cartoon: rainbow robe of many colors
Rumor has it that his robe was of a special seamless cloth, a garment that would have been very expensive in its day. But rumor also has it (started by me right now) that it was also a rainbow of colors. Certain colors. Two soldiers continue to gamble for the rights to own this very unique garment at the feet of its previous owner. They don’t want to divide it, like they usually do, because of its value. The soldier holding the robe is curious. He has seen these colors before… in a parade his son was in. What could this mean? Did this man know his son? Did this man wear these colors in solidarity with his son and his friends? He was perplexed, and pondered these things in his heart.
This cartoon and post is in participation with a synchro-blogging project called “Bridging the Gap“, the purpose of which is to share positive stories, ideas, and suggestions on how we can bridge the gap between people on the topic of faith and sexuality. Another way to put it is, “How can we embody mutual honor and respect in our conversations and relationships with those with whom we may disagree on the topic of homosexuality?” You can find other participants and read more about it here.
I wonder about the symbolic significance of such a seamless and colorful robe. Not even that would be divided. And if it was made up of many colors… it speaks to the unity of seamlessness and the diversity in colors. I believe this is possible to experience in community.
Check out my t-shirts HERE. I’m growing my inventory all the time. And check out my contemplative art here.
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!
Thanks David for contributing to the synchroblog ….. regular naked readers (just had to say that) you are more than welcome to check out the other posts – links listed at our blog.
Seamlessness …… what a beautiful but challenging image …. something I’ll roll around in heart and mind.
Can’t link to it David
FiF: fixed. thanks for the heads up.
The last thing that Jesus would have promoted was sin.
He certainly came to forgive sin, that is for sure.
But to advocate it…no way.
That little book that you do not think too much of, but that has been the source of truth, and guidance for life for countless millions over the course of millenia, says that homosexuality is a sin.
I believe that. I believe it is no worse a sin than the ones I comitt, but it is a sin nonetheless and not to be trumpeted as a lifestyle “just as good.”
Steve…whatever our position is with respect to the book, does that mean the end of knowledge be it biological,geological,cosmological and even theological?
Sometimes we can be too smart for our own good.
‘He is not a thief, he had a rough childhood and NOW we realize that some people are predisposed to stealing.’
There. Now stealing is no longer a sin.
I think the Good Lord knew what He was doing when He laid out the rules for living rightly, both for the individual and for society.
If homosexuality was good, then it would be good for everyone.
If everyone practiced it, we would cease to exist.
Not good.
Do you eat shellfish?
I LOVE it!
If the whole world loved it and ate it, would it make the world worse?
I also love pork!
I am free (because of Christ) from the old religious rules of worship.
I am not free to sin.
I’m fee to learn the relationship between biology and sexual orientation.
…fee as a bird…lol…;)
There is still no ‘gay gene’ (discovered). Maybe some are born that way, but most people’s sexuality is not fixed (I believe). Society and culture and individual experience plays a large role.
Of course, you are fee to disagree!
Steve…” but most people’s sexuality is not fixed”….so let’s not fix it for them…nature will trump religion.
FiF,
I think we ought encourage that which is most good for society as a whole.
Not to punish gays. Not at all. But we ought encourage man/woman marriage. It is best, generally, for children, and it is best for the survival of of a nation.
Gays should be free in society. Homosexuality ought be preached in the church (when the lectionary deems – not harped on) as a sin, for that is how the Bible describes it.
Gays should be welcomed in the church, but the gay lifestyle ought not be advocated or glorified.
To the extent that sexuality is not fixed, we ought set the ‘ideal’ as heterosexuality, and not ask litttle boys and girls in 1st grade who they will marry when they grow up…a boy or a girl.
But what about those who “are born that way”(yr words)?
Love them.
Also, love the ones who maybe weren’t born that way.
Just don’t glorify or advocate the lifestyle. Don’t try and punish them for it. Just don’t encourage it by lowering the man/woman ideal.
Unfortunately,some foolish people outlawed slavery…in a more enlightened age, we cd enslave homosexuals in the service of heterosexuals….it wd be a win/win situation….good hetero modeling with little idle time to be tempted by the lifestyle and we cd sleep soundly in the knowledge that those unfortunate gays,who are born with that terrible genetic defect, were being loved by people who take biblical integrity seriously.
I already said we ought love them and welcome them and not punish them.
OhIi know what you said Steve,but since we’ve been discussing maintaining and upholding biblical principles and the institution of slavery is seemingly well supported by both Old and New Testaments,I just thot that the suggestion deserved another look.
I think it was the Biblical principle of freedom (Gal.5:1) that spurred Christians to take the lead in abolishing slavery in England and the U.S.
I think yr right…a good lesson on the subject of biblically supported ethics…discernment is everything ,not to mention thinking outside the box
There are times when thinking outside the box is a great thing.
Also, times to stay in the box. The first sin was an expression of popping out of that box.
Ciao, FiF!
Thank you, so much. I hope one day my father will be like the soldier – after I gather up the strength and courage to tell him who I really am inside.
Steve,
I would caution against the “go forth and multiply” argument as global overpopulation threatens our environment seriously.
would He make friends with gay folk? heck yeah. but rainbow-color shirts? don’t think so…
(not to mention the fact that Jesus never really sided with political movements, more like, created his own, the Kingdom movement, if that is political, at all).
Interesting perspective regarding this piece. Perception always seems to be an individuals reality.
uhh. Wasn’t it the fabric that was important? Besides, with the dyes available at the time – it would most likely stand out more than it would in modern times. Dyes were expensive, Jesus died a poor man. Casting lots for his clothes was part of prophecy.
God made men (and women I spose) with sexual desire, but sex before marriage is still fornication. If you truly feel that you are not attracted to the opposite sex, and the whole changing your orientation doesn’t work (but it has worked). Then just don’t have sex, maybe that’s your burden to bear. Some people are prone to addictions, or anger, or something else that could lead to sin. That’s why humans are tempted. That doesn’t make it right.. I don’t see what’s so hard about not having sex. and if you really do love each other, why would it matter?? I guess it’s hard for some people. I have a friend who struggled with fornication. and repented. now she’s in a position to warn her brother.
Anon,
I seriously doubt that. There is plenty of room.
Paul Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb in the late sixties was the ’scare du jour’ and turned out to be a bomb in and of itself.
The main problem is Western democracies not being able to reproduce their own populations while immigrants multiply at a greater rate.
Many of the immigrants values are much different. Non-Western and non-Christian, and in many cases non-democratic.
