Are gays allowed in the evangelical churches, especially the Baptists?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheBreak
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I was born into Evangelical churches, and spent 47 years in some of the best in the U.S.

Yes, homosexuals would be welcome. But I can’t imagine why they would want to come to a church that is utterly contradictory to their lifestyle, UNLESS they are trying to get OUT of their lifestyle.

Remember, even though things are changing, a lot of Evangelical churches still frown upon or even forbid use of alcohol, dancing, attending movies and plays, having a TV in the home, reading or listening to secular news media, reading secular novels, listening to secular music (other than classical, but certain composers are suspect), attending sports events that occur on a Sunday, sending their children to public schools and colleges, etc.

Also, most Evangelical churches “expect” their friends and members to show up for not only the Sunday service, but also a Bible study and prayer meeting, a small group, and at least one (preferably more) “ministries” in the church. Men are often “expected” to be involved with the “accountability group,” (often the men attending have problems with porn or other sexual sins) and I would imagine that an openly gay man would especially be expected to attend this group faithfully.

One of the things that I learned over the years is that even though “salvation is by faith alone” in Evangelical churches, the “faith” is proved “real” by following a gigantic list of “rules”, unwritten, but very clear to those who are in the Evangelical churches. Violate those rules, and you will be out the door.

IF the gay person is “caught” doing ANYTHING that even suggested gayness (e.g., meeting someone of the same sex in a bar for a drink), he/she would be asked to meet with the pastors and church elders and asked to stop the behavior. If the person did not stop, he/she would be asked to leave the church and shunned.

I am not sure how most Evangelical churches would handle two gay men or lesbians who lived together in celibacy. That’s a tough one. I think it would depend on how masculine the gay men acted outside of their home, or how feminine the lesbians acted. Any hint of effeminacy from the men or “butch” from the women would probably incite a very negative reaction from the church leaders and laiety.

Evangelicals do a LOT of children’s and teens programming, and I think that a lot of Evangelicals would be militantly opposed to having gay people around their children and teens. Yes, they accept that everyone is a sinner, but when it comes to their children, some sins aren’t ever acceptable to expose them to, and “gayness” is one of those sins.
Back when I was very involved with Evangelicals, I did a lot of music/theater with my children’s choir, and I tried to talk some of the parents of the really interested children into doing community theater (this was back before Christian Youth Theater was created). The parents shook their heads and told me that they didn’t want their children exposed to homosexuals. They came right out and said it.

Also, many Evangelical churches are EXTREMELY conservative politically, often lining up with the most extreme of conservatives and opposing even pieces of legislation that could be a “compromise” bargaining tool for more moderate conservatives. Evangelical Protestants do not usually “compromise,” ever. It’s black and white. That’s great when it comes to abortion, but not so great when it comes to laws affecting the environment, or economic legislation, or gun control, or any of the “gray areas” that really aren’t grave sins one way or another.

Like I said, WHY would a gay person WANT to be part of all this, unless he/she was trying hard to stop being a practicing gay person?!

Yes, a lot of the Evangelical churches, especially the big ones, are getting rid of all these “rules.” That’s one reason why the big megachurches are so popular–they don’t demand.anything of their attendees. That’s one reason a lot of Catholics like to go to these megachurches–you just sit, sip latte, listen to a video and some really awesome music, and then leave. You might be asked to join in a “community ministry,” like helping to clean up a street or paint a school. But you aren’t asked to teach or lead a club or facilitate a Bible study or play the piano (the musicians are hired professionals). Megachurches are perfectly-designed for U.S. culture in 2013.

I’m sorry if this post sounds harsh towards Evangelicals, and I do realize, as I’ve said several times, that many Evangelical churches are striving to change and get rid of their unwritten “list of rules.”
 
I’m sorry if this post sounds harsh towards Evangelicals, and I do realize, as I’ve said several times, that many Evangelical churches are striving to change and get rid of their unwritten “list of rules.”
You’re definitely right about the general culture of many Evangelical churches, the unwritten rules as you call them. You’re also right about many of them trying to change. And the results are definitely mixed, at times inconsistent. :o
 
Remember, even though things are changing, a lot of Evangelical churches still frown upon or even forbid use of alcohol, dancing, attending movies and plays, having a TV in the home, reading or listening to secular news media, reading secular novels, listening to secular music (other than classical, but certain composers are suspect), attending sports events that occur on a Sunday, sending their children to public schools and colleges, etc.



