Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
March 19, 2024, 07:01:07 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Gender ID & Sexuality  (Read 94421 times)
Captain Bible
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 83



« Reply #40 on: March 11, 2011, 10:49:58 am »

hey there Innerlight.  in my company we were forced to attend 'diversity training'.  it was about four hours of christian bashing and ended by the facilitator comparing christians, yes he said 'christians' by name, to 'goose stepping nazis of hilter's germany.'  who needs diversity training more, the christians or the intolerant christo-phobes?

Who do you work for?!  Shocked

I hope you have reported this to your companies supervisors, the media would have a field day if they could get that one on tape.
Logged

"When you divide the land by lot as an inheritance, you must set aside a donation to the Lord, a holy portion of the land, eight and one-third miles long and six and two-thirds miles wide. This entire tract of land will be holy." Ezekiel 45: 1
Innerlight
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136



« Reply #41 on: March 11, 2011, 11:47:25 am »

C’mon Captain Bible, I’ve read your posts before, you are a well-written intelligent person.  Don’t set up a straw man argument about Hugh Hefner, when the issue is homosexuality.  You know as well as I do that all true Christian People are opposed to pornography and the cruelty it inflicts on women (and men), as they are to having a gay agenda pushed on them. 

I’ve been around enough Pastors and laypeople, and their odd fixation on pornography, to discern what’s going on.   Perhaps they are struggling as well.  In some ways I resent that all men are viewed as closet perverts, staring at internet porn.  Stay out of it, and flee, run as far and as fast away as you can.  I travel for a living, and am glad to see Marriott has removed it from their hotels.  I have been known to drink a few beers in the hotel bar.  Call the Deacons!

I stand with you that this is a horrible thing, and the many are destroyed in this industry.   

I hate to use the old cliché, “some of my best friends are black (or gay)”, but it is true.  I have friends and relatives that are.  I love them, and enjoy their company.  I really, really try not to judge.

Where you and I will part ways is that is I see no indication of this lifestyle condoned or uplifted in the Bible.  All of the references are negative.  Having said that, Christ’s blood was shed for all of us, and he desires all of us to have a right relationship with him. 

Can we agree to disagree?  Declare a truce? 
Logged
Captain Bible
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 83



« Reply #42 on: March 12, 2011, 08:04:53 am »



Truce, yes please.

Have you heard Zach Wahls?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSQQK2Vuf9Q&feature=related

What Do you think marriage is?


Logged

"When you divide the land by lot as an inheritance, you must set aside a donation to the Lord, a holy portion of the land, eight and one-third miles long and six and two-thirds miles wide. This entire tract of land will be holy." Ezekiel 45: 1
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #43 on: March 12, 2011, 08:47:00 am »

Good question, Captain. We know that marriage is a picture of Christ and His bride. To draw this back to a GC connection, it's one of the reasons that we were so troubled when MD told the 1,000+ gathered at an ECC all church event that "we were his bride" and then went on to say that we were meeting at the home of another man's bride (because we were renting the auditorium of another church). We know that Jesus has only one bride.

One thing that bothers me is how words get redefined. Marriage, traditionally has been defined as a union between a man and a woman. When we add other unions to the definition of marriage, the word becomes meaningless. For example, I saw a feature on the BBC about a woman who "married" the Eiffel Tower. This most definitely confuses the meaning of "marriage".

If asked, I would say that a union between a woman and an iron lattice tower in France is not a marriage. This does not mean that I hate this woman or wish her ill even though I may be bold in speaking out against the idea of calling her relationship with the French Icon a marriage.

That 19 year old obviously loves his moms. Most definitely a good thing. I think we have to be careful about using personal experience to redefine terms. My nephew has experience that would counter this young mans as he gives his testimony at Outpost meetings. Definitely everyone needs to be treated with love and respect.

Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
Innerlight
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136



« Reply #44 on: March 12, 2011, 12:24:30 pm »

Truce declared.   Smiley
Logged
Innerlight
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136



« Reply #45 on: March 12, 2011, 12:43:05 pm »

As I mentioned before, I am close to people in GCC, but personally I dont attend.  having said that, I identify with many of the people on this site, as I went through a smilar experience in my denomination, and can "feel the pain".

From time to time I will listen to Brent Knox or Mark darling via their websites, and am amazed at what I hear, and what passes for teaching.  Recently I listened to Knox discuss marriage and sex (they seem to talk about this a lot in GCC). 

The teaching began with an article from the Mpls. paper about a priest who was in trouble for having an affair with a church member, and that at the end of the day the priest said it was consentual.  The point was that this wouldn't happen at a GCC church.  I'm guessing as I'm still not sure what the point was.

This was followed by a testimony from a member who was very sexually active, and met a girl, but finally declined the temptation, as he remembered some Bible verses from his youth.  OK, but I could never tell a story like that in front of my family and fellow church members.  The point:  Sex is everywhere! 

Third, was Knox subjecting himself to watching "Everyone Loves Raymond", and that their dysfunctional marriage is due in part because Ray is always begging for sex, and she doesn't "put out" in the youth vernacular.  Point:  I guess wives should be ready at all times.

