RANT,
I, myself, know of an S.B. church that asked a member to leave because he was living with some one and unmarried. (Again, this flies in the face of
Christ's actions considering that the first preacher woman 3 times formerly married was, at the time Christ asked her to spread the word, was living
with a man, unmarried - This is what blows my mind about ALL christian churches, irrespective of catholic or protestant denomination - that they can
think they can disregard the words and actions of Christ and come up with their own rules). But, as I stated, and you reiterated, this is a
church-specific decision. Here's how I take issues like this. Each church is ruled by its preacher and deacons, and through the vote and will of
the congregation (i.e. if the congregation doesn't like what the preacher and deacons are doing, they can vote the preacher out). There are churches
that I absolutely don't agree with their decisions...guess what I do, I wouldn't let my foot cross the threshold...period. But I'm not going to go
and try to force them to change because I think they're wrong (which is exactly what they're doing by forcing some one out of their church...right?)
I'll just go to a church that the congregation believes the way I believe.
See, this is the problem I have with the gay/lesbian issue right now. And I want to be clear where I stand on this.
1. I believe churches that refuse membership to ANY person, based on their lifestyles, desiring membership is acting in opposition to Christ and his
teachings. Now, if that person brings anti-christian behavior INTO the church (i.e. teaches, practices what is considered unGodly acts WITHIN the
church - run their butts off, because the church cannot be sallied by anti-christian practices and teachings) BUT, to deny the gospel to some one
because they are a sinner (whatever that sin is defined by) is the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard of in my life. Christ said he came for the
sinner...otherwise, he didn't have to come at all.
2. Guess what the origins of the Southern Baptist denomination were? Originally there was the Baptists...period. Then, around the time of the civil
war, the Baptists decided that it wasn't Godly to own slaves. There were a large number of members in the southern states that DID own
slaves...hence the start of the Southern Baptist denomination. Now, there is nothing in the foundational doctrine that says "and, by the way, it's
okie-dokie to own slaves"...if there was, I wouldn't even be admitting that I was raised in that denomination. But in essence, what the spin-off
members did was re-create the doctrine of the Baptist church, added the autonomy of the churches (this gets around a central organization deciding
that something you have been doing is now wrong...lol), and went on about their business, but they did NOT create a doctrine that okay'd slavery - I
want to make that clear. But here is my contention for any homosexual Christian who wants to follow the Baptist doctrine...start your own
denomination...but don't try to force a bunch of people who have decided they don't like your way of life so much that they will reject you as a
member of their body of believers into letting you in. It serves no purpose...really, it doesn't. Start your own "Rainbow Baptist"
denomination...or whatever...just like the Southern Baptist did.
People just don't think clearly anymore...they want to control that which they have no right to control (the Southern Baptists and the homosexuals,
both sides are guilty of this).




All across the America, there's no
better work ethic, party towns, colleges, communities, entrepreneurs or opportunities than in the South. 