The church and homosexuality

The ones who allow a divorcee to remarry. That’s about the single clearest comment from Jesus about a concrete, modern issue that I can think of in the bible. Yet, the Church of England allow remarriage.

Great, yeah, thats probably a good one. From my experience as a Christian (both Anglican and Evangelical-ish) and those of others I know and have read etc, the general teaching in the church on divorce is: Divorce is not good, marriage is something that we believe God created for man and woman to be together and is sacred, so to split it is not good. Jesus said this as you mentioned and that is what we believe. BUT we also believe, even more strongly and on top of that, that there is not ONE of us that is without fault and sin. All sins are equal in the eyes of God. So, although divorce should be avoided (and most churches have great counselling teams for marriages in difficulty to try and avoid it), if it does happen, then there is no condemnation on the couple – they are no more sinful than anyone else. If they then re-marry, then that is a great thing – they are entering into another sacred bond under God and this is good!

Hope that makes some sense, please feel free to pick any bits that don’t and I’ll try and explain further.

I believe the singer out of Slipknot went to Rome to see the Pope…

Is my reply appearing to anyone? It said its posted but for some reason I can’t see it?!?!

EDIT: Yes it is thre…..was looking on the wrong page….

Yep. Forum bug. Do not adjust your set.

Hope that makes some sense

You’re new to this, aren’t you?

speed12 – Member

Great, yeah, thats probably a good one.

How come you ignored mine?

Hope that makes some sense, please feel free to pick any bits that don’t and I’ll try and explain further.

So essentially the church has modified it’s stance, away from the literal teachings of the bible, to adopt a more common sense approach? Why can’t it do that on gay marriage then?

they are entering into another sacred bond under God and this is good!

You mean like gay people would like to but aren’t allowed?

Hurrah! Mr Woppits here!

What’s your view on linen and woolen clothing?

Hope that makes some sense, please feel free to pick any bits that don’t and I’ll try and explain further.

Umm the bit where you conclude that sinning is “great” is less than clear. Granted I wasn’t brought up CofE but I’m fairly sure that in most branches of chritianity sin is seen as a bad thing.

if [divorce] does happen, then there is no condemnation on the couple – they are no more sinful than anyone else.

If what Mike says is correct, this is contrary to what the Bible says. How does the CofE reconcile that?

crikey – Member

Hurrah! Mr Woppits here!

Thankyou. I have been here for some time already, if you read the thread. Something that speed12 evidently hasn’t managed to do or he wouldn’t be arguing from his steaming great bag of superstitious gibberish.

All sins are equal in the eyes of God

Really? 😯

Speed12 – I agree that divorce is not good. Mine was expensive, traumatic and nearly cost me, well, more than I could say. What that has to do with religion, however, is debatable. I felt bad enough at the time without religious condemnation, thanks. Reading back through this thread, I wonder why I maintain that I believe in God. All I can say is that I do, but that organised religion needs to spend an awfully long time on the naughty step.

Oh and there’s a difference between respectfully disagreeing with someone and slagging them off with insults.

The latter is not nice regardless of subject.

he wouldn’t be arguing from his steaming great bag of superstitious gibberish.

Harsh.

As religious opinions go, Speed12’s appears to be well thought out and well presented.

For all that I’m anti-religion, it’s possible to take that viewpoint without being a dick about it.

Sorry Mr Woppit, I’ve been out on the bike and automatically flicked to the end of the thread to see where it had ended up. My recollection is hazy, but it’s normally about this point where Mrs Barnsleymitches chest is brought in and the conversation becomes rather more well rounded…

Oh and there’s a difference between respectfully disagreeing with someone and slagging them off with insults.

The latter is not nice regardless of subject.

Ultimately though, I have no more credulity about believing in God than I do if someone believes in Unicorns. I wouldn’t go out of my way to say that to a christian in a mocking way but that is my honest opinion.

Do you suggest I should pretend otherwise – or keep quiet about it at all times in case it offends? Why shouldn’t I be able to express my honest opinion or debate about religion?