Interesting thread but what does any of this have to do with the topic for Synchroblog?
We can be in unity within a diverse community.
As I mentioned in one blog …
Take the original 12 Disciples of Christ. You couldn’t get any more diverse then that company. You have the tax collector along side the uneducated fisherman…. and we can see in the scriptures just how diverse they really were and what we can see from the scriptures are people who had their differences, then they hashed out their differences and in the end, I believe as scripture leads me to believe this, they came back together with this revelation, “They will know we are Christians by our love”
I do not believe that a God who is all-good, all-wise, all-loving creates people in such a way that to live out the way they were created leads inevitably to damnation. I don’t believe that God creates us in such a way that one group (heterosexuals) living out a life of committed, covenanted love is participating in sanctification while another group (homosexuals) living out the exact same kind of love is condemned to damnation.
Jesus on homosexuality: silent. Paul on homosexuality: never mentions it, as it is currently understood by the American Psychological Association. Leviticus on homosexuality: uses the same word (abomination) that is used for eating shellfish and wearing clothing woven of different materials.
Jesus’ New Testament ethic of including those whom the religiously “pure” seek to exclude tells the tale.
NP, thanks for the cartoon. Love it.
Cecilia,
You must have missed what Paul says in Romans.
Steve Martin, you must have missed what I said in my comment.
Celia,
You are right. I think I wanted to miss it.
I don’t think the A.P.A. offers very much on the law of God.
No, but it speaks to “natural” and “unnatural.” Paul had no concept of a “natural” predilection for same-sex love. He saw it as “unnatural” and flowing from idol worship.
Neither of these applies to me. Jesus Christ is my Lord and savior.
Why it (homosexuality) occurs is still a mystery. The nature/nurture argument goes on.
But it is not normal, given the low percentages, and it is not the ideal.
Love them, welcome them, befriend them..I have and I will.
But I will not give license to the lifestyle and equate it with what is naturally better for society, and I will not allow it’s moral equivelancy claims in the church door because that is throwning out the law of God.
I know…I am a dinosauer. Somebody’s got to do it!
“Normal”? Or “Common”? Is the platypus “Normal”? Is Christianity “Normal”? Be careful as to what you hold up as “Normal”! Is anything that is less than 51% of the population automatically not “Normal”?
Is “Normal” a biblical category?
We are speaking of a behavior within a certain species, not comparing different species.
You are right, it is way less than 51%.
3% on the conservative side…up to 10% on the liberal side.
Normal seems to be the natural situation by which plants and animals (people included) do best in their environs for the perpetuation of the species.
Many believe this natural order, or normalcy is God ordained. I guess I am one of those.
I repeat my question: Is it a biblical category or notion? Please understand that you are drawing conclusions based on percentages. Einstein was not “normal”. Does that mean his ability/ behavior was not God ordained? Please, please, please consider the damage your kind of thinking brings to faithful people who Only. Want. To. Love. and. Be. Loved.
Let’s cut to the chase.
Homosexuality is wrong and a sin according to the Bible.
In addition, it is not normal and it is not healthy for society.
The church ought love sinners but not ought condone sin.
No problem.
I believe you are wrong. The bible is, at best, confusing on the subject, and does not, in fact, address homosexuality as it is currently understood.
Jesus boils down the law and the prophets to this: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and mind and soul and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. I trust him.
Why enforce this understanding (which is not clear) and ignore what JEsus says on divorce (which is crystal clear)? Why enforce this and not the prohibitions on shellfish and clothing?
I’ll tell you why. Because it is not normal FOR YOU. It is not natural FOR YOU. You feel disgusted or dsiturbed by this, which is natural FOR ME. It is how GOD MADE ME. You don’t get to disagree with that… you don’t live inside my experience.
Have a little humility about that which you personally have not experienced. Have a little Christian forbearance about that which is NOT a central tenet of faith.
I have not experienced murdering anyone, either, but I will still have to say that it is a sin and is not good for society.
For some people, molesting chuldren is normal for them. It is still a sin and not good for society.
Gotta run. I’ll check back later.
Cecilia there is no point in trying to argue with Steve Martin on this subject, he unfortunately has a closed mind and selective hearing/reading on it.
Steve, once again the comparisons are drawn between gay people and murderers/child molesters. Have you any idea how hurtful and UNLOVING that is for people that it affects?
Such ignorance!
What about the comparison between adulters and homosexuality? Or if that’s too harsh, fornicators and homosexuality?
The comparison between a liar and a murderer? Someone who curses and a child molester? a gossip and a rapist?
God does create people who are doomed. And I’m not sure it’s biblical to say God is all-loving..
This whole marriage/sex thing is confusing. The only thing I know is that we are supposed to be fruitful and multiply. And that the bible does talk about husband/wife relationships.
Maybe it’s to do with moderation. Like some alcohol is good, but getting drunk isn’t. I don’t know.
Christianity is unnatural in a way. Why wouldn’t God give people temptation?
And why is it so neccessary to have sex? it baffles me. You can love someone without wanting to sleep with them… I don’t get it.
I’m not sure what your definition of homosexuality is. It’s totally okay to live with, love, hug, any other person. It’s not okay to have sex with them. It’s okay to care about someone who is engaging in sin, it’s not okay not to warn them.
sex is a minor sin in itself (although no sins are minor), it’s other sins that are more problematic, but if you really do trust God and try to follow him as revealed. and are repentant. It might be a conscience issue. A fall, but not a fatal fall. But consider all things are permissible but not all are profitable. So even if it isn’t wrong, is it right?
Caroline,
Ok…let’s use gossipers and liars instead. They are welcome in the church…we love them…but we do not advocate the sinful behavior. It is not good for society and it is contrary to God’s law.
I’m only open minded if I agree with YOU. You disagree with me, and yet YOU are open minded.
Steve Martin, you rock. Just wanted to say that. I loved that last sentence,. “I’m only open minded if I agree with YOU. You disagree with me, and yet YOU are open minded.”
Why do people try to change Christianity? Why don’t they just leave it and go to some other religion that agrees with their beliefs? I am not being argumentative, I am honestly asking this. I don’t understand why Dave Hayward wants to remain a pastor in the Vineyard Church if he doesn’t share their beliefs. That seems like it would be torture, being a pastor in that situation.
If I have misunderstood these threads on the z-theory and homosexuality, please someone explain it to me…
Cecilia said, on June 25th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Have a little humility about that which you personally have not experienced. Have a little Christian forbearance about that which is NOT a central tenet of faith.
