Seventh-gay Adventist?

 

A short item in a recent Dutch newspaper. A Roman-Catholic priest in one of the southern provinces of the country refused to baptize a baby. Why? Because the parents are a lesbian couple. The priest concluded that his conscience did not allow him to perform the baptism. A colleague in another parish, however, was willing to baptize the infant. The bishop commented that the priest had not asked the advice of his superiors. He has the freedom to use his own judgment, even though he may, under these circumstances not have acted in the wisest possible way, the bishop added.

In any case, Adventist preachers will not face this particular dilemma. The Adventist church does not baptize infants, regardless whether the parents are homo or hetero. But Adventist pastors increasingly face similar problems. More and more often Adventist ministers face the question how their church thinks about same-sex matters, and must ask themselves what they think themselves and what choices they will make.

I know of a number of cases that currently play out in the Adventist Church, in the Netherlands as well as in Belgium. Can a lesbian woman, who has been living for years in a stable, monogamous relationship, be baptized and become an Adventist church member? Must we tell a homosexual couple that wants to receive a blessing on their relationship, that they ‘live in sin’ and that therefore the church cannot bless them? Can an Adventist homo safely come ‘out of the closet’ and retain his/her responsibility in the local church?

The discussion about homosexuality and everything that relates to it has hardly started in the Adventist Church. The church is still too busy with the commotion surrounding ordaining female ministers, and the problems concerning a literal six-day creation. But in the meantime it is clear that the questions regarding same sex relationships (which according to many Adventists are unequivocally condemned by the Bible) can no longer be ignored.  It is also clear that these various issues have one common denominator. It is the basic question: How does one read the Bible? Can you only read the Bible in such a way that you have little or no room for maneuvering in these matters? Or can you, in good conscience, (and with the unwavering belief that the Bible is the Word of God in tact), also read the Bible in a way that leaves room for a non-literal approach that also takes into account that we live today in a world that starkly differs from the world of Bible times?

Not too long ago I saw the film Seventh-gay Adventists—a fascinating documentary that followed three Adventist same sex couples over a period of some years. The film pictures in a clever, sometimes surprising, and often sad, manner what homosexual men and women must go through when they want to be full members of the Adventist Christ.

One of the partners of one couple asks his brother who is an Adventist pastor, to officiate at their marriage ceremony. He goes through a lot of inner turmoil. He does not know how to handle this situation. But, eventually, he decides to respond positively. ‘Because,’ he says, if I make a mistake, I rather err at the side of humanness and mercy, that that I make a mistake by giving too much emphasis to rules and organizational policies, without due regard for real people of flesh and blood.’

It will be a while, I guess, before we can have an open discussion about these matters at all levels of the church, in all countries and in all cultures. There is indeed a great number of theological, cultural and historical issues to consider. Might it be that, for the time being, we could follow the example of the two Dutch priests and his bishop, who stated that the priests could make their own independent decision in this matter.  Could it be possible that we give the Adventist minister, and the individual Adventist congregation, the same kind of space and freedom? I suspect that most of those with a ‘different’ sexual orientation will understand that not all pastors and church committees will, in good conscience, come to the same judgment. But it may, at least for now, provide a pragmatic and yet spiritually responsible way out of many terrible dilemmas.

It may be that my thinking may change again in the next year or so. It has changed in many ways in the last few years. I continue to struggle with several aspects. But I have concluded that always saying ‘no’ when brothers and sisters with a ‘different’ sexual orientation want to be full members of the church, is no Christian option.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 36 Comments
  • Johan

    Hi Reinder, Where is your hearts desire: woman ordination or bringing the 3 angels message to the world? I never see that your heart goes to the latter.

