I was, however, asked by our pastor not to talk to anyone in
the church about my acceptance of evolution (and trust me — I hadn't been) because it was «dangerous».
Not exact matches
The fact is there are already plenty of
churches in America, arguably the majority of them in this country, that emphasize social justice,
acceptance of LGBT, and «letting science to its thing» — I'm talking
about the mainline liberal
churches.
«But on the other hand, I worry
about LGBT people... because the
church teaches you that you can not reach your full potential and have full
acceptance in the
church unless you marry someone of the opposite sex.»
A simple way for
church leaders to show that homosexuality is not shameful is by publicly inviting gay or same - sex attracted people to be open
about it, and to assure them of a warm welcome and true
acceptance if they are.
You also speak as though you are certain no gay people are present and that «we evengelical Christians» are talking amonst ourself
about what an entire group of people deserve in terms of full inclusion and
acceptance in society and the
church.
Talking
about acceptance and diversity allows mainline
churches to signal their adherence to the canons of liberalism and to erect symbolic boundaries against fundamentalism.
Once we grasp this, it becomes clear how we can accept with rational confidence the canon which the
church hands down to us, even though many questions
about the origin, circulation, and stages of
acceptance of the various books remain unanswered.
Such arguments as «the
Church teaches --» were destined to become less and less sufficient to win immediate
acceptance for the ideas they prefaced The validity of traditions was questioned; general beliefs
about physical phenomena were subjected to various tests.
An unquestioning
acceptance of everything the New Testament says
about Jesus yields us a picture of Jesus that suffers from internal inconsistencies, that is clearly in a few places a construct of the needs of the early
Church, and that will not stand historical critical scrutiny.
But the traditionalist view again lost the day, with the result that the new religious orientation included the separation of
church and state (Jefferson and Madison), a democratic faith in the common person (Jacksonian democracy), and
acceptance of a new romanticism which brought
about a flourishing of the first truly national literature, art, and architecture.
The
church's
acceptance of prevailing American assumptions
about justice blocks its capacity to discern and live out the distinctively Christian contours of justice.
Funny, a whole long article
about how apologetic these people are, but I didn't see one thing
about them offering the couple the choice of a symbolic marriage ceremony at the
church to show both
acceptance & tell the bigots there cries for hate won't be tolerated & they won't get their way.
«The Son of Man, therefore, means the agent and inaugurator of the coming kingdom who will enable others to share with him his special relationship with God through a voluntary
acceptance of death».46 Whenever we think
about the
church, John Taylor suggests, we must never forget that when Jesus chose the title «Son of Man» He was using a figure with a plural meaning.