Landmark survey reveals in-depth beliefs, perceptions of Adventist members

[JoeMo]

Hey Club,

You never really answered my question; but thanks for the sermon. To repeat my question, if a person is attracted to someone of the same gender, but (by the grace of God) does not partake in gay behavior, is he/she still a sinner and ineligible for church membership?

If I am prone to telling "little white lies" to avoid uncomfortable situations, but refuse to lie, am I still a liar; and ineligible for church membership? If I occasionally have a beer, am I a raging alcoholic ineligible for church membership? If there was bacon grease in the green beans I ate at Golden Corral last night, am I an infidel ineligible for church membership? Let's say that I am not yet an SDA and practice these things prior to asking for baptism, do I need to get my act together before coming to Jesus?

[ClubV12]

We are dealing with "open sin" JoeMo, that means, by definition, it is a clear violation of Church law. Such violations could result in "censure", loss of office or up to disfellowship.

What you think and what you are able to hide from others is between you and God, the Church will not, in fact, by Church law, CANNOT interfere! There are about a dozen specific reasons one could be disfellowshipped. There are a larger number of reasons one could be "censured", most of the reasons are common sense violations. If you grab the butt of the Sabbath School teacher, assuming your not facing legal or criminal action as a result, expect to be "censured" by the Church. While under "censure" one cannot transfer their membership to a different Church until the censure has been lifted.

I don't know why you have such a problem understanding this. If you are in a gay relationship, not hiding it, open with it, THAT will subject you to the consequences of Church law. This is NOT complicated!

There are other requirements for Baptism, if you don't meet the requirements, you won't be baptized.

[JoeMo]

Quote:

I don't know why you have such a problem understanding this. If you are in a gay relationship, not hiding it, open with it, THAT will subject you to the consequences of Church law. This is NOT complicated!

You still don't get my question. If a person has gay leanings, but refuses to give in to them because he/she is convicted that it is against the law of God, is he/she still considered gay and ineligible to join the church? I agree that if they are in an openly gay relationship and flaunting it to the church and the world, the "rules" prohibit that person from being a member if good standing.

BTW ( you won't like this), I think people are born gay - it is not simply a conscious moral or sexual choice. If that is true, outside of a miracle, how does that person change their inclinations (like the leopard changing his spots)?

[kailooa]

Gerry Cabalo, to answer your question about 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, did you know that the very concept of homosexuality did not exist in Biblical times? Nor was there a word for a homosexual person. So the very fact that the word homosexual appears in the modern text should spark some curiosity about that. The word itself didn't appear in the Bible until 1946.

Before 1946, the King James version of that text read “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Effeminate is translated from the Greek word "malakos" which means, literally, soft, flexible, delicate, often used in description of luxurious clothing. Its figurative meanings included weak, un-manly, not a strong warrior, coward, not in possession of the superior qualities of men/inferior like a woman, as well as the young call-boys in Greek society and the passive partner in a male-to-male homosexual act. It is not possible to know specifically which meaning was intended in the Biblical text, but even if the "passive partner" meaning applies, that's more specific than a general label of homosexual. Nor does it apply to females. In actual fact, there was no connotation of effeminacy in the practice of homosexual acts in ancient Greece. Homosexual acts were a normal part of being male, and being womanly/weak/effeminate was a separate concept. The modern application of the word malakos in Greece is equivalent to effeminate, or sissy. That's a way to ridicule men who don't embody macho characteristics, but it's not as specific as homosexual, even when that is implied.

"Abusers of themselves with mankind" is translated from the Greek "arsenokoites" which appears to be a word Paul coined or borrowed from the Leviticus passage you quoted above. 2000 years ago, the common interpretation was that Paul was referring to temple prostitutes. It was not a word in common enough usage for modern scholars to develop a confident, comparative definition for. Unless, of course, they have an agenda to fit.

There is plenty more on these words and their potential interpretations available for your perusal all over the internet, from many different angles and with many different conclusions. To me, the very fact that the word "homosexual" was inserted into the Biblical text in 1946 and came from imprecise English translations of Greek words that are not well defined and/or ambiguous is enough to give me pause.

Like I said, I'm not here to convince anyone and I don't need to be right. I'm sharing this information because you asked. Clearly I disagree on the finer points of homosexuality and morality with everyone here, but I agree with several on what's important. Not shutting people out with fear and misapplied judgment, but loving people with the unconditional love of Christ and praying for the Holy Spirit to speak to everyone according to their own walk with God. And trusting God to fulfill His promises. I will be praying for all of you, especially those who are living in fear. That can't be any fun.

[kailooa]

JoeMo, your latest post reminds me of something I saw on the internet today. It's a joke, the kind that makes you think:

"I believe that God made me better than you for a reason. Please respect my deeply held religious beliefs. Thank you."