    • http://reinderbruinsma.com/ Reinder Bruinsma

      That does not seem to be a fair comment. Just took a better look at all that I have written about and what my ministry has been all about

  • Inge Anderson

    Dear Reindeer,

    You wrote, “Can a lesbian woman, who has been living for years in a stable,
    monogamous relationship, be baptized and become an Adventist church
    member”

    I don’t think it’s necessary to approach the question like that. I do know of a gay couple who were both members of a church in California while living together celibately. Both had the attitude that they loved each other too much to lead each other into sin–as I know from their personal testimony to me. But, as far as I know, the church members never questioned them about their sexual habits. They knew the biblical standard, and the members trusted them to live by them. Even after one partner died and the other (of Catholic background) is getting a bit disillusioned with the Adventist church, he is sticking by his stand on sexual purity.

    We need to think more deeply of what it means to treat others how we would wish to be treated. It seems clear to me that we cannot tell people that God endorses gay sex. After all, the Bible is very clear on the fact that God designed sex for persons who are joined to each other for life in the biblical covenant of marriage, and that is not possible for gay people, even if they call their union “marriage.”

    When the opportunity arises to address same-sex couples, I believe we should clarify what God designed for sex and marriage, being ready to admit that heterosexual couples often do not live up to God’s standard. But that doesn’t change the standard. And marriage is more than sex. And that’s an area in which questions have been addressed to me in the form of “Is it wrong for two same-sex persons to live together.” I generally point to the difficulty that sexual tension introduces. If that is not a problem (possibly so for some lesbians), then there’s still the problem of exclusivity.

    God designed for one man and one woman to be in an exclusive relationship. Other relationships are meant to be open. And that’s where I see the biggest problem of same-sex couples continuing to live together. In the example of my two gay friends, one began a promising relationship with a woman, but it was effectively nixed by his dominant partner. So it’s not necessarily a clear either/or decision.

    We must leave room for people to grow, even as we teach biblical principles. But not many congregations are ready for that … sadly. When we attempt to be conscience for others, it’s bad for us, and it’s bad for them, because it deprives them of an opportunity to grow.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Carrol-McBroom-Grady/1035698385 Carrol McBroom Grady

      Just wondering if you believe in “present truth,” Inge.

      • Florin Laiu

        Sorry, you would make me wonder if the serpent’s proposal to Eve was not THEN a present truth…

  • Florin Laiu

    Dear Dr Bruinsma, I would be decided regarding this topic. How should we interpret the conditions that John the Baptist asked his baptismal candidates? Repentance from conscious sins, is a sine qua non condition of baptism. Could we, in the true fear of God, accept active gay people as our brothers and sisters in Christ? This is not a question of charity, I think, but of reverence towards the principles of God. We cannot transform God’s grace in a disgusting and abnormal licentiousness. I would rather accept polygamous families in the Church (and state), since we have at least Biblical precedents. But the gay phenomenon in the Church? I will probably withdraw from the Church which treats gay people as a normal “sexual orientation”. That is rather a spiritual and cultural disorientation. Gay people need our compassion and we should pray for them; we should allow them visit our churches and socialize with them in the hope of their salvation, but Brother Jude (1:23) says about such sexual abominations: “save others by snatching them out of the fire; on others have mercy with fear, abhorring even the outer garment stained by the flesh.” The only Christian option for such cases is that which the apostle of grace and Gospel himself recommended: “Expel the wicked man from among you.” (1Cor 5:13).

    • Constitutionalposter

      Well said. Amen to that.

      Leviticus 20:13
      – If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of
      them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
      their blood [shall be] upon them.

      Leviticus 18:22 – Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

      Not sure where this is from but I think it’s from the Bible, love the sinner, but hate the sin.

  • Catherine Taylor

    *The people partook largely of the same Spirit,
    intruding upon the province of conscience and judging one another in matters
    that lay between the soul and God. In reference to this Spirit and practice,
    Jesus said “Judge not that ye be not judged”. That is, do not set yourself up
    as a standard. Do not make your opinions, your views of duty, your
    interpretations of the Scripture, a criterion for others and in your condemn
    them if they do not come up to your ideal. Do not criticize others, conjecturing
    as to their motives and passing judgment upon them. Ellen G White Thoughts from the Mount of Blessings pg. 123, 124

    • Constitutionalposter

      You are way off the mark on this. From what you say, if I meet someone that likes to kill people I can’t call him a murderer because I’d be judging him, that’s idiocy. The Bible already made the judgement, not the people, it is stated in the 10 commandments that you shall NOT murder, so I’m not judging by my standards, I’m stating what the Bible says.
      The same goes for homosexuality, I’m not judging by my standards, I’m going by what the Bible says, if you don’t like it, go find another religion that doesn’t follow the Bible.
      Leviticus 20:13
      – If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of
      them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
      their blood [shall be] upon them.

