Posted on 07/01/2005 12:13:05 PM PDT by mbarker12474
Good post! And right on target!
Wondering why the queers don't go off and start thier own church and do what they want to in it.
Sorry I said queer I mean't ass bandits or muff divers which ever is your cup of tea>
AMEN!!!!!!
Pending any evidence to the contrary, this is most likely how the minister discovered the problem in the first place.
Perhaps the question is "Should the church government ignore the wishes of the congregation?". I believe that came up in the case of the lesbian pastorette.
Read reply to gidget7. No, I don't condone homosexuality and recognize it is a sin. I believe the church cannot accept the practice of homosexuality without condoning sin, just as the church cannot condone adultery. And does not. But I also believe Christ commands us to minister to homosexuals and attempt to get them to recognize their sin. Come on down, sinner! As you suggested, let's remind them of it every time they sit in church. Heck, I get reminded of my sins every week and I still show up.
Because their primary goal is the destruction of what others have built, not to build something of their own.
Otherwise, why would they chose this course of action?
Is it any wonder that I just realized that this isn't much of a holiday for me this year? It's been becoming less and less of one, but it's over, for now. I can't celebrate this country of perverts and degenerates. Thank God for you good people, but I'm pooped. I've had it. I can't take any more of this garbage.
That begs the question about whether couples living together should be allowed to join the church. We have a lay leader that is living in sin and leading services at our Methodist church (with great Unitarian flair).
Again, the question was not about whether to minister to homosexuals, but to accept them fully as members. That would make ministering to their sins rather difficult, you know.
A church is not a democracy, it, and it's leaders are there to preach the gospel, not take a vote on it's content.
>That begs the question about whether couples living together should be allowed to join the church. <
Their is no question to beg.They should not be in leadership or any position that would lead anyone to think the church condones this.
It probably was how the minister found out. The prospective member stated they were homosexual. Now, where the conversation went from there is something we are all speculating.
If the person confessed homosexuality as a sin in this disclosure, then I believe it was wrong to deny membership.
If they informed the minister as an "in your face, you must accept me as a homosexual because I see nothing wrong with it" then I support denial of membership. No different than someone wanting to join the church, but insisting they were going to home to worship Satan after service Sunday and found nothing wrong with it.
Please don't feel that way. You must remember, we are celebrating the Country our founding fathers built, NOT the one these perverts would have it be. If everyone gives up, our nation will be lost, and all that those who died to preserve it will be for naught!
>If the person confessed homosexuality as a sin in this disclosure, then I believe it was wrong to deny membership.<
You would have to be pretty much clueless to assume that is what happened in this case.
I'm also a Methodist, and I disagree with the UMC on this one, on principle. I do think the bishop has a point that the Book of Discipline does not prohibit homosexual membership, however, and thus I think the UMC was within its rights.
What if this were an adulterer or fornicator? Would they be refused membership? My church has them in the congregation.
They should be. This is a major problem in the modern universal Church--allowing unrepentant sinners (note: UNREPENTANT) to become members of the church, and not disciplining members who fall into sin.
I recall a sermon by one of our pastors; he was stating that someone once scoffed at attending our church because we were all sinners. The pastor's reply was "Sure we are! Our church is filled with sinners and there is always room for one more!"
There is a major difference between the principle that "Every man has sinned," and "Every man is an unrepentant sinner."
We are all sinners. I sure am. I have no right to enter heaven for the sins I have committed, and trust, I have committed some bad ones. If I go to heaven, it is only by the grace of God. God calls us to recognize our sin and repent.
Exactly my point. God calls us to repent; and in fact, having gone through a change-of-congregation membership ritual within the past two years, I know that part of the vows taken to become a member in the UMC include the vow that you repent of your sins and renounce the forces of spiritual darkness. An unrepentant sinner should not be granted membership, whether that sin is practicing homosexuality or heterosexual adultery or anything else. Given the political nature of homosexuality, I would be loathe to even consider putting a practicing homosexual through the membership ritual without some assurance that he understands that homosexuality is NOT acceptable behavior for a member of the church.
I agree with your suggestion. Either this person will recognize their sinful nature and repent, as God calls them to do, or they will not. I think the pastor was wrong for refusing this person's chance to repent of their sin. If we start refusing sinners to attend church, it will be a lonely and empty building.
The problem is not that the practicing homosexual was not permitted to ATTEND church, neither is the issue that he was refused the chance to repent; it is that he was denied MEMBERSHIP in said congregation.
Here's the problem - they're following the wrong book.
Christians should vote with their feet - i.e., LEAVE & find a church that makes God's Word final authority.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.