Which Christian denominations support Gay Marriage?

[Grace_Seeker]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

But the CHurch has never been wrong and never will be. If the CHurch is wrong then Jesus lied to us and the HS has failed us and the devil has won.

That does not logically follow.

It is also possible that the Church is wrong, not because Jesus lied to it. But because Jesus never actually said what the Church has heard, for it has misconstrued what it was that Jesus was actually saying and thus believes something as being true which was never actually said by Jesus in the first place, at least not in the way it has been misunderstood to have been meant.

 

[rinnie]

That does not logically follow.

It is also possible that the Church is wrong, not because Jesus lied to it. But because Jesus never actually said what the Church has heard, for it has misconstrued what it was that Jesus was actually saying and thus believes something as being true which was never actually said by Jesus in the first place, at least not in the way it has been misunderstood to have been meant.

How can that be when christ himself IS the Church. Jesus said I will never leave you orphans. I will sent the advocate the HS to guide you. Now if our promise is that when it comes to understand and teaching scripture Jesus promised us that the Church will have the fullness of the truth then your theory could not possible be correct. Again we are promised that the church will be led by the HS. How do you explain that?

 

[Grace_Seeker]

How can that be when christ himself IS the Church.

That itself may be an incorrect understanding of what Jesus said.

 

[rinnie]

That itself may be an incorrect understanding of what Jesus said.

Not according to the teaching of the RCC and Scripture. They go hand in hand. Jesus is the RCC. The RCC is led by the Holy Spirit. One God in three persons. The HS is just as alive and visible today as when Jesus walked the earth. God has never left us.

Or are you saying you deny the presense of the HS in the CC?

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Not according to the teaching of the RCC and Scripture. They go hand in hand. Jesus is the RCC.

So you say.

 

[elvisman]

So you say.

No - Scripture does.

---

In Acts 9:4-5, Jesus equates his Body – the Church - with his very self:
**He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. **
Notice that Jesus DOESN’T say, “Why are you persecuting the Church?” (which isEXACTLYwhat Paul was doing). Jesus chose to equate the Church with himself.

Jesus established only ONE Church - the Catholic church. H****e and that Church are inseparable.

 

[rinnie]

So you say.

Not me Love, the Holy Spirit. I am led by the HS not by my own self. I have never claimed nor will I ever claim to have that Power.

 

[rinnie]

No - Scripture does.

---

In Acts 9:4-5, Jesus equates his Body – the Church - with his very self:
He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
Notice that Jesus DOESN’T say, “Why are you persecuting the Church?” (which isEXACTLYwhat Paul was doing). Jesus chose to equate the Church with himself.

Jesus established only ONE Church - the Catholic church. He and that Church are inseparable.

elvis you took the SCRIPTURE right out of my mouth This is my favorite scripture proof that I am indeed in the right Church! This scripture I live by!

 

[Grace_Seeker]

No - Scripture does.

---

In Acts 9:4-5, Jesus equates his Body – the Church - with his very self:
He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
Notice that Jesus DOESN’T say, “Why are you persecuting the Church?” (which isEXACTLYwhat Paul was doing). Jesus chose to equate the Church with himself.

Jesus established only ONE Church - the Catholic church. He and that Church are inseparable.

Notice, you’ve interpreted scripture. It didn’t actually say that Jesus = the Church. That is an interpretation you’ve arrived at. Similarly, in reading the scriptures, I’ve arrived at an interpretation that all who are in Christ are a part of the body of Christ and therefore members of his Church. But the Catholic Church denies this. Since neither of us would claim that scripture is wrong, the only choices left are that either the Catholic interpretation of scripture is wrong or mine is. Obviously I don’t think mine is wrong, or I wouldn’t believe it. Therefore I hold that the Catholic Church has drawn some erroneous conclusions from scripture. The exclusive identification of the Church with itself is one of those.

 

[rinnie]

Notice, you’ve interpreted scripture. It didn’t actually say that Jesus = the Church. That is an interpretation you’ve arrived at. Similarly, in reading the scriptures, I’ve arrived at an interpretation that all who are in Christ are a part of the body of Christ and therefore members of his Church. But the Catholic Church denies this. Since neither of us would claim that scripture is wrong, the only choices left are that either the Catholic interpretation of scripture is wrong or mine is. Obviously I don’t think mine is wrong, or I wouldn’t believe it. Therefore I hold that the Catholic Church has drawn some erroneous conclusions from scripture. The exclusive identification of the Church with itself is one of those.