      Leviticus 18:22 – Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

  • Andrew Dykstra

    “Religious people are notorious for confusing acceptance with agreement. When that happens, people assume that disagreement must result in rejection and condemnation.” from “The End of Religion” by Bruxy Cavey. (2007)

    Dear Dr. Bruinsma,

    Thank you for this very thoughtful posting. It is so helpful in processing conflicting views.

    My sister told me that her local Reformed Church (Reformed Church of America) (here in Canada) is fighting bitterly over the issue of ordaining women as elders and deacons. Some are so furious about the proposed change that they have left the church. Our dear Adventist church has at least dealt with that issue while still struggling over full ordination as pastors. I told my sister that in a small town in Friesland an aunt of ours attends a Reformed church served by a gay pastor who lives with his partner. Apparently that is causing our aunt no distress. Perhaps the above statement refers to her. Acceptance does not necessarily indicate agreement.

    Some years ago, a cousin of mine and her husband adopted an infant girl. They were members of the Christian Reformed Church. In keeping with the custom of their church they sought baptism for their infant, and the consistory said they would allow it, but only if segregated from the other infants. Ostensibly the reason was because no one knew “where this infant came from.” This is the same church that practices a “closed” communion table–open only for members. Apparently Christ’s table needs vigilant protection. (Sarcasm intended)

    I have seen “Seventh-gay Adventists” and was so proud of the church attended by the two women featured in the film. They cobbled an agreement with which everyone could live in good conscience. Acceptance did not mean agreement, but it was felt to be better if the two women were included in the fold.

    Thank you, Dr. Bruinsma for all you do to foster better understanding.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew Dykstra

    (Toronto, Canada)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Carrol-McBroom-Grady/1035698385 Carrol McBroom Grady

    It is very encouraging to me when people at your level of influence are willing to voice questions I share. It is indeed sad when I hear my gay/lesbian friends who are still part of the church, despite its rejection of them, agonize over their non-Adventist gay/lesbian friends who have been impressed by their lives and want to know more about their church. How can they encourage other gays/lesbians to join a church that won’t accept them?
    It seems so very clear to me, after all these years, that God doesn’t reject His gay/lesbian children, and doesn’t want us to. But many of my good friends cannot see it this way. To me, this is a “present truth” that the Holy Spirit is bringing to our attention, but so many are not open to the Spirit’s leading.

    • Constitutionalposter

      “It seems so very clear to me, after all these years, that God doesn’t reject His gay/lesbian”. You’re right, in a way, God didn’t reject them, they rejected God.

      You don’t know the Bible and that means you do not know God.

      Leviticus 20:13
      – If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of
      them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
      their blood [shall be] upon them.

      Leviticus 18:22 – Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

    • Florin Laiu

      Please, Carrol, read what the Bible says about this sin and others,
      “‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.” (Ezek. 16:49-50 NIV).
      “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (Lev. 20:13 NIV)
      Such instructions which God gave his people are clearly not related to forced sexual relationships, nor to exclusively pagan rites, as some gay exegetes claim. They simply refer to the homosexual act/contact, as an abomination.
      Or, if you prefer the New Testament, please read,

      ”Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? DO NOT BE DECEIVED: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor MEN who have SEX WITH MEN nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Cor. 6:9-10 NIV)
      ”We also know that the LAW is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing HOMOSEXUALITY, for slave traders and liars and perjurers– and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.” (1 Tim. 1:9-11 NIV)

      ”Because of this, God gave them over to SHAMEFUL LUSTS. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, … They are …. arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; …. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also APPROVE OF THOSE WHO PRACTICE THEM.” (Rom. 1:26-32 NIV)

      What Bible translation do you use? Did Jesus meantime convert to the modern Gospel according to the Flesh? It is nice that you love your friends, but if you really want their eternal good, help them see what is sin and urge them repent. Did you find another way to heaven but through Jesus?

