I'm no scholar, but it doesn't take much understanding that blessing same sex relationships is the same as blessing any other sin. Are you going to start giving the thumbs up to beastiality, being a drunkard...? You know where i'm going with this. There is no way in the Heavens or the earth it can ever be justified. Romans 12:2 'Be not conformed to the patterns of this world' , and I speak to myself with this verse as well. I pray for you. I detest cotton-wool Christianity, and may those who support same sex blessings be rebuked in the name and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ!
"It seemed to ME that was good fruit"... Scripture is clear on what constitutes sexual immorality and "good fruit" from a human perspective doesn't negate that. Instead of speculating and humming and hah-ing and then deciding based on how you feel, how about asking someone like Beckett Cook whether it's truly loving to show support for same-sex couples (by blessing a clearly unscriptural "unity") or rather to show support for individuals who suffer with same-sex attraction and help them first with the truth of scripture and then with "human" kindness...
Truly awful. The LORD has called us out of a life of sin, when you put off the old man, it means turning from sin - not living in it. The LORD loves all people but hates sin - this isn't "traditional", it is foundational. Women also should not become Elders, Pastors or any position where they are expected to teach The Word. The LORD has given us our own roles, we do not need to take from others, only to glorify ourselves. Christianity IS divisive! Christ warned us that following The Way would set children against parents, husbands against wives, etc! Please, choose this day whom you will serve and turn away from the golden calf of self you now worship. Glorify The LORD alone xx
You said it. When you're called out of a life of sin, how can you continue in it. Jesus was tested by the Pharisees with the adulterous woman who by the Jewish law ought to die by stoning. Jesus asked those without sin to cast the first stone. They all walked away because each religious leader knew they themselves were sinners. Jesus then said to the woman.." neither do I condemn you, but go and sin no more". The Church of England has voted to not only allow sinful relationships, but it actually wants to bless these relationships. Haven't they worked out that they're blessing something which God rejects. The CoE is no longer a Christian church.
@@seanpittaway5341When were the testaments changed? The Dead Sea Scrolls found in 1947 contain copies of all Old Testament books except Esther. They translate the same as the modern versions. The Dead Sea Scrolls date to 200BC. There are 24,000 ancient copies and fragments of the gospels still in existence in eleven languages. These too are consistent with each other and modern bibles. So where are the changes you speak about? Believing in God is a personal choice.
@@seanpittaway5341Reject Jesus if you dare but accept that to sign up to the merry Sunday religion club and only to pay lip service to the Bible IS insane! Better to be whole hearted than fudge anything in life!
Should one listen to the devil? Should we be sympathetic to him.? Should we care for his advocates and nourish them? Or is what is wrong, wrong? Did not Christ say to the adulterer, "sin no more"? Did not God raise Soddom to the ground?
Not surprising to be honest. Considering that Zionism was considered a heresy over a hundred years ago, it's shocking that some Christian groups are so staunchly pro-Israeli in modern times that they consider it infallible and turn a blind eye to its (anti-Christian) crimes. Feels as though Christian churches have been compromised
Man constantly changes his weak, feeble, limited mind. The good news is that GOD never changes his mind. Truth is not truth if it changes. A man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his female/wife.
It's the people at the top who think they are smart but they are so easily decived by other perverted intellectuals. Also, they talk about narratives rather than * truth* This is a Marxist tactic and you see it in many areas of society where there is corruption.