I’m sorry if this post sounds harsh towards Evangelicals, and I do realize, as I’ve said several times, that many Evangelical churches are striving to change and get rid of their unwritten “list of rules.”
Cat, I often agree with your posts about Evangelicals, but I disagree with this …to a degree. Many it’s a regional difference, with Midwestern and Southern US Evangelicals being more conservative; but I’ve been attending Evangelical churches in East Coast small towns, large cities, and rural areas all my life ( I’m 46) and really have not encountered the “unwritten list of rules” that I’ve seen you talk about a couple of times. What I have encountered since I was a child is the idea that most of the things you’ve listed are okay in moderation.

To answer the OP’s question, I agree with many of the other posters—Gay people are welcome in Evangelical churches but expected to remain celibate. In my experience, in the few times non-celibate homosexual couples are living together they’ve been pretty private about it; as a group the church members either have either ignored it, had the pastor talk with the couple, or gossiped a little. In earlier days the couple may have been asked to leave, but these days a lot of Evangelicals have a “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” attitude.
 
Cat, I often agree with your posts about Evangelicals, but I disagree with this …to a degree. Many it’s a regional difference, with Midwestern and Southern US Evangelicals being more conservative; but I’ve been attending Evangelical churches in East Coast small towns, large cities, and rural areas all my life ( I’m 46) and really have not encountered the “unwritten list of rules” that I’ve seen you talk about a couple of times. What I have encountered since I was a child is the idea that most of the things you’ve listed are okay in moderation.

To answer the OP’s question, I agree with many of the other posters—Gay people are welcome in Evangelical churches but expected to remain celibate. In my experience, in the few times non-celibate homosexual couples are living together they’ve been pretty private about it; as a group the church members either have either ignored it, had the pastor talk with the couple, or gossiped a little. In earlier days the couple may have been asked to leave, but these days a lot of Evangelicals have a “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” attitude.
I disagree with the notion of let he who is without sin attitude. This is a generalization of a specific incident. Jesus spoke of marriage, in the beginning and in this particular incident was addressing the sin of

Adultery…

So, then the crowd could have identified with “this sin” and to say…

he who is without this sin

as opposed to

he who is without any sin

would have made more impact…because at the time the incident in question was Adultery…and if you look at Romans when Paul says…do you who say do not steal, steal, etc…that would have made more sense…recall all the whoa to you scribes and pharisees, the sermon on the mount and the beatitutdes…

To say that this “he who is without sin” applies to looking away from all that sin is inconsistent and to adopt this attitude for homosexuality would not be consistent with the entirety of what is taught in the Bible.
 
I disagree with the notion of let he who is without sin attitude. This is a generalization of a specific incident. Jesus spoke of marriage, in the beginning and in this particular incident was addressing the sin of

Adultery…

So, then the crowd could have identified with “this sin” and to say…

he who is without this sin

as opposed to

he who is without any sin

would have made more impact…because at the time the incident in question was Adultery…and if you look at Romans when Paul says…do you who say do not steal, steal, etc…that would have made more sense…recall all the whoa to you scribes and pharisees, the sermon on the mount and the beatitutdes…

To say that this “he who is without sin” applies to looking away from all that sin is inconsistent and to adopt this attitude for homosexuality would not be consistent with the entirety of what is taught in the Bible.
Coptic, I understand your extreme point of view, but I hope you don’t mean that we should fired gays from the church and shut the doors front of them, oh please don’t make me lose my last faith in Middle Easters people.
 
Cat, I often agree with your posts about Evangelicals, but I disagree with this …to a degree. Many it’s a regional difference, with Midwestern and Southern US Evangelicals being more conservative; but I’ve been attending Evangelical churches in East Coast small towns, large cities, and rural areas all my life ( I’m 46) and really have not encountered the “unwritten list of rules” that I’ve seen you talk about a couple of times. What I have encountered since I was a child is the idea that most of the things you’ve listed are okay in moderation.

To answer the OP’s question, I agree with many of the other posters—Gay people are welcome in Evangelical churches but expected to remain celibate. In my experience, in the few times non-celibate homosexual couples are living together they’ve been pretty private about it; as a group the church members either have either ignored it, had the pastor talk with the couple, or gossiped a little. In earlier days the couple may have been asked to leave, but these days a lot of Evangelicals have a “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” attitude.
That’s interesting. I agree with you that it’s probably regional. A lot of the Midwest was settled by people who were trying to get away from the crowded cities and towns, and their “worldly excesses.”

