Do other Christian denominations accept homosexuality for their own convenience?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
at9009 said:
So you solution to my question is to deflect and ask me? I was genuinely interested in your perspective. I would like to know what you would consider loving and what you would consider not loving. My opinion and views are basically irrelevant in that case.

Also kinda of presumptuous to assume that all homosexual people must be sexual active and must be trying to push a same sex affirming lifestyle on you forcing you to bake a cake.
Click to expand...
The issue was brought up by someone else who said{
Catholic_farmer said:
How should Catholics behave towards gay people? The proper attitude is love. Just love…
Click to expand...
I said that I personally do not engage in loving activities with homosexuals, but I am neutral toward them. Then another poster said I am violating a major commandment which commands us to love our neighbor. So the implication is that I am committing a major sin.
So my question to everyone who loves homosexuals is how do you express your love toward them? If they are married, will you be benevolent and bake them a cake and give them a present for their wedding anniversary? Will you attend their gatherings? How do you express your love for them?
 
Thorolfr said:
Putting aside the issue of wedding cakes, if a homosexual couple moved into the house or apartment next to you, would it be so bad to bake a regular cake for them as a house warming gift or stop by and introduce yourself and just try to make them feel welcome?
Click to expand...
Why put aside the issue of baking a cake for them? You don’t know me and you don’t know where I live. But in our neighborhood there is a married homosexual couple who regularly have parties and invite the neighbors. I usually attend the parties and have brought a cake on occasion. I accept them as my neighbors, but I don;t engage in any type of loving relations with them. Apparently though, you would not bake a cake for them, but at the same time you accuse me of violating a major commandment?
 
Tomdstone said:
Why put aside the issue of baking a cake for them? You don’t know me and you don’t know where I live. But in our neighborhood there is a married homosexual couple who regularly have parties and invite the neighbors. I usually attend the parties and have brought a cake on occasion. I accept them as my neighbors, but I don;t engage in any type of loving relations with them. Apparently though, you would not bake a cake for them, but at the same time you accuse me of violating a major commandment?
Click to expand...
Why wouldn’t I bake a cake for them, even a wedding cake. I never said I wouldn’t (but obviously some Catholics have an issue with baking wedding cakes for gay people). But you seem to equate the word “love” with some kind of sexual or romantic intimacy which is not always the case. The word “love” can also have the meaning of “affection based on admiration, benevolence, or common interests”. There’s nothing wrong with having affection based on benevolence even towards people with whom you disagree on certain issues. It sounds to me as if you are loving your neighbors by accepting them and going to their parties and bringing cakes sometimes.
 
Tomdstone said:
So my question to everyone who loves homosexuals is how do you express your love toward them?
Click to expand...
I’m on the other side of this alignment, but, to name a few, people who love me:
  • took care of me when I’m sick
  • fed me, when I haven’t eaten in days
  • lended me money, if in late autumn I ended up without warm clothes and footwear
  • let me stay at their place, when I was in town
  • took me in, if for a couple of days I needed shelter
  • wished me happy birthdays
  • stood up to those who told me to never darken the church porch
  • tried to convince me that I’m not condemned to Hell
  • talked me out of killing myself
  • let me cry on their shoulder
  • kept my secrets
  • prayed for me
 
Tomdstone said:
but at the same time you accuse me of violating a major commandment?
Click to expand...
“You have heard it said, hate your enemy but be neutral toward your friend. But I say to you be neutral towards your enemy, and do neutrally towards those who hate you.”
 
Thorolfr said:
(but obviously some Catholics have an issue with baking wedding cakes for gay people)
Click to expand...
Well, at least some have an issue because there are priests, who for that would ban the baker from receiving the Eucharist. And I know I’m going to be the bad gal here, but if a gay couple knows that this particular person may be denied something so precious over their wedding cake, and still insists that the cake is baked by this particular person instead of a non-Catholic baker, who exists and is willing to help, I’ll be among the first to call them out. “But what if the gay couple doesn’t believe in the Real Presence” would be double standard-ish.
 
Tagetes said:
Well, at least some have an issue because there are priests, who for that would ban the baker from receiving the Eucharist.
Click to expand...
I find that a little hard to believe … but then, no bunch of apples is completely homogenous.
 
jlhargus said:
I see your profile says “Religion: Catholic”. And you don’t know the answers to those questions?
Click to expand...
Correct. I have no way of knowing whether you believe contraception is wrong or not. Being Catholic does not mean being psychically linked to each other.
 
