Methodists elect 1st openly gay bishop in defiance of ban

Associated Press ^

[StormPrepper]

SCOTTSDALE, Arizona – The Western district of the Methodist church has elected an openly gay bishop despite the denomination's ban on same-sex relationships.

[Lumper20]

I believe John MacArthur has the right message. A few West Point men I know who are class of 65 helped me to get back the faith I so much enjoyed as a young boy. One sent me John MacArthur’s study bible. I treasure it.

[imardmd1]

Repentance and healing is possible

Before, or after one is elected to the bishopric?

The teaching of the assembly today was based on the text:

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the
kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor
idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of
themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are
sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord
Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God" (1 Cor. 6:9-11 AV).

effeminate = μαλακός

Strong's Number G3120
μαλακός
malakos
mal-ak-os'
Of uncertain affinity; soft, that is, fine (clothing); figuratively a catamite: - effeminate, soft.
Total KJV occurrences: 4

Abusers-of-themselves-with-(hu)mankind (male or female) = ἀρσενοκοίτης
------------
Strong's Number G733
ἀρσενοκοίτης>
arsenokoitēs>
ar-sen-ok-oy'-tace>
From G730 and G2845; a sodomite: - abuser of (that defile) self with mankind.
Total KJV occurrences: 2

***********

I think you can put a negative operator on the male aspects above to estimate God's idea of what His reaction to be toward behavior of the female gender so far beyond the pale of decency that it was not even imagined or recorded in the Bible.

The whole matter is covered again, esp. re a "bishop" in Paul's definitive letter to Timothy (1 Tim. 1:10, 2:12, and 3:1-7)

Is this putative openly "gay" woman "bishop" washed in the Blood of the Crucified One? Is she set apart for Christian service by God's Scriptural appointment? Is she declared by Almighty God to be judicially "Not Guilty" of slavish dominance of personal depravity?

Sounds to me like such a one is a bondslave of Satan as a father; of Sin as a master; and of irreversible attraction to lust of the eye, lust of the flesh, and embolden in an impious and empty presumption which trusts in the stability of earthy things.

What does it sound like to you, when vested in a human assuming a role and practice entirely violating Scripture from Genesis 1:1 to the Revelation 22:21? (John 8:44)

If this is the best that the Conference congregants can find among its members and elect to administration, what of them? Eh?

[cloudmountain]

1. Don't worry about that. The Catholic Church moves so slowly that we'll all be long dead by that time.
2. It's just rumblings.

1. True enough. The Catholic Church has been around 2000 years and WILL be around another 200,000+ years...that is, forever.
There will be other Protestant denominations, just to combat the goings on of the gay seed planted in too many Protestant churches.

2. Yep.

[cloudmountain]

When Paul, in 1 Corinthians, reiterated a short list of those who would not inherit the Kingdom he immediately followed it up with “and such were some of you”. Repentance and healing is possible.

ALWAYS.
And WE don't know whom God ultimately forgives, do we?

[cloudmountain]

Women as pastors seems like a slippery slope to all the other liberal nonsense.
My observation also. What stance does a church with female pastors take on abortion, for example?

There are simply TOO many problems with female clergy. If they have children, then their duty is REALLY to their babies.

Even the Anglican wives of Anglican priests have said that all priests SHOULD be single because they simply DO NOT have the time to be an effective
*shepherd of their flock
*husband
*father to their children.

[cloudmountain]

Since the Methodists are Sorta Scritura rather than Sola Scritura, they will be one of those dishonored churches mentioned in Revelation.

Sorta Scritura??
Lol. Good one.

[Rurudyne]

But we can all too often discern those who are presently not saved based on their overt actions or the clear theological stances they actually profess.

Someone high handedly living in sin, while claiming to be saved, and also working to arrogate God’s Word is certainly just such an instance. Arguably the clearest example of such. Working to arrogate Scripture alone should qualify.

Yes, there is certainly a desire to see all be saved; but, that does not empower any hypothetical arguments to that effect.

[fwdude]

It is no longer a viable denomination if it cannot rule itself.

[Cronos]

My opinion as a Catholic is that you should look into the Orthodox Church. Not for the reason you give, but because for a non-Catholic there is a lot of baggage about the CC, so it would be easier to follow our Orthodox brothers

[Cronos]

seriously, just go to a liturgy. You will be an asset to any community.

[StormPrepper]

The closer to the second coming we get, the worse society will get.

As these churches embrace evil, wise people will understand that those churches were never God’s true church to begin with.

Every church that embraces homo marriage was always a false church from the beginning.

The violence will continue to increase and so will the acceptance of all things homo. It’s sad and it makes good people angry, but this was no surprise. It was prophesied about since the time of Adam.

Personally it causes me to marvel at prophesy actually coming to pass right in front of my eyes.

I know what’s coming. I just built a new home on land outside the city. I’m going to be canning and storing food that I grow. Remember, God told Noah that the flood was coming, it was up to Noah to build the boat.

[imardmd1]

It is no longer a viable denomination if it cannot rule itself.

