Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by 2 Timothy2:1-4, Dec 4, 2007.
They also have women Deacons
If they're members of this church, and they're homosexual, that's a serious problem for me. If they're reaching out to homosexuals and bringing them into the church to reach them, that's one thing. But to have openly homosexual members, and ever those in leadership, that's a problem.
We have a policy at our church that we try to adhere to:
We love you enough to meet you where you are.
We love you too much to let you stay there.
What Joshua said.
There's a huge difference between having female deacons and the potential affirmation of homosexual behavior. In my opinion, you can make a scriptural case for female deacons, but can't even come close to making a scriptural case for homosexual behavior. I know a number of people in this congregation, and this issue has the potential to completely split the congregation.
I am a member of a sister Fort Worth congregation that has female deacons, yet is conservative in theology. I've been concerned about Broadway's unofficial position on homosexual behavior for several years, but they haven't had to take an official stand regarding it. Now they will have to take a stand one way or the other...
The BGCT has removed churches that affirm homosexual behavior in the past (University Baptist - Austin) and may likely do the same here if Broadway goes that direction. The Tarrant Baptist Association is likely to do the same thing.
I lived in Fort Worth in the mid to late 80's, and Broadway was pretty liberal back in that day.
Aside from that, I know some churches who have "in the closet" folks who get their pictures taken alone and were in the church directory.
As long as this thread stays on topic regarding whether or not homosexuals ought to be included in the church membership it can remain open here. If it drifts into a discussion of homosexual practices it will be deleted.
There is nothing conservative about women deacons.
It's a good church with loving people...and the biggest pipe organ in North America I think...
This is a sticky issue and hits a major issue that evangelicals aren't prepared to confront in our contemporary culture: accountability between believers.
Personally I have two things to say about this whole business and I'll be done with it:
1. Why in the world would anyone waste money on a church directory? It's a money pit that takes away money that could be used elsewhere for better ministry.
2. I believe Scripture is clear about homosexuality...it is sin. But what are we going to do about the guy who uses drugs, or the woman who is a harlot, or the couple that is obesse, or the lady that gossips, or the guys who tell dirty jokes, or the liar who is a Congressman, or the man cheating on his wife, or the couple that are swingers, or the people who don't tithe? I mean really what do we do with all of that?
I'm not trying to be snarky just honest. What do we do with messy people? Church/community is messy. Reaching the unchurched is messy.
I agree with that.
Especially about directories....I havent' seen one of those in years!
This is funny :laugh:
In Romans 16:1, Phoebe is mentioned by Paul as a deacon (usually translated as "servant" in English bibles).
Paul also gives qualifications for women who serves as deacons (1 Timothy 3:11), although English translations often obscure the meaning by translating it "their wives."
I realize that many will not agree, and that's okay. I would prefer not to make this a thread about female deacons. There are more substantial issues to deal with.
Here's a link to an old discussion we had on the subject.
Obese people, what if they are obese because of a heath condition like, metabolism or blood circulation, and so on?
With homosexuals they choose to be that way. they have been deceived by Satan himself.
If "conservative" means "something that Paige Patterson and Paul Pressler would agree with" then you are correct.
If "conservative" means "believing the Bible as it is written (not what we want it to say)" and "bringing our practices into line with scriptural principles, as we understand them" then you are wrong.
Ultimately, I don't care if people think I am "conservative" or not because I'm not terribly interested in labels. I'm more interested in being faithful to God.
And for what it's worth, I sincerely doubt Jesus would be mistaken for a "conservative," whatever that is supposed to mean.
We are getting dangerously close to being in violation of Baptistboard rules...
I just want to point out that all of us "choose" to sin, whether it be sexual immorality or not. But there are many people (most people) are ruled by sin in their lives, and no one has any hope of breaking out of those cycles and patterns outside of the transforming power of Jesus in their lives. Most people don't even know they have a choice about the matter. But the gospel is the message of the way of Jesus, where we enter into discipleship with Him and He frees us from our sin as we participate in His life.
Yes, there are various reasons for obesity. The way it was worded struck my funny bone
So, what day did YOU choose to be heterosexual? What were the criteria of your decision? I never knew anyone who chose before. I find it hard to believe anyone would choose something that makes them so hated by so many.
Second Moderator Warning: I already warned you all once to keep this thread strictly on the topic of the OP and not to drift off into specifics about homosexual practice etc. I strongly suggest that if you want to continue the discussion quoted above in this post you take it into the PMF. Otherwise, this thread will be toast before you know it.
I love that line - What do we do with messy people!