————-I have NOT experienced the desire for sex with underage children, but I know it is wrong and a sin.
————-I have NOT experienced the desire to rape, but I know it is wrong and a sin.
————-I have NOT experienced the desire to do heroin, but I know it is wrong and a sin.
————-I HAVE experienced the desire to get drunk [and have on to many to count occasions], and I know it is wrong and a sin.
======I have NEVER experienced a person breaking into my house and trying to kill my family, but I know it is wrong and a sin—–and I won’t let it happen without a fight–preferably with my .357 mag.
Experience–you don’t need experience to understand and know right and wrong.
fishon
Just Jill,
Thanks! I think you rock!
You’ve got it right, Jill. They want their own version of Christianity, that is a kinder, gentler version, but in reality it is empty mush. It stands for…nothing.
Jesus told us that He would divide people.
We want to be loved by everyone…even at the expense of our Lord…who we will hang out to dry in a N.Y. second if it makes us appear tolerant and nice, and loving.
I think it’s all jibberish that doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.
Caroline, I think it’s a lost cause… reading these last posts.
But thanks for your words of support. Saving my breath now for those who are truly interested in hearing the Good News.
For those of you reading this post who are gay, please keep up the good fight. For those who are not gay, I ask that we continue to struggle to find a way to dwell together in mutual respect, and that there would be peace on earth, good will towards ALL people!
I spoke with a person the other day who is an elder in another church, and he said they are trying to figure out what to do with gays. I said that I wish the day would come when the power would be transferred, so that gays would have to figure out what to do with straights. It is about power.
For me, it has NOTHING to do with power.
It is a matter of right and wrong. It’s what is good for society, for children, for the church.
Gays are free to be gay. No one wants to stop them. We want to stop the promotion of it (homosexuality) as something that is a good thing for society.
First stage thinking cannot see the ramifications of a society that cannot reproduce itself and is taking over by non-Western entities…many of whom hate gays and regularly stone them to death.
I come in peace
Throughout this bridging the gap initiative I have had at least one question surface…
Can I as a conservative hold to my conservative values and beliefs and still respect other people in their differences and respect people in their choices, and respect people regardless if their beliefs, choices, and convictions are different?
I think that’s what this bridging the gap is all about … don’t you?
Can I still discuss with people my opinion and beliefs on certain issues and still have the same respect I give them to be given back to me?
Jesus – on Homosexuality actually refers back to creative intent and quotes from the scriptures and affirms that God created Adam and Eve to becomes one and what God has joined together let no man separate. And so Jesus did in that sense say something indirectly however, in regards to what God intended for human sexuality and union between one man and one woman. It spoke on the issue of divorce which is spoken against just as much as in regards to homosexual behavior.
Paul — on homosexuality says a great deal but one would also have to dig a little deeper into the original Ancient Hebrew language to have a better context to what Paul was saying and I’d be glad to discuss that further on a later posting … on my blog or this one …. I still want to be respectful to the owner and author of this particular blog.
I can also discuss further about the dietary laws and how they are different from the biblical texts surrounding sexually immoral behavior.
And in closing to NP …
Gays still have to figure out what to do with straights … I do this all the time !!!
I think we’d have to try and see this from different perspectives. As I’ve been thinking about this bridging the gap initiative a few questions has come for me and one of the main question is this …
Can I with my conservative view of scriptures still maintain my conservative view of scriptures, continue to hash out my differences with Gay Christians and others within the GLBT Community and still bridge the gap? Is bridging the gap always dependent upon me having to say that the other side is right and actually never voice the convictions I have while being on the other side? Let’s face it … the two sides exist because we both think we’re right in our convictions and beliefs … correct? And the other question I have is … Can I still hold to my conservative views of scriptures and have the same respect I give to others be returned in like manner? Sometimes it seems like in order to bridge the gap I would have to be less vocal about my side and more affirming to the other side in order to bridge the gap? Why can’t we just hash out our differences and be equally as vocal while mutually respecting one another at the same time? Is that not even possible?
nakedpastor said, on June 25th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
For those of you reading this post who are gay, please keep up the good fight. For those who are not gay, I ask that we continue to struggle to find a way to dwell together in mutual respect, and that there would be peace on earth, good will towards ALL people!
——————Though you have ducked several of my questions, I will chance asking a question or two one more time
QUESTION: What does mutual respect look like to you.
Expain how you have mutual respect for a mass murderer?
How do you have mutual respect for the child beater?
Should the gay have mutual respect for me though I think they are living
in sin?
I spoke with a person the other day who is an elder in another church, and he said they are trying to figure out what to do with gays. I said that I wish the day would come when the power would be transferred, so that gays would have to figure out what to do with straights. It is about power.
———–No, it is not all about power, it is about sin, heaven and hell.
fishon
Sarah said: Can I as a conservative hold to my conservative values and beliefs and still respect other people in their differences and respect people in their choices, and respect people regardless if their beliefs, choices, and convictions are different?
I think that’s what this bridging the gap is all about … don’t you?
————–But Sarah, how far do we go in respect. Is there not anything, anyone, any
act that does NOT deserve our respect?
SARAH:Why can’t we just hash out our differences and be equally as vocal while mutually respecting one another at the same time? Is that not even possible?
————Not to long ago, gays did not have the respect from the Christian community that they enjoy in several christian communities of today. We are now told by many that we must respect their sin choice, and it has gone so far that if we say we love them, but hate their sin we are now the bad guys. My question is this. What next? What sin witll spring up next that we must embrace as personal choice–born with it, so it really isn’t sin, and if you call it sin, you are a hater?
fishon
Fishon — respecting the person has little if nothing to do with affirming one’s behavior.
— I think even Exodus is looking for ways to better communicate this error to say that as Christian we hate the sin but love the sinner … in much the same way we can turn it around to say, how would we like it if somebody were to say us I hate the Christ but love you? It doesn’t sound good now does it? I think the point is that the response to say hate the sin but love the sinner causes much confusion especially with folks who are Gay identified.
My point is this …
1. Everyone no matter who or what they are, what color of skin, sexual orientation, what career or job they have every one of us deserves respect period.
2. Every one of us has been created by God and for that reason alone should be enough to respect because obviously if that person is here God being the giver of all life purposed that person to be here. That alone deserves respect.
3. Every one of us are good … some of us may get confused and might hurt people from time to time because in this world there are hurting people and hurting people tend to hurt people but deep down underneath it all is this good person and most often then not when a person receives adequate love, care, and nurture the good nature and qualities in that person comes out despite the differences of views and convictions that we have. I look at many of my friends in the gay community and see a whole lot of good individuals and also people with morals and convictions they choose to live their life by. The fact is, they’re good people.
