Posted on 06/19/2011 2:42:53 PM PDT by SmithL
that was funny :)
pastoresses
pastorettes
:>)
Seems everything I flip over nowadays says that.
Because I was curious. I saw the footnote in his quote and wanted to know what it said. I could have gone to my study bible and looked it up, but I was too lazy.
Don’t worry. It wasn’t some pro-homosexual agenda “gotcha”.
I have seen, and agree with, the theological reasons for ordaining only men.
I note, however, that for me the most persuasive practical reason for not ordaining women is that the women who most loudly clamour for ordination to ministry are manifestly unfit for it.
This lovely lesbian would seem to be "Exhibit A".
>>If your Church sect is studying this issue in any way, you’ve already lost.
UMC General Conference is every 4 years. They’ve voted to study the issue 5 times. I fear that there will not be a sixth vote to “study”. If they vote to allow gays in the clergy, then you’re right—we have lost and they will lose me.
You misunderstood me. That the discussion of whether or not to allow homosexuals to practice their sin with church affirmation is on the table, and that they're actually voting on it, means you've already lost. The fact that the UMC has already voted 5 times on this over a couple of decades means that it's a rotting corpse.
Our tradition requires votes on everything. The fact that it keeps losing is meaningful. The people have to really be against something for it to fail 5 times in a row.
That’s not a him. That’s a dyke.
If everything is negotiable in their version of Christianity, then you owe it to yourself to turn and run. Fast. And don't look back.
>>If everything is negotiable in their version of Christianity
In my years as a Methodist, the teachings of Christianity have been very consistent and very uniform from congregation to congregation but we do tend to give more weight to the words in red than the epistles.
But, as I said earlier, if they vote to ordain homosexuals, I will leave. I’ll be looking for a church that is 100% correct about scripture and always has been. What denomination are you?
While I naturally agree that this pastoress should never have been ordained, it is interesting to see just exactly how depraved some of the Reformation Churches have become. While I may agree with a good portion of the theory behind their Theology, such as salvation by Grace through Faith, the fruits that they have born have effectively destroyed their witness. The root of the issue can be directly traced back to their rejection of Holy Scripture as the source for final authority in a Believer's life.
I believe it to be a case where the Reformation Churches, in a desire to remove as much of the questionable rituals and abuses of power of the Roman Catholic Church as possible, threw the baby out with the bathwater by rejecting not only the authority of the Church in a Believer's life, but also the authority of the Holy Scriptures. Now I'll grant you that it didn't happen right away, but the underlying attitude of liberty at all costs eventually led to licentiousness and we all know where that leads eventually.
No comments on the other details :) because I see this issue as not a "ooh, lookit the slimey ....." rather as a Christian problem affecting me too -- the media don't really care about our differences, to them we are just standing in the way of the nice, happy gay folks just getting married.
Not to put too sharp of a point on it, but how can they vote on anything in the Scriptures? You're Church didn't acquire Salvation on it's own, so why do they now presume to either accept or reject parts of the teachings that come with it?
Christianity isn't a democracy, despite what most Christians seem to think. It's a monarchy and while our Regent is not physically with us at this time, He left explicit instructions on how our daily lives were to be lived and how the government of His Kingdom was to operate. His subjects voting to either accept or reject His laws will not go over well.
I understand that you are trying to hold the line, so to speak, but even the very act of voting on accepting or rejecting portions of Scriptures can be seen as sedition against Christ.
While I agree that the Sodomite problem started recently, you hit the nail on the head when you stated that this was a case of one thing leading to another. No matter how well intentioned, we should not and cannot accept any deviation from what Scripture lays out for us as acceptable. To do otherwise is courting disaster.
No comments on the other details :) because I see this issue as not a "ooh, lookit the slimey ....." rather as a Christian problem affecting me too -- the media don't really care about our differences, to them we are just standing in the way of the nice, happy gay folks just getting married.
I agree, this isn't a matter of "bash the sodomite", this is a matter of remaining salt and light to the world. If we're no different than the world we live in, then we deserve to have our candle removed. I could care less about what the media thinks or tries to portray, we all know that we won't get fair cover from those who are a part of this world, but I do care that we remain faithful to our commission, which is to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ without fail and without error. As Scripture states, one plants while another waters, but God gives the increase.
Also, I meant that we should not see this as just a “Methodist problem” — but one affecting each of us.
Absolutely, I in no way think of this as just a "Methodist Problem", just like I don't think of the Priest abuse scandals as a "Catholic Problem" or Jessee Duplantis as a "Pentecostal Problem". I see them as Christian problems with a central core theme. False teachers have infiltrated the Body.
>>I understand that you are trying to hold the line, so to speak, but even the very act of voting on accepting or rejecting portions of Scriptures can be seen as sedition against Christ.
I agree with you. There are certain liberal factions in the UMC that would send us straight to Hell if that’s what it took to follow the liberal/progressive agenda. They can bring an issue to a vote and the rest of us can say “No” through our votes.
I would defect and go across the street to become a Southern Baptist, except that there are some interpretations of scripture and doctrines in that church that I do not agree with. As things stand right now, I am a United Methodist in my service to Christ. If they decide to become apostates, I will take my bible and leave. If I am told something that doesn’t smell right in my church, I do the research in a bible (checking a couple different translations to be sure) and decide if it is good and scripturally based. My pastor tells me that I’m 80% Baptist and I only stay a Methodist because I like to argue theology. He’s probably more right than wrong on this. He and I are well aware of my spiritual gifts and he respects my arguments and the conclusions I draw from my studies.
Agreed — even the JD bit :) — the media uses that to portray all Christians in that manner. Well, stereotypes work very easily — for example, the image of America in most of the world, thanks to American serials is a place where everyone sleeps with everyone and parties all night and day and works in a hospital or lawyers office after that.
After looking at my post, I came off the wrong way in it. I don't mean to not vote at all, just that when they do vote, the proper response is to do just exactly what you've been doing and vote "NO". My preference would be that the issue not be brought to a vote at all, as it's cut and dried in Scripture, but since the Church elders are going to bring it up, the historic understanding of the text needs to be defended. That you have done so is a great credit to you, as you have helped hold true to God's word.
I would defect and go across the street to become a Southern Baptist, except that there are some interpretations of scripture and doctrines in that church that I do not agree with. As things stand right now, I am a United Methodist in my service to Christ. If they decide to become apostates, I will take my bible and leave. If I am told something that doesn’t smell right in my church, I do the research in a bible (checking a couple different translations to be sure) and decide if it is good and scripturally based. My pastor tells me that I’m 80% Baptist and I only stay a Methodist because I like to argue theology. He’s probably more right than wrong on this. He and I are well aware of my spiritual gifts and he respects my arguments and the conclusions I draw from my studies.
It appears that you've given this extensive thought already, so I won't insult your intelligence, but I say that while I also agree with about 80-85% of Southern Baptist Doctrine, I'm not completely sold on their views either and have since found a home in an unaffiliated Fundamentalist Church. While I hope that you don't have to resort to abandoning your home Church completely because it became apostate, if that becomes a recourse of last resort let me know so I can put you on the prayer list here. We've got dark days ahead of us and we've got to stick together, no matter what the denomination.
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.