Sexual Ethics and the Pro-LGBTQ Argument within The United Methodist Church

by

by

Comments (3)

Comment Feed

Re: There's a lot of confusion

Like most of those in "left-wing circles", Mr. Shuler offers not one word of Biblical support for his diatribe - which is not unusual, because he can't... there is no Biblical support for such a view.

Speaking for "right-wing circles", I couldn't care less about what consenting adults do behind closed doors. It doesn't frighten me in any way. What I do care about is the Word of God that expressly and specifically condemns acts of homosexuality as sinful and those who wish to ignore it and in fact, promote it, as does Mr. Shuler. You can make all the emotional human pleas you wish, but it doesn't change the fact that in the eyes of God, these things are sinful.

The church, Methodist or otherwise, is at a precipice: Are we going to continue, as a church, to bring the ways of God into the world, or are we now going to take the ways of the world and bring them into God's church? Some have already fallen off the edge. There is no confusion.

Stephen Kidd more than 4 years ago

There's a lot of confusion...

...in right-wing circles about human sexuality. The bulk of the true believers has no idea what LGBTs do in bed and it frightens them. They grew up believing people should have sex about twelve times in their lives and only for the purpose of procreation with the lights off or, worse, claim to have been libertine in youth and converted to puritanism after seeing the light. How convenient. These sorts of ridiculous arguments, like the bathroom laws in North Carolina and Mississippi, just show how desperate these forces of repression are. It's the church equivalent of the Filipino military's thirty year war with a Japanese Lieutenant who refused to surrender. He sniped at them from the jungles and eluded his captors from 1945 to 1975. His name was Hiroo Onoda and his futile fight was one of the many oddities of the mid-1970s. Japan had moved on and was embarrassed by it. So will the church in 30 years.

George Nixon Shuler more than 4 years ago

Re: Sexual Ethics and the Pro-LGBTQ Argument within The UMC

I'll ask Mr. Dalton the same I ask everyone in favor of same-sex marriage (SSM): Chapter and verse, please. I can give a half dozen SPECIFIC passages in both Old and New Testament that say “no”. SSM supporters can give zero that say “yes” or even “maybe”. If you can twist and contort the Bible to make it say SSM is acceptable, then you can make it say that ANYTHING is acceptable.

It's disheartening to see a man like Mr. Dalton, who has supposedly pledged his life to leading others in the teachings of God, ignore the obvious. We have enough secular humanists in the world. We don't need them standing behind a pulpit of the UMC.

If someone in our congregation had a public and acknowledged alcohol or drug abuse problem, would we try and help them? If someone had a known gambling problem? If a man is known to abuse this wife or children, would we as Christians try to help that man? I hope the answer is "yes" because these people are publicly mired in sin and are leading a life that is destructive to themselves and others.

Acts of homosexuality are sins - no better or worse in the eyes of God than the abuse of people or substances - yet instead of helping homosexuals with their sinful issues, we have those who believe this is not a sin, or choose to ignore these sins.

We expect the drunk to sober up, the druggie to get clean and the wife or child beater to stop by modifying their sinful behavior. Yet if someone is an admitted homosexual, are we not as Christian’s doing them a disservice by not expecting modification of their sinful behavior?

The issue is that Christians, including Mr. Dalton, have been made to feel guilty by secular elements of society and to believe there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, which I find baffling since they by-in-large-loath the Christian community. I feel no shame siding with the Word of God and not the view of the world. Mr. Dalton obviously does not.

I’ve been at church discussions where people say, “Why do we like to single out this sin so much more than any other?” According to the Bible, acts of homosexuality are indeed a sin, so if that is the argument, then I drop the microphone and walk off stage. It’s sinful – end of story. We should strive to shun all sin.

Jesus Himself in John 8 says to “Go and sin no more.” Mr. Dalton believes that some sins are Ok and that the UMC should actually endorse this particular sin.

So apparently Jesus was wrong. He has allowed specific references to acts of homosexuality as being sinful to occur multiple times in both halves of the Bible. That then means the Bible is imperfect and that God Himself is imperfect. Mr. Dalton can believe that if he chooses, but he should not be standing behind a pulpit of UM or any other church. If God’s not perfect, then what’s the point, really? I have no interest believing in or worshiping an imperfect God.

I choose to stand by the Word of a perfect God. I hope the UMC Conference has sense enough to do the same.

Stephen Kidd more than 4 years ago