The question I now present is this …
How can we Side B Folk respect Side A folk and still hold firm to our beliefs and convictions?
Fishon, how on earth do you expect to have a constructive dialogue when you compare being gay to being a child beater or a mass murderer? How do you expect anyone to take such a position seriously– that two people who are adults in a consensual covenanted relationship are somehow comparable to those?
Do you even hear yourself?
Fishon,
The one who abused children were more then likely abused themselves though that doesn’t make what they’ve done right but explains where they’re at. — A very hurting person.
The one who commits murder? They’re still created by God and still perhaps like the one who abuses the child perhaps they too were children abused and received no advocacy .. should I then turn my back away from the person who wants to be reformed?
And last, to compare the homosexual to a child abuser and murderer is counter productive to the message of Jesus Christ.
There is a scripture verse though that would bring this all into perspective … or a few I should say.
1. 1 Cor 6: 9-11
Taking this into context … the murderer deserves grace and aught to be welcomed into full fellowship of the church, the adulterer … same thing and my biggest question here is since when as divorce been socially acceptable within the church when the bible does say that divorce is an abomination? And to lie is an abomination and yet there are so many people within the church who lie and cheat and show lack of integrity… food for thought… and then the homosexual deserves to be accepted wtihin the church. It’s not about affirming the person’s behavior …
1 Cor 6:11 in context to the murderer, the liar, the cheater, the swindler, the prostitute, and the homosexual ….
AND THAT IS WHAT SOME OF YOU WERE …. but you have been washed and sanctified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Romans Chapter 2 vs 1,2 speaks heavily upon the kindness of the Lord leading people to repentance. Since when did it say that it’s the judgement of the Lord? Since when is it the church’s responsibility to judge another’s salvation?
There is and will always be grace and forgiveness and the extravagant love of the father poored out to the child abuser, to the murderer, and to the prostitute. Still not comparing the murderer to the homosexual but stating a fact that there’s grace and forgiveness and love for these people. God loves these people just as much as he loves you. And that might be hard to chock back but it’s true.
John 3: 16, 17 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world but that through Him the world be saved.
Question here …
Was the homosexual excluded in this passage of scripture?
No.
So then why do we somehow act and perhaps even believe that God would not love the homosexual and wish that the homosexual come to faith in His Son Jesus Christ?
My friend is openly gay living with his gay partner. God created my friend and purposed my friend to be here. I might disagree with him and have to from time to time hash out our differences but the fact is God created my friend. For that reason alone I need to respect my friend and just because I’m a Christian and walked away from homosexuality that does not make me any better to receive more respect from people!
My point is, love and respect isn’t based upon how well another person meets my expectations and it’s certainly not based upon how much we agree on the topic of homosexuality.
Love and respect isn’t something to be earned it’s something that we simply need to give regardless if we agree on the topic of homosexuality or not.
Jesus also says, “go and sin no more”.
Sure He loves and forgives us. But He does not want us to continue to sin and hurt others and ourselves.
Repentance and forgiveness.
Not JUST forgiveness.
Jesus said that ’some are born eunuchs and some are made eunuchs’. He was obviously not referring just to castration as no one is born castrated. He was talking about homosexuals. Most eunuchs were homosexuals because the castration affected their hormonal development. Others were born with this difference. That’s why they were usually safe to have in harems.
As someone suffering from Stein-Leventhal syndrome, I was flooded with excess testosterone in my mother’s womb. I still have a hormone imbalance and this affects my sexuality.
Very interesting, Tiggy.
I think people are affected, afflicted, are have all manner of sexuality proclivities.
What they do in the privacy of their home is their business (as long as it’s legal activity – no minors or unwanted violence).
It’s the public advocacy and the striving for equivalence that is wrong, in my opinion.
It’s the watering down of God’s law, and the resultant lack of repentance for sin that bothers me when it is brought into the church as just another lifestyle.
I hope and pray that you have the best possible life you can have in spite of your biological imbalances.
Sarah said, on June 25th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Fishon — respecting the person has little if nothing to do with affirming one’s behavior.
My point is this …
1. Everyone no matter who or what they are, what color of skin, sexual orientation, what career or job they have every one of us deserves respect period.
———–Sarah, I don’t know, I guess what I am going to say will not make sense to you, but I will give it a try. What I say is true. No hypothical.
*****I love my daughter—–I hated her sin of street prostitution—–I did not respect her for her chosen profession. I love her. Doesn’t that make any sense?
fishon
STEVE MARTIN: ‘It’s the public advocacy and the striving for equivalence that is wrong, in my opinion.’
So you are saying that people are afflicted with something (as you see it), but that they have no right to be treated equally or to advocate that publicly.
Do you apply that to people who are afflicted with other things? Disabilities, diseases, mental health problems?
I’m not saying homosexuality is a disease or affliction. It’s jut how some people are born in the same way as some people are born transgender.
I’m always very surprised when Christians refer to ‘God’s law’ as though we were not under His grace. Did you not notice how Jesus criticised legalistic attitudes?
Cecilia said, on June 25th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Fishon, how on earth do you expect to have a constructive dialogue when you compare being gay to being a child beater or a mass murderer? How do you expect anyone to take such a position seriously– that two people who are adults in a consensual covenanted relationship are somehow comparable to those?
Do you even hear yourself?
————Yes, Cecilia, I hear myself. And the answer, though you will not understand it is this. They are sin. Sin is sin–I didn’t make the rules. Adultry, gossip, etc. And there in lays the rub—you don’t believe it is sin and I do. I do not know how we overcome this impass?
fishon
You remind me of the policeman Javert in Les Miserables. He couldn’t handle what he saw as God’s laws being broken because it would result in ‘disorder’. He eventually realises he has lost morally and kills himself.
It’s not sinful to love someone. It’s not sinful to touch someone who wants to be touched and who isn’t betraying another. It’s sinful to leave people alone without love and without being touched. It’s sinful to deny others an intimate relationship.
Just imagine, if you can, how it would feel if the universe as you see it were different and it was heterosexuality that was a sin. What would you do?
Sarah said, on June 25th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Fishon,
The one who abused children were more then likely abused themselves though that doesn’t make what they’ve done right but explains where they’re at. — A very hurting person.
