The cocked gun to the head

Originally posted by kirksey957
Let us talk about "change." What is wrong with admitting the need for change. Is this not what repentence is all about? Why are denominations so resistent to change? What a wonderful example denominations set for individuals when they admit they have a history of wrongful and hurtful behaviors. Baptists once turned a blind eye to slavery. Some ...[text shortened]... cept of change is nothing to be afraid of as it is often impetus of a right relationship to God.

The reason why the Church and denominations need to resist change is simple enough - because they are supposed to be the beacons of human morality. They are supposed to represent an absolute standard that is independent of what is considered fashionable or politically correct in society. If what is truly "right" can change over time, then what sense does it make to speak of right and wrong? On what basis can we condemn the actions of the Nazis?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
The reason why the Church and denominations need to resist change is simple enough - because they are supposed to be the beacons of human morality. They are supposed to represent an absolute standard that is independent of what is considered fashionable or politically correct in society. If what is truly "right" can change over time, then wha ...[text shortened]... does it make to speak of right and wrong? On what basis can we condemn the actions of the Nazis?

You are operating from an "all or nothing" point of view. It goes like this: If we somehow allow that homosexuality is not the evil sin that we once thought it was, then it follows that we have no basis to condemn the Nazis who wanted to extermimate the Jews. I am sorry but I don't understand that. These two have nothing to do with one another.

As I read the Bible, the only "absolute standard" is God. Isn't the history of the church one of institutional screw-ups?

Originally posted by kirksey957
You are operating from an "all or nothing" point of view. It goes like this: If we somehow allow that homosexuality is not the evil sin that we once thought it was, then it follows that we have no basis to condemn the Nazis who wanted to extermimate the Jews. I am sorry but I don't understand that. These two have nothing to do with one another. ...[text shortened]... "absolute standard" is God. Isn't the history of the church one of institutional screw-ups?

The history of the Church is in many ways similar to that of any human organisation - it has its highs and its lows. To say that its history is one of institutional screw-ups is to see the glass as half-empty. On the other hand, the Church is also the Church of St. Francis, Bl. Mother Theresa and John Paul the Great.

Yes, homosexuality and Nazi crimes have very little in common. But it is a matter of right and wrong. If a matter that was once considered wrong is now considered right (as with homosexuality), can you say that something else that is considered wrong will not some day be considered right (as with Nazi crimes)? If you believe in a God who is the "absolute standard" of morality, then is God changing his mind with the passage of time? If he is, then are we all at the mercy of a capricious All-Powerful Being? If he isn't, then does the human race know what the standard is? Or has He left us to find out for ourselves? If so, then has he left us a guide?

So, just because homosexuality and Nazi crimes have very little to do with each other on a visible level, does not mean that they are completely unrelated. Of course, I am not in any way equating the two (just to be perfectly clear!) But each of them, in its own way, leads me to the question of morality. As do other things - like Saints.