Aineo wrote:Tommy J wrote:I will give you one example of this. About a year ago a 19-year-old atheist who had earned his Eagle Award sued the Boy Scouts because as an avowed atheist the Boy Scouts said he did not meet their criteria for becoming a scoutmaster. The media was all over this and labeled the Boy Scouts hypocrites. Now judge for yourself who was the hypocrite:
On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country; and to obey the scout law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.
Who was the hypocrite the Boy Scouts of the 19-year-old who recited this pledge at every scout meeting he attended?
Lets discuss the Boy Scouts in a separate thread because that's of specific angst to me for many reasons. I don't want to muddy this thread related to inclusion to that issue. (I do have strong feelings about why the Boy Scouts were wrong about that issue)
As to the part of the letter you bolded I don’t know of many churches that excludes anyone based on race, gender, age, or sexual orientation. Bible based churches will not deny the truth of God’s word but neither will they reject people who attend who sin; otherwise you might as well close down all the churches. “For all have sinned and fall short of His glory” is found in the Bible. And when the Bible says all it means all.
What this letter does not state is that homosexuality is not a sin. Elitist churches do exist and will always exist since mankind is filled with arrogance and pride, but that is not the message of Christ.
Because If I'm correctly reading between the lines in the letter to the AJC from the Black Christian leaders here in Atlanta they're are admitting that perhaps they were WRONG in judging gay people as immoral or sinners.
I know you support bible internacy and I'm not enough of a biblical scholar to debate that point with you, I'm just saying I simply don't understand why Christians cannot be more flexible with regard to viewing homosexuality as such a terrible sin.
You said in a different thread that that Jesus threw out the 'dietary' laws of the OT but the moral laws still apply -- correct?
It seems inconcievable to me that any reasonable Christian would still adhere to some of the more bizarre moral laws.
Small example:
Lev 21:20 says I cannot approach the alter w/o good eyesight. Does this still apply?
Lev 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around .
Clearly the above two are not related to dietary laws but morality.
My confusion is, why is a Christian of the 21st Century so willing to throw these out as 'out of step with today's morality' but on the other hand, line and verse still adhere to the ones related to homosexuality?
This is baffling to me.