———I agree
The one who commits murder? They’re still created by God and still perhaps like the one who abuses the child perhaps they too were children abused and received no advocacy .. should I then turn my back away from the person who wants to be reformed?
———Absolutly not. To turn our back would be absolutly unbiblical.
And last, to compare the homosexual to a child abuser and murderer is counter productive to the message of Jesus Christ.
———We’ll just have to disagree with that
God loves these people just as much as he loves you. And that might be hard to chock back but it’s true.
———For sure God loves everyone just as he loves me. Where did you get that I don’t believe that? But just as Jesus died that I who was a drunk and on my way to hell needed to be born again, so too the practicing gay, child beater, or gossip.
Sarah, you have no idea of who I have baptized into God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Homosexuals, Child molesters, Drug dealers, Porn distributors, Drunks, Liars, etc. If I believed as you seem to think I do, I would have not baptized anyone.
John 3: 16, 17 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world but that through Him the world be saved.
Question here …
Was the homosexual excluded in this passage of scripture?
No.
So then why do we somehow act and perhaps even believe that God would not love the homosexual and wish that the homosexual come to faith in His Son Jesus Christ?
———–No one is excluded from God’s love. However, you can’t isolate that scripture alone——One word: REPENTANCE.
Love and respect isn’t something to be earned it’s something that we simply need to give regardless if we agree on the topic of homosexuality or not.
———-Depends on what love you are talking about.
Ok, Sarah, do you respect Bernie Madoff?
Do you respect Fred Phelps?
Sarah, I am enjoying my conversation with you. I hope that I am not frustrating you too much.
fishon
Gal 3:28, There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
If there is neither male nor female, then how can some relationships be classed as as okay and others as not okay? It shouldn’t make any difference what our genitalia are.
As my friend and former pupil Fanny used to say, ‘It’s the person, not the plumbing’.
I’m pretty sure that the person born eunuch would be someone born sexless, possibly a hermaphrodite (although that’s probably stretching it.) It’s rather odd to think of it referring to homosexuals.
If sex was altogether a sin, I wouldn’t have sex. You can touch someone without having sex, you can love someone deeply without having sex. You can have a roommate who’s the same sex, and care very much for them, and hug them at times. And not have sex.. I don’t get what the big deal is. I suppose you could get jealous that other people get to have it. But sometimes certain people can’t do some things. Like women don’t get the same roles as men. Isn’t sex a little like food? I mean we have to eat, so god made food taste good, and we have to reproduce so god made sex good (from what I’ve heard.), but it can be used wrongly.
They shouldn’t be persecuted, they should be told they are sinners, just like everybody else. It is unfortunate that we are focusing on just that sin. You could show them that they aren’t a good person without even mentioning sex. And they should be shown the gift of repentance and faith. The rest is between them and God.
But if a friend were having sex before marriage, and were calling themselves Christian, they should be warned, and told they are sinning, so that they may repent. And it wouldn’t mean that you hated them. It wouldn’t even be unfair. If a friend were continually using God’s name in vain, even if they weren’t swearing, just saying things like, “Oh my g” you get the point, then you’d warn them of their sin.
I have learned that somethings can be harmful, even if you don’t realise it, even if it seems like a part of you. Even our thoughts are under a curse.
tiggy – that’s a verse to ponder. Especially considering male/female roles with regards to leadership
Excuse me asking this, Semety, but are you very young? It’s just that I’m amazed at anyone saying, ‘And not have sex.. I don’t get what the big deal is.’
Do you really think it’s your job to go around criticising people all the time? REmember Jesus said ‘Look at the big log in your own eye.’
’sometimes certain people can’t do some things. Like women don’t get the same roles as men. ‘
And you think people should just accept this? Or are you talking about sex roles in the bedroom, in which case I’m not too sure what you mean.
Steve,
I only referred to you as “closed-minded” on this particular subject, not in general.
I never professed to be open-minded myself, but my opinions on this subject have significantly changed over several years of studying into this *myself* rather than just believing what I am told from the pulpit. And I thank God that I chose to do so, or I would be living a very unhappy life right now.
It always amazes me how passionate people get about making sure all us gays know how “sinful” we are. I know I am, thanks very much. But I don’t believe it’s because of that part of me.
Caroline,
Believe me. I sin in thought, word, and deed, every bit as much as anyone who has ever lived. In matters of sexuality, also.
God’s law is not open for discussion (us to Him). He has given it to us and it stands.
Many of us cannot seem to shake whatever it is that has us.
The Law produces repentance. Then the gospel (forgiveness) can go to work in us and bring us new life in Christ. This is not a one time shot (I accepted Christ and now it’s a done deal – it doesn’t work like that), but rather a process that lasts a lifetime.
Repentance and forgivenes. Dying and rising. Over and over and ove again.
I’m not saying that I am better than anyone. I am probably worse than most.
We have to keep God’s standards (all of them) so that we know that we don’t measure up, so that repentance is brought forth, so that the active relationship can continue.
It’s not about whether someone can conquer any particular sin, although by God’s grace it does happen (other sins will remain), but rather it is the much needed realization that we are not who we were meant to be (we are fallen) and we need a Savior.
If there is no sin, then no Savior is needed and no Savior will be offered.
Our relationship with God trumps (or ought to) anything that we are doing down here, good or bad.
Thanks, Caroline.
David,
Could you, would you, join same sex couples in marriage? That will determine your final convictionis through the doors of your new found freedom. If not, why? Would it not promote peace to all mankind. Or, is it to save face for those in your community who hold fast that homosexuality is sin?
Sorry I get a little confusing. I’m 20, 21 in a couple months – I guess I might be young? I still don’t understand the whole sex thing. It’s just another physical thing..
Clarifying the part about roles. Men are given the leadership role, women are supposed to be more.. submissive. Men have authority in certain things, they are the head of the household, they can be pastors. Women are to obey their husbands (as long as they do not sin), and they are the ones responsible for children. They still have the same value, a woman is not less for being obedient. And, I’m not sure because I’m a woman, but I’d say the guy has the harder job – seeing as he is called to “love his wife as christ loved the church and gave himself for her”. It pictures the relationship of christ and his church or sometimes father and son.
