Gay Pastors?

Well, I thought before reading this thread that there would be a strong general concensus against the idea of a gay pastor.

I can only speak for my local church. Such a person would not get one second of consideration at the pulpit committee level. It would never reach the congregation, and if it did, they would find themselves out the door about five seconds after the vote was taken. There are no shades of gray here.

A couple of other flawed points that were made: To God, sin is sin, period, end of subject. There is no better sin than another. That is a man made concept.

Another flawed statement: Pastors and deacons being the husband of one wife does not mean they have to be married. It means they cannot have been married twice.

 

Saturn, the norm argument is that he cannot be polygamous. i.e., he can be remarried if his wife died.

1Ti 5:9 Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man,

Does this mean 'not polygamous,' too?
No, it means she must have been married.

It applies to men the same way it applies to women: EXACTLY ONE, no more and no less.

"To God, sin is sin, period, end of subject."

Be careful, bud. You attached God's name on it, I hope for your sake you're right. Otherwise, that's blasphemy.

And I do disagree.
The wages of sin is death, you earn yourself hell for any and all sin.
However, to say that there is no greater sin, defies James and many other verses. They are equal in as far as they all earn hell.

 

If his wife died, then he is still the husband of one wife if he remarries. If divorce was the case, then his first wife is not dead, and he is married to more than one wife if he remarried.

You need to read the rules of Baptist Board. What will get you a ticket out of here really quick is to accuse someone of blasphemy, especially in a frivilous way which you just did. The wages of sin is death, period. Scripture does not say the wages of sin at a certain level is death or a worse death. I would strongly suggest you not use the word blasphemy in relation to any of my posts again, or anyone else for that matter.

 

Hi Sakuras,

Which is it "is gay" or "was gay".

"was gay" is all right, "is gay" is not.

2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.​

HankD​

 

There is nothing in scripture that could remotely be implied to allow a practicing homosexual to be a pastor. The answer is therefore no.

If a person has engaged in homosexual acts in the past, but has since chosen to turn away from that, and has chosen a life of celibacy, I would accept that, since it demonstrates repentance. That presumes, however, that scripture allows single persons to be pastors. Some here will argue that only married men are permitted to be pastors. In that case, it can be argued that a celibate man is not qualified to be a pastor.

I disagree. There are many heterosexual individuals who have chosen a life of celibacy, for whatever reason. It unreasonable to assume that those people are secretly fornicating. Likewise, if a person who is homosexual has chosen a life of celibacy so as not to engage in sin, then there need be no assumption that such a person is secretly fornicating.

Paul even says that it is good to be single. He doesn't say you can only be single if you've engaged in intercourse with a person of the opposing gender.

 

I might be in the minority but I don't think people are born gay. They may be born with a predisposition or leaning in that direction but I think to be gay you have to make that choice. It seems the majority of "gay" people I've come into contact with were either abused or faced singular challenges that shaped them at the particular moment of human development which will cause a development in favor of being gay. Yet ultimately its a path chosen. Someone is not born a fornicator but certainly they are born with a predisposition for this behavior. To be a fornicator you must make the choice to fornicate. You don't fall into it so to speak. I believe the same is true with being gay. So the senario a "gay" pastor who is celebate and is not participating in said lifestyle makes no sense. By that definition the person rejects being gay as a sin and is not gay anymore than they are a fornicator. Now the better question is this would you accept a former gay person being a pastor? In this case turning their backs on the sin and accepting it as that makes them regenerate. I don't have a problem with that. But if they insist "God" made them gay or that they were born that way I would have problems with because there is no repentance. So I think lets do away with the consept that some one is born gay and accept the truth which is some one is born with the predisposition of rebellion agianst God in its many forms. However, to be associated with a sin one must make that choice to sin.

 

There's a lot of layperson's debate on the topic, but what it comes down to is that all people are born with a carnal desire. Imagine that a in a person's brain there is a pack of wolves. There's a wolf that craves fornication, a wolf that craves the same gender, a wolf that craves the opposing gender, a wolf that craves multiple partners, and so on and so on. Which wolf wins out? The one you feed. The other wolves are always there, but you choose not to feed them.

That's an incredinly simplistic analogy for a person's born sinful nature, but I think it makes the point.

 

"til death" - It seems unlikely to me. Temptations till death, perhaps.

It sounds similar to what is called a "recovering alcoholic".

That would be more acceptable to most churches.

I don't know, it probably wouldn't work for most conservative local churches.

HankD

 

That's the point I'm making. I have a desire to fornicate and to commit adultry. I have a desire to steal and to harm others. Yet I'm not considered a fornicator, an Adulterer, a theif, or a murderer unless I actually give in to those desires and choose to do them. So it is with being gay. I do not believe a person is gay unless they choose to give in to the nature that leads them in that direction.

 

I agree. But if a person chooses to turn from that, and choose to live a life of celibacy, that should be respected, and I believe such a person would not necessarily be disqualified from the pastorate.

 

If a single person is engaging in fornication, whether that fornication is with a person of the same gender or of opposing gender, that person is disqualified from the pastorate. So, yes, I'd agree with you.

 

We all have equal disposition to murder, homosexuality, adultery, gluttony ect.

 

They are going to let a divorced man be a priest? I thought divorced people couldn't even have communion.

Of course, maybe they will get his marriage annulled.

 

A divorced man is eligible for the priesthood if the church considers the marriage to be null. An annullment is typically how this is demonstrated. Just because a person is divorced does not mean the church will grant an annullment. In fact, tey frewuently do not, which means the person cannot remarry in the Cathoilc church, and such a man cannot be a candidate for the priesthood.

A divorced person does not need an annullment to receive communion.

 

I say he should have thought of that before he married. He should have stayed married, thus blessing his children with an intact family.

And if she knew it beforehand, and chose to marry him anyway, why on earth she would support the divorce and annullment is beyond me. Sounds like both of them have spiritual issues.