  • Carolyn Parsons

    I have heard that the SDA church has baptized one or more polygamists without requiring them to get rid of their spouses. This seems directly relevant to the issue you are discussing. On the other hand, I am sure the church will not see it the same way because of animus against LGBTI people by the church.

    • Constitutionalposter

      You have no idea what the church is about. The church isn’t against the LGBTI, they are against what they do. This church loves the sinner, but hates the sin.
      They can come and worship with us, they just can’t be baptized because that would go against the Bible.
      The Bible says:
      Leviticus 20:13
      – If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of
      them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
      their blood [shall be] upon them.

      Leviticus 18:22 – Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

      You should not speak of that which you do not know.

    • Florin Laiu

      Polygamy is not an ideal marriage, and in fact many Christians today are ”polygamous”, by divorcing and remarriage. This is bad enough and falls short of God’s plan. But anyway, polygamy and divorce/remarriage was not punished by God through the Law of Moses, they were tolerated evils. But homosexuality was a capital sin in the Law, even worse than adultery; since adultery must meet the death penalty, even though this is a natural sin, while homosexuality is against the nature – disgusting even for most and worse sinners.

  • PEDRO PABLO

    PEDRO PABLO SAYS:

    This man I believe him little or nothing.

    PEOPLE THERE IS HIS POWER MONOPOLY IN THEOLOGICAL intelligentsia.

    WHERE THERE IS A SUPERIOR pyramidal organization / TOP DICTATED guidelines to follow or risk being relegated FINALLY THEY PREACH THE MESSAGE OF THE THREE ANGELS.

    Not surprising because the prophecies THIS MUST BE MET.

  • http://www.facebook.com/kahn.benwessi Kahn Toufick Benwessi

    33 “Make
    a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its
    fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. 34 You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of. 35 A
    good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and an
    evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. 36 But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken. 37 For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.” Matthew 12 33-37

  • Tiago Lopes

    “Might it be that, for the time being, we could follow the example of the two Dutch priests and his bishop, who stated that the priests could make their own independent decision in this matter. Could it be possible that we give the Adventist minister, and the individual Adventist congregation, the same kind of space and freedom?”

    —It depends… which head is ruling the church body, satan or Christ? One should be our speech. Should a pastor act different that the creed that “employs” him? Of course not. I he wants to act differently, he can go join another creed in accord to his thinking. That’s his liberty, who’s stopping him?

    “It may be that my thinking may change again in the next year or so. It has changed in many ways in the last few years.”

    —That reminds me that “we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting,” (Ephesians 4:14). And the word “cunning” reflects the word “clever” that you used to describe the documentary you watched, “Seventh-gay Adventist” (I get confused by the wording game there; I keep wondering when will an eight-gay appear, and who was the sixth-gay).

    “can you, in good conscience, (and with the unwavering belief that the Bible is the Word of God in tact), also read the Bible in a way that leaves room for a non-literal approach that also takes into account that we live today in a world that starkly differs from the world of Bible times?”

    —Where did Ecclesiastes 1:9 go to in your Bible? Is it still there? is the sun still defining your sabbath limits?

    • http://Facebook.com/ Patricia Harvey

      Great presentation. One thing I do know is God’s response to the first official gays in the Bible: He gave them their own taste of hell – a literal hell. Such a hell is reserved for those today who practice the gay lifestyle among others and God Himself convenes it once again. So if the goodly pastor openly sympathises with the lifestyle, encouraging those who practice to continue to do so, then his place in hell is secured right alongside the prince of darkness whom he serves.

