Civil Religious Discussions : all things Christianity II

[chipbennett]

Have to disagree. No where can you show that Jesus approved their behavior. It never says that.

Nor did I say that, so why would I attempt to show scripture saying something that I never claimed? In fact, Jesus always called out sinful behavior.

All have to around “sinners”. Back then it was the Paharisse that would not be anywhere near them in the self righteousness.

Indeed. Because they claimed that eating with such sinners constituted condoning/approving/associating with their sin. Sort of like saying that attending a wedding constitutes condoning/approving/associating with the sin of the celebrants.

Jesus talked and helped sinners, he did not approve nor did he go where they were partaking in the very act of prostitution.

Does prostitution take place at a wedding? Do sexual acts of any kind take place at a wedding?

They knew this, and invited him because they wanted to hear from Him.

Do we not want our brothers and sisters to hear us and our views? To be able to see Christ in and through us?

They were actively sinning and getting married to same sex couples. There was no partaking on His part in their evil deeds. They did not ask Him to come watch while they fornicated in front of him. They wanted to hear him and his views.

Nor are a homosexual couple "fornicating" in front of their wedding guests. Nor are you participating in their acts of fornication when attending a wedding. (Unless y'all have some way more wild weddings that I've ever been to.)

 

[DragonGunner]

Where is this described/clarified in scripture? Absent doctrine, it remains a matter of conscience. (And I readily accept that I may be in the minority with respect to conscience on this particular matter. So was Paul, in the acceptability of eating food sacrificed to idols.)


Divorce is sin, but it is no different from any other sin, so it does not uniquely condemn to hell.

The Bible refers to limited acceptability for divorce. The two primary ones are adultery and an unbelieving spouse who leaves. Where would domestic violence fit in here? Is that covered under the Mosaic certificate of divorce?

Don’t know any scriptures on wife beatings. But what would you say is worse, cheating or being beat to death? Which is worse, abandonment or being beat to death? I would say abandonment has already takin place when the beatings started. I guess someone could say get a gun and kill him in self defense then you’re free to marry again according to scripture. Not saying that’s you.

 

[DragonGunner]

Nor did I say that, so why would I attempt to show scripture saying something that I never claimed? In fact, Jesus always called out sinful behavior.


Indeed. Because they claimed that eating with such sinners constituted condoning/approving/associating with their sin. Sort of like saying that attending a wedding constitutes condoning/approving/associating with the sin of the celebrants.


Does prostitution take place at a wedding? Do sexual acts of any kind take place at a wedding?


Do we not want our brothers and sisters to hear us and our views? To be able to see Christ in and through us?


Nor are a homosexual couple "fornicating" in front of their wedding guests. Nor are you participating in their acts of fornication when attending a wedding. (Unless y'all have some way more wild weddings that I've ever been to.)

The wedding in itself is the act of sin. We will have to agree to disagree with each other. I have read your posts but can’t find any ground to agree. We are on separate pages. But that’s not wrong, I respect your views and willing to share.

 

[DadSmith]

You are describing what is true for your conscience. You are not describing anything that has specific, doctrinal guidance.

Again: to the Pharisees of His day, the very act of Jesus eating with tax collectors and sinners (prostitutes) similarly constituted His "stamp of approval" on their behaviors/actions/lifestyles. And yet, Jesus ate with them.

He did not participate in their wrong doing like going to a same-sex wedding.

Going to a same-sex marriage is to approve of the homosexual lifestyle, which the Bible clearly and consistently labels as sinful.

Romans 1:28-32
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
Test all things; hold fast what is good.
Abstain from every form of evil.

 

[blain]

I wouldn't tell you that. I'd follow Paul's advice/approach in I Cor. 8.

It was Paul's writing about food offered to idols, that lit up the bulb of Grace over my head.
It turned my black & white, legalistic belief on its head. Of course there is nuance in what I learned, I'm not a doctrine builder.
But my eyes were opened to a fresh realm of Grace, that I'd never experienced before.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

You are describing what is true for your conscience. You are not describing anything that has specific, doctrinal guidance.

Would you attend a pride parade to support a friend? Or a drag show?

 

[Cameramonkey]

Where is this described/clarified in scripture? Absent doctrine, it remains a matter of conscience. (And I readily accept that I may be in the minority with respect to conscience on this particular matter. So was Paul, in the acceptability of eating food sacrificed to idols.)

