Why does the Church not welcome the LGBT community?

[Guest shiloh357]

10 minutes ago, kwikphilly said:

Well,I don't accept their lifestyle & neither do you or most of us here(I would HOPE),,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,& the church should never shun a sinner,not talking about accepting their lifestyle nor being politically correct or complacent or tolerant,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,what do you suggest? Personally I don't ,make any excuses or bones about it,neither does the church I attend,,,,,,,,,,,,,,IT IS SIN,,,,,,,period!

   So,the LGBwhatever community is making a big deal about it,what?Here? Do you seuppoase the church(local bodies etc,,,) should refuse them?
 

I have pointed out on previous posts on this thread that they are not being shunned or mistreated by the church.   Their problem is that there are people like you and me out there who have not acquiesced to their demands that we accept their lifestyle.   THAT's why they play like they are poor persecuted victims.   The majority of the church is accepting of the gays into their folds and accepts them AS Christians which is problematic.   I have read statements by Lutherans, American Baptists, United Methodists, United Church of Christ, and even Catholic and Episcopals affirming that lifestyle.

But they make a big deal of their lifestyle to the point that they want in our churches.   So we gotta deal with it.

PS, I see that we cross posted!!  LOL   Nah, you're no dummy!

[kwikphilly]

Uh boy,,,,Shiloh,we keep posting at the same time,,,lol    I saw your post after I asked,,,,,oi vey!!!    I believe in ZERO tolerance,,,,, to me it would be the same as allowing a " st6oned" heroin addict be an elder or an usher,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the 2 are incompatible,,,,,,the lifestyle of continuing in sin is  not  Embracing Christianity,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,no way,it i0s unrepentant,,,,,

[enoob57]

3 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

Uh boy,,,,Shiloh,we keep posting at the same time,,,lol    I saw your post after I asked,,,,,oi vey!!!    I believe in ZERO tolerance,,,,, to me it would be the same as allowing a " st6oned" heroin addict be an elder or an usher,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the 2 are incompatible,,,,,,the lifestyle of continuing in sin is  not  Embracing Christianity,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,no way,it i0s unrepentant,,,,,

And all God's children says  

[The_Patriot21]

4 hours ago, Butero said:

The way the article is written, it comes across like a person can continue in this lifestyle and be in right relationship to God.  I don't believe that.  It is one thing to welcome sinners to attend church.  We should, but the idea is to make disciples, not to condone sin. 

well., with a cursorary look, I would agree with you, however if you read into the second reason, the author does indeed call homosexuality a sin. Though, honestly, im not entirely certain what his goal is....all 3 "reasons" look like the same reason re-worded. But maybe thats just me.

[Guest shiloh357]

When reading the second point/reason offered by the author, the author is having to reluctantly admit it is a sin, but argues that you should not tell anyone that it is a sin because that's "judgmental."   

The Gospel begins with the reality of sin.  Romans 3:1-10 is Paul's assessment of the world.  The "good news"  ironically begins with bad news.   The only way to bring people to good news is to show them their spiritual condition without Christ.   But the author here indicates that with homosexuals, we need to bypass that part because this will turn them away from Church and from Christ.

I would also point out that Jesus turned more people away than drew people.  At the end of his ministry, Jesus, though he had ministered to thousands, had only 11 disciples and a handful of followers outside the disciples.   Jesus lost hundreds of disciples and followers in John 6 alone.   He turned away 3 potential disciples in Luke 9.   He turned off the rich young ruler who was, by any external indicators, the ideal convert.   Jesus was not interested in numbers and Jesus also turned away most of the religious leaders at that time, as well.  Jesus, by modern church estimates, was a ministry failure.   He preached to thousands, but only had 11 disciples.  And that was after countless public miracles. Jesus said that to follow him meant that you had to deny yourself and take up a cross.  The cross, in those days, was an emblem of shame and contempt.   It meant the loss of all things.  Jesus said that follow him means you need to be willing to lose your friends, your family, your job, your reputation, etc.  Not exactly how they teach people to do evangelism these days.   Today, we are supposed to make converts at any cost and never say anything that would "turn someone away."   Yet, Jesus was doing everything opposite and antithetical to how we are taught to do evangelism today.