Grace Seeker what did Jesus say Saul why are you persecuting me. Saul said who are you. Jesus said it is I Jesus. Now are you saying the the CHurch is wrong in saying that Saul was persecuting the Church? Or are you saying the CHurch was wrong in saying Jesus said he was the Church? Or both, and please show US scripture to show we are wrong.

 

[elvisman]

Notice, you’ve interpreted scripture. It didn’t actually say that Jesus = the Church. That is an interpretation you’ve arrived at. Similarly, in reading the scriptures, I’ve arrived at an interpretation that all who are in Christ are a part of the body of Christ and therefore members of his Church. But the Catholic Church denies this. Since neither of us would claim that scripture is wrong, the only choices left are that either the Catholic interpretation of scripture is wrong or mine is. Obviously I don’t think mine is wrong, or I wouldn’t believe it. Therefore I hold that the Catholic Church has drawn some erroneous conclusions from scripture. The exclusive identification of the Church with itself is one of those.

**Then yopu need to establish just WHICH Church Jesus started. That’s what all this boils down to. **
**I know for a fact that Jesus didn’t establish the Methodist or Baptist or Presbyterian churches - or ANY of the thousands of Fundamentalist and Evangelical churches that exist today. That is a fact that can be proven.

**What can also be proven is that the Catholic Church IS the ONE, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church Jesus established. There IS no other. Jesus gve this Church authority on heaven and earth (Matt. 16:15-19, 18:15-18, John 16:12-15, 20.21-23). **
These are irrefutable passages unless the reader twists the Scriptures to his own destruction (2 Pet. 3:16).

I find it interesting that you assert the Catholic Church has had it wrong since the 1st Century - yet YOU got it right thousands of years later..

 

[rinnie]

Then yopu need to establish just WHICH Church Jesus started. That’s what all this boils down to.
I know for a fact that Jesus didn’t establish the Methodist or Baptist or Presbyterian churches - or ANY of the *thousands *of Fundamentalist and Evangelical churches that exist today. That is a fact that can be proven.

What can also be proven is that the Catholic Church IS the ONE, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church Jesus established. There IS no other. Jesus gve this Church authority on heaven and earth (Matt. 16:15-19, 18:15-18, John 16:12-15, 20.21-23).
These are irrefutable passages unless the reader twists the Scriptures to his own destruction (2 Pet. 3:16).

I find it interesting that you assert the Catholic Church has had it wrong since the 1st Century - yet YOU got it right thousands of years later..

And if I could add we know it is not the Protestant Church that left the Catholic Church because Luther started the Protestant Church. And Protestant got its name because it Protests the Catholic Church. And we know for a fact that Luther broke off from the Catholic Church. We also know that Luther was a Catholic Monk.

And our other proof is Peter. Peter was the first pope and the Pope today still holds the keys to the kingdom. The Pope still is in charge of the CC. It can be traced all the way from the Pope today straight to Peter.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Then yopu need to establish just WHICH Church Jesus started. That’s what all this boils down to.

And I’ve even identified my understanding of who/what that Church is. It is the body of Christ, all person joined to Jesus by faith. It is made up of the Methodists, Baptists, Presbyeterians whose churches you are quite right Jesus did not start. It is also made up of Fundamentalists and Evangelicals, Orthodox, and even Catholics. It is made up of the people of all of the churched, denominations, ecclesiastical communities, and even people unattached to any faith community but who are attached to Jesus Christ. It is INCLUSIVE of them all. It includes those who do communion the “right” way, the “wrong” way, and those who don’t do communion at all. It includes high church, low church, and no church. It includes those who have thoroughly read and understood, perhaps even memorized the catechism, and those who don’t even know what a catechism is but who do know Christ.

I find it interesting that you assert the Catholic Church has had it wrong since the 1st Century - yet YOU got it right thousands of years later..

I don’t assert that. I don’t think that the Catholic Church, as you speak of it, even existed in the first century. I do think that the first century Christian community was catholic, inclusive of all people who were in Christ as members of his one, holy, apostolic, and catholc Church. But the Catholic Church that exists today is just one of many offshoots that grow out of that body. And while each of those offshoots my be holy, even apostolic. The one Church can only exist when speaking of the totality of the people who are part of those offshoots. And those individual offshoots are only catholic when they recognize the inclusion of each of those other offshoots (not just their own) in the larger concept of the Church as all who belong to the body of Christ. By your own admission that is not true of today’s Catholic Church, hence it is only Holy and Apostolic, but most certainly not catholic.