Again, how do you feel about Scientologists who believe this:

In the materials for OT III (Operating Thetan level 3), L. Ron Hubbard writes that, 75 million years ago, the head of the Galactic Federation, made up of 76 planets, was a being named Xenu. Faced with an overpopulation problem, he brought beings to this planet, blew them up with hydrogen bombs, and packaged them. Their spirits now infest our bodies: he says “One’s body is a mass of individual thetans stuck to oneself or to the body.” Scientologists at this level try to rid themselves of these thetans (spirits) by helping each one to remember the painful experiences of being blown up like that.

?

Their views should be respected and not questioned in case they are offended right – or does it only apply to christians? How about extremist muslims who are against women being educated, and think that all non-believers deserve to die? Let’s respect them too.

I already did that over on the BLURAY vs DVD thread crikey, but speaking of well rounded… 😀

For all that I’m anti-religion, it’s possible to take that viewpoint without being a dick about it.

Isn’t it. I have great hopes for barnsleymitch, however. Just a couple more steps…

For all that I’m anti-religion, it’s possible to take that viewpoint without being a dick about it.

+1

All sins are equal in the eyes of God

Then God is an Ass

Not a prayer woppit, you naughty old evangelist you! By the way, somebody on the DVD thread just mentioned directional cables! 😳

Then God is an Ass

Ah, that explains that coveting commandment then; I always wondered about that.

The comment and the coveting are unsurprisingly linked

Why shouldn’t I be able to express my honest opinion or debate about religion?

You can, that’s fine.

Just don’t, as you put it, ‘go out of your way to say that in a mocking way’.

That’s what I have a problem with. We go to quite some lengths in real life and on here to be nice to each other except for politics and religion threads. Mostly the latter can get extremely nasty for no real reason.

That’s what I am campaigning against.

Surely better that some people go a bit over the top in mocking/criticism of religion than the centuries of stifling intolerant religious dogma that have preceded the current situation?

And what about Scientologists? Fair game for mocking/scathing criticism or not?

Surely better that some people go a bit over the top in mocking/criticism of religion than the centuries of stifling intolerant religious dogma that have preceded the current situation?

Er, not really following you there.

How does upsetting a nice believing person redress centuries of nastiness?

And what about Scientologists? Fair game for mocking/scathing criticism or not?

Only if they start it. Isn’t this obvious stuff we teach to kids? Don’t hit first…?

I believeCrikey to be correct:
The singer out of Slipknot did indeed go to Rome to see the Pope.

And then what did the Pope say to his aide, Crikey? 🙂

I believe the answer is contained within:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG_gv7YzIzY

Except I can’t get it to link properly…

How does upsetting a nice believing person redress centuries of nastiness?

Straw man argument.

Ah, thanks Crikey.

I thought that’s what he said.

the centuries of stifling intolerant religious dogma that have preceded the current situation?

think there’s a few people irked by this, and they may well have a point TBH. That sort of stuff does kinda put people on edge.

How does upsetting a nice believing person redress centuries of nastiness?

Straw man argument

That’s what I am saying.. Grum’s point was a straw man.

Er, not really following you there.

How does upsetting a nice believing person redress centuries of nastiness?

I never said it did. Yours is the straw man argument – really not sure how you are claiming mine is there. 😉

My point is, better the current situation where a few people get a bit upset occasionally but people are free to say what they like about religion, rather than a situation where large numbers of people are genuinely persecuted, even killed, for doing something the church doesn’t agree with, which has been the status quo for hundreds of years.

A lack of willingness to criticise religion was a large part of that status quo being able to maintain it’s hold for so long.

Only if they start it. Isn’t this obvious stuff we teach to kids? Don’t hit first…?

But what if you believe scientology to be a scam? You should keep quiet in case you offend anyone?

As one of your friendly STW Christians I’ve sat this one out so far… don’t want to keep getting involved and you lot thinking I’m a God botherer now, do I? 😀

There’s been some good new input, some old and tired arguments and of course Woptit’s wonderful charm and eloquence.