When we go out witnessing, we witness to everybody. If someone comes up to us we’d talk to them first. If someone specifically said they were cheating on their wife or specificallly said that they were thieves, we’d probably specifically say that was a sin, before trying to be general. If someone says they’re homosexual, they will be told that it’s a sin. It’s not picking on homosexuals, it’s the fact that the homosexuals are figuratively the ones who come up. And the purpose is to witness to all the worlds nations and people. If this were a place where a bunch of Muslims or probably more accurately hindus, saying their way was right (muslims would probably be similar to christians, saying their way is the only way, which doesn’t really apply to homosexuality, but hindus would most likely say any way was right) Then we’d tell them that was a sin, and it wouldn’t be picking on them personally, even though it might seem like it. Does that make sense? (you probly won’t agree with it – but does it make sense?) I’d love for all homosexuals to come to christ, and fornicators, and thieves, and atheists, it doesn’t really matter what the sins are. and part of that is repentance.
hmm just thought of something. One of the bad things about being christian is an awareness of sin. “If you say you have no sin you decieve yourself and the truth is not in you.” christians will still sin, until the end, and it is impossible to be repentant for everything, when sometimes it’s hard to be aware of where we fall short. We shouldn’t say people aren’t christian because they are homosexual. because christians still sin. we should leave it up to god.
hmm but we should still say that it is a sin. we would want our sins revealed to us if there were any hope of change (well maybe not want, but it would be for our good). And people should have the opportunity to know it’s a sin, so they can repent.
Perhaps we should make the statement, not retract it just because it make people uncomfortable. and then be quiet. They know, let them deal with it. When witnessing there comes a time to leave. let the seeds sink in, and pray.
it’s out of our hands..
Excellent, Semety!
Nice job.
Semety,
Wow. Excellent.
Paul told Timothy, “Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young….” Hang in there.
Ah, the roles of men and women. I am the head of my house. That being said, 95% of all decision made in our house comes through my wife. I say “Yes,” because she is the one with the best ideas and sense. As the head of the house, I am thankful God has given me the wisdom to know who is the brightest in our house.
fishon
Semety, thanks for that, it was excellent. I especially appreciated this part:
“Perhaps we should make the statement, not retract it just because it make people uncomfortable. and then be quiet. They know, let them deal with it. When witnessing there comes a time to leave. let the seeds sink in, and pray.
it’s out of our hands..”
I have always loved watching those seeds sink in and work, when I have been priveleged enough to do so. God is amazing.
I just want to say how grateful I am to have heard Semety articulate the “men as head of household” and “women as submissive” and “men as pastors” and (clearly) “women not”.
That puts this whole conversation in a new light.
So I gather you all are fine with polygamy (as lived out by God’s faithful servants Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Solomon, and others)?
And I gather you have no problem with slavery, as cleary God’s seal of approval is placed on the Hebrews having slaves and slaves are told to be obedient in Paul’s letters.
This is all very, very helpful in understanding where you are coming from.
And the resounding Amen’s from Steve and Fishon… all very very helpful.
Cecilia,
I liked your recent post and it points out to our rediculious some people’s beliefs can be and I know some may think about my beliefs in the same light ….
I attend a church where a woman is the Executive Pastor but most people in the church don’t know she’s the Executive Pastor because her Lead Pastor is a guy and he does most of the preaching and most of what you would see the Lead Pastor do but at the same time the Lead Pastor is having to submit to the leadership of the Executive Pastor. It’s very interesting to see how a church functions with a woman Executive Pastor and it’s interesting to see how she leads the church but from behind the scenes if you will. She’s an amazing speaker and teacher and if she wanted to she could preach more and ask her Lead Pastor to not preach so much but she allows him to be more up front in leading the congregation.
I also attend a church where the understanding of husband/wife relationship and male/female relationship is complimentary to one another, equally submissive to one another serving each other. It’s nothin to do with male domination or the extreme women’s liberation movement but rather coming along side and affirming the gifts of the other and encouraging the man in his place of leading and initiating and the women strengthening and empowering the men in her life to be all that they were meant to be. That means for women to walk in humility and to submit for sure and that also means for men not to oppress but rather to lift up and allow for God to work in and through her in the way that God desires.
Some people in the church has a view of headship in regards to marriage relationship and others view as complimentarity. And then there are some marriage relationships where the wife becomes too dominating herself. If we’re complimentary to one another then we’re serving each other and building up the other. What men want is respect and what women want is to be loved. In a complimentarity role of marriage we see this between husband and wife. It becomes confusing when we try to model this in same sex marriage but this complimentary cannot exist without the acknowledgement that men and women are uniquely gifted in their own way to be equally valued in relationship between men and women. At least, now that I’ve mentioned complimentarity at least now you have a description of what that complimentarity between husband and wife looks like and also modeled in relating to the oposite gender.
I don’t really think it’s up to us to go around pointing out individual’s sins or what we consider to be their sins. We should deal with our own.
Some women are better at being dominant, some men are better at being more passive. People relate in all kinds of different ways.
Just ask who are the more dominant ones in society, men or women? I hardly think it’s women who need to be told not to dominate!
Hi Brokedown: Thanks for visiting my blog and taking the time to comment. I appreciate your question and think it is an important one. I personally believe that gays should be allowed to marry. I also think marriage is a human event and relationship and therefore should be performed by the state, not the church. The church can be involved especially if the couple desires it, but the official legal part is recognized by the the state. This would solve so many problems. I am away right now and can answer more thoroughly later, if you wish.
Oh man, the gay debate – a Christian sore point.
I find it odd all the arguement against the gay issue and the amount of forgiveness many other offenders of God’s law can get – obesity anyone (which is more about greed than it is about obesity)?
Fact is – the way some people are interpreting God’s law is the problem – not the law itself. Christians have a very sh*tty view of the law and read it in weird interpretive ways. They don’t understand this was a ‘law’ for a ’society’ once upon a time. It functioned like the American constitution and law system – complete with judges and everything. Look up Jewish law sometime – and see how those things are being interpreted now…it’s very interesting.
I know for a fact some conservative and reform Jewish congregations are marrying hay couples – yet they follow Leviticus. How is that even possible if the Christian viewpoint is correct? Because as much as Christians think they have a grasp on the Hebrew books and law (Torah) – they don’t and much of what we hear in churches on many issues is complete mumbo jumbo.
Look at Abraham – he almost sacrificed his son; David had someone killed to steal his wife; Hosea marries a prostitute; Moses was a murderer; Solomon was likely as close as we see an agnostic in any book of the bible (see ecclesiastes); Hosea marries a prostitute and Noah was a drunk. But guess who made the books of the bible as characters to learn from? Yes, all of them…and for some reason this is not a problem for Judaism.
Why? Because we are human and God knows that better than anyone else – hell He created us as we are to this day (if we believe in creation). And we want to knock someone for being ‘gay? Maybe God approves – how can anyone be so sure?