What can also be proven is that the Catholic Church IS the ONE, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church Jesus established. There IS no other. Jesus gve this Church authority on heaven and earth (Matt. 16:15-19, 18:15-18, John 16:12-15, 20.21-23).
These are irrefutable passages unless the reader twists the Scriptures to his own destruction (2 Pet. 3:16).

Then beware of twisting scripture so as to declare yourself the exclusive members of something that is inclusive of so many more than you recognize, or you might find yourself seperated from those you call “seperated brethern” in a way you don’t expect – on the outside looking in.

 

[Christ_Imitator]

The list had Lutherans as accepting Same-Sex marriage, that is only partly true.
The Evangelical Lutheran Church accepts it; the other ones do not.

Also, these Churches that I have been to/know about, do not support it.

-Evangelical Free Church
-Evangelical Covenant Church
-Assemblies of God
-Reformed Christian Churches
-Southern Baptists (If not all, almost all Baptists are against SSM)

 

[centurion210]

Grace Seeker,

You say, " I don’t think that the Catholic Church, as you speak of it, even existed in the first century. I do think that the first century Christian community was catholic, inclusive of all people who were in Christ as members of his one, holy, apostolic, and catholc Church. But the Catholic Church that exists today is just one of many offshoots that grow out of that body."

I would be very interested in knowing how you arrived at this conclusion. You are aware that all of the reformers were Catholics. So, all of the many Protestant churches had their origin in the Catholic Church. Prior to the Reformation, the only major split appears to be with many of the Eastern churches (with whom Catholics mostly agree ). That was in the 11th century. Prior to that there was one church. It was called the Catholic Church.

The sacrifice of the Mass was celebrated from the beginning.( see St. Justrin Martyr). His description of the liturgy is used in the Catholic catechism. Only the Catholic and Eastern churches celebrate the Eucharist in this way. The early Christians were called cannibal because they claimed to consume the body and blood of Jesus Christ. The Catholic and Eastern churches alone have always declared the Eucharist to be the real presence of Jesus Christ.

There have been 21 Church councils. The Catholic Church embraces them all. Catholic doctrine growing out of these councils is well-documented for anyone to examine. Apostolic succession can be traced through the writings of the early church fathers. St.Irenaeus gives a detailed account of all the bishops of Rome from Peter to his day. Eusebius and others confirm and expand on this list. There is nothing to contradict these writings. It’s history! You can determine this information for yourself.

The earliest approved canon of Scripture is the same as the Catholic Church uses today.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. So, please explain how and when you believe the Catholic Church began.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Grace Seeker,

You say, " I don’t think that the Catholic Church, as you speak of it, even existed in the first century. I do think that the first century Christian community was catholic, inclusive of all people who were in Christ as members of his one, holy, apostolic, and catholc Church. But the Catholic Church that exists today is just one of many offshoots that grow out of that body."

I would be very interested in knowing how you arrived at this conclusion. You are aware that all of the reformers were Catholics. So, all of the many Protestant churches had their origin in the Catholic Church. Prior to the Reformation, the only major split appears to be with many of the Eastern churches (with whom Catholics mostly agree ). That was in the 11th century. Prior to that there was one church. It was called the Catholic Church.

The sacrifice of the Mass was celebrated from the beginning.( see St. Justrin Martyr). His description of the liturgy is used in the Catholic catechism. Only the Catholic and Eastern churches celebrate the Eucharist in this way. The early Christians were called cannibal because they claimed to consume the body and blood of Jesus Christ. The Catholic and Eastern churches alone have always declared the Eucharist to be the real presence of Jesus Christ.

There have been 21 Church councils. The Catholic Church embraces them all. Catholic doctrine growing out of these councils is well-documented for anyone to examine. Apostolic succession can be traced through the writings of the early church fathers. St.Irenaeus gives a detailed account of all the bishops of Rome from Peter to his day. Eusebius and others confirm and expand on this list. There is nothing to contradict these writings. It’s history! You can determine this information for yourself.

The earliest approved canon of Scripture is the same as the Catholic Church uses today.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. So, please explain how and when you believe the Catholic Church began.

It’s not about canon or eucharist or the role of Peter. It is about what it means to be “catholic.”

The word catholic means universal. The church we read about in scriptures held that all people who belonged to Christ belonged to the Church. Since today’s Catholic Church holds differently and holds that there are those who are in the body of Christ but outside of the Catholic Church, it is obvious that the tern “catholic” as used by the Catholic Church today means something different than it did to the early Church.