The Bishop of Oxford is indeed right to call for change. It's quite true that St Paul spoke out against homosexuality (1 Corinthians 6:9, if that verse was even properly translated), and it's also quite true that he told slaves to obey their masters (Ephesians 6:5). As for the old testament, if we abstractly deploy every single verse, we have very serious problems indeed (just LOOK at Exodus 27:7-27, and there are many other examples as well). Up until the early-19th century, people in this country used bible passages like these to justify slavery. Why the double standard? Jesus supposedly spoke against sex outside of marriage (although these passages have largely been lost in translation--we can't know for sure that the Greek word 'porneia' was referring to all sex outside marriage, though it might well have been), but of homosexuality he made no mention. In Matthew 19:1-12, and Mark 10, he is said to define marriage as between a man and a woman, but he didn't. He was responding to a specific question about divorce--he certainly wasn't saying, 'If anyone should ever in the 21st century allow same-sex marriage, they must be heretics.' So, if we are to proudly assert that homosexuals should suppress their natural instincts and live a celibate life, whereas heterosexuals can go to town (provided they save themselves for marriage), we need to have a good justification. We could say that sexual activity must be open to the possibility of life, meaning gay sex is always wrong. However, this church, since 1930, has accepted the use of contraception. This means, heterosexual couples can get married and not be open to the possibility of life, if they don't want to be. Therefore, in continuing to condemn gay sex, we are applying this theory narrowly. Another instance of a double standard, dare I say? And don't try to compare homosexuality with paedophilia, bestiality or necrophilia. You don't know what you are talking about. Science has outright proven that homosexuality is not a choice, but a variation in attraction found in 3 or 4 percent of humans and most animals, for which there are evolutionary explanations (if you don't believe in evolution, that's ridiculous). For the aforementioned other forms of sex, no such links have been found. I am saying all of this as a straight Christian. I don't think it is possible to assert there to be something lesser with homosexuality compared to heterosexuality, and yet claim not to be homophobic. How could we, with a good conscience, say that it is absolutely fine and natural to be attracted to the opposite sex, and you can give into those instincts under certain circumstances, but for homosexuality this doesn't apply? Just accepting the human dignity of homosexuals (I'm sick and tired of people referring to them as 'people with homosexual inclinations'--oh yes, and I'm a 'person with heterosexual inclinations', am I?) is, in my opinion not good enough. And maybe I am indeed being 'secularised' by modern culture. Maybe I am putting my personal morality above God's morality--oh wait, have we ever questioned God's morality on this??
Just as athiest scientists are turning to the truth of the bible, some clergymen are turning to scientists for direction. I pray some scientist will help him make a 360 degree turn, back to God.
The love of God is not a dopamine dump of diversity, equity and inclusivity. It is the cross. John 3:16. The church of nice is entertaining goats rather than feeding sheep. All sinners, not just homosexuals are called to repent.
Wow! Yes, sin isn't acceptable to God and if you reject that Biblical teaching then you get rid of the need for atonement and reject Jesus! "You will know them by their fruit." Agreed, but the fruit from this 'church leader' is leading people astray and no discipleship for those still on spiritual milk!
Traditionally we have looked at whether something is true or permissible for Christians by thinking about Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. These are not equal for Scripture is our final authority, so we can consult and think about tradition, what the church has taught down the centuries, we can think about reason, what does science, philosophy or common sense have to teach us on this subject, and finally human experience. If experience, tradition, or reason contradicts Scripture we go with Scripture, that is what for me it means to be evangelical. This is not what the Bishop does. The Bishop jumps right to experience and gives its the decisive role in coming to his conclusion. He then talks not about the passages that deal with marriage and sex in the Bible but takes a verse from the Sermon on the Mount and asserts he knows LGBT Christians who produce good fruit, therefore homosexual sex must be affirmed as a valid activity for Christians. This reasoning is like saying that I know loving and caring atheists so atheism is a valid option for believers. While not wishing to doubt there are loving, good people who claim to be LGBT Christians there is more to Christian discipleship than being nice people. If Scripture says homosexual sex is wrong and is to be confined to heterosexual marriage and someone is having homosexual sex then, by definition in the view of Scripture, not all the fruit we are to know them by is good.
Is this guy looney the laws been setup the sin is wrong just like adulterers just like stealing just like ETC etc the individual is saved by Grace no one is saying the sinner doesn’t need Jesus common sense is saying the laws have been placed by GOD who are u a priest who saying GOD is wrong
it's a very sad fact that good intentions can lead to heresy. The arguments for universalism are based on an understanding that God couldn't possibly implement eternal judgment and still be a good God. This is a trust in our human evaluation that is strongly compelling, but breaks the cardinal teaching of Christ, namely that the Bible is the source of God's revelation, not our understanding of God's ways (Proverbs 14:12). Croft has formed an opinion that because same sex people exhibit the signs of flourishing that this is 'good fruit'. It's a classic error. I know an adulterous couple living in blissful happiness, doing all kind of good works and charitable works, admired and respected by all as beacons and pillars of the faith. This kind of liberal thinking is causing shipwreck in the Church. The Bishop is deluded and has abandoned the faith. Saint Paul said that the Church was not unaware of the devil's schemes. The CofE certainly are.