If you read the Little House books, you will see that Ma Ingalls and all her female friends were ardent prohibitionists, which made sense out West, where many a woman ended up a widow because of her husband’s weaknesses in regards to alcohol, etc.

My dad (RIP) only last year joined with a bunch of the remaining “old farmers” to try to fight the end of “dryness” in their small town. (Dryness was stricken down and now the town has restaurants with liquor licenses. Yuck.)

So you see a lot more “puritanism” out here than back East. I can testify that many Evangelical churches will NOT have anything to do with alcohol, even avoiding the “family style” restaurants like Chile’s and Applebees that serve liquor. That’s one reason Culvers is so hugely-popular here in the Midwest, while other parts of the country have never heard of it.
 
If you are a gay that is fine…

But if you had a sex between male to male you have sin even have a relationship. You have to confess and not ever do it again.
 
Coptic, I understand your extreme point of view, but I hope you don’t mean that we should fired gays from the church and shut the doors front of them, oh please don’t make me lose my last faith in Middle Easters people.
I do not understand what it is you are asking here?
 
I do not understand what it is you are asking here?
My question is, Do you agree with closing the doors of the church front the gays? Should we say to them “ah ah, sweetie, you’re not welcome here, because guess what, Jesus was walking with perfect sinless people”
 
One of my sister and her family are members of an “Affirming Baptist” church group. They openly accept the gay and lesbian members of their congregation. They consider themselves “evangelical”.
 
I disagree with the notion of let he who is without sin attitude. This is a generalization of a specific incident. Jesus spoke of marriage, in the beginning and in this particular incident was addressing the sin of

Adultery…

So, then the crowd could have identified with “this sin” and to say…

he who is without this sin

as opposed to

he who is without any sin

would have made more impact…because at the time the incident in question was Adultery…and if you look at Romans when Paul says…do you who say do not steal, steal, etc…that would have made more sense…recall all the whoa to you scribes and pharisees, the sermon on the mount and the beatitutdes…

To say that this “he who is without sin” applies to looking away from all that sin is inconsistent and to adopt this attitude for homosexuality would not be consistent with the entirety of what is taught in the Bible.
Coptic,

I’m sorry—I was writing hurriedly this morning and I could have been more clear.

I have only known two instances of gay couples living together whilst attending Evangelical churches, so my experience is really limited. This morning I was looking for a shorthand way to describe the attitudes of the church members. And that was, that the lay church members didn’t want to single out the homosexual couples because they looked at their own lives and saw a variety of struggles with sexuality within their own families.

Though I wasn’t clear about it, that was just one of my “describing, not prescribing” observations.
 
My question is, Do you agree with closing the doors of the church front the gays? Should we say to them “ah ah, sweetie, you’re not welcome here, because guess what, Jesus was walking with perfect sinless people”
Explain how you came to ask me this question as you percieved what it is you believed I wrote.
 
Coptic,

I’m sorry—I was writing hurriedly this morning and I could have been more clear.

I have only known two instances of gay couples living together whilst attending Evangelical churches, so my experience is really limited. This morning I was looking for a shorthand way to describe the attitudes of the church members. And that was, that the lay church members didn’t want to single out the homosexual couples because they looked at their own lives and saw a variety of struggles with sexuality within their own families.

Though I wasn’t clear about it, that was just one of my “describing, not prescribing” observations.
And that was, that the lay church members didn’t want to single out the homosexual couples because they looked at their own lives and saw a variety of struggles with sexuality within their own families.
In this statement you are in essence equating homosexual couples on par with male/female families. This is apples and oranges.
 
My dad (RIP) only last year joined with a bunch of the remaining “old farmers” to try to fight the end of “dryness” in their small town. (Dryness was stricken down and now the town has restaurants with liquor licenses. Yuck.)
I have an Evangelical Christian friend who moved from France to New York City to California, then down to west Texas for college years ago. He complained to me about being in a “dry town”. I wasn’t familiar with that term at the time, so I thought he meant that the area got very little rainfall. 😊

I think you said you have German farming ancestry, Cat, IIRC. My mom’s family were PA German farmers, here in the heart of Pennsylvania Dutch (German) country. Somehow, I can’t imagine the many Lutherans in this area allowing the existence of a dry town.
 