There is no such thing as "a viable denomination" named or called for in Scripture. Denominationalism is an invention of man's lesser and more basic lust for power as applying to religion.

The only viable organization of the doctrine taught by Jesus and His Apostles is the local autonomous assembly of regenerated believer-disciple-priests keeping the commands of Jesus watchfully secure, and ministering to each other in the needs of body, soul, and spirit.

Any widespread suprachurch controlling organization is an artifact of the attempt to wed Platonic philosophy with Biblical doctrine, lending political power by solidarity rather than depending on spiritual power coming from the Faith in and on The Christ.

Denominationalism is Satanic in nature, especially when administered by a two-class religious system of mutually exclusive classes of clergy and laity.

Such a system did not work for Judaism, and it has not worked for man-made organizations claiming to be "Christian," IMHO.

[fwdude]

Okay, I appreciate your long dissertation, but let’s just consider “denominations” to be synonymous with individual church bodies, such as were extant in the early Church. I’m only talking about organization, against which there is no prohibition in scripture. Order is a mandate.

[cherry]

definitely thinking Orthodox church.....but will they accept us?....

[xzins]

I’ve been told they would, but will be a huge culture shift

[imardmd1]

So?

[cloudmountain]

But we can all too often discern those who are presently not saved based on their overt actions or the clear theological stances they actually profess.
Someone high handedly living in sin, while claiming to be saved, and also working to arrogate God’s Word is certainly just such an instance. Arguably the clearest example of such. Working to arrogate Scripture alone should qualify.
As for 'empowering"
Yes, there is certainly a desire to see all be saved; but, that does not empower any hypothetical arguments to that effect.

All true.
And, yet people can repent over and over again, can't they? They can repent on their deathbed. We wouldn't know that nor would we know of any true contrition in their heart. THAT is God's bailiwick.

I'm not arrogating to empower any arguments, hypothetical or not. I am JUST DISCUSSING. No lacuna in my logic at all.

You used "handedly" incorrectly. It's used with adverbs, not alone AS an adverb. Unless, perhaps, you took the "new" English classes offered in public schools these days.

-handedly, combining form in adverbs corresponding to adjectives ending in -handed (such as heavy-handedly corresponding to heavy-handed ).

[Rurudyne]

“Handedly” is part of “high handedly” and it’s use is correct, referring to, in this case, the arrogant, arbitrary and unlawful assumption of the right to basically amend the Scriptures, altering what they say or mean.

And I was not accusing you of arrogating the Scripture: rather that is in reference to those who do so, as in the case of “christians” who set aside the demand for repentance because some sin has become socially acceptable. Naturally this mean those who actively do so.

Please don’t think I’m accusing you of stuff, certainly like we are talking about here.

Still, in the case of sexual sins, it is not homosexuality alone we are told to flee, but simply sexual sin. That includes heterosexual adultery and fornication and not just outright perverted acts. Of course Christ said that lust itself was the real issue not to be played with and He equatied it to actual adultery. So I’m hardly surprised that when confronting a worldling about porn they often act just as upset as if I had just encouraged them to be a prude from now on (now, in these licentious times, deemed a negative in every respect).

When someone thinks their illicit sexual escapades are what it means to pursue happiness they really don’t like God’s expectation that we be suitably chaste and pure people.

[alrea]

They can repent on their deathbed.

They might repent someday, but if the church decides to put openly unrepentant persons in positions of authority it is more or less demonstrating that repentance is not intended or they think no sin occurs. They also are thus willing to disregard and reinterpret a few thousand years of teaching on scripture while totally disregarding the opinion of a large percentage of their members. To arrogate is to take over.

[cloudmountain]

To: (use semi-colons to separate multiple recipients) Rurudyne Your Reply: (HTML auto-detected, see help for more information) Oh goodie, ya wanna cookie? Tagline: (optional, printed after your name on post): Spell Preview Post I have already previewed or do not wish to preview this composition. Word Wrap: ON Loose lips sink ships. In the Religion forum, on a thread titled Methodists elect 1st openly gay bishop in defiance of ban, Rurudyne wrote: “Handedly” is part of “high handedly” and it’s use is correct, referring to, in this case, the arrogant, arbitrary and unlawful assumption of the right to basically amend the Scriptures, altering what they say or mean. And I was not accusing you of arrogating the Scripture: rather that is in reference to those who do so, as in the case of “christians” who set aside the demand for repentance because some sin has become socially acceptable. Naturally this mean those who actively do so. Please don’t think I’m accusing you of stuff, certainly like we are talking about here. Still, in the case of sexual sins, it is not homosexuality alone we are told to flee, but simply sexual sin. That includes heterosexual adultery and fornication and not just outright perverted acts. Of course Christ said that lust itself was the real issue not to be played with and He equatied it to actual adultery. So I’m hardly surprised that when confronting a worldling about porn they often act just as upset as if I had just encouraged them to be a prude from now on (now, in these licentious times, deemed a negative in every respect). When someone thinks their illicit sexual escapades are what it means to pursue happiness they really don’t like God’s expectation that we be suitably chaste and pure people.

==========================================

Oh goodie, ya wanna cookie?