‘Nashville Statement’ condemns LGBT Christians and those who support them

Yes, we should turn away from such who profess to be saved, until such time as they repent and change their views, but God knows His own!

 

Agreed, as a real Christian can at times still choose to sin, but there will not be a habitual defined lifestyle of sinning.

 

NONE

 

The CBMW holds to the Arian subordination of the Son to the Father ie: heresy. This in turn informs their adherence to the subordination if women to men.

Eternal Subordination of the Son and CBMW

 

@Matt Black , before we become entangled in opinions on application or other doctrinal positions, do you believe that homosexuality is sin?

I doubt there's much reason to delve into these other issues if we have no agreement on the essential position of the Nashville statement.

 

I believe he is refering to Grudem and Ware who say Christ was subordinate in FUNCTION (and function only), but equal in worth, value and divine being. It is a belief that upon incarnation, the son voluntarily submits to the Father to execute the plan of redemption that glorifies Christ. They call it “eternal functional subordination”.

Some have misrepresented the views of Ware and Grudem and claim they deny that Jesus is truly God.

*I will add that they view the authority of Christ as equal as well. Only in FUNCTION did Christ submit...as well as the Holy Spirit at times. The will is the same. This is also the view of Calvin and Augustine. See Calvin Institutes 2.12.2

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

Homosexuality is not a sin. Sexual activity outside of marriage is.

 

Not only is it a sin but its sick, perverted, and completely contrary to God's plan for creation.

 

"and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error." Romans 1:27

Paul, in accordance with *(giving up) "natural relationship" usage of stoic and Hellenistic Jews would be referring to homosexuality.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

Which? The condition or the act?

 

Thank you for answering. Care to tell us your beliefs on same sex marriage?

(Or feel free to tell me to shut up at any time. )

 

I don't think this question can or should be considered isolation but with a host of allied questions:

What did Jesus say about it?

What is the status of remarried divorcees?

Should the standard be different for those in the Church from those outside?

Flowing from the above, should there be higher standards for those in authority in the Church? If so, why?

Also flowing from the above, is the civil/legal ie state/ government's answer to these questions legitimately different from the sacramental/spiritual ie Church's answer? Should the Church be concerned about the former?

How has the civil/state's definition of marriage changed over time? Eg: property rights, inheritance, permission to divorce and remarry, SSM.

How has the Church's position changed? Eg: issues of consanguinity, annulment, divorce and remarriage

How does the Bible's position change? Eg: polygamy, concubinage in the OT, Moses permitting divorce, Jesus prohibiting divorce, meaning of "husband of one wife", etc.

I don't pretend to have the answers to all or indeed any of these questions necessarily, but they are all I think legitimate and germane to the question you have posted and I think demonstrate that the answers to these points are not necessarily 'millennia old' as Ann asserts above.

 

It is garbage.

 

Is remarriage after divorce a sin?

 

Depends if the covenant was broken by adultery [perhaps even pornography...but another debate for another time]. Jesus did teach an "except". Paul seems to indicate if a believing spouse is abandoned by an unbelieving spouse, they are free as well.

I know of no one on this forum that holds to divorce on demand is not a sin.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk