Against a backdrop of red stage curtains at one of Oslo’s most prominent LGBTQ+ spaces, the Church of Norway apologised for the discrimination and harm it had inflicted. “The church in Norway has caused LGBTQ+ people shame, great harm and pain,” the presiding bishop, Olav Fykse Tveit, said on Thursday. “This should never have happened and that is why I apologise today.” The “discrimination, unequal treatment and harassment” had caused some to lose their faith, Tveit acknowledged. A church service at Oslo Cathedral was scheduled to follow his apology.
The Lutheran Church of Norway is not alone. Like many religions around the world and like nearly every Christian Church of any creed or confession, the Church of Norway (evangelical Lutheran church that is by numbers Norway’s largest faith community) confessed to having marginalised LGBTQ+ people, refusing to allow them to become pastors, and failing to allow them to marry in the church. The increasingly liberal Church of Norway beame the second in the world to allow same-sex registered partnerships (1993) and the first Scandinavian country to allow same-sex marriage (2009). It joins the Church of England, the Irish Methodist Church, and the United Church of Canada in offering an apology to the LGBTQ community for their past refusal to recognize and support the various sexual desires and genders represented there.
The problem with this is simple. These churches did not follow a pattern of willful and wanton discrimination but, at least prior to their acceptance of such folks, had merely followed the words and common interpretation of Scripture to which every Christian community had adhered until culture and society changed. As one wag put it, "We have failed to celebrate and delight in all of your beautiful creation..." Well, of course, you did. Not because you were or are homophobic or possess any other phobias but because you listened to the Bible and not current polling and you followed the Scripture instead of what people thought or felt.
I am not at all denying homophobia or any other kind of phobia existed or exists in churches. They are, after all, made up of sinful people. But that is not what was their apology. They were disowning God's Word and the consistent and clear understanding of that Word over millennia. The apology is rather meaningless and perfunctory for those who have complained about such discrimination and everyone knows that the churches mentioned are clearly now in the woke camp. What is not meaningless or perfunctory is how easily, quickly, and without much thought, these churches have disowned what God has said. I do not mean to suggest that it is easy or will not come with a cost to own the Word of God. Faithfulness has always had a cost. But I am challenging the whole idea of a church that claims to be Christian but disowns the book that makes it Christian. If God's Word is not the authority, then what is? Clearly the answer is what people think or say. For the sad reality is that we live in a world in which it is expedient to throw God under the bus in order to retain your woke credentials before the world. The apology was not for the churches in question but for God. Once you begin apologizing for God, there is not much left to offend you which will not be jettisoned. Sin seems to be on the table now. How long before it will be ditched in favor of a God who loves everyone, stands for nothing, and is needed by no one?
8 comments:
I have often wondered if a person or church body which formerly claimed to believe in Christ and His word realizes that they are falling from grace? Is there an awareness and conviction that must first be suppressed and ignored? Is there an awakening, rejection and rebellion that must overtake the gentle prodding of the Holy Spirit? Is it something that proceeds gradually, or a sharp and intense change of the heart? In the case of this Lutheran body in Norway, we might surmise it has been gradual and culturally driven. The culture is Satan’s tool to change hearts, and he develops a customized plan to overcome the souls of his victims. We might view these changes in that particular church body as an absolute turning away from Holy Writ to pursue a culturally friendly gospel, one that is inspired by political correctness, but alien to the true Gospel message. God calls His people to be faithful, not confused or doubtful, but some will falter temporarily, some will fall entirely. The Bible tells us. Romans 1:16, “For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes…”. The last thing a Christian should ever consider doing is to apologize to the world for what we believe, and whom we follow. Soli Deo Gloria
For the purpose of this posting, all LGPTQ are born that way. I know this is an inflammatory topic. Please try to stay calm when you read this.
What does Matthew 12:31-32, "every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven", say about LGPTQ? Is being LGPTQ the Sin against the Holy Spirit? We tend to judge these people on the basis of their “pride to be LGPTQ.” However, it is estimated that 20% of them never come out.
In high school, I had a classmate who was homosexual. He was the son of a Pastor. He committed suicide.
Galatians 3 13Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— 14so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.
26for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. 27For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.
Peace and Joy!
George A. Marquart
George, my brother, homosexuals are not born that way. The idea of nature vs nurture is a compelling argument often used to excuse sin, and it is wrong to assume that a person is born homosexual, anymore than one is a born a drunkard, thief or murderer. These are sins of fallen humanity that are exercised through free will choices. When Our Lord forgave the woman accused of adultery, He did not affirm her in her sinful conduct, but said “Go and sin no more.” There are no birthright exemptions for sexual sins and other sins of the flesh. Read Romans 1, as this refers to sexual sin. There is no pardon attributed to any natural disposition or tendency being consigned at birth. Taking a pastoral view of homosexuality, it is to be seen as sinful and immoral, and we ought to pray for those struggling with this behavior, offering understanding, counseling and kindness, not harsh judgment, but never affirmation. Soli Deo Gloria
Dear John, thank you for your response. Here is the problem: the first sentence, "homosexuals are not born that way," is simply wrong. As a result, the entire posting is filled with errors. Out of countless sources that provide information on this theme, I am quoting a Journal that identifies itself as, “Academic rigor, journalistic flair”, “30 August 2019 It has long been clear that a person’s sexual preference – whether they prefer male or female sexual partners, or both – is influenced by his or her genetic makeup. The most straightforward evidence for this is that sexual preference is more likely to be the same in identical twin pairs, whose genetic makeup is identical, than in non-identical twin pairs, who share only around 50% of their genetic makeup.”
