Wayward began as a Katrina recovery blog in 2006 but has since wandered off to consider social justice; theology; the intersections of faith, politics, and the environment; and a life lived between DC, Idaho, Nebraska, and New Hampshire.
Progressive Christian, conservationist, music lover, craft beer enthusiast, Dartmouth alum, and Sierra Club online organizer. Former DNC staffer, online consultant, MyDD blogger, and ministry intern. Views my own. Follow me on Twitter: @nathanempsall
For a nice round-up of GAFCON articles and blogs, read Dave Walker at the Church Times Blog.
Labels: Anglican Communion, Christianity, GAFCON
posted by Nathan Empsall @ 6/24/2008 10:47:00 AM
5 Comments
Links to this post
View blog top tags Comment Policy: The only rules about comments are: no spam, no racism or sexism, and no anonymous insulting (anonymous comments are otherwise allowed, albeit discouraged). Unfortunately, I have recieved all three of these, so comments must be moderated. The flipside of moderation is that I get to turn off that obnoxious word verification!
Picture Policy: Please ask before reprinting any photos you see on this blog, as original photos are intellectually copyrighted. If you see a picture of your own used without permission and want it attributed or taken down, please ask in the comment section and I will do so immediately.
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
5 Comments:
I only became aware of what the actual issue you were talking about was last night. I was listening to the BBC World Service and they had a man from Africa talking about homosexuality.
I only have this to say on that:
1st Corinthians: Chapter Six: verses nine through ten.
The actual issue I am talking about is not homosexuality, but the foundations and future of the Anglican Communion. That aside, though, I also "only have this to say on that":
Cultural understandings nad historical context can shake a literal reading to its very core.
And if that's the only thing you have to say and the only thing I have to say, then I guess that's that. :)
That may be true in some cases but not this one. In the Old Testament you would be stoned for practicing such acts, and I don't think God changed his views in the following millennium. Especially when Jesus himself said he didn't come to add or detract from the Old Testament.
There is only the literal interpretation here. However, verse 11 gives hope to those who have practiced sexual immorality.
There is very much a historical/cultural context here, and to take a strictly literal approach is somewhat naive. However, the comment section of an only-tangentially related blog post is not the place to discuss such a complex issue, especially after both commenters claimed "I only have this to say."
literal interpretation here
God Forbid!!
Jordan, Christ may have a few things to say about (you're) Literal interpretation!!
Something not publishable here!!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home