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

We can say that sin leads to death.

Amen! Duh!

And I would like to add, mankind in general is still here, not as a result of continuing to sample the forbidden fruit, but as a result of refusing to accept the gift of repentance that would bring the change necessary to allow entrance into the eternal Kingdom.

God cares!

[ClubV12]

JoeMo says,

"You still don't get my question. If a person has gay leanings, but refuses to give in to them because he/she is convicted that it is against the law of God, is he/she still considered gay and ineligible to join the church?"

What about the struggling dope addict or alcoholic, should the Church deny them membership because they are TEMPTED and have THOUGHTS about some sinful behaviour? Heaven forbid! IF that were the case, we would all be dismissed! But what if they come to Church stoned or drunk, not once, not twice, but often! THAT is "open sin", it must be dealt with.

If you are having serious thoughts and a serious struggle of an LGBT nature the Church would be well advised to NOT put you in certain offices of responsibility. It may be well advised to have you ESCORTED while on Church property even! But this does not mean you could or would be "censured" or dismissed. UNLESS, it becomes an "open sin" problem.

Fact is: Gay men who molest male children are among the most difficult cases of all to overcome. They are at lifetime risk of relapse. In such a case, the Church would be MORE than well advised, it may be REQUIRED to have you escorted anywhere on Church property. But you could still be a member and welcome!

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

Just like a alcoholic who is not drinking, is still an alcoholic! A drug addict who is not practicing doing drugs is still a drug addict. A non-practicing (put what you'd like here) is still what he's recovering from!

If you want to lump all those sinful practices together and just say all are sinners, I agree. As to individual controlling practices, au contraire. There are, thank God, multiplied millions of Christians who are no longer even tempted by what use to be their controlling sin. Paul the apostle is the most illustrious one I can think of offhand.

God cares!

[ClubV12]

My Church had to deal with a recovering alcoholic, an Elder! He was discovered buying beer, while drunk, at a store. He was removed from office via a "censure" action of the Church. In time, he was fully restored to the body and it was wonderful seeing his deep humility, public apology and re-conversion. Praise God!!!

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

What about the struggling dope addict or alcoholic, should the Church deny them membership because they are TEMPTED and have THOUGHTS about some sinful behaviour?

"For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin."Hebrews 4:15 NASB

The sin is obviously not temptation, no matter how often one might be tempted. I am a sinner because of yielding to the temptation and participating in the forbidden practice, even if it's a tryout, onetime venture.

We need the cleansing blood continuously and the only reason it would ever stop is if we reject it, either by failure to admit we need it or by negligence to ask for it.

"If we [freely] admit that we have sinned and confess our sins, He is faithful and just (true to His own nature and promises) and will forgive our sins [dismiss our lawlessness] and [continuously] cleanse us from all unrighteousness [everything not in conformity to His will in purpose, thought, and action]. If we [freely] admit that we have sinned and confess our sins, He is faithful and just (true to His own nature and promises) and will forgive our sins [dismiss our lawlessness] and [continuously] cleanse us from all unrighteousness [everything not in conformity to His will in purpose, thought, and action]." 1 John 1:9 AMP

Brackets parenthesis their's LHC

God cares!

[Bravus]

Times I'm pleased to no longer be within a particular group...

I bear it no will, but the whole 'fall in line or else' tenor of many of these messages is something I don't need.

(Just quietly, Jesus was actually pretty terrible at falling in line with the 'party line' of the authorities...)

[ClubV12]

No new concepts are being presented here, just society, or family or a different Church or club with rules. Every Church, every group, every country, family, etc. etc. has rules. Without it, we have anarchy. Put your feet up on the table at dinner time? I don't think so, there are family rules about that! Drive as fast as you want? Pay the price when your caught, tell it to the judge.

It's pretty simple, if you want to be a MEMBER of the group of Seventh-day Adventists (or Baptists or Mormons) you need to play by the rules. If you don't want to be a member, your welcome to visit. But some rules even apply to visitors. Break them and you will be asked to leave. Just like you would be asked to leave any group, or business, or store, or home if you can't deal with the rules.

There are rules about when you go to work, to lunch, leave for home, even when your self employed!

Paul, Peter, other representatives of the early Church, the World Church, met and set, rules AND enforced them! Giving specific directions on how to deal with those who didn't like the rules and refused to follow them. Today this Church follows that same pattern. When in session the General Conference is the highest authority on earth, as was the case when Paul, Peter and the others met to set, rules.

Jesus was actually very good at "falling into line" with the rules. He honored and obeyed the Jewish Church as did Paul, who apologized for being rude to the High Priest.