I’m no theological scholar all I can add is my own humble interpretation …. Do unto others… The number one lesson. Be it from the Bible, the pulpit or your mum and dad …. and at the moment CoE is failing in this…. I’m sure given time they (the hierarchy) will come to their senses…. hopefully soon

Peace out

Ok, bit by bit as i read it

Are we suggesting that the Vatican’s views can be safely ignored for the purposes of discussing Xtianity as a whole, now?

I’m not sure why you ask this. I think we can see that discussing Christianity as a whole is not useful. The variety in the views on same sex marriage demonstrated that. Secondly, I’m not sure, but are you critical of the pope’s apparent change of mind, both between popes and within popes? I think it’s a good thing that he can change his mind. It also demonstrates that the view is not doctrine, not actually a part of the beliefs of the church. The link between the stance of the Catholic church with regard to condoms and Aids in Africa is often cited. This is strange as Catholicism is not the majority Christian religion in Africa. Then even in the countries with a large proportion of Catholics, AIDS is not noticeably more widespread. The seems to be almost no relationship between incidence of AIDS and the Catholic population. It seems the pope’s views on condoms resulting in high AIDS incidence cannot be supported by evidence.

Yours is the straw man argument

My general argument, or that particular comment? Cos that was just a rebuttal not an assertion…

My point is, better the current situation where a few people get a bit upset occasionally but people are free to say what they like about religion, rather than a situation where large numbers of people are genuinely persecuted, even killed, for doing something the church doesn’t agree with, which has been the status quo for hundreds of years.

Yes, you’re quite right.

But that still does not give you the right to randomly slag people off cos you feel like being nasty! (the hypothetical you)

But what if you believe scientology to be a scam? You should keep quiet in case you offend anyone?

If you feel that you can help someone that you are close to by discussing the business practices of that lot then fine. Don’t just walk up to Tom Cruise and start yelling in his face.

Like I said. Don’t hit FIRST.

don’t want to keep getting involved and you lot thinking I’m a God botherer now, do I?

Its ok we forgive you 😉

My general argument, or that particular comment? Cos that was just a rebuttal not an assertion

BINNERSTSHIRTS – the molly show

I mean gently arguing round and round in circles when you dont even really mean what you say

I mean gently arguing round and round in circles when you dont even really mean what you say

Or to put it another way, trying in vain to make a philosophical point.

From my experience as a Christian (both Anglican and Evangelical-ish) and those of others I know and have read etc, the general teaching in the church on divorce is: Divorce is not good, marriage is something that we believe God created for man and woman to be together and is sacred, so to split it is not good. Jesus said this as you mentioned and that is what we believe. BUT we also believe, even more strongly and on top of that, that there is not ONE of us that is without fault and sin. All sins are equal in the eyes of God. So, although divorce should be avoided (and most churches have great counselling teams for marriages in difficulty to try and avoid it), if it does happen, then there is no condemnation on the couple – they are no more sinful than anyone else. If they then re-marry, then that is a great thing – they are entering into another sacred bond under God and this is good!

I get the whole hate the sin, not the sinner thing. But…

I get the logic of: Remarriage is adultery –> adultery is a sin –> all sins are forgive –> remarriage is ok

But with homosexuality it seems to become “being gay is okay as long as you don’t keep doing it”. Ie. you can be gay, as long as you don’t continue having sex with men. The logic being that sins are only forgiven if you truly repent, and you can’t truly repent if you keep doing it.

If the same standards/logic were applied to remarriage of divorcees, the marriage would be okay, so long as there’s no sex happening.

Yet, in the bible homosexuality is barely mentioned and the teaching on divorce is so clear:

Luke 16:18
Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.

Mark 10:2-12
And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” 3 He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” 4 They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away.” 5 But Jesus said to them, “For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.” 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

Interestingly, I’m sure I’ve heard the middle of that second passage used as a model for marriage and the reason why the church won’t allow same sex marriage.