via Telling Secrets: What would YOU do?
Really? Honestly? How depraved can you get? First, Christ is speaking about Eunuchs in two of those passages – men who, well, were men once, or who had become celibate by choice. The Lord was not talking about gay men, but men under the control of a king or the King. The issue with Ruth and Naomi misses the point of the entire story of Ruth – who married two men for love. Ruth was a part of Naomi’s family, and vowed not to leave her. That is a love that is greater than mere loyalty or lust. And then there is the time honored tradition of using David to promote just about any sin that one can imagine. Just read this blog where David is used to defend any number of false prophets and sinners. Instead of seeing love as something that can be pure and deep between those that have a common bond, many see only sexual suggestions.
It is a shame that so many out there, especially those claiming Christ, would give any credence to this, well, garbage, but not do they, but they make it to a doctrine, teaching it rather than the love of Christ.
To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled.
(Titus 1:15 NKJV)
I guess it wasn’t on my calender, but the author reminds us,
Today just happens to be Transgender Remembrance Day. You can find more information here.
If only it ended there…
Her occasion of writing is:
I have posted below my comments to a brother clergy who was about to have a couple from his congregation come visit him. Seems that this couple know a couple who have a young son. From the age of three, this young boy has identified as female.
The parents have supported that child in his gender identification, allowing him to wear feminine clothes and play with toys that are more typically embraced by the female gender of the species.
He’s now off to elementary school and his parents have instructed his teachers to do likewise, including a feminine version of his name. Just for sake of conversation, let’s say his name is ‘Paul’ and they’ve instructed the teachers to call him ‘Paula’.
Here’s the thing, instead of cheating this boy out of a normal life, here is a ‘pastor’ urging further deceptive and sinful behavior. Instead of trying to help this family through this crisis, she is encouraging them to accept this as normal. When will normality, real normality, cease to be normal?
I guess she is being asked for her advice:
Believe it or not, I’ve been in similar situations three times in the past 10 years. I have one kid in my congregation I’ve been watching for the past 6 years and I have no doubt that we’re headed into “crisis” soon. He’s now 10 and, well, I could be wrong, but I strongly suspect he has Klinefelter Syndrome – “genetically female, pragmatically male”. (Ms. Conroy concurs, which is very important, as you know.)
……
So, for what it’s worth, here’s my best shot – not as a Transgender person but as a pastor – AND not knowing important particulars of your situation (neither, apparently, do you).
Shes gone on to offer different perspectives – physical, physiological, etc…
There’s lots. lots more to this, including all the components of the term ‘Transgender’, but I’ll stop here. Don’t hesitate to call me if you need to talk this through.
God has called you to do a mighty work of justice and peace with this family. I know you will be as much of a blessing to them as you are to us all.
…….
Maybe that’s why the conservatives are jumping ship.
Conservatives who have abandoned the U.S. Episcopal Church by the thousands in recent years are trying to form a separate-but-equal church, a move that could leave two branches of Anglicanism on American soil.
“I have tried to see if we can create a safe haven (for traditional views) within the Episcopal Church, but failed,” said Bishop Martyn Minns, a leader of the conservatives.
He is helping write a constitution for a new church, to be unveiled December 3, in an effort to be recognized as a new entity within the worldwide Anglican Communion.
Long-time divisions over scriptural interpretation and gay rights had already fragmented the 2.1-million-member Episcopal Church by 2003 when it consecrated Gene Robinson of New Hampshire as the first bishop known to be in an openly gay relationship in more than four centuries of Anglican church history.
That act further roiled the U.S. church and the 77-million-member Anglican Communion of which the Episcopal Church is the U.S. presence.
In recent months four dioceses out of 110 have split from the church in California, Pennsylvania, Texas and Illinois. The church says that fewer than 100 out of 7,100 congregations had either left
One final question….if everything that we do and feel is okay and right, then what exactly is the sins that Christ came to save us from?
Joel Landon Watts is a Masters of Theological Studies student with a focus in Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark. His interests include exploring the role of mimesis in human civilization, specifically in the study of religion and media, as well as science fiction and the way in which it has allowed mythology to be explored in light of scientific ideals of the past century. Currently, he is a TA for Old Testament at United Theological Seminary under Dr. Vivian Johnson, Associate Professor of Old Testament. His first book, Rhetorical Strategies of the Evangelist: Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark, is expected to be published by Wipf and Stock early next year. He is currently co-editing a book on moving from Fear to Faith (Energion, 2013).
of course calvin was right and it was augustine long before him who asserted total depravity. and augustine was followed by all who came after him- especially the Reformers. it’s only in our ‘postmodern’ arrogance that we have turned our backs on the truth.
of course calvin was right and it was augustine long before him who asserted total depravity. and augustine was followed by all who came after him- especially the Reformers. it’s only in our ‘postmodern’ arrogance that we have turned our backs on the truth.