Peter_J said:
Correct. I have no way of knowing whether you believe contraception is wrong or not. Being Catholic does not mean being psychically linked to each other.
Click to expand...
I’m not a cafeteria Catholic I believe as the Magisterium teaches.
 
BornInMarch said:
Those denominations would argue that the biblical verse condemning homosexuality is misinterpreted, or they would argue that that rule was one of the Old Testament Rules that got cancelled in the New Testament (like the restriction against eating pork and shellfish). .
Click to expand...
Yet they produce no Scriptural or Tradition to back up there claim even from their own denomination. There are 46 English Bible translations by different denominations, literal and liberal, from the 1600 hundreds till today on Bible Gateway.

[1Cor6:9 **Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.]

legacy.biblegateway.com/verse/en/1%20Corinthians%206:9 View 46 Different English Bible translations of 1Cor6:9

[1Tm1:9 **Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;]

legacy.biblegateway.com/verse/en/1%20Timothy%201:10 View 46 different English Bible translations of 1Tm1:10.

[Rms1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: **for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.]

legacy.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Romans%201:26 View 46 Different English Bible translations of Rms1:26.

legacy.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Romans%201:27 View 46 different English Bible translations of Rms1:27.
 
eamonnroma said:
So, are you saying that the homosexual person is sinful and disordered?
Click to expand...
Of course.

So is everyone else. That is why we all need ongoing conversion, through life. We have been baptized but still must deal with lingering effect of original sin. The sin is not in being homosexual, but in any person to engage in behavior that is wrong. We are not in a position to judge whether this or that action is sinful in a man. We can judge that going against the Natural Law is bad, along with other things. 100% of us are judged to be objectively, wrong, but I can’t judge whether a given person is sinful. Only God can.
 
Thorolfr, even though you don’t agree with our other points about Gay Pride Parades, would you agree that it is unfortunate when they reinforce stereotypes about gay people?
 
Catholic_farmer said:
Homosexuality is very clearly wrong in the bible. Please go back and re-read the quotes.

In addition, homosexuality is wrong because of how God describes marriage. He tells us that a “man’s seed” is for procreation. This cannot occur naturally except between a man and woman. It isn’t as much about saying “no, you can’t do that” as it is about understanding what sex is for and appreciating it as a gift from God. Their are limits to what ‘straight’ people should be doing as well because certain acts do not allow for procreation (use your imagination). Read Theology of the Body and then try to justify homosexual (or other) acts.
Click to expand...
I’ve already read quotes and I’ve also read how some of the other Christian faith communities have come to understand homosexuality and marriage differently.
 
Sy_Noe said:
I’ve already read quotes and I’ve also read how some of the other Christian faith communities have come to understand homosexuality and marriage differently.
Click to expand...
  1. There have been many, many thousands of different Christian faith communities over the past 2000 years. They include those who flourished, or shrank, or been persecuted, in hundreds of different cultures, urban and rural, arctic and tropical, monarchy, dictatorship, democracy, well read or illiterate, at war and peace, in ethnic majority or tiny minority, sacramental or sola scriptura, South America or South Korea. Most if not all of them, until very recently understood homosexual actions as inherently wrong, and marriage as heterosexual. There is more unanimity on this than there is on the Trinity. If this is now on the table, up for renegotiation, the Trinity and the New Testament canon may be renegotiated tomorrow.
  2. Christians historically have recognized as a source of temptation as “The World”, along with “The Flesh” and “The Devil”. The massive herding of some denominations in obedience to the secular culture’s demands on homosexuality and marriage, fits the historic definition of yielding to “The World”.
 
Sy_Noe said:
I’ve already read quotes and I’ve also read how some of the other Christian faith communities have ****come ********to ********understand ****homosexuality and marriage differently.
Click to expand...
  1. There have been many, many thousands of different Christian faith communities over the past 2000 years. They include those who flourished, or shrank, or been persecuted, in hundreds of different cultures, urban and rural, arctic and tropical, monarchy, dictatorship, democracy, well read or illiterate, at war and peace, in ethnic majority or tiny minority, sacramental or sola scriptura, South America or South Korea, in Middle Ages or mid 1940s. Most if not all of them, until very recently understood homosexual actions as inherently wrong, and marriage as heterosexual. There is more unanimity on this than there is on the Trinity. If this is now on the table, up for renegotiation, the Trinity and the New Testament canon may be renegotiated tomorrow.
  2. Christians historically have recognized as a source of temptation as “The World”, along with “The Flesh” and “The Devil”. The massive herding of some denominations in obedience to the secular culture’s demands on homosexuality and marriage, fits the historic definition of yielding to “The World”. Every time someone surrenders to the secular demands, it is described as “come to understand”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top