UPDATED: Fort Worth’s Broadway Baptist Church to consider excluding gay couples from member booklet

bpferrell, says:

This is very unfortunate. These members they ought to be pictured with one another - they are family after all. I wonder if they allow pictures of people who have divorced and remarried (an arrangement Jesus was pretty direct about if I recall)?

Sometimes the baby steps are very small, but hopefully this won't be a big deal some day soon.

interestedcitizen, says:

Non Roman Catholic Christian churches did step into a quagmire when they started blessing remarriage after divorce while the divorced spouse was still living and unmarried, and reconcilation was still possible.

If it was considered adultery for a divorced man or woman to marry another while his or her former spouse was still living and unmarried, then, blessing a marriage of such a man or woman was in essence blessing adultery.

The better view has always been for divorced couples to remain unmrried and never stop seeking reconciliation, but churches as a whole have given up on that standard, which opens the door to the criticism above.

Yes, churches got on the slippery slope when they sanctioned remarriage after divorce. But, just because they started down that slide doesn't mean they should slied further.

I don't think we can say that people who remarry after divorce are among the whoremongers who are listed along with homosexuals in the New Testament among those who will not see heaven. A whoremonger is regularly engages in sexual relationships with many different people outside of marriage. It is a person who is a lover of self instead of a lover of God.

The clear Biblical pattern is one woman for one man, for life. That pattern is not just Biblical, it also pictures Christ and the church. The words Bride (The church, or the one who respondes to another's intiative) and Groom (The lover who prepares a place for the Bride and comes back to get her) refer to male and female. The word husband implies a man and the word wife implies a female. The Bible sets forth patterns for a division of labor and a model of servant leadership.

Broadway Baptist has a reputation as a liberal church. It has slid far enough. It must not be coerced to slide further. It must stand its ground.

bpferrell, says:

Oh geez. Whoremonger? Really? I think they're playing in Deep Ellum tonight.

BBCAdvocate, says:

Broadway welcomes all people. The actions to exclude some from a printed directory were taken by a few members who have chosen not only to discriminate but also to aggressively threaten the jobs of staff members and to usher in the advent season with a devisive vote that could split the church. All in the name of Jesus. Go figure.

CastleHills, says:

Wow. Um, InterestedCitizen, just to let you know...the year is now 2007.

Also, btw: Animal husbandry, also called animal science, stockbreeding or simple husbandry, is the agricultural practice of breeding and raising livestock.

Oh wait...animal.....man... Nevermind.

interestedcitizen, says:

Castle Hills,

So it is 2007. So, a lot of people publicly embrace homosexuality as a lifestyle. I don't embrace the culture that embraces homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle.

It's not that I'm not aware. I am aware. I know what the American Psychiatry Association did with homosexuality back in the 1970s. I know about the Stonewall riots and the movement they ignited. The APA caved under political pressure. I know that an experiment that compared the size of the pituritary glands of a few homeosexual and heterosexual men who died of AIDS tried to prove that homosexuals were morphologically and therefore genetically distinct from heterosexuals.

I know about an experiment that tried to isolate a gay gene. I've taken genetics. embryology, biochemistry, psychology, and neurophysiology. None of these experiments are conclusive, and someone with a science background, as I have, can see right through them. These experiments are designed with the goal of proving relationships, such as the prevalence of homosexuality in certain families. The problem is that these experiments don't rule out social and environmental influences that lead to homosexuality in these families.

Further, in my view, the existence of just one set of identical twins, one of whom is fully heterosexual and the other of whom is homosexual, disproves conclusively that homosexuality is genetically acquired. There might be numerous sets of identical twins who are homosexual, but that proves nothing, since they had the same influences. Now, a set of identical twins, separated from birth, both of whom became homosexual, might suggest a link between genetics and homosexuality, but not without fully examining the way they were raised. Again, just one set of identical twins, separated at birth, one of whom became homosexual and the other of whom remained heterosexual, disproves a genetic cause of homosexuality.

Further, a substantial number of medical doctors and psychiatrists still consider homosexuality both deviant and dangerous, despite the fact that the APA has removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. Essentially, what the APA did was just give up.

I think there was a deeper problem, just as there is with all kinds of depressions, phobias, and neuroses. Psychiatry tends to ignore the deep spiritual issues and replace the problems brought on by excessive self love with mood altering drugs. Psychiatry could never have "cured" homosexuality. I agree that it isn't a mental disorder and should never have been on the APA's treatment list. I'm also realistic to know that some people will never change, just as there are heterosexual adulterers and child molesters who will never change. Change begins by admitting "I am wrong and I need help." That is repentence. Until a person comes to that point, he cannot change.

I am countercultural. The Bible calls all true Christians to be countercultural. "Love not the world, nor the things in the world...the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the boastful pride of life, are not from the father, but are from the world."

Those who urge Broadway Baptist Church to avoid taking one more step down the slippery slope of loving the world instead of being countercultural are advocating that the church be true to its calling.

It isn't about hate. it is about loving God more than self or the world. Love of self says "conform to the world," and today that means "be inclusive and tolerate all kinds of deviant lifestyles." Love of God says, "be true to the great I AM and His Word, even at the cost of rejection and ridicule." Sometimes, love of God means to shake the dust off one's feet and move on down the road when people reject the gospel message. There is a point at which Christianity is exclusive. The gospel is a message of hope and peace, but it demands change, and change can only come after repentence.

Sadly, a vote last week in Congress puts homosexuality on the same plane as race and reflects the depths to which our culture has fallen. Now is not the time to just give in. The church must remain steadfast.

interestedcitizen, says:

Rawlins,

Why is that an attempt to engage in intelligent debate must end in ad hominem attacks? This is not the way to discover truth. In my view, when a person must resort to ad hominem, he has admitted the weakness of his argument. That's what I learned in argumentation. Ad Hominem is a logical fallacy. It is a tool of propaganda. Sincere truth seekers do not resort to ad hominem, and they see right through it when it is employed. Those who insist on using ad hominem essentially say they don't care about the truth.