Now, we know that Jesus was NOT a ministry failure.   Obviously Jesus' ministry goes beyond His original earthly ministry and Jesus is still making disciples today.   The problem is that this article wants to make you feel guilty if gays don't come to your church and puts the blame on you for calling homosexuality a sin and not allowing gays to be comfortable in their sin. If you tell people the truth about sin and they are turned off, that is not a failure on your part.  That's the response of a hardened heart.  

This article seeks to guilt us into accepting homosexuality in our midst by arguing that if gay people are uncomfortable in your church it is because you are judgmental for pointing out that their lifestyle is sinful.   The author is exploiting the fact that today, we judge how successful a church is by how many people join on a regular basis.   We are totally caught up in the numbers game.   But the true indicator of success  isn't numbers.  It's how many disciples for Jesus that are produced.  

Churches that avoid uncomfortable conversations about sin are churches that grow and grow and grow, which churches that teach that things like homosexuality, transgender, etc are sinful, will not grow.   The more inclusive you are, the more your church will grow.   That's one reason that Joel Osteen has the largest church in the US.   He is soft on sin, VERY soft on sin.   You don't those numbers by being a church that focuses on doctrinal purity.    And people don't choose a church based on doctrine.  If they did, Joel Osteen and those like him would be selling shoes or working in a grocery store.

 

[The_Patriot21]

It was poorly written and not thought out real well...and I think the author knows it seeing as he hasn't bothered to stick around and defend his work.

[LadyKay]

My church has not shun anyone. They teach that homosexuality is a sin just as they teach that a man and women having sex outside of marriage is a sin. Telling someone that you think what they are doing is a sin is not shunning. Telling people they have to leave the church and come back when they are no longer sinning is. But for the most part my church does not pick a certain sin to preach against every Sunday. It more about teaching you  how to see the sin in your own life. Teaching you how you can know in your heart if there is sin that you need to come to come to Christ for. 

Everyone is also free to disagree with the pastor on anything he says. You will not be put out of the church or shun for disagreeing with the pastor.

 

 

[Steve_S]

I'd simply like to know where the overwhelming plethora of churches that spend at least 30 minutes of every sermon preaching against homosexuality are anyway. I have visited some incredibly conservative (think independent fundamental type) churches in the past, and even there never heard hours long rants against homosexuality from the pulpit. I have heard it mentioned, but I have heard a lot of other sins mentioned too. A lot of this is due to the fact that there is cultural pressure towards acceptance and members of the church push back against that. Also you have people blogging and writing articles on the internet that do seem incredibly hateful at times, but that doesn't seem to be representative of the true Christian church (totality of the body of Christ) at large, at least not in my experience.

A lot of it has to simply do with definitions. The cultural definition of the word tolerance now looks a lot more like the textbook definition of an amalgamation of the words acceptance, agreement, enthusiastic endorsement, and celebration. If you don't go all aboard for something, particularly if it's a liberal social and cultural idea, then you are being intolerant, bigoted, and hateful to today's standards. This is something that we, as a church, are going to have to come to terms with in the coming years. Theological liberalism has basically infiltrated and destroyed the old mainline denominations in the US and is now working on the ones that currently tilt more conservative, as well as many non-denominational individual congregations. This is a lot broader than the question of homosexuality in my mind. This is a systematic attempt at a broad spectrum change in hermeneutics from the seminary level all of the way down to the local bible study in your neighbor's basement. A lot of the perception that conservative evangelical congregations spend the majority of their time sitting around in a circle railing against homosexuality is, in my mind, at least partially, a straw man that is being built so that the entire paradigm of literal scriptural interpretation that is the bedrock of bible based Christianity can be ripped down from the inside.

[RustyAngeL]

18 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

I don't know Rusty,it is not any better or any worse than any other sin,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,????? Beats me & I also cannot imagine a church that  does not welcome sinners??????    That's pretty sad,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,                       With love-in Christ,Kwik

Our church welcomes all sinners, too.  I just think we have talked it to death.

[Steve_S]

2 hours ago, RustyAngeL said:

Our church welcomes all sinners, too.  I just think we have talked it to death.

I think it's accurate to just go ahead and assume that this is a topic that is not going to go away anytime soon, either on the forums, in chat, or in just every day life. There is a cultural shift that has taken place. Even if you go through all the members on worthy that have posted in threads or had discussions in chat about this in the past, every day new members join that may want to talk it through. We have to be prepared to engage people on topics such as this, because this is the sort of thing that affects people's every day lives. It's impossible to avoid it, basically, nor should we, I think, no matter how redundant it may get over time.