As for the eunuch debate – I would suggest people study that term if they want to speak on it…since Jesus does mention it. This may the closest thing we say to Jesus referencing to anything about gay people. It is a known fact kings would leave these ‘eunuchs’ with their wives and what have you to care for them – because they were effiminate (and no worry to cheat with his wives). These are the same people Jesus accepts and then says ‘those who can hear this – let them believe’. Well – I believe Jesus on this one.
Why is it so bad for gay people to be themselves? They are not heterosexual – for many this is a plain and simple fact of life. Now I don’t condone any other behavior for them (like adultery or fornication) – but if they are committed to one another – grand!
As for the Adam/Eve debate on this topic – well 2 becoming 1 is also about the committment within in relationship (companionship). Now although gays cannot actually reproduce (fact) – this does not mean they cannot be considered ‘married’. If you think about that term ‘2 becoming 1′ – it includes 3 aspects – companionship, sex. and the child. Gays can at least fulfill 1 of those idea (maybe 2 depending on someone’s view ons sex) – but really – all you need is one aspect to remain biblical -0 and in this case it’s companionship.
Now the ideal may be relationships that create children – but is that the only definition? No – it can’t be. Because then someone without children (or barren) is considered unmarried also…or the person that is a parapeligic isn’t either – nor the elderly couple that get married. So we can determine from that marriage is about companionship first and foremost – or as Adam’s request goes – ‘I need a mate’.
I need a mate too.
societyvs said:Christians have a very sh*tty view of the law and read it in weird interpretive ways.
——–ah then, you are not Christian?
fishon
“ah then, you are not Christian?” (fishon)
Oh I am – but I also know my view of biblical passages relating to the law need to be tempered with Jewish viewpoints (this is their whole faith) – and I admit also that what I was taught in bible school and church(es) was quite different than what Judaism is saying on those same passages. I can admit I am limited in what I know about the law – but I choose to go to Jewish sources now for info on their scriptures and the understanding of the law (Torah). I think the Christian process is very flawed and biased.
Someone get Tiggy a mate – lol
Just out of interest and kind of off topic, Soceityvs, what are your views on Israel and Palestine?
Societyvs said, on June 26th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
“ah then, you are not Christian?” (fishon)
Oh I am –
———-Oh, ok, I was confused when you said, “Christians have a very sh*tty view of the law and read it in weird interpretive ways.” ———–You must be excluding yourself when you said that. I missed the “We” part and it messed my thinking up.
fishon
Look I am a woman. Submissive is not a bad thing, it’s just the easiest way I know to articulate the particular role of a woman. And as for men being pastors and women not, I guess it depends on your church’s form of goverment. Husbands should consider their wife’s advice. And they should love their wives, and try to protect them and do their best to lead them in Christ. They get the final decision, but they aren’t obligated to use it.. They are obligated to discipline the children and teach them about God. Women should care for their husband, and children. Single women can have any job they want. So can married women, but they also should consider the needs of their family. Women are like advisors, maybe. It’s hard to explain – it’s not meant to be demeaning. Anymore than it’s demeaning for the Son to obey the Father, or the Church to follow Christ. As to being a pastor, women should teach other women and children, and are best equipped to do so. Teaching the church is simply the man’s responsibility. Women can be advisors, deacons, possibly elders (I’m not sure), they could even be prophets (if there are able to be any more), but they can’t be a Teaching elder (pastor). Having different roles, complementary I like that, even a submissive roles, does not make the woman of any less value than the man. I think Sarah’s definition is pretty much spot-on.
I’m not sure about polygamy, I know it happens in the Bible. I know it says that someone, I think it was the elder, should be a man of one wife, but I don’t know about how it’s mentioned elsewhere. I know that it is illegal, and since it’s not immoral not to be polygamous, we should obey the laws of the nation. But if it weren’t illegal, I’m not sure.
As for slavery, that’s tricky, because from what I can tell slavery was different from the way it ended up. Kidnapping is wrong, and so is forced slavery. Masters were to treat their slaves fairly, and slaves were to obey honourably. Christians are even compared to slaves of christ (most translations use the word bondservant.) If a person could not manage themselves enough to work on their own, they became slaves. It shouldn’t be a race thing. It shouldn’t be oppression. And I’m not sure about how children worked out.
The gay debate, I mostly follow the new testament for that. I’ve heard about Leviticus, but I know that a lot of those laws were for israel, purity laws and such, and were actually revoked, once they were no longer neccessary.
I don’t know enough about all those characters. I do know David sinned, first by adultery, then murder, and that Nathan the prophet chastised for it. And that he REPENTED. And I know that Hosea married an unfaithful wife, and pursued her (I didn’t remember her being a prostitute, but she could have been.) It was somewhat prophetic, as were his children. And I know that people in the Bible sin, because humans sin, and that God uses them. And that not all the people in the Bible are Christian, even some main ones – Saul, Judas. A lot of them repent/are chastised/are punished. Just because God appears to let sin go, doesn’t mean he does. At a certain point someone is punished for the sins.
I wanted to mention something that might be kinda odd, but give you another view on where I come from. I have only been Christian a year, maybe a bit more. Before that I was practically atheist, post-modern, very liberal. And an ardent advocate of gay marriage. I personally believe in love. I don’t see how it can be wrong. I don’t know why homosexuality is wrong, and I wish I could still stand up for it. I feel that it isn’t wrong, but I believe that the Bible says it is and that that means it is. I don’t get attracted to people, not really. I mean I get fascinated with people, but I never particularly want to have sex with them, or even have any physical attraction. I’ve had crushes on girls that were insanely deep. But they weren’t physical. I’ve had a couple on guys too. Before I was christian I thought I might be bisexual, or at least bi without the sexual part, but I never told anybody, mostly cause it wasn’t a big deal. And then I never told anybody, because I didn’t want it to be a big deal. So there, none of that might mean anything to you. But I don’t want anyone to think I’m just doing this out of blind hate or something.
Aww, Semety, thank you for sharing that with us. That must have been very confusing for you. I guess some people don’t have very strong sex drives but still feel a romantic passion towards people. With me the two are intertwined. We all form attachments of various kinds and sometimes we long to express those feelings in a physical way. I think it’s very important that people are touched and that doesn’t have to be sexual for some people, but for others it does. Maybe as you get older you’ll feel that need more or maybe not.