So this is what passes for teaching?Huh

The world is in flames, and this is what passes for edification, building up and encouragement?   
Logged
Captain Bible
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 83



« Reply #46 on: March 12, 2011, 12:44:08 pm »

Good question, Captain. We know that marriage is a picture of Christ and His bride. To draw this back to a GC connection, it's one of the reasons that we were so troubled when MD told the 1,000+ gathered at an ECC all church event that "we were his bride" and then went on to say that we were meeting at the home of another man's bride (because we were renting the auditorium of another church). We know that Jesus has only one bride.


So what does the relationship between Christ and his bride really look like?

Am I as a man a bride?  

If marriage is a picture of Christ and the church, what does marriage mean?

Logged

"When you divide the land by lot as an inheritance, you must set aside a donation to the Lord, a holy portion of the land, eight and one-third miles long and six and two-thirds miles wide. This entire tract of land will be holy." Ezekiel 45: 1
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #47 on: March 12, 2011, 01:03:11 pm »

The concept of Christ the groom and the Church the bride is a metaphor.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
Captain Bible
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 83



« Reply #48 on: March 12, 2011, 01:18:16 pm »

I agree, I just don't understand it.
Logged

"When you divide the land by lot as an inheritance, you must set aside a donation to the Lord, a holy portion of the land, eight and one-third miles long and six and two-thirds miles wide. This entire tract of land will be holy." Ezekiel 45: 1
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #49 on: March 13, 2011, 10:53:51 am »

Quote from: Innerlight
The teaching began with an article from the Mpls. paper about a priest who was in trouble for having an affair with a church member, and that at the end of the day the priest said it was consensual.  The point was that this wouldn't happen at a GCC church.  I'm guessing as I'm still not sure what the point was.
That is interesting. At our last meeting with two pastors, the meeting where MD asked us to leave rather than stay and cause trouble by trying to change things, I gave MD a final warning. I told him a story about a Christian sect in Japan that my nephew Jon was working with. The pastor had been molesting the teenage girls in the church. He was caught, it was a national scandal in Japan, and my nephew who works with helping people get out of cults (and has visited Wellspring) was invited in to help the people restructure the church. Ironically, the church was divided over elders who were still loyal (even after knowing what the pastor did) to the pastor and elders who felt he should be removed. The man ended up in jail and I'm not sure what happened to the church.

Anyway, I mentioned this situation to MD and looked him in the eye and said, "I don't know if you are aware of this or not, but elders are fiercely loyal to each other. Even to the point where an elder could have had an affair and the congregation would not know about it because the other elders would cover for him." MD, a man on the national board of GCC, replied, "I'm sure it's happened." I've told this story several times on this forum, but want to keep repeating it for people who may not have read it. The proper response to my comment would have been, "That is terrible. I appreciate loyalty, but not when it is used to cover up sin." For a leader to suggest cover-ups of major moral failures had happened was astonishing. It made leaving a little bit easier.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1053



« Reply #50 on: March 15, 2011, 12:19:21 pm »

So what does the relationship between Christ and his bride really look like?

Am I as a man a bride?  
No, you are not a bride, nor am I. There is nothing in Scripture that speaks of individuals as brides of Christ. The church as a whole is the bride of Christ. At least, that's my understanding of it.
Logged
EverAStudent
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 716



WWW
« Reply #51 on: March 15, 2011, 02:10:03 pm »

Huldah, I liked your answer.  You also forced me to consider what the metaphor of a bride and groom means in this case.  Here is what my preliminary thoughts came up with:

  • the "marriage" is a coming together of the head (Christ) and the one who is subject to the leader (the church)
  • the church must leave its "home" and all of its other love interests behind to cling to one God
  • it is based on mutual love
  • it is permanent
  • it is cause for celebration
  • Christ will come for us at an hour of His choosing to bring us to our new home--a wedding procession

Unlike human marriage it is non-romantic and without sex or gender, per Christ's description of life in the resurrection.
Logged
MidnightRider
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302



« Reply #52 on: March 16, 2011, 02:50:06 pm »

...
He got away with it because the law had not been written yet, in Davids time. Leviticus was written latter during the exile to Babylon. At least as I have understood things most of the Torah came latter on. 
...

If there was no law against adultery, then David's conversation with Nathan in 2 Samuel 12 would have been different.

The idea that Leviticus was written during the exile is one of those liberal theories that is based on a theory of history rather than solid evidence. It is hard to reconcile with Christianity. The book certainly presents itself as a record of laws given by God to Moses. If it was written centuries later, it would be a work of fiction.

John 5:46-47
"For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me.  But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?"