To the early church to be catholic was to be inclusive. But the Catholic Church of today is an exclusive Church, not encompassing what itself recognizes is the totallity of the body of Christ. Hence, since the Catholic Church of today is not inclusive of the entire body of Christ it is not catholic in the same sense that the early Church was. When that change was made I don’t know and don’t have to identify. I don’t think that the truly catholic Church has ever been exclusive, but you say it is. So, when did the Catholic Church come up with the idea that one could be a genuine follower of Christ, a Christian, and a member of the body of Christ and yet still not be recognized as being included in the catholic Church. Whenever it is that you identify that as having happened (and it is obvious from your own posts that you view it that way today) that is when it happened. And it is a shame and a blight on the body of Christ that it has.

 

[Jimmy_B]

It’s not about canon or eucharist or the role of Peter. It is about what it means to be “catholic.”

The word catholic means universal. The church we read about in scriptures held that all people who belonged to Christ belonged to the Church. Since today’s Catholic Church holds differently and holds that there are those who are in the body of Christ but outside of the Catholic Church, it is obvious that the tern “catholic” as used by the Catholic Church today means something different than it did to the early Church.

To the early church to be catholic was to be inclusive. But the Catholic Church of today is an exclusive Church, not encompassing what itself recognizes is the totallity of the body of Christ. Hence, since the Catholic Church of today is not inclusive of the entire body of Christ it is not catholic in the same sense that the early Church was. When that change was made I don’t know and don’t have to identify. I don’t think that the truly catholic Church has ever been exclusive, but you say it is. So, when did the Catholic Church come up with the idea that one could be a genuine follower of Christ, a Christian, and a member of the body of Christ and yet still not be recognized as being included in the catholic Church. Whenever it is that you identify that as having happened (and it is obvious from your own posts that you view it that way today) that is when it happened. And it is a shame and a blight on the body of Christ that it has.

The combination “the Catholic Church” (he katholike ekklesia) is found for the first time in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written about the year 110. (Found-HERE)

.
Obviously, if Saint Ignatius wrote about the “Catholic Church”, then he wrote about a Catholic Church, which already existed.

If we include St. Peter, Ignatius was the third Bishop of Antioch and the immediate successor of Evodius (Eusebius, Church History II.3.22). (Found-Here)

 

[centurion210]

Grace Seeker,

I am sorry. I am not clear about what church you are describing. The early Christian church was very structured. New converts were not allowed to participate in the full liturgy until the church leaders were convinced of their intentions. They were allowed in the early stages of the Mass when the Scriptures were read. They could not participate in the Eucharist. Confessions were made during the mass in front of the congregation. The church had some rather harsh discipline for unrepentant members.There were bishops,priests, and deacons.

I am really glossing over the details, but anyone willing to do the research will find that the only church that fits this description is the Catholic Church (as well as the Eastern Church’s) and since Jesus commissioned the apostles to spread the faith “to the ends of the earth”, only the Catholic Church, which is found all over the globe, and has remained in union with “Peter”, is the one true universal church.

You and anyone else who believes are welcome. No one stands at the door “checking ID cards”. No one is allowed to receive the body and blood of our Lord Jesus unless they are in full communion with us. Just as the very first Christians required.

There are many good books on the early church. But you also have available the preserved documents of the early church fathers( available from Protestant as well as Catholic sources) so you can verify anything you read in someone’s book.

 

[raderag]

Which Christian denominations support Gay Marriage? Here a list that I have put together based on various internet sources, whose reliability, I’m not quite sure of. So, Please let me know if this information is inaccurate. Thank you!

---

Apposes Gay Marriage

Roman Catholic Church
Orthodox
Church of God in Christ
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Conservative Congregational Christian Conference
Conservative Mennonite Conference
**Convocation of Anglicans in North America, **
Hutterite Brethren
Orthodox Church in America
Seventh-day Adventist Church,
Southern Baptist Convention
Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America

Supports Gay Marriage

Metropolitan Community Church
United Church of Christ
Unitarian Universalists
United Church of Canada
Episcopal
Lutheran

---

Moreover, is Gay Marriage morally wrong?

---

Your Thoughts?

The denominations that are neo-orthodox or liberal support Gay marraige. There are conservative denoms that have arose out of neo-orthodoxy for Baptist, Presbyterians, Anglicans, and Lutherans.

Methodists are still on the Fence.

 

[gearhead]

I just noticed that “Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America” is on the OP’s list. I’m pretty sure they’re not a Christian denomination.