Oh really? What about women who do not cover their head, or who have short hair (mentioned around ten times in 1 Corinthians or 1 Timothy). Can they be Christians? You ignore those bits and yet insist on homosexual activity as incompatible with Christianity. Homosexual relations in the bible are actually mentioned a similar number of times (according to Alan Wilson, it's nine times), mostly in the old testament, and none of them talking about gay sex within a marriage or civil union (most talking about nonconsensual gay activity). You almost certainly do things which, in a few isolated passages, are considered so sinful that you should be put to death for them--you just happen not to do this thing.
Polyamory and polygamous marriage is completely normal and right and there should not be any restriction or law that prohibits any number of consenting adults marrying each other.
Neither polygamy nor polyandry have any genetic or evolutionary explanations. I've never met anyone who feels compelled to marry more than one person. Also, though you are right that the New Testament speaks about marriage as monogamous, the old testament does not, by any means--many instances of polygamy and even polyandry exist in the Old Testament.
@@randomusername2761 Polygamous attraction, ie not marriage) is absolutely genetically explained. Many humans are hard wired to not settle for one mate. It is only societal rules that limit the expression of this.
@@markcroydon3195 Sure, but if someone is attracted to several women, they can still be with one woman, right? If you're gay (which I am not--no bias here), you must live a celibate life
@@randomusername2761 No. The person who is polyamorous, but is limited to only one partner is just as discriminated against as the person who is same sex attracted who is denied the partner of their choice. Both are denied the partner(s) of their choice.
When a denomination capitulates on women's ordination the rest of the dominoes quickly fall, CoE is just another example that proves this.
According to 1 Corinthians 14:34, women are not even allowed to speak in church, let alone preside/preach. Do you believe that?
No true. Lots of denominations allow women preachers and are against same-sex marriage. Assemblies of God (Pentecostal) are an example of this.
The one opposing same-sex marriage is literally a woman bishop!
We're living through the great apostasy right now.
If they are gay then pray for deliverance... sis is sin my friend don't be stupid
You are right brother! They almighty has delivered many a nan and woman from sexual perversion. Eg Rosario Butterworth and Beckett Cook.
I'm no scholar, but it doesn't take much understanding that blessing same sex relationships is the same as blessing any other sin. Are you going to start giving the thumbs up to beastiality, being a drunkard...? You know where i'm going with this. There is no way in the Heavens or the earth it can ever be justified. Romans 12:2 'Be not conformed to the patterns of this world' , and I speak to myself with this verse as well. I pray for you. I detest cotton-wool Christianity, and may those who support same sex blessings be rebuked in the name and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ!
"It seemed to ME that was good fruit"... Scripture is clear on what constitutes sexual immorality and "good fruit" from a human perspective doesn't negate that. Instead of speculating and humming and hah-ing and then deciding based on how you feel, how about asking someone like Beckett Cook whether it's truly loving to show support for same-sex couples (by blessing a clearly unscriptural "unity") or rather to show support for individuals who suffer with same-sex attraction and help them first with the truth of scripture and then with "human" kindness...
Truly awful. The LORD has called us out of a life of sin, when you put off the old man, it means turning from sin - not living in it. The LORD loves all people but hates sin - this isn't "traditional", it is foundational. Women also should not become Elders, Pastors or any position where they are expected to teach The Word. The LORD has given us our own roles, we do not need to take from others, only to glorify ourselves. Christianity IS divisive! Christ warned us that following The Way would set children against parents, husbands against wives, etc! Please, choose this day whom you will serve and turn away from the golden calf of self you now worship. Glorify The LORD alone xx
You said it. When you're called out of a life of sin, how can you continue in it. Jesus was tested by the Pharisees with the adulterous woman who by the Jewish law ought to die by stoning. Jesus asked those without sin to cast the first stone. They all walked away because each religious leader knew they themselves were sinners. Jesus then said to the woman.." neither do I condemn you, but go and sin no more". The Church of England has voted to not only allow sinful relationships, but it actually wants to bless these relationships. Haven't they worked out that they're blessing something which God rejects. The CoE is no longer a Christian church.
@@WHU63 Absolutely
By their fruit you shall know them indeed Bishop
I THANK GOD I LEFT THE C/E IT DISGUSTS ME
old testiment/new testiment, changed by man because it was all made up by man, this is no different. The fact people still believe I a god astounds me
@@seanpittaway5341When were the testaments changed? The Dead Sea Scrolls found in 1947 contain copies of all Old Testament books except Esther. They translate the same as the modern versions. The Dead Sea Scrolls date to 200BC. There are 24,000 ancient copies and fragments of the gospels still in existence in eleven languages. These too are consistent with each other and modern bibles. So where are the changes you speak about? Believing in God is a personal choice.