Logged
Innerlight
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136



« Reply #53 on: March 16, 2011, 06:24:21 pm »

well he would've certainly violated two of the ten commandments...just sayin!
Logged
EverAStudent
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 716



WWW
« Reply #54 on: March 16, 2011, 10:19:07 pm »

If the entire Law as only written during the Babylonian exite, it makes a thinking person wonder why the Jews would ever have wanted to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem.  All those exiles would have been eyewitnesses, watching those writers of fiction cobble together bogus accounts of their alleged history, laugh themselves silly that these "modern" fabrications were being passed off as their ancient Scriptures, and returned to their idol worship since their own religion was now based on works of fiction. 

Sigh...all those eyewitnesses would have known that Moses never wrote the Pentateuch, they would have told their children about the fraud, and the religion would have come to and end right there. 

Consider Christianity, from its very beginning people have been more than willing to cast doubt on questionable documents that allege to be New Testament Scripture...now imagine what they would have done if a crowd of eyewitnesses had come forward in 99 AD to declare, "Nope, all that New Testament gospel stuff was all written by the Coptics just a decade ago, they made it all up."  The conspiracy would never have worked.  Conspiracies rarely stay hidden forever.
Logged
G_Prince
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417



« Reply #55 on: March 17, 2011, 09:38:16 pm »

So if we can get back on point here...does GCx treat homosexuality differantly or is it pretty much lock step with other conservative churches?  My opinion is the latter. I think they sincerely want to help homosexuals (just like they want to "help" Mormans or liberals) but like most churches, they are clueless about homosexuality and don't know were to start. They can't cure them and they can't incorporate them so they give up on the whole idea. 
Logged

Here's an easy way to find out if you're in a cult. If you find yourself asking the question, "am I in a cult?" the answer is yes. -Stephen Colbert
EverAStudent
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 716



WWW
« Reply #56 on: March 18, 2011, 06:42:17 am »

G-Prince, I'll crawl out onto the proverbial branch and jump and down a bit:

Yes, I think GC is a bit more unhelpful with homosexuals than most other evangelical churches.  Since GC is more judgmental toward the average believer in Christ in general and chases out of the church more Christians for "no good reason" than any other denomination I know, there can be no doubt they are less tolerant and less respectful toward the seeker who is gay. 

How many people on this forum were frozen out just for asking a theological question?  How many more were put on the shelf for not dedicating sufficient time to their voluminous programs?  How many were judged rebellious because they disagreed with an elder about a sermon? 

In most evangelical churches I have attended a gay seeker will find a receptive audience if they want to talk to the leadership about their lifestyle.  No one would freeze them out.  Many even offer counseling for this specific situation.  Of course, once they join the church membership formally, they will be expected to behave in a Christian manner, and that would preclude overt unrepentant homosexuality, just as it precludes obvious and unrepentant heterosexual fornication.  There is just no getting around the biblical requirement we give up defending and promoting our blatant sins when we come to Christ and join a Christian fellowship.
Logged
LucyB
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 74



« Reply #57 on: March 21, 2011, 07:38:49 am »

like most churches, they are clueless about homosexuality and don't know were to start. They can't cure them and they can't incorporate them so they give up on the whole idea.  

This is so true. Marriage is not just about sex; it is about love and partnership. Zach Wahls' moms are life partners who love each other and are a family with children (and probably grandchildren in the future). One of them is in a wheelchair. They are who they are. Sex is not the biggest issue in their lives. When they come to faith, they have no church to welcome them, because the church is so hung up on homosexuality--which is a non-issue to them. To them, it's like being left-handed. They don't perceive it to be a sin. Jesus said to love the Lord with all our hearts, souls, minds and strength, and to love our neighbors as ourselves. He said that on these two commands hang all the law and the prophet. When the rules of the church require someone to do something unloving and even treacherous to our families, there is something seriously wrong with the church. Christians need to repent of their OWN sins.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2011, 07:41:59 am by LucyB » Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #58 on: March 21, 2011, 08:59:33 am »

I believe that the Bible is clear about homosexuality being a sin. So, I want to put that on the table first.

None of us can argue with Zach's experience with his moms. I'm sure he loves them and they love him. They all sound like very caring people. The point isn't to judge their character or say they are bad or uncaring people. I could refer you to many who have gone the homosexual road, with regret have come to understand it is a sin, and have repented and moved on. Their experience is the opposite of Zach's. In fact, I believe my nephew gave the "counter" to Zach's position at a recent convention of the Presbyterian church.

Zach's moms' sin is no different than any other. Greed, lust, adultery, covetousness, lying. However, the difference that I see is that most people don't embrace their sin. They admit their struggle and ask God for help. I believe there is a difference between struggling with a sin and giving in to the sin and embracing it as though it were not a sin.

No matter what, all people should be treated with love and kindness.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
EverAStudent
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 716



WWW
« Reply #59 on: March 21, 2011, 01:14:28 pm »

Linda, I agree with your post. 

It seems this thread has come full circle to where it started.  It started with a rather detailed investigation as to whether the Bible really refers to homosexuality as a sin.  Based on the posts I have reviewed there was very little persuasive evidence presented to say that the Bible embraces a homosexual lifestyle as "righteous" while there was a significant body of evidence to show that God has always classified homosexuality as a sin. 

Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1