the weakest most vulnerable time in their lives was from a gay person and over a period of time convinced themselves they were gay when for most of their lives they had strong sexual attractions to the opposite sex. I’ve seen this in multiple circumstances and in many of the cases, those people flounder back-and-forth trying to figure out exactly what they are with regard to sexuality.

It is not a simple black-and-white issue. I believe there are definitely people born with a propensity to be gay but there are others who become that way and make a “choice” due to the things that happen to them in life. Just my two cents concerning what I have witnessed regarding the issue.

That is what makes this church issue so complicated. I take the stance that all people are loved by God and that I am directed by Christ to love all people as he loves all people. However, it becomes complicated when a sexuality movement is not satisfied with love and acceptance but demands that others condone, promote and celebrate behavior that is clearly condemned in scripture. That makes appointing such people as clergy or leaders in the church a very difficult hurdle for many to reconcile with their faith. Homosexuality is clearly not compatible with Christian teaching unless you deem that scripture is not the divine inspired word of God and propose that we just ignore those parts of the Bible. That being said, homosexuals are hardly the only people who abuse and distort what God intended sexuality to be for.

It’s such a complicated issue, I hope we can all just love each other and at times agree to disagree.
Used to be you'd see men with too much estrogen marry women with too much testosterone. They were literally "made" for each other. I'm not talking of genetic abnormalities where sex is hard to determine, etc.. while they didn't fit the typical molds, they still for with someone of the opposite sex. I think now today people assume they must be gay because of the social pressures that started even back in the 80's. It was common back then to have people call guys gay that weren't "masculine" enough.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,178
31,764
1,743
oklahoma city
#63
You have to have something to base your opinion on. Whereby do you have expertise to speak for all of Christendom?
I’m not speaking for it I’m speaking about it.

But, I’ll remember how you feel the next time there is a discussion about possible future wars around here. You will jump in to question the expertise of the nonveterans and tell them they have nothing to base their opinion on, right?
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
69,293
49,528
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#64
I’m not speaking for it I’m speaking about it.

But, I’ll remember how you feel the next time there is a discussion about possible future wars around here. You will jump in to question the expertise of the nonveterans and tell them they have nothing to base their opinion in, right?
Asking someone to back up their opinion is always fair, is it not? I'll always be happy to back up my own. Please back up yours. Or admit you're pulling it our of your arse.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,178
31,764
1,743
oklahoma city
#65
Asking someone to back up their opinion is always fair, is it not? I'll always be happy to back up my own. Please back up yours. Or admit you're pulling it our of your arse.
You didn’t ask me to back it up, you made a BS appeal to authority and a false claim.

Tell me this. If Kanye and Kim developed a time machine and were able to go back in time to say 1890 or so and walked into a random Protestant church in the southern US and said to the pastor that they wanted a Christian marriage in that Christian church and were ready to devote their lives to Christ as a couple, what would have been the response? Same situation, maybe even the same actual church, today?
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
69,293
49,528
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#66
You didn’t ask me to back it up, you made a BS appeal to authority and a false claim.

Tell me this. If Kanye and Kim developed a time machine and were able to go back in time to say 1890 or so and walked into a random Protestant church in the southern US and said to the pastor that they wanted a Christian marriage in that Christian church and were ready to devote their lives to Christ as a couple, what would have been the response? Same situation, maybe even the same actual church, today?
Yeah, still nothing to back up your claim... pulling it out of your arse... we all know it.

The difference is, steross, there is nowhere in the Bible where mixed marriage is specifically called a sin. It doesn't require a major theological shift or throwing out specific scriptures to allow it, only a change in attitudes. What you're claiming requires a theological shift. Please back up the claim theologically. How do you arrive at this doctrine?
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,178
31,764
1,743
oklahoma city
#67
Yeah, still nothing to back up your claim... pulling it out of your arse... we all know it.

The difference is, steross, there is nowhere in the Bible where mixed marriage is specifically called a sin. It doesn't require a major theological shift or throwing out specific scriptures to allow it, only a change in attitudes. What you're claiming requires a theological shift. Please back up the claim theologically. How do you arrive at this doctrine?
Of course, you didn’t answer the question. And we both know the pastor back then would have told them it is a sin and justified it with his interpretation of scripture.

There are plenty of places the the Bible specifically calls things that were interpreted to be about mixed marriages a sin. Now, they are interpreted differently (mostly, not sure about Bob Jones and some others). Jesus did not mention homosexuality. The verses in the Bible have always been interpreted and my opinion is that the interpretation will change. Slavery was VERY specific. You found a way to rationalize the scriptures about no penalty for beating slaves to “servitude.” Pretty major theological shift there. Interracial marriage as a sin took more interpretation but could be. It was taken as part of the scripture for a long, long time. Homosexuality will eventually be accepted with some attempt to justify the scripture similar to slavery. Do I know this 100%? Of course not, it is my prediction based on history. Just like you don’t know I am wrong, despite your bluster and bigoted attempt to act like my opinion is not valid because of my beliefs. And your Fox News style repeating of “pull it out your arse” is weak when any idiot would know exactly how I formed it based on historic examples. Disagreeing is one thing. Trying to demean the other person’s opinion( and in the process making yourself look silly) is pretty low. Tell me, is this denigrating manner how Jesus would have defended the scripture if I were fortunate enough to discuss with him?

That’s all I’m going to say because I know there is no way I am changing your mind and honestly at this point don’t really care to.
 
Last edited:
Nov 16, 2013
3,138
1,981
743
33
tractor
#68
Jesus also didn't mention porn, dropping the F bomb, computer sex, going to massage parlors for a happy ending, driving 90 mph in a school zone, child porn, beastiality, sexting with minors, smoking a joint, rooting for colleges in Norman, beating one's spouse, turning your son into the daughter you never had, or cocaine being bad for you. I guess the modern protestants should let all of these stand as well? This is what happens when everybody gets a participation trophy and is never told they are clueless.
 

okstate987

Special Teams Coach
A/V Subscriber
Oct 17, 2009
6,463
4,727
743
A Galaxy Far, Far Away
#69
Jesus also didn't mention porn, dropping the F bomb, computer sex, going to massage parlors for a happy ending, driving 90 mph in a school zone, child porn, beastiality, sexting with minors, smoking a joint, rooting for colleges in Norman, beating one's spouse, turning your son into the daughter you never had, or cocaine being bad for you. I guess the modern protestants should let all of these stand as well? This is what happens when everybody gets a participation trophy and is never told they are clueless.
I see what you did there.