God is very real , the church worships the devil.
@@seanpittaway5341Reject Jesus if you dare but accept that to sign up to the merry Sunday religion club and only to pay lip service to the Bible IS insane! Better to be whole hearted than fudge anything in life!
Should one listen to the devil? Should we be sympathetic to him.? Should we care for his advocates and nourish them? Or is what is wrong, wrong? Did not Christ say to the adulterer, "sin no more"? Did not God raise Soddom to the ground?
Not surprising to be honest. Considering that Zionism was considered a heresy over a hundred years ago, it's shocking that some Christian groups are so staunchly pro-Israeli in modern times that they consider it infallible and turn a blind eye to its (anti-Christian) crimes. Feels as though Christian churches have been compromised
Man constantly changes his weak, feeble, limited mind. The good news is that GOD never changes his mind. Truth is not truth if it changes. A man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his female/wife.
At the beginning, was the video on the right paused or was the woman sitting very still?
This is no longer a church as it no longer obeys the word of God 😢
It's the people at the top who think they are smart but they are so easily decived by other perverted intellectuals.
Also, they talk about narratives rather than * truth*
This is a Marxist tactic and you see it in many areas of society where there is corruption.
Science tells us how, it does not tell us why. What is proposed here is sinful. In hoc signo vinces +.
The Bishop of Oxford is indeed right to call for change. It's quite true that St Paul spoke out against homosexuality (1 Corinthians 6:9, if that verse was even properly translated), and it's also quite true that he told slaves to obey their masters (Ephesians 6:5). As for the old testament, if we abstractly deploy every single verse, we have very serious problems indeed (just LOOK at Exodus 27:7-27, and there are many other examples as well). Up until the early-19th century, people in this country used bible passages like these to justify slavery. Why the double standard?
Jesus supposedly spoke against sex outside of marriage (although these passages have largely been lost in translation--we can't know for sure that the Greek word 'porneia' was referring to all sex outside marriage, though it might well have been), but of homosexuality he made no mention. In Matthew 19:1-12, and Mark 10, he is said to define marriage as between a man and a woman, but he didn't. He was responding to a specific question about divorce--he certainly wasn't saying, 'If anyone should ever in the 21st century allow same-sex marriage, they must be heretics.'
So, if we are to proudly assert that homosexuals should suppress their natural instincts and live a celibate life, whereas heterosexuals can go to town (provided they save themselves for marriage), we need to have a good justification. We could say that sexual activity must be open to the possibility of life, meaning gay sex is always wrong. However, this church, since 1930, has accepted the use of contraception. This means, heterosexual couples can get married and not be open to the possibility of life, if they don't want to be. Therefore, in continuing to condemn gay sex, we are applying this theory narrowly. Another instance of a double standard, dare I say?
And don't try to compare homosexuality with paedophilia, bestiality or necrophilia. You don't know what you are talking about. Science has outright proven that homosexuality is not a choice, but a variation in attraction found in 3 or 4 percent of humans and most animals, for which there are evolutionary explanations (if you don't believe in evolution, that's ridiculous). For the aforementioned other forms of sex, no such links have been found.
I am saying all of this as a straight Christian. I don't think it is possible to assert there to be something lesser with homosexuality compared to heterosexuality, and yet claim not to be homophobic. How could we, with a good conscience, say that it is absolutely fine and natural to be attracted to the opposite sex, and you can give into those instincts under certain circumstances, but for homosexuality this doesn't apply? Just accepting the human dignity of homosexuals (I'm sick and tired of people referring to them as 'people with homosexual inclinations'--oh yes, and I'm a 'person with heterosexual inclinations', am I?) is, in my opinion not good enough.
And maybe I am indeed being 'secularised' by modern culture. Maybe I am putting my personal morality above God's morality--oh wait, have we ever questioned God's morality on this??
Just as athiest scientists are turning to the truth of the bible, some clergymen are turning to scientists for direction. I pray some scientist will help him make a 360 degree turn, back to God.
Bending to the world.
The love of God is not a dopamine dump of diversity, equity and inclusivity. It is the cross. John 3:16. The church of nice is entertaining goats rather than feeding sheep. All sinners, not just homosexuals are called to repent.