[CoAspen]

Question, do you believe it is 'rules' that Christ is using for entrance into heaven?

I am not sure I understand your use of 'rules".

[Bravus]

I think he means more like rules for being in a club.

As I tried to say above, I'm not arguing with the rules, for the members.

Just feeling blessed that I'm not a member.

Particularly as the rules committee seems to have been hijacked by those who want to exclude as many people as possible.

My understanding is that Jesus' mission was and is about *inclusion*.

[ClubV12]

Yes I do believe it is "rules", absolutely! For openers, He has "ten". But because we are unable to understand them in their true depth, He has given us a "book" to help explain them in detail. In this modern age, because we lost a great deal of understanding, He sent us yet another messenger! Through her, He has once again layed out the rules in a manner and fashion we are able to grasp. He even advised on His natural law rules through a health message. Oh He has left no stone unturned! How to dress for the best circulation, how to budget your time and money and LIFE!

God is ALL ABOUT rules, organization, structure. Even the angels present a golden card to gain access to the city! They love rules, they bring order, peace, harmony and love into the family home. Rules are beautiful. Sadly, the evil doer didn't like rules, he challenged Gods laws and rules. Said he had a better way, and here we are! He "hijacked" Gods rules, and fooled a lot of angels in the process.

Jesus would love to "include" everyone, but most prefer to make up their own rules and thus would not be happy in heaven, with all those rules the angels live by. In their "club", the Angelic Host Club.

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

do you believe it is 'rules' that Christ is using for entrance into heaven?

"...he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing."

John 15:5 NASB

Sounds like a good start. Then this will perpetuate it.

".....and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Do all things without grumbling or disputing; so that you will prove yourselves to be blameless and innocent, children of God above reproach in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you appear as lights in the world"Philippians 2:11-14 NASB

God cares!

[kailooa]

Bravus, I'm sad to say that in my time here on this forum I have come to feel as you do and now I must figure out what to do about the fact of my membership. Very, very sad. Heartbroken, in fact.

[CoAspen]

Well, I guess for some they need rules, rather than natural consequences of actions. I used to see the 10c's as rules, but gave that up a long time ago. My belief is that Christ simply wants the best for his creation and does not have a check list. He gave us a brain and made us in His image and then asked us to use it and reflect the creator through our lives. When we are constantly watching the rules and making sure we are not breaking them, the focus is turned in the wrong direction, to ourselves and others. Any way.........to each his own!

[ClubV12]

"...natural consequences of actions..."

Who made those rules?

I don't like this natural consequence thing, let me do whatever I want. It's a travesty of justice that if you jump off a high cliff, this rule of gravity says you will die. Who made THAT rule? I don't like it, I will ignore it.

Ignore Gods rules if you must, He certainly won't force you to obey anything. The rules are for your own protection. To keep you from getting killed when you rob the bank, for instance. Theres a rule for that, "Dont steal", ignore at your own risk.

Natural consequence is Gods way of getting your attention, it's his "other book of rules".

[Tom Wetmore]

... It's a travesty of justice that if you jump off a high cliff, this rule of gravity says you will die. Who made THAT rule? I don't like it, I will ignore it...

There are refinements and nuances and exceptions to rules. In a simplistic view of gravity, you are correct that jumping off that cliff is a bad idea. But if one can fly, not so much. Properly equipped, the law gravity is not quite so absolute.

The early explorers of flight were viewed as defying God's natural laws and dire predictions of God's judgment were pronounced.

Just something to think about.

[ClubV12]

It's an excellent point Tom. When we understand Gods rules (laws of all things) and work with them we see the beauty! Trial and error are a hall mark of understanding how to work with, appreciate and see the beauty in Gods laws. I try, I fail, I get up and try again. Pretty soon, I begin to figure it out.

Taste and see that the Lord is good.

[kailooa]

Most of the 10 commandments are basic rules necessary for a cooperative society. It's common sense that killing each other and stealing each other's stuff isn't going to keep a society together. Those basic rules of conduct are codified into law all over the world.

[Gail]

Talking about rules...

I read in the news today that Rhianna was asked to leave a mosque in Abu Dhabi, even though she was covered head-to-toe in a black jumpsuit

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Rhianna was being disrespectful in her words as well as in the photography locations and poses... that's why she asked to leave. Sometimes singers, actors and actresses (and lots of other so-called "important" people) have inflated views of themselves and that manners don't matter...

[olger]

You still don't get my question. If a person has gay leanings, but refuses to give in to them because he/she is convicted that it is against the law of God, is he/she still considered gay and ineligible to join the church?

I would consider them a brother and welcome their membership. Their life (as you have defined it) demonstrates freedom and victory, and those two aspects illustrate the Christian life, by the grace of Christ.