Curious about your thoughts.

[twofourthree]

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/mark_s_sisk/2007/03/i_have_changed_my_mind.html

Let me know your thoughts on this, it would be much appreciated.

Love,
T$

Comments

[bethmonkey]

I like this article and agree with his assessment of how things stand. I thought his reflection on the passage in Matthew was very insightful. I understand it is a complicated issue for many Christians, as it seems to fly in the face of what the Bible says. If one is to take a historical/literary approach to the Bible, as I do, it is less of a problem than if one is to take a more literal approach. I don't know what the answer would be for Biblical literalists.
Personally, it's nice to see the powers that be attempting a more balanced look at an emotionally charged topic.

[veggygrl33]

I'm not really a literalist, but if I look at it from a literal standpoint, what I see is that it is a sin. Fine. The Bible says it's a sin, whatever. But everyone sins. What makes your sin as a homosexual worse than a divorced woman's sin?

Literally, we are ALL sinners, and the Bible says a sin is a sin. There is no room for, "Well, mine was a tiny sin!".

But I'm sure a real literalist would have some sort of rebuttal to that.

[twofourthree]

Literalists would typically argue that the conventional passages used to argue against homosexuality, such as those in the Hebrew Bible and the few in Paul's writings, show that homosexuality is immoral.

The question is, really, whose interpretation is right on this matter. Whenever we read the Bible, we are interpreting it through our experiences. Many people looking at the same verses will argue that historical information or textual considerations show that they do not condemn homosexuality, especially the homosexuality we talk of in modern terms. Scriptural arguments can really go in circles.

The question is, when it comes to an idea of sin, is if someone knows that they are sinning - then they should not continue in that sin but struggle against it. From the church, we should not attack people we think are sinning simply for the fact that they are sinning...

[bethmonkey]

Most literalists believe every sin is equal. In God's eyes sin is sin. Stealing, adultery, murder, covetess... It says in the Bible that remarriage after a divorce is adultery. Mark 10:2-12, Matthew 19:2-9, Romans 7:1-3. The passage that talks about a "divorced woman's sin" (Matthew 5:31-32) says "You have heard the law of Moses says, 'A man can divorce his wife by merely giving her a letter of divorce. 'But I [Jesus] say that a man who divorces his wife, unless she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit adultery. And anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery."

1 Corinthians 7:10-16

It is true that ever human sins. So, the justification for sinning is "everyone sins"? So in other words don't bother trying not to sin, just rationalize the sin?

what I think about "I've changed my mind"

[the_z_girl_zara]

Matthew 7:15-18

Re: what I think about "I've changed my mind"

[twofourthree]

You make a good point that we should accept all who are gifted for ministry. It seems like the point of departure in this discussion is whether or not homosexuality is a sin. If it is a sin, then someone purposely practicing sin (we can debate whether it matters if they know it is sin or not) may not be in the right place to lead a congregation. While all pastors certainly sin, the question is whether this is purposeful or not. If it is not a sin, then I do not believe that there should be any blocks to ordination of GLBT peoples.

Re: what I think about "I've changed my mind"

[twofourthree]

I agree that heterosexual couples get it right too. And I understand that are you saying that even if someone bears good fruit, if he or she is purposely disobeying the intentions of God, that person may not be suited for ministry. We must, however, keep in mind that all pastors sin - they question is whether they do this purposely and knowlingly or not.

I would love to talk over some of the Biblical passages you are coming from, Zara, and hear your thoughts on them. I have looked into many of them in depth and taken a course on this debate, and would love to hear your perspective on it all and discuss that. Have you looked at the passages that much in the past?

[veggygrl33]

I have nothing to really add to the article, because it said everything

[twofourthree]

I definitely agree that there is an important consideration here about 'remove thy log' before you criticize someone else. I think in this discussion, talking about the role of GLBT in religious leadership, it seems the main question is whether sexual orientation can be a sin

[veggygrl33]

I suppose anyone can "interpret" the Bible any way they see fit, but with the different interpetations comes the question: Which interpretation is from the Spirit? Bottom line - Christ was crucified, died, and rose again. One sacrifice for all time for the sins of humankind.
Hebrews 10.

[veggygrl33]

The inclusion of the Gentiles was not unique to Paul. Jesus spoke of their inclusion in the Kingdom in Matthew 8:11. Yes, the nation of Israel were God's chosen people, but faithful people of other nations were also spoken of by God in the old testament - Malachi 1:11. Peter also preached the Good News to Gentiles - Acts 10:1 - 11:18