Refute my point. Show me the weakness of my argument about the identical twins, one of whom is heterosexual and the other of whom is homosexual. Further, show me a metabolic pathway by which a certain gene directs the production of brain chemicals, hormones, or pheromones, or sets up neurological impulses that drives two people of the same sex to desire each other sexually. Then explain to me how one of two identical twins, with the same internal genetically driven body chemistry, can end up having homosexual impulses while the other has heterosexual impulses.

I don't think you can refute my point. I've never seen it in the research. It is clear, then, that homosexual behavior is a choice, just as 15 year old boys and girls choose to experiment and become addicted to promiscuity at a young age. It's also the same as enjoying that first game of football or baseball. We can become addicted to sports, food, or scary movies. These addictions are actually idols. They are things we set up for ourselves that take the place of our love for God. We allow these idols to enter our homes and take over our affections.

I hope Broadway Baptist in this instance does not take the "broad way that leads to destruction, but instead takes that narrow, straight way that leads to enternal life."

Bemused, says:

"I don't think you can refute my point."

A solid assertion, interestedcitizen. It's been my contention for quite some time that Rawlins, like many of his cronies here, is incapable of refuting anything. Of course, were logical argumentation a prerequisite for registration on this site, these blogs would be ghost towns.

interestedcitizen, says:

Here is a link to an extensively annotated college paper that takes an objective point of view concerning the causes of homosexuality. I didn't choose it because it supported my viewpoint. In fact, its conclusion might differ from mine. It was objective, and well written. It raises plenty of room to doubt that homosexuality is genetically acquired.

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro...

I think the significant thing about this paper is that it reports that, while it is more probale that an identical twin will be homosexual if his twin is homosexual than in the case of fratneral twins, the fact that less than 100% of identical twins are homosexual where one of them is homosexual, excludes the conclusion that homosexuality is genetic.

This paper also mentions that additional studies need to be done on the question of identical twins separated at birth and the incidence of homosexuality among them. (obviously, given the nature of adoption laws and the closed records of childen separated at birth, the logistical difficulties of finding these people, studying them, and assuring that they represent a truly random sample make this kind of study almost impossible to do)However, my point still stands. If less than 100% of identical twins,separated at brith or not, do not share an identical sexual orientation, that disproves that homosexuality is genetically acquired.

The fact that identical twins tend to model each other's behavior more than fraternal twins is not surprising. I have identical twin nieces, for example. While they attempted to assert their individuality by attending separate colleges and pursuing differing majors, they eventually ended up at the same college pursuing the same major. This was not genetic. It obviously had something to do with social conditioning, intense bonding and modeling. I know two identical twin brothers. They, too attempted to assert their individuality. one went to seminary and the other went to medical school. Yet, the one who went to seminary eventually ended up in medicine. Choosing medicine was not genetic, since neither of their parents was a medical doctor. The same is true of my nieces. They chose college majors that no one in our family has ever chosen. They attended the same college my sister attended, a behavior that was obviously influenced by social conditioning.

Back to the main point of this discussion, however. There is no compelling evidence, scientific or otherwise, to suggest that homosexuality is genetically determined behavior. Homosexual acts are sin according to the Bible and are not to be condoned by members of the Church. Churches are charged with upholding the Bible. One method of discipline is to temporarily exclude from fellowship those who disobey the Bible. Thus, as an extremely mild form of discipline, Broadway Baptist Church may prevent homosexuals from appearing as couples in its membership book, although they may appear as singles. This is a much less harsh form of discipline than outright excommunication. According to the Bible, they must also be excluded from taking the Lord's supper.

DC, says:

Just curious, but what grade did that second year bio paper get?

Here's another excellent objective college term paper on the psychology behind the Oedipus complex:

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/image...

DC, says:

I think all of the comments regarding the Greek society of the time are well covered in "Planes, Trains and Plantains" as posted above.

DC, says:

"A man can only justify his actions if he regards his demeanor with deductive thinking."

The above introductory statement really clears up much of the debate posted here. For further text, I suggest the well thought out discussion below:

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/image...

Seriously, this will be the last time I refer to this excellent dissertation. Really. Promise.

luniz, says:

>>In an ecosphere shaped by natural selection, the fundamental deficiency of homosexuality raises the question, “If homosexuality is 'natural,' how did nature select it?”

if you have to ask that question, you don't understand natural selection at all. Why is it only Christians who seem to think natural selection works on an individual basis?

luniz, says:

>>He was merely stating that if homosexuality were as innate as race or species, and that because homosexuals are by their very nature sterile, homosexuals would cease to exist as a populous because they cannot reproduce themselves.

>>He wasn’t proposing natural selection on an individual basis

oi. I can't tell if you're serious or just giving me a hard time. If you can't understand what the two things I've highlighted have to do with each other, then you don't completely grasp the way that natural selection works. Also, I don't think anybody ever said homosexuality was "innate as race or species"...that makes no sense at all.

Bemused, says:

"Bemused, I'm trying to get in touch with you for a story we're working on, but the email addy you registered with does not work. Can you please call me at 214-514-4710?"

Mr. Orren, someone alerted me to your comment, which is the only reason I am replying. I decline your invitation to participate in a Pegasus News story. The publication is absurdly biased and completely void of journalistic merit. I retract anything favorable I've said about it in the past. Its mere existence is emblematic of a culture steeped in mediocrity.

Nothing personal, though, Mike. As Theodore Roosevelt instructed, "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." Sorry you don't have more.