Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: rhema
because the church's governing body had voted to let gay men and lesbians serve as pastors.

Sure. Put flaming homosexuals in charge of watching over the purity of the flock. That ought to work out well - NOT.
They call this a church? What do they use as a Baptismal pool? A Bath house?

2 posted on 10/01/2009 7:07:32 AM PDT by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: concerned about politics
Even before the current ELCA nose-thumbing at the Bible, the groundwork for equivocation and accommodation to the world had been laid:

Human Sexuality and Sexual Behavior
A Social Statement of the American Lutheran Church, a predecessor church body of the ELCA (1980)

[the ELCA's accompanying we-reserve-the-right-to-be-apostate clause]
Predecessor Church Body Document Disclaimer
Please note: this document is one which was voted on by a church body which preceded the founding of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). Any such statement has the status of a “historical document.” These documents may guide the ELCA and inform the work of the Department for Studies, and act as policy when sufficient agreement exists and the ELCA has not adopted another statement on the same subject. However, social statements of predecessor church bodies do not constitute ELCA policy, as they have not been voted on by a Churchwide Assembly. When quoting or referring to these documents, please take care to make the non-binding nature of this relationship clear.

2. This church regards the practice of homosexual erotic behavior as contrary to God's intent for his children. It rejects the contention that homosexual behavior is simply another form of sexual behavior equally valid with the dominant male/female pattern.

3. We have reviewed the challenges to the traditional interpretations of those scripture passages that appear to proscribe homosexual behavior. We are not convinced by the evidence presented. Among passages cited as requiring interpretations different from the traditional interpretation are Genesis 18:l6—l9:29; Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13; Romans 1:24-32; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy 1:10. While we see no scriptural rationale for revising the church's traditional teaching that homosexual erotic behavior violates God's intent, we nonetheless remain open to the possibility of new biblical and theological insights.

4 posted on 10/01/2009 7:26:13 AM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson