At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
Should a Christian allow those taking the lead in the Church such as Ministers be gay
I believe that no man or women should ever be allowed to serve as a minster or a leader of any church that represents God. Why?
To be frank, the Bible condemns homosexuality. No amount of verbal hocus-pocus can make scriptures like Leviticus 18:22 and Romans 1:26, 27 disappear.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (New King James Version)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,[a] nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
Mankind has become very tolerant and will make all kinds of excuses and take the Bible and twist it to fit what they want it to, so as to do their own thing. They even go as far as saying that if a Christian is to love all people then they need to love the gay person. As a Christian myself, I do love all people including homosexuals, I though hate their behavior and their choice to go against God's laws. I am able to separate the person from their behavior or actions. God does not approve of homosexuality but He also does not approve of a Christian treating anyone harshly or to hate them in any way. I also feel that gays are welcome into the the congregation I attend, but they will be asked to respect God's house by obeying His commandments and laws about proper conduct. A gay person would not be serving as a leader in the congregation that I attend. How could they? They are suppose to be representing the supreme Sovereign of the universe. They can not serve God and Satan. The Bible forcefully admonishes, "O you lovers of God hate what is bad." Psalm 97:10 Homosexuals who want to serve God must do so on his terms, not there own.
If Leaders in the Congregation of God allows these gays to enter into a leader position and to try to teach others to do God's will and they themselves are not obedient to God's laws, and they approve of homosexuals becoming priest and leaders of their church, this is detestable in God's eyes and I truly feel sorry for the future generations. Gay or homosexual behavior is not approved by God nor should their conduct be welcomed in any place of worship of those claiming to serve God.
As a minister of God, I welcome all persons gay, straight, thieves, murders and sinners, but once you enter the congregation of God, all the conduct that God does not approve of will never be welcomed. We can not serve the God of the Bible and not obey his laws against homosexuality. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroy in Lots day. Why? Homosexuality was one of the reasons. One reason I don't go to the churches of this world is because of this very thing. As a Christian, Jesus Christ is the head of the Congregation. Those who take the lead in the congregation must become workers for the members of the congregation, under Christ. There are requirements that those taking the lead in the congregational affairs must adhere to. Notice what the Bible says these qualification are. Here is God's view on the matter.
I quote:
(1 Timothy 3:1-7) 3 That statement is faithful. If any man is reaching out for an office of overseer, he is desirous of a fine work. 2The overseer should therefore be irrepressible, a husband of one wife, moderate in habits, sound in mind, orderly, hospitable, qualified to teach, 3not a drunken brawler, not a smiter, but reasonable, not belligerent, not a lover of money, 4a man presiding over his own household in a fine manner, having children in subjection with all seriousness; 5(if indeed any man does not know how to preside over his own household, how will he take care of God's congregation?) 6not a newly converted man, for fear that he might get puffed up [with pride] and fall into the judgment passed upon the Devil. 7Moreover, he should also have a fine testimony from people on the outside, in order that he might not fall into reproach and a snare of the Devil.
(Titus 1:5-9) 5For this reason I left you in Crete, that you might correct the things that were defective and might make appointments of older men in city after city, as I gave you orders; 6if there is any man free from accusation, a husband of one wife, having believing children that were not under a charge of debauchery nor unruly. 7For an overseer must be free from accusation as God's steward, not self-willed, not prone to wrath, not a drunken brawler, not a smiter, not greedy of dishonest gain, 8but hospitable, a lover of goodness, sound in mind, righteous, loyal, self-controlled, 9holding firmly to the faithful word as respects his [art of] teaching, that he may be able both to exhort by the teaching that is healthful and to reprove those who contradict.
1 Thess. 4:3-8: "This is what God wills ... that you abstain from fornication; that each one of you should know how to get possession of his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in covetous sexual appetite such as also those nations have which do not know God; that no one go to the point of harming and encroach upon the rights of his brother in this matter, because God is one who exacts punishment for all these things, just as we told you beforehand and also gave you a thorough witness. For God called us, not with allowance for uncleanness, but in connection with sanctification. So, then, the man that shows disregard is disregarding, not man, but God, who puts his holy spirit in you."
Eph. 5:5: "No fornicator or unclean person or greedy person-which means being an idolater-has any inheritance in the kingdom of the Christ and of God."
People do change though and many who used to practice homosexuality are now Christians and serving God and obeying his laws. They learn God's way of Cleanliness and they have changed their ways to gain God's approval and with His approval comes many blessings. You see, God is love and he does forgive, if we choose to obey Him and do things his way, not the way of this world. God wants his followers and servants to be clean because He is clean. Anyone overseeing the Christian congregation therefore will have to be clean in God's eyes.
In other words Labman, you would not disqualify a person from being ordained (or being your own minister) if that person was homosexual, but chaste. Well, that's a good starting point.
I guess someone here has to stick up for the liberal wings of the various US denominations that have ordained openly gay clergy - it may as well be me. I understand that anyone on this board whose religious views are driven by a belief in the literal interpretation of the english language version(s) of the bible is not likely to be persuaded. However, a few points to ponder:
As I believe Labman would agree, one can be gay and non-sexually active and still be ordained and could make a terrific minister or priest. Anyone disagree?
So let's address the issue of ordaining homosexuals who are in active, committed, monogamous, and loving relationships - that's where most of the controversy lies. The english language translations for many of the biblical passages regarding homosexuality inevitably are about male prostitution and promiscuousness. The concept of sexual orientation as we understand it today wasn't even considered back when the bible was formulated - for example, any male-on-male sexual activity in those days was considered a form of prostitution because people who did this there were inevitably involved with multiple partners, performing in orgies, etc. The bible is virtually silent on the issue of homosexuality between committed, monogamous, and loving partners.