Oddly enough, at one time I thought that women should stay at home though I hadn’t really thought it through at all and was very politically naive. I think it’s very important that women are in leadership positions and can have a positive influence on the world, because look how it is at the moment. There is plenty of evidence that despite what St. Paul may or may not have said, there WERE women leaders in the churches in his day. He refers to quite a few of them iby name in his letters. I’m wondering why you say that women should only teach women and children? I regularly teach English to men. Don’t you think that some of the people teaching men in Bible colleges and seminaries are women? For most of histoyr men have thought women shouldn’t be educated and that they shouldn’t be allowed to vote and we’re still on the tail end of that in both church and state.
I agree with you about the OT characters. Despite being the Biblical heroes, they were a dodgy lot. Ruth, one of the heroines of Israel, made herself a prostitute to save her nation. I think what people are trying to say is that we shouldn’t forget our humanness. God created us as fragile and vulnerable human beings, not as automatons who follow rules in everything. I think he likes us to be beautiful and human and live interesting stories.
Okay maybe I’m not sure about the whole teaching thing. I’ll have to look it up to get a clearer picture. Sometimes women are the only ones available too. I temporarily retract my statements regarding pastorship. But not about leadership :p
Uh are you sure it was Ruth who became a prostitute? I thought Ruth married Boaz? Maybe it was Naomi/Mara? Or is there more than one Ruth? Or was she a prostitute in her homeland?
And I don’t think women should neccessarily stay at home. I do think women should care more about family than career, and at least spend part of her time at home. Not that men shouldn’t care about their family too, just that women are usually very suited to raising children. And that’s biological too not just biblical. At least until the children are old enough.
Oops, I meant Esther.
Aren’t pastors leaders? My church has a pastor and he’s the leader. He’s a man now, but he used to be a woman. LOL I don’t mean the pastor changed – his gender did. Though I don’t know if he was a pastor when he was a woman as that was before I lived here.
I’d like to hear more teaching and sermons from women. The men go on and on and sometimes I wonder if it’s an ego trip because t hey say in half an hour what could be said in ten minutes. Actually, I think they are probably just unconfident about ending or they want to hold on to the microphone like it’s a penis extension – poor things!
The early church didn’t have pastors or leaders I think. At least they didn’t use those titles. They had elders and deacons and stuff and a lot of women seemed to be running things judging from Paul’s letters. He also cites their inspirational teaching in relation to one of his missionary assistants.
tiggy,
You might check on that Esther thing too.
fishon
Tiggy: The men go on and on and sometimes I wonder if it’s an ego trip because t hey say in half an hour what could be said in ten minutes. Actually, I think they are probably just unconfident about ending or they want to hold on to the microphone like it’s a penis extension – poor things!
———–OH, Tiggy, you haven’t lessened to too many Americian women preachers then.
fishon
Well I suppose it depends on your definition of prostitution.
I’ve never heard an American woman preacher. The thing is we don’t actually have sermons as such in the church I go to now. The main leader gets up and talks in a fairly impromptu way about how he’s feeling – he’s very in touch with his feminine side and I love him for that. Often he’s very funny – usually unintentionally, but he laughs at himself. He’s not boring at all. But sometimes there are other men invited up after that who go on pretty much about nothing and are poor speakers and use long sporting metaphors that bore most of the congregation silly. They always run over time and people have to go and pick up the kids from the Sundy School rooms and of course we all need to go to the loo by then. Then there isn’t enough time left for worship at the end so things end on a low and dull note.
In our church there are two different kinds of elders the teaching elder and the ruling elders. The teaching elder is what we call the pastor, and he’s the one who preaches. In fact, when he was on vacation, the guy who was supposed to substitute for him had his plane cancelled. So one of the ruling elders read a sermon from a different pastor, because he couldn’t preach.
Let me rephrase that then. I temporarily retract my statement about pastoring, but not the ones about marriage roles. That’s what I meant to say.
heh my pastor doesn’t need a microphone yet, our church is so small. But other churches I’ve been to (not many yet) – their sermons were so short, it was all music, and stories, and dramas. Our pastor preaches long sermons, but I’m pretty sure he couldn’t do it in ten minutes. You can say a lot when you’re expositing the Bible, without being redundant. I once heard a sermon somewhere else where the guy was talking about Philippians I think, and he stopped to explain the first line, which is something along the lines of ‘Paul, a bondservant (slave!) of Jesus to all the saints at Philippi’.
What sort of church is it? Not all sermons are line by line Bible expositions. Some of them are more like Thought for the Day and connect everyday things to God.
I’m not married, so I’ll let people sort that out for themselves. I don’t particularly want to get married now – I don’t want to do some guy’s ironing. Do you think women are divinely appointed to do the ironing Semety?
From what you’ve said, I think you should try some different churches – some very different churches.
Why can’t they be both? The afternoon sermons aren’t line by line, but they still rely on scripture.
I don’t think irons were around when the Bible was written Tiggy. :p I think men and women should discuss that among themselves. I don’t know how to iron. My dad ironed his own shirts. I don’t think being submissive means doing all the chores. Unless the woman likes that kind of stuff. Women might be more likely to do the cleaning and stuff. It depends on the situation.
I’m trying to get a chance to go to a friend’s church. It’s not really a church, they call it an assembly. They gather on sundays, they don’t really have pastors i think. People go as they are led (but not disorderly) and offer a hymn or a prayer or a bible verse. And then after awhile they break bread, and some wine. and then they do it a bit more. It actually sounds closer to the earlier church. But I have to take my little 8 year old friend to our church, so I need to find someone to take care of her before I can go.
You probably think I need a better counsellor than my pastor too :p. Seriously, being at church and being christian has helped me. Although at the moment it may feel I’ve traded one crisis for another. Even though I cried real hard tonight – I didn’t try to hurt myself over it. I went and played piano instead. I don’t think I would’ve been able to do that even a month ago.
Music is very healing. And not just to the soul. There have been lots of reports in scientific and medical journals recently of the effects of music on healing the body.
I don’t know much about churches over there. Here you’re fairly safe if you stick to the Church of England because they tend to be quite balanced. Having said that, I go to two churches on Sundays and neither are C of E. Some of the leadership team at the charismatic one have some weird ideas and I don’t know if I will stay there. The other church is very small and is for gay people who haven’t felt able to continue at mainstream churches. It IS accepted by the other churches in the city though who all work together quite a bit. Not everyone there is gay, but it’s a very non-judgemental church. I’m trying a C of E one tomorrow because I’m still quite new to the area and want to see what the options are.
Thanks, NP, for you beautiful cartoon, and the thought you put into the synchroblog.