Gay Bishop-elect Robinson Mocks Critics

BBC News ^

[mtbopfuyn]

Disgusting how gays enjoy shoving it in your face. He said the other day that God wanted him to do this. I really doubt God wants the church torn apart.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I'd say that from a religious perspective, the rejection of scriptual authority is a much graver sin, because it amounts to a rejection of God's authority. He really is saying that Man is God. If that is true, why belong to a church, let alone be one of its bishops?

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Disgusting how gays enjoy shoving it in your face.

Uh . . .

[Cincinatus]

You're still missing my point. The vast majority of Episcopal clergy believe in the Bible exactly as this guy does. Should they not also be removed, as you advocate for Robinson? And if so, is not his homosexuality then irrelevant?

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I'm not Episcopalian, and am not aware of how the majority of Episcopal clergy believe. But if they see the Bible as man-made and open to "modern" interpretation, then I would think that Episcopalians should call for their removal.

[TheCrusader]

"To my knowledge, Jesus never said anything overriding the Old Testament prohibition of homosexuality."

You are correct. In fact, Jesus had much to say about homosexuality, and He affirmed their eternal damnation in Luke 17: 28-29.

"Likewise as it was in the days of Lot--they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom fire and sulphur rained from heaven and destroyed them all--" Luke 17: 28-29.

Saint Jude's letter in the New Testament affirms the precise nature of the sin of Sodom, and also affirms thier punishment.

"just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 7)

[kinsman redeemer]

Maybe God DOES want this church torn apart.

I am sure you are right if you intended to say that God does not want His Church torn apart.

[HarleyD]

"...and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts..." Roman 1:27

It's not just in the Old Testament.

[Princeliberty]

Actually he did not override the food passages.

The food restrictions were types of the seperation
of the Jews form the Gentiles after Jesus brought
salvation to the Gentiles those scriptures
were fufilled and hence the restrictions no longer
applied to the Church.

Not the case with homosexuality and the bishop
is showing his contempt for the Bible.

[BubbaBasher]

Maybe God DOES want this church torn apart.

Maybe he does indeed. As destructive is it seems, the blasphemers and apostates will be reveiled for what they are and the true believes will be left stronger.

[Revelation 911]

Darn HTML.

slow poke

[Revelation 911]

Uh . .

eeeewwww!

[Wilhelm Tell]

You're still missing my point. The vast majority of Episcopal clergy believe in the Bible exactly as this guy does. Should they not also be removed, as you advocate for Robinson? And if so, is not his homosexuality then irrelevant?

I think you have identified the bigger issue. They have rejected the Word and the Lordship of Christ -- everything follows from this.

[xzins]

Hey is this your wife?

[CatoRenasci]

Exactly. I daresay one would be hard-pressed to find any significant number of Episcopal clergy or laity (or in any mainline Protestant denomination for that matter) that believes in the inerrancy of the Bible. There is probably no more clear line dividing the traditional mainline Protestant denominations (Episcopal, Congregational (United Church of Christ), Presbyterian, Lutheran (ELCA)) from what they term fundamentalist denominations, beginning with the almost mainstream Methodists and Baptists, and moving on to the right through the Lutheran (Missouri Synod) towards the various evangelical churches, where many people still think (as one mainliner puts it) 'every jot and tittle of the Authorized Version (King James) is literally true.'

The mainliners have been Biblical relativists to one degree or another since the early 19th century, with the development of philology and the 'higher criticism'. Their clergy gave up on King James before the end of the 19th Century with the American Standard revision and continued with the Revised Standard by the mid-20th century. Many mainliners, the more conservative ones, believe the Bible to have been divinely inspired, but subject to the ministrations of human scribes, and hence not possibly inerrant. Others just think the Bible is how the Jews and early Christians decided (quite consiously as humans) to tell their stories, and given the machinations in the first four centuries AD over what would and would not make the final cut of the Canon, quite subject to error and politics.

In mainstream educated thought, the view of the Bible as literally true has not been respectable since 1925, when Clarence Darrow made such a fool of William Jennings Bryan.

[Frumanchu]

Grant's wife?

If it was, she most likely said what she did and then left before anyone could question her or oppose her.... ;

[BSunday]

I will never cease to be amazed by the American press:

sizeable minority = majority

[dfwgator]

The Bishop-elect, winning himself a ripple of laughter, said Leviticus also forbids the consumption of shellfish, but we still eat it.

I thought gay men didn't like "fish."

[Saundra Duffy]

"What bothers me most is that a schism is occurring and that breaks my heart," she said.

There it is. THAT's the problem but the gay bishop is making it all about him. Sheeeeeesh. (God must be puking up there.)