Rev. Calvin Robinson

[Lucian Hodoboc]

Currently, Church of England members of the clergy are not permitted to carry out same-sex marriages, whilst homosexual Anglicans are required to remain celibate. In recent years, however, the Church of Wales, the Scottish Episcopal Church, and, most recently, the Methodist Church, have all embraced marriage equality. In February 2023, the General Synod met to discuss the issue, raising the question across the Anglican Communion and Christendom: should Christianity extend the sacraments to same same-sex marriages? This is part of Rev. Calvin Robinson’s response.

What are your views on Rev. Calvin Robinson's presentation at Oxford on the 15th of February, 2023?

 

[prism]

Earlier on Feb 4th, he took part at an Oxford debate, where he made this classic comment, ...

"People will argue, “we know more about homosexuality now than we did then” maybe so. But are you then suggesting God knew less than we do now? For either all Scripture is God-breathed, or it isn’t. Either we believe Christ, or we don’t."

Sadly the other side won the debate.

 

[tango]

Earlier on Feb 4th, he took part at an Oxford debate, where he made this classic comment, ...

"People will argue, “we know more about homosexuality now than we did then” maybe so. But are you then suggesting God knew less than we do now? For either all Scripture is God-breathed, or it isn’t. Either we believe Christ, or we don’t."

Sadly the other side won the debate.

It can be tricky picking apart which bits of the Bible we want to follow and which bits we don't.

A lot of people on the more liberal side of things offer little more than a lot of hand-wringing and generic claims that "love is love" and the like. A lot of people on the more conservative side pull verses from Leviticus while conveniently ignoring much of the rest of Leviticus. Then the debate starts about what is cultural and what is eternal, and usually what happens is that it generates a lot of heat and precious little light.

In the NT the primary voice against homosexuality is Paul's but these days a lot of people like to put conditions on verses like 1Co 7:10 where Paul makes it clear that God commands a wife not to depart from her husband. Nowadays we make all sorts of exceptions that aren't in the text, mostly about abusive husbands. Can we sensibly ignore a command like 1Co 7:10 while demanding that 1Co 5:11 be fully observed?

 

[prism]

It can be tricky picking apart which bits of the Bible we want to follow and which bits we don't.

A lot of people on the more liberal side of things offer little more than a lot of hand-wringing and generic claims that "love is love" and the like. A lot of people on the more conservative side pull verses from Leviticus while conveniently ignoring much of the rest of Leviticus. Then the debate starts about what is cultural and what is eternal, and usually what happens is that it generates a lot of heat and precious little light.

In the NT the primary voice against homosexuality is Paul's but these days a lot of people like to put conditions on verses like 1Co 7:10 where Paul makes it clear that God commands a wife not to depart from her husband. Nowadays we make all sorts of exceptions that aren't in the text, mostly about abusive husbands. Can we sensibly ignore a command like 1Co 7:10 while demanding that 1Co 5:11 be fully observed?

I find it hard to listen to the liberal side of things when one of their own Justices can't tell us the difference between a man and a woman...and they're going to educate us on homosexuality? Pleeze.

 

[tango]

I find it hard to listen to the liberal side of things when one of their own Justices can't tell us the difference between a man and a woman...and they're going to educate us on homosexuality? Pleeze.

Irrelevant comparison. You might as well say some who call themselves Christians are pedophiles therefore Christanity must be false.

 

[Messy]

It can be tricky picking apart which bits of the Bible we want to follow and which bits we don't.

A lot of people on the more liberal side of things offer little more than a lot of hand-wringing and generic claims that "love is love" and the like. A lot of people on the more conservative side pull verses from Leviticus while conveniently ignoring much of the rest of Leviticus. Then the debate starts about what is cultural and what is eternal, and usually what happens is that it generates a lot of heat and precious little light.

In the NT the primary voice against homosexuality is Paul's but these days a lot of people like to put conditions on verses like 1Co 7:10 where Paul makes it clear that God commands a wife not to depart from her husband. Nowadays we make all sorts of exceptions that aren't in the text, mostly about abusive husbands. Can we sensibly ignore a command like 1Co 7:10 while demanding that 1Co 5:11 be fully observed?

I agree that it's hypocrit to say remarriage is always fine, but homosexuality is forbidden, but in some cases remarriage is okay. If it was a real serial cheater, it's fine to remarry and also with real abuse and not the 'he was not so nice to me, so he's a narcissist and I'm a poor victim and I go find the next one', but once when I was looking up preachings online to see if remarriage was forbidden (zillion different opinions) I saw an interesting thing from a guy whose friend got shot dead by her husband cause they forced her to stay married and he said that that was the basic right from slaves, which Jesus didnt speak against. He also didnt say incest was bad, because that's already in the O.T. and obvious that it never changed.

Bible Scandals - 4. Marital Abuse

David Instone-Brewer's new book The Jesus Scandals not only shows how the life and teaching of Jesus must have shocked his contemporaries but helps us better to understand and apply Jesus' teaching…

www.bethinking.org

 

[prism]

Irrelevant comparison. You might as well say some who call themselves Christians are pedophiles therefore Christanity must be false.

I was speaking of their 'cream of the crop', perhaps not as irrelevant as one might think.