Its societal. You are invited to witness and celebrate the marriage. Its often explicitly stated in the invite itself, but not always. Either way that is what society expects.

And not EVERYTHING is explicitly in scripture by name.

 

[DragonGunner]

Matthew 19:9​

“And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.”

I will step out and give a opinion on this, that I never never heard from any church or Pastor. Its just from my own personal study so take it with a grain of salt.

"Put away" many believe is divorce. However, this may not be the case so clearly. In the old, men were marrying more than one wife, often many. It is possible these men weren't divorcing their wives. But simply putting them away and marrying another, thus having 2 wives, 3 wives....without ever divorcing them. Since there was no divorce another man couldn't legally marry them nor could that woman be married seeing she was never given a divorce.

That may be why in other scriptures it says, "A elder must be the husband of one wife..." You could not be one that had multiple wives. There are many cases in the Bible where men had multiple wives.

We do not think nor believe once a divorce takes place and that person marries again, that we say they now have two spouses. Not very long ago we had a religious sect practicing having multiple wives. In any case I believe Paul using wisdom saw that adultery could indeed kill the marriage, among others things also.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Interesting point DG.

 

[foszoe]

And that's why, if by attending such a ceremony, your conscience views such attendance as participating in the union itself, you should absolutely follow your conscience.

For me, I wouldn't view attendance as participating in (or endorsing) the union.

This is rather perfectly analogous to Paul's discussion of eating food sacrificed to idols.

Would the answer/reasoning change if we're invited to a bachelor's party where you knew strippers had been hired?

No I am not trying to find the gaps or draw an equivalency.

I don't know you from Adam, so these are questions are intended to be exploratory not accusatory.

A recurring theme over time is relying on one's conscience to inform one's decisions.

How is one's conscience informed?

Can nonessential become essentials over time or are essentials absolute and nonessentials relative?

How many essentials are there?

In the event of a disagreement over essentials, if each party believes their conscience is clear are all parties correct inasmuch as they can be at that moment in time?

 

[foszoe]

Er, you're skipping over this part:

"Fornication" translates as "sexual immorality".

Scripturally, sexual immorality involves some of overt physical sexual act. The underlying Greek is porniea. In modern parlance, fornication seems a close equivalent in English especially if one accepts a broadened definition of sexual immorality beyond acts into thoughts.

 

[foszoe]

So you are saying if a husband beats his wife, she has a choice of 50 years of beatings or hell. doesnt sound very Christ like to me.

How did you arrive at this dichotomy leaving no other understanding possible? Are you saying adultery is an unforgivable sin?

 

[chipbennett]

Don’t know any scriptures on wife beatings. But what would you say is worse, cheating or being beat to death? Which is worse, abandonment or being beat to death? I would say abandonment has already takin place when the beatings started. I guess someone could say get a gun and kill him in self defense then you’re free to marry again according to scripture. Not saying that’s you.

All fair points, that I agree with, which is why I merely attempted to reference what scripture explicitly says on the matter of divorce. A physically abusive husband violates the covenant and institution of marriage at its most foundational and symbolic level, and violates scriptural commands regarding how the husband must treat his wife.

 

[chipbennett]

The wedding in itself is the act of sin. We will have to agree to disagree with each other. I have read your posts but can’t find any ground to agree. We are on separate pages. But that’s not wrong, I respect your views and willing to share.

I had further thoughts about this last night. I partially agree: but from the perspective of the church and the officiant. No church should perform such a wedding, and any officiant is endorsing/condoning/approving/joining in the union.

Beyond that: I understand that we must agree to disagree. It is why I have been very cautious to say that one must follow their conscience, and not attend if such attendance violates their conscience.

 

[chipbennett]

Would you attend a pride parade to support a friend? Or a drag show?

I would potentially do either. I have attended drag shows. I have ministered to the lost in the red light district in Manchester, UK - full of this very segment of society. They are often lost, and hurt, and find family and intimacy and connection in the lifestyle, because they have not found it in the church. Many in this community/lifestyle have been shunned by the church. And that is to our, not their, shame.

"Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings." (I Corinthians 9:19-23)

 

[chipbennett]

Its societal. You are invited to witness and celebrate the marriage. Its often explicitly stated in the invite itself, but not always. Either way that is what society expects.