When the scientific community announced that there is no “homosexuality gene,” many immediately assumed that homosexuality is a life choice. Extensive scientific investigation clearly demonstrates that there are other mechanism through which homosexuality is hereditary.
Just because a condition is hereditary does not mean that its exercise is not sinful. Tourette Syndrome causes people to behave antisocially. There are a number of others that cause antisocial, or sinful behavior. All of these are forgiven to a devout, baptized Christian. That means there is no affirmation of these behaviors, but there is affirmation for the possibility of their forgiveness, because none of them are The Sin Against the Holy Spirit.
I was surprised that you argue for free will, by which people exercise their choices. Romans 6, particularly verse 19 debunk that notion, “For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification.”
A good maxim is that God is always more merciful than we suspect.
Peace and Joy!
George A. Marquart
You have brought up some compelling points, and it is true that there are genetic conditions which alter behavior in people born with types of inherited predispositions, but for the most part, I remain convinced that most examples of homosexuality are chosen lifestyle choices, and that those who practice it know that it is sinful, immoral, and unnatural. Where society advances homosexuality or normalizes it, even more people choose this practice, because they believe a permissive society has accepted. But it is plainly against God’s word, and sinful since the beginning. Soli Deo Gloria
Dear John: You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Although I am certain that science, specifically logic, statistics, and research are often essential to forming theological opinions, Science is by no means the final arbiter in theological matters.
Scientist agree that there is no Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) that affects whether a person is a homosexual. At the same time, they are certain that choice is not a significant factor affecting homosexuality.
If it is true that most homosexuals are those who did not become so by choice, they are not disqualified from salvation. The One Holy and Apostolic catholic Church has an obligation to them, as distasteful as it may be. This “love one another” does not always come easy.
Peace and Joy!
George A. Marquart
George, this will be my last comment on the topic. We may have to simply agree to disagree. I disagree with your point that “science, specifically logic, statistics, and research are often essential to forming theological opinions.” If that were so, one could simply dismiss the miracles of Jesus as illogical and unscientific, His resurrection questioned, and the parting of the Red Sea a figment of the writer’s imagination. Which do we prefer, faith in God and His word, or faith in science? Science is fine, but will not answer all the intriguing questions of humanity, nor can science explain the Trinity. As for the topic of “disqualifying homosexuals from salvation,” no sin except blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is unpardonable. God forgives the repentant sinner, whose sins are covered by Our Lord’s sacrifice on the cross. No homosexual, prostitute, thief, or murderer is not allowed into church, to pray and worship the Lord while sitting besides other sinners. In fact, everyone in church is a sinner, in need of, and saved by grace. But not all are saved! As no one will go to Heaven who doesn’t desire to be there. Those who know the will of God and reject Him do not show evidence of any spiritual change, of any striving or struggle against sin, against the things of the world, the flesh, and the devil. Romans 1 speaks of human depravity, of a debased mind, of those who will not retain a knowledge of God, and His righteousness. “For the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness” vs20. it also speaks of futile thoughts, foolish hearts, darkened, and debased minds, and that there is a point where “God gave them up to uncleanness, in the lust if their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves.” vs24. And vs26 “For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind to do those things which are not fitting, being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil mindedness,…..”. Romans convicts not only these practices, but those who approve of them as well. There is much more to Romans, and it is a warning to all. I will leave this thread, as the topic has been discussed at length by both of us. Let the wisdom of God guide us in our understanding. Soli Deo Gloria
Dear John: Your first point. Do you remember John 5:39 in the KJV? “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life…” For centuries Christians believed this was a commandment, ignoring the fact that it made no sense. However, logic and linguistics prevailed.
The first verse of Psalm 121, “ "I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help.” Again, it took centuries as well as logic and linguistics to show that the first part of this verse should be a question, followed by the affirmation, “My help comes from the Lord,” not from the hills, where the followers of Baal worshiped.
Science, as I freely admit, does not always get it right. The best example is the “alma” – “Parthenon” controversy from Isaiah. The best, and I believe, final decision comes from the Jewish authors of the Septuagint. Those linguists from long ago, who have to be recognized as the best judges of what the Jewish text means, wrote “Parthenon”, firmly asserting that the Mother of God, a virgin, gave birth to a son.
Here is the point: We take what Scripture says, as a given. Within that text, we use logic, linguistics, and other texts from Scripture, and other sciences to determine what Scripture really says. God is a God of order, and of truth; He does not try to deceive us. Therefore, it is our duty to find out what the true text of the original is, and what it means in the vernacular.
The matter of miracles follows the rule. It is part of the given of Scripture, not to be debated, although some changes have been made in the texts of these miracles. Ironically, one of your “miracle” examples has been wrong for centuries. The Hebrew text does not say “red” but “reed”. The idea that the Jews trekked all the way from Goshen, where they lived, through a hostile Egypt, to the Red Sea fails the logic text together with that of linguistics. Granted, this does not affect our salvation, but it confirms the infallibility of Scripture.
The matter of the Trinity follows the same rule. It is part of the given, not to be debated, although you would be hard put to find the word in Scripture.
As for the matter of depravity and those who encourage it, as apparently I do, we have to remember that our duty is to encourage Godly behavior and to be clear in proclaiming what is not God’s will. However, to judge who will be in Paradise, and who will not, is solely God’s decision. The Penitent Thief (probably murderer and many other things too) is an everlasting affirmation of that.
Basta. I will not look for a response, although I deeply regret that you and I are the only ones, who think this matter is worth discussing.
Peace and Joy!
George A. Marquart
Post a Comment