I have barely scratched the surface of Augustine, finding him truer than modern ‘theologians’. There is something to be said for those that recognize that we are not God, nor godly, and that the morality and holiness of God is not issued by a democracy.
I have barely scratched the surface of Augustine, finding him truer than modern ‘theologians’. There is something to be said for those that recognize that we are not God, nor godly, and that the morality and holiness of God is not issued by a democracy.
Sigh … Yes, Ruth loved her mother-in-law. Only a serious pervert would think that that means anything homosexual.
David loved Jonathan, too.
It’s really sad that these people don’t have any close relationships like these, so that maybe they’d understand what it means to love your dearest friends and your family members.
Sigh … Yes, Ruth loved her mother-in-law. Only a serious pervert would think that that means anything homosexual.
David loved Jonathan, too.
It’s really sad that these people don’t have any close relationships like these, so that maybe they’d understand what it means to love your dearest friends and your family members.
Wickle, I woke up this morning to see your comment was moderated – not my idea. WordPress.
Wickle, I woke up this morning to see your comment was moderated – not my idea. WordPress.
I think when you read 1 Samuel, the story of David and Jonathan’s love is quite clear. That you confuse being gay with a sex act is understandable. I assume you aren’t gay, but perhaps you can understand that if a man marries a woman, and has children with her, despite that it’s all an act, a sham marriage, because he lives in a society that is fiercely intolerant and abusive of lesbians and gays, that does not make him heterosexual. If sex equals love, then does that exclude all of those, who by age or handicap, as being unable to love because they are unable to perform a physical act?
There are all kinds of love: love for your parents, love for your spouse, love of God, love for your country and planet, love for your enemies, and love for your friends. Two men can be in love and not have it be a “sexual” relationship. So, please, don’t get hung up on that when you read about Jonathan and David.
There are many mysteries that God continues to reveal to us, so before you defend what is “normal” please take into consideration that what we consider normal today wouldn’t have been imagined yesterday.
PS I does make me question the commitment of those who claim to believe in a literal bible when they stumble upon something that disturbs them and that they would rather view as an allegory. But sometimes, in the Bible, the sky is blue and not simply a metaphor.
I think when you read 1 Samuel, the story of David and Jonathan’s love is quite clear. That you confuse being gay with a sex act is understandable. I assume you aren’t gay, but perhaps you can understand that if a man marries a woman, and has children with her, despite that it’s all an act, a sham marriage, because he lives in a society that is fiercely intolerant and abusive of lesbians and gays, that does not make him heterosexual. If sex equals love, then does that exclude all of those, who by age or handicap, as being unable to love because they are unable to perform a physical act?
There are all kinds of love: love for your parents, love for your spouse, love of God, love for your country and planet, love for your enemies, and love for your friends. Two men can be in love and not have it be a “sexual” relationship. So, please, don’t get hung up on that when you read about Jonathan and David.
There are many mysteries that God continues to reveal to us, so before you defend what is “normal” please take into consideration that what we consider normal today wouldn’t have been imagined yesterday.
PS I does make me question the commitment of those who claim to believe in a literal bible when they stumble upon something that disturbs them and that they would rather view as an allegory. But sometimes, in the Bible, the sky is blue and not simply a metaphor.
I don’t see the love between David and Jonathan as a hidden love. I think of it this way – David had arranged marriages and was a prince, as was Jonathan. Most likely, they may have engaged in acts with concubines, but no matter, the love of David’s wife (wives) did not meet muster – nothing true and lasting.
I believe that men may love each other without any hint of a sexual desire or without being gay. Love does not require sexual desire (not sure if I said it that plain before).
Trust me, sometimes those that take the bible most literal will have the most metaphors.
I don’t see the love between David and Jonathan as a hidden love. I think of it this way – David had arranged marriages and was a prince, as was Jonathan. Most likely, they may have engaged in acts with concubines, but no matter, the love of David’s wife (wives) did not meet muster – nothing true and lasting.
I believe that men may love each other without any hint of a sexual desire or without being gay. Love does not require sexual desire (not sure if I said it that plain before).
Trust me, sometimes those that take the bible most literal will have the most metaphors.