Much of the argument in the liberal denominations in support of ordaining openly gay clergy has been based on a model of balancing (a) scripture, (b) reason, and (c) traditions in determining what the church should do on this issue. If you believe that only (a) applies, then there's no reason to be against slavery (which no where does the bible condemn) or child labor, or supportive of women's rights, at least from a religious perspective. The more liberal denominations have tended to believe that the bible should be read and understand in terms of broad themes, such as loving one's neighbor, forgiveness of sins, etc., and not so much word-for-word analysis of passages written by men from cultures long ago. These denominations do not believe the bible is inerrant, especially as translated into english by men who most certainly had their own biases. They also firmly believe that homosexuality and heterosexuality are not choices, but are part of who each of us are, and so to treat homosexuality as inherently evil is counter to the notion that we are all God's children. And once again, to be clear, we are talking only about people who are in committed, monogamous, and loving relationships, which is a concept the bible does not address.
Okay first of all to address your statement on ministers who are not acting out on that impulse... the notion that for instance "Once an alcoholic always an alcoholic" or anything else, is a secular point of view. And you can not combine the secular viewpoint with the christian.
If they are no longer maintaining a gay stance then they must think its wrong, therefore, have repented, therefore as God has forgiven them so should the congregation and they are no longer homosexual.
Also... the notion that homosexuality is something people are born with... secular viewpoint.
People are all born with a sin nature.
Some people are more likely to want to steal, some to lie, some to rebellion... and one in the same, some people are born with the tendency to want to be homosexual... but sorry, its not a gene.
As with anything, you can fight off any of those desires... but everything in society today revolves around accepting and acknowledging your wants and desires. If you want to have sex on the first date... GO For iT! jsut make sure to wear a condom. If you want to get plastered at a party go for it... just dont drink and drive.
Im sad for the people. People who are brought up to believe such things therefore making it so much more difficult to acknowledge the fact that so many of these things are in fact wrong.
They continue to hurt themselves and get more and more violent and or depressed, but "its not what they are doing, its a chemical condition that requires medication to fix. not prayer nor repentance, jsut more and more pills."
God made the laws that he did to keep us from pain... because he loves us and no matter how much you want to contort the bible or say that it was meant differently, he told the writers of the bible what to write so even the most belligerent or unlearned people could understand and follow, but only if they want to.
The Bible has a definition for chastity which makes certain lifestyles incompatible with its definition. In short, a murderer, habitual, thief, habitual liar, adulterer, fornicator, idol worshipper, habiutual sloth, a person who is habitiually violent, or even one who entertains evil thoughts though he doesn't carry them out doesn't qualify as being virtuous.
Is it your position then that church leaders must be virtuous, per this definition? Do you know of any church leaders who measure up? I would bet that all people have had "lust in their hearts" (to quote Jimmy Carter) at some time in their lives - clergy included. I submit that this doesn't disqualify a person from being ordained. What's important is how one choses to act (or not) on these "impulses." So, I ask - as a first step: what is it about a person with homosexual tendencies who is chaste that in your view would disqualify that person from being an outstanding church leader? And would you also disqualify a heterosexual who has an occasional fantasy regarding the opposite sex?
Is it your position then that church leaders must be virtuous, per this definition? Do you know of any church leaders who measure up? I would bet that all people have had "lust in their hearts" (to quote Jimmy Carter) at some time in their lives - clergy included. I submit that this doesn't disqualify a person from being ordained. What's important is how one choses to act (or not) on these "impulses." So, I ask - as a first step: what is it about a person with homosexual tendencies who is chaste that in your view would disqualify that person from being an outstanding church leader? And would you also disqualify a heterosexual who has an occasional fantasy regarding the opposite sex?
No one measures up. The only reason we are accepted is based on Jesus Ransom sacrifice. However, the stipulations for church leadership are found in the Bible itself
and are very clear and they disqualify a practicing homosexual. That you suggest they be ignored shows that you hold the Bible in little esteem. Which of course is again your privilege. But please allow others their right to respect the biblical view.
There are countless scriptures I could show you which encourage us to keep our minds free from evil thoughts. But since my computer doesn't permit it at present that will have to wait.
(1 Timothy 3:1-7) 3 That statement is faithful. If any man is reaching out for an office of overseer, he is desirous of a fine work. 2The overseer should therefore be irrepressible, a husband of one wife, moderate in habits, sound in mind, orderly, hospitable, qualified to teach, 3not a drunken brawler, not a smiter, but reasonable, not belligerent, not a lover of money, 4a man presiding over his own household in a fine manner, having children in subjection with all seriousness; 5(if indeed any man does not know how to preside over his own household, how will he take care of God's congregation?) 6not a newly converted man, for fear that he might get puffed up [with pride] and fall into the judgment passed upon the Devil. 7Moreover, he should also have a fine testimony from people on the outside, in order that he might not fall into reproach and a snare of the Devil.
From the op's biblical reference , I do not believe a homosexual should be church leader.
But not only does it speak to the issue of homosexuality, which everyone gets their underclothes in a wad about, but also about other character traits.
I certainly would not qualify, because i've been divorced [? husband of one wife - or is that in reference to polygamy] and most of the time my kids are too rambunctious.
Well everyone knows that there aren't many people who can even qualify as it is. The people who do were chosen by God himself to lead the rest of his people in said community.
Hmmmmm..... I think the church should focus on the bigger problem of getting rid of all the pedophile church leaders before even attempting to take a stand on this positition
Linear Mode