  • kaydenpat

    I say err on the side of compassion, love and tolerance. Accept people for who they are. If a gay couple wants to be baptized and come into fellowship with other SDAs, they should be allowed to do so. Like other couples, they would have to be monogamous and accept church doctrines to remain in good standing. But I don’t think that Adventist Christians should be blocking the doors against GLBT members.

    • Constitutionalposter

      I hear you, you and Reinder think it’s better to side with people than the Bible.

      You are to love the sinner but hate the sin. It is sin and the Bible is CLEAR on that matter.
      They can come join us in church, be loved and treated as Gods children, but if they want to live a homosexual lifestyle they cannot be baptized and become members of the church.

    • Florin Laiu

      What is more important in God’s sight? Accepting some doctrines or living a clean life? If not, why is so important that gay people be monogamous? When will we be ready to accept in our fold, people who make sex with animals (exclusive / monogamous relationship!) ? Can’t you hear that such sins are outcrying up to heaven?

      • http://reinderbruinsma.com/ Reinder Bruinsma

        Dear Florin, I do not think that the comparison with bestiality is fair. The entire issue is not as clear-cut as many seem to think. The biblical statements refer to another kind of problem than committed same-sex monogamous relationships. I am not saying that I have solved all problems and have all the answers, but I have greatly benefitted from reading books by pro- and con-voices–inside and outside the SDA community. If you want me to, I could recommend some useful literature.

        • http://biblerealities.com/ Bryan Glass

          I see the problem, you’re looking for answers outside of the Bible, that’s why it’s not “cleat-cut” to you.
          Leviticus 20:13 – If a man also lie with mankind, as
          he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they
          shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.
          Leviticus 18:22 – Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

          Looks very clear to me….

          Then, if you add common sense, something that is lacking now days, all you have to do is look at the anatomy of the male compared to the female and it’s even clearer.

          This is the problem with all the homo’s and people that are pro-homosexuality, they don’t use the Bible but still want to be called a Christian, sorry, you can’t have it both ways. Either you follow God’s word, or you’re not a Christian, there is no middle ground, there is no such thing as “no so clear-cut”.

        • Florin Laiu

          Dear Reinder
          I had sufficient dialog with some gay leaders (trained in theology), and therefore I think I do not need to read more similar stuff.
          In fact, it is not even necessary to read a Bible, in order to call this sin with its proper name shiqqutz. It is a psychologic and sexual perversion by any criteria. It is obviously against the nature.
          The gay exegesis to the Sodom case reported in Genesis is not sufficient. Ezekiel 16:49-50 shows that the Sodomites’ sin was not limited to their violent assault. Their sins were first pride, luxury and egotism, and the climax of their sinfulness was that they became arrogant and “committed disgusting (abominable) acts before me”. Just imaine that you are witnessing such “love”. But God surely sees all these shiqqutzim.
          I am waiting for better news from you.

          • Alf

            Florin, why is your heart so full of hate? I wish you will find love in your life. God loved the world and we are all invited to join him. I am thankful for all people who will share Gods love. It’s all about the inside. Peace to you.

    • WutDixLibsR

      Leviticus 20:13 – If a man also lie with mankind, as
      he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they
      shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.

      Leviticus 18:22 – Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

      God considers homosexuality an abomination.

      The only reason for homosexuals to be SDA’s is to start trouble. They know the church does not allow it, so why would anyone want to be part of an organization that considers what they do as wrong? Why don’t they start their own church?

      • http://reinderbruinsma.com/ Reinder Bruinsma

        You seem to know very little about the issue! Believe me I know many committed SDA gays and lesbians who want to belong to our church and the last thing they want to do is creating trouble. Have you ever had some good heart-to-heart talk with some homosexual christians? If not, you really have no right to express such opinion as you did about 2 hours ago.

        • http://biblerealities.com Conservative Protestant

          First of all, you can’t be a homosexual Christian. Christians will go to heaven once Jesus returns, but homosexual will not go to heaven, so they can’t be Christians. Christian is someone who follows Christ, and one of the main things Christ taught us was to follow God’s word.