Peace be upon you, I am Ali from Syria. I ask you to pray that I pass the work test
Wow! Yes, sin isn't acceptable to God and if you reject that Biblical teaching then you get rid of the need for atonement and reject Jesus! "You will know them by their fruit." Agreed, but the fruit from this 'church leader' is leading people astray and no discipleship for those still on spiritual milk!
Traditionally we have looked at whether something is true or permissible for Christians by thinking about Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. These are not equal for Scripture is our final authority, so we can consult and think about tradition, what the church has taught down the centuries, we can think about reason, what does science, philosophy or common sense have to teach us on this subject, and finally human experience. If experience, tradition, or reason contradicts Scripture we go with Scripture, that is what for me it means to be evangelical. This is not what the Bishop does.
The Bishop jumps right to experience and gives its the decisive role in coming to his conclusion. He then talks not about the passages that deal with marriage and sex in the Bible but takes a verse from the Sermon on the Mount and asserts he knows LGBT Christians who produce good fruit, therefore homosexual sex must be affirmed as a valid activity for Christians. This reasoning is like saying that I know loving and caring atheists so atheism is a valid option for believers.
While not wishing to doubt there are loving, good people who claim to be LGBT Christians there is more to Christian discipleship than being nice people. If Scripture says homosexual sex is wrong and is to be confined to heterosexual marriage and someone is having homosexual sex then, by definition in the view of Scripture, not all the fruit we are to know them by is good.
As Mary Magdallen put it ,' never trust a thirsty camel at a dry waterhole'.
Is this guy looney the laws been setup the sin is wrong just like adulterers just like stealing just like ETC etc the individual is saved by Grace no one is saying the sinner doesn’t need Jesus common sense is saying the laws have been placed by GOD who are u a priest who saying GOD is wrong
it's a very sad fact that good intentions can lead to heresy. The arguments for universalism are based on an understanding that God couldn't possibly implement eternal judgment and still be a good God. This is a trust in our human evaluation that is strongly compelling, but breaks the cardinal teaching of Christ, namely that the Bible is the source of God's revelation, not our understanding of God's ways (Proverbs 14:12). Croft has formed an opinion that because same sex people exhibit the signs of flourishing that this is 'good fruit'. It's a classic error. I know an adulterous couple living in blissful happiness, doing all kind of good works and charitable works, admired and respected by all as beacons and pillars of the faith. This kind of liberal thinking is causing shipwreck in the Church. The Bishop is deluded and has abandoned the faith. Saint Paul said that the Church was not unaware of the devil's schemes. The CofE certainly are.
Satan is running the church. You are doomed for not living by scripture.
Sorry - but a practising homosexual or lesbian cannot be a reborn Christian as well. Totally incompatible 😣
Oh really? What about women who do not cover their head, or who have short hair (mentioned around ten times in 1 Corinthians or 1 Timothy). Can they be Christians? You ignore those bits and yet insist on homosexual activity as incompatible with Christianity. Homosexual relations in the bible are actually mentioned a similar number of times (according to Alan Wilson, it's nine times), mostly in the old testament, and none of them talking about gay sex within a marriage or civil union (most talking about nonconsensual gay activity). You almost certainly do things which, in a few isolated passages, are considered so sinful that you should be put to death for them--you just happen not to do this thing.
Just as well you are perfect then!
Polyamory and polygamous marriage is completely normal and right and there should not be any restriction or law that prohibits any number of consenting adults marrying each other.
Neither polygamy nor polyandry have any genetic or evolutionary explanations. I've never met anyone who feels compelled to marry more than one person. Also, though you are right that the New Testament speaks about marriage as monogamous, the old testament does not, by any means--many instances of polygamy and even polyandry exist in the Old Testament.
@@randomusername2761 Polygamous attraction, ie not marriage) is absolutely genetically explained. Many humans are hard wired to not settle for one mate. It is only societal rules that limit the expression of this.
@@markcroydon3195 Sure, but if someone is attracted to several women, they can still be with one woman, right? If you're gay (which I am not--no bias here), you must live a celibate life
@@randomusername2761 No. The person who is polyamorous, but is limited to only one partner is just as discriminated against as the person who is same sex attracted who is denied the partner of their choice. Both are denied the partner(s) of their choice.
@@markcroydon3195 Show me some statistics that polygamous attraction is genetically explained.