And not EVERYTHING is explicitly in scripture by name.

Indeed. And where scripture is silent, the matter becomes one of conscience.

In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.

 

[chipbennett]

Would the answer/reasoning change if we're invited to a bachelor's party where you knew strippers had been hired?

Well, certainly. I would be directly participating in a sinful act.

No I am not trying to find the gaps or draw an equivalency.

I don't know you from Adam, so these are questions are intended to be exploratory not accusatory.

A recurring theme over time is relying on one's conscience to inform one's decisions.

How is one's conscience informed?

Ideally, through study of the Word and the counsel of the Holy Spirit, combined with trustworthy human counsel.

Can nonessential become essentials over time or are essentials absolute and nonessentials relative?

I believe that essentials are absolute. What are the precise requirements for salvation? Nothing more, nothing less.

How many essentials are there?

In the event of a disagreement over essentials, if each party believes their conscience is clear are all parties correct inasmuch as they can be at that moment in time?

My view on "essentials":

"For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified." (I Corinthians 2:2). One might expound a bit more on "essentials" following the "Romans Road" set of scriptures: we have all sinned, the cost of our sin is spiritual death, God came to earth as Jesus and died to atone for our sin, Jesus rose from the dead to conquer spiritual death, our salvation rests in believing, confessing, and being baptized in the name of Jesus as our Lord and Savior.

And I would suggest that all of I Corinthians 2 speaks directly to these questions.

 

[HoughMade]

We do not think nor believe once a divorce takes place and that person marries again, that we say they now have two spouses.

Not if the divorce fits the exception, but other than that, it doesn't mean what we think, or say, is correct.

We don't take marriage seriously enough.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Not if the divorce fits the exception, but other than that, it doesn't mean what we think, or say, is correct.

We don't take marriage seriously enough.

No-fault divorce is a national disaster.

 

[DragonGunner]

Not if the divorce fits the exception, but other than that, it doesn't mean what we think, or say, is correct.

We don't take marriage seriously enough.

Thats for sure...you can stay married all your life and still be a adulterer at heart. Lusting, porn addict, filthy dreamers. I'm sometimes reminded by people, "You can look just don't touch." I say Jesus said, " if any man look at a woman and lust in his heart he has committed adultery already in his heart." I usually get a silent look.

Hebrews says marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled, but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

This may very well include those married for life to only one. Know a guy who told me he is always trying to cheat on his wife he has been married to all his life. I asked him, then why haven't you? He said because he hasn't found anyone who has wanted to.

I personally know a guy from long ago whose christian wife left him for a 50 year old married man, she was 20. Just went nuts, guy went through hell and broken. He was sad and mad, he felt he could divorce her, and was told by pastors it was OK. Then he thought what if it had been me? What f I was the one who went nuts and had left God and ran out doing this horrible thing.....what would he want her to do? Divorce him or fight for him to come back to God and the marriage? He decided he too was a sinner too, he learned forgiveness and fight and get her back. It was hell for 3 years for that poor soul.

Then by a miracle she walked into the church a changed person, found Christ and even more. She had divorced him but never remarried and he had been waiting not going on. They were remarried 2 weeks later. Sadly just a few short years later she did the exact same thing all over again and this time the marriage failed. He felt he had done all he could. She had problems that were never going to be resolved. And realized what Paul said on some of these matters.

He learned a lot during those times. He had asked God for so many years why he wasn't strong, why he couldn't stop loving, all those sad days while she was out having a blast and happy. Why he couldn't be a real man and just forget and go on and find another woman and get over it like everyone else he knew. But God never answered and after years he quit asking.

Then many years later while driving the Spirit asked if he remembered all those prayers......then he remembered and said "yes, but I never got a answer." Spirit said, "you couldn't go on for so long and hurt so bad because thats your testimony that you loved. The people that just go on and don't care, that don't really hurt and just shake it off like its nothing are the ones that never loved, thats their testimony, that they never really loved."

Things after decades got better for that guy I know. He has been happily married for 12 years to a wife that went through so much of the same thing he did. They are blessed by God indeed. He still remembers decades ago going through that one divorce, seeing a picture on a wall in a office one day. "Oh great spirit in the sky, let me not judge my brother until I have walked a mile in his moccasins." I hope that guy won't be judged too harshly by the brotherhood.