          1 Corinthians 6:9
          & 10

          Or do you not know
          that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived;
          neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor
          HOMOSEXUALS, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
          swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God
          A homosexual is someone who has sex with the same gender, PERIOD!
          If they are to come into the church, they have to give that up, but guess what? If they give it up, they are NO LONGER homosexuals..
          So WutDix is right because an ex-homosexual is NOT a homosexual.

          I smoked all my life, but I quit, so I am NO LONGER a smoker. Do I crave it, yes, but I don’t do it, so I an no longer a smoker.

          I have a friend who committed adultery, but he’s not an adulterer, because he quit, he doesn’t do it.

          We all make mistakes, but a making a mistake is different than continually doing something that is wrong. If someone commits adultery but repents and tries not to do it again, he’s not an adulterer, and the same for homosexuality. If someone quits, repents, they are no longer a homosexual. But what if he slips and has a homosexual relationship? Well, that’s the same as the one who slipped and committed adultery, it’s a mistake that can be forgiven.

          The difference is someone who calls himself or herself a homosexual. That person is stating that they are planning to sin, they accept sin.

          Homosexuals know SDA’s are against it, so what purpose would they have in going to the church as homosexuals? To start trouble. If they really wanted to go to the church to worship, they would give up their ways.

          And before you ask me the same question you asked WutDix, YES, I’ve had many heart to heart discussions with a homosexual. My uncle was one, and he had it worse than most people of today, he was born in the 1930′s. In the late 90′s he came to God and gave up his homosexual ways. Does he still have the same feelings? Yes, so in my opinion, his fight is harder than most and God will reward him greatly in heaven.

          But let me finish with this. If a homosexual wants to worship with the church, then they should be counseled first, to see if they have any intension of giving up their homosexual ways. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying we should have someone standing at the door and blocking homosexuals from coming in, I’m talking about homosexuals that want to continue to worship, they are the ones that need to quit one or the other, either quit the homosexuality, or leave the church. The church cannot allow them to continue to attend if they will not give up their ways because the church cannot condone what the Bible has forbidden.

  • James Price

    Dear brother Reinder
    God loves gays and lesbians,He loves you and me,He even loves Jesuits,Freemasons,all of the illuminati; satanist and the pope, for He is the God of love,the God of light and the God of no secrets.

    Just remember there will be a judgement day…Those that did not accept Jesus Christ as their Savior will be destroyed with Satan and his followers.The book of Jude clearly speaks about the doom of false teachers we have in our church,I recommend you go read the book of Jude thoroughly as it has a special message for the jesuits

    We are to follow the teachings based on the bible and the bible alone.

    I pray that you and me and all people mentioned above would choose life over death by accepting Jesus Christ and rejecting satan;and the wealth he tries to give you in his secular and secret societies.

    James Price

  • Constitutionalposter

    Leviticus 20:13
    – If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of
    them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
    their blood [shall be] upon them.

    Leviticus 18:22 – Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

  • Constitutionalposter

    Leviticus 20:13
    – If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of
    them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
    their blood [shall be] upon them.

    Leviticus 18:22 – Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

    I just don’t get you people, so caught up in your own selfishness. The Bible, the word of God is so clear on this matter, but you people just want your way and will twist the truth. Sodomy is a sin and is disgusting.

  • Florin Laiu

    If a sexual relationship, different from the heterosexual marriage, established by the Creator, is really justified in the Church fellowship as an alternative way of life, then I wonder which obvious sin cannot be accepted in such fellowship? And why should we profess an Adventist message, calling people to worship the Creator, and not rather join the largest possible „communion of saints”, including all people who prefer kinds of unrepented sins?

