Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jhpb@garage.att.com (Joseph H Buehler) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Gay Ordination in the Presbyterian Church Message-ID: Date: 4 Apr 91 06:22:44 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 23 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article RJB@slacvm.slac.stanford.edu (Rich Belcinski) writes: >|> A further comment: I gave the thought/word/deed categorization; there >|> are others. For example, somone who defends homosexuality, while not >|> strictly engaging in it himself, is guilty of it. I mean that quite >|> literally -- someone who defends a sin has to answer for that sin at >|> their personal judgement. This is sin by way of condoning, vs. doing. >|> >|> Joe Buehler Ah..... I don't know about *THAT*... I have never seen a passage about being *judged* in that way. A good passage on the subject is one that is actually closely connected with the topic of homosexuality. Romans, isn't it? ...not only those who do such things, but those who consent to those who do them [are worthy of death]. Disobeying God's moral laws and fighting against them *are* distinct things, but, in matters as grave as the one under consideration, definitely enough to damn one, either way. I will try to dig out some material on the various ways to be guilty of sin.