I think most churches of any type would allow homosexuals to attend services, pray, and worship with them- though being an unrepentant homosexual (that is to say someone living a gay lifestyle) could be a barrier to membership in many Evangelical churches including Baptists (although Baptist is almost as general as saying Protestant, the Southern Baptist Convention very strongly condemns homosexuality). There are some Mainline Protestant denominations that have taken a liberal position on LGBT people and grant varying degrees of acceptance to openly gay people ranging from allowing them to be members to blessing their unions and even ordaining openly gay ministers (the Episcopal Church has gay clergy and even a couple of gay or lesbian Bishops, the United Church of Christ generally has a very open position toward LGBT peoples in many congregations, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America allows gay clergy, etc.) And of course self-described “Progressive Christians” and their churches are open to gay people.
 
I think most churches of any type would allow homosexuals to attend services, pray, and worship with them- though being an unrepentant homosexual (that is to say someone living a gay lifestyle) could be a barrier to membership in many Evangelical churches including Baptists (although Baptist is almost as general as saying Protestant, the Southern Baptist Convention very strongly condemns homosexuality). There are some Mainline Protestant denominations that have taken a liberal position on LGBT people and grant varying degrees of acceptance to openly gay people ranging from allowing them to be members to blessing their unions and even ordaining openly gay ministers (the Episcopal Church has gay clergy and even a couple of gay or lesbian Bishops, the United Church of Christ generally has a very open position toward LGBT peoples in many congregations, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America allows gay clergy, etc.) And of course self-described “Progressive Christians” and their churches are open to gay people.
If you do a search for churches that deny Homosexuals membership you will find…
Membership denied
Adventist
Southern Baptist Convention
Christian Reformed Church in North America
Church of Nazarene
Jehovah Witness
Old Order Amish
Assemblies of God
Church of God (Cleveland, Tenesee)
United Pentecostal Church International
Evangelical Presbyterian Church
Orthodox Presbyterian Church
Presbyterian Church in America
 
That’s interesting. I agree with you that it’s probably regional. A lot of the Midwest was settled by people who were trying to get away from the crowded cities and towns, and their “worldly excesses.”

If you read the Little House books, you will see that Ma Ingalls and all her female friends were ardent prohibitionists, which made sense out West, where many a woman ended up a widow because of her husband’s weaknesses in regards to alcohol, etc.

My dad (RIP) only last year joined with a bunch of the remaining “old farmers” to try to fight the end of “dryness” in their small town. (Dryness was stricken down and now the town has restaurants with liquor licenses. Yuck.)

So you see a lot more “puritanism” out here than back East. I can testify that many Evangelical churches will NOT have anything to do with alcohol, even avoiding the “family style” restaurants like Chile’s and Applebees that serve liquor. That’s one reason Culvers is so hugely-popular here in the Midwest, while other parts of the country have never heard of it.
Evangelicalism is so broad that you can’t really pin much of its “moral expectations” down. While as you said, some will entirely reject liquor, others do not at all. I can certainly tell you that Pentecostals in Italy do not reject alcohol at all. My parents consider the thought of being completely dry as entirely absurd.

But here in New England you can find people in Evangelical churches that are not anti-alcohol, do not have a particular expectation of clothing modesty,and certainly do not avoid Chili’s and Applebees.

I should note that the majority of Catholics I know in this area are more or less the same. Fairly liberal. It has more to do with regionalism than with a particular religious denomination.
 
I’m sorry if this post sounds harsh towards Evangelicals, and I do realize, as I’ve said several times, that many Evangelical churches are striving to change and get rid of their unwritten “list of rules.”
I sort of agree with Abidewithme. Your portrayal of Evangelicals is not inaccurate, but it is a little dated. Since at least the 1970s (some of it goes all the way back to the 1940s and '50s), there has been a process of “liberalization” which has eliminated the most radical of these unwritten rules. Really, in my experience (which I assume is close to the mainstream of Evangelicalism these days), the only “taboos” that remain in force are prohibitions against alcohol use, tobacco use, profanity, extra-marital sex, and Ouija boards. Things like sports, TV, and dancing are OK as long as it is in moderation, and does not display inappropriate behavior.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top