  • David

    The Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and their ‘ontological’ relativistic view of Reality… is something that has effected all of their thinking. Existentialism, Absurdism and Mysticism runs in every channel of their world view. That is why they are so spiritually emasculated and have an almost impossible time evangelizing their land. Everyone is afraid to call a thing and thing. You cannot call sin by it’s right name. Why? Because the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden will ask you the ‘ontological question’, “what is sin?”, “Is it a thing or just a perception of wrong?” They have no concept of God’s ‘ontological’ orientation. God references Himself and His Word as the bases of all ‘Reality’. God is not so Pantheistic to believe that we (yes, even His church) is not the basis of all Reality. We are vapor and we are fading and withering. It is He and His Word that ‘remains forever’ and our ‘councils’ and our decisions are but air and fluff to be dissolved by Him upon His return. ‘We’ make nothing real. That is Rome’s great fault. Rome thinks that It can make saints, turn bread to the body of Jesus and hold the keys to salvation and anathema… But God laughs at these self important circles and whispers to them that ‘it will all come to nothing in the end.’

  • John Rosier

    I’m not so sure that the Biblical writers within the context of their culture thought it possible for two people of the same sex to be attracted to each other as a man is attracted to a woman, and visa versa, let alone to actually fall in love with each other as soulmates. Some years ago a pastor friend of mine asked me what I thought about this issue, and my reply was that after some years of teaching Biblical Studies and reading through some of these texts in the Torah it appeared to me that the real issue was sodomy and bestiality. To lie with a man like a woman suggests sexual intercourse which in the case of males is sodomy; intercourse with animals is also forbidden. These practices were part of Canaanite religion and culture, and we know that the Ionian Greeks practiced sodomy as a rite of passage, and it was certainly practiced to some degree in Classical culture during the time Paul was writing, hence his references to it. The Hebrews in this regard were to be different, of course.
    The term ‘Homosexual’ is a 19th century invention, and widened the activity beyond mere sexual acts between two men. In the past, especially the middle ages, men were burnt and hanged for sodomy, Church and State being quite draconian, though it is of interest that while sodomy laws remained in force in the UK, and were buttressed using the term homosexual in the 1860s, this prohibition was not extended to lesbianism. Women due to their anatomy cannot engage in sodomy, never mind about the sensibilities of Queen Victoria.
    We also know that the practice goes back a very long way in human history and there are examples of it in pre-history artefacts, and from most cultures, whether tolerated or not. Apparently, according to studies of animal behaviour in the wild we have observed examples of this sort of behaviour among apes and some other creatures; it’s not something that is peculiar to humans.
    However, the Adventist Communion has never had to address this issue until fairly recently, although it almost tore the Anglican Communion apart in the late 1990s, and it still unresolved. It does not matter how we try to deal with the situation sodomy is Biblically prohibited. But one would be hard put to find a passage that actually says that two people of the same sex must not fall in love with each other or live together as soulmates in a non-sexual relationship. The Bible in my view does not address this phenomena.
    But, while we have gone on about the same-sex couples there is no apparent objection to the practice of sodomy within marriage, which research in the UK regarding sexual practices among married couples has unearthed. As long as they are married as man and wife what they do in bed is their business despite the fact that they are practicing something within marriage that is Biblically forbidden. Interesting one that.
    As for same-sex marriage, which is now legal in the UK, it is in my view an absurdity. Marriage by definition has to be between two people of the opposite sex for the purpose of having children. That is the model. I do think that the Adventist Communion should put up considerable resistance to any pressure from the State or Gay and Lesbian communicants to performing same-sex marriages in church. There is a secular civil form which people can use for that, and the Communion certainly can reserve the right not to bless such a union even if contracted within a civil ceremony. That is my position where that is concerned. As for the rest I leave it to God.
    I do believe that if one does confront the living Lord then regardless as to what sins were are prone to by nature, they can be through the power of the Holy Spirit be counteracted. A Gay man and a lesbian woman will always be so, as a musician or painter will always be so, but the power of God is such that the desire to do certain acts prohibited in scripture can be diminished to the point of no longer wanting or desiring to do them, that is the growth process in the Divine economy. We are all sinners by nature and we are all born in sin, a point that some of the contributors to this blog seem to forget. We are only seen as non-sinners, and unfallen inside Christ, remove him and we are no more than condemned dust regardless as to how moral we pretend to be. Put any believer on trial before God and he/she would fail the so called Christian test. We are saved and giving our saved status by grace alone. Those who go on about the sins of others should remember that.