Having close friends that are homosexual

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wollie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
wanner47 said:
No. Why would it?

Well… yes. That is the example Jesus set for us, after all. He socialized with sinners while encouraging them to repent of their sin.

I know that it’s a difficult concept for some people to grasp, but it is possible to love the sinner and hate the sin. 🙂 As previously stated, that’s the very example Jesus set for us to follow.

And me being happy is not “all that matters.” All that matters is that I follow Christ’s teachings, and that of His Church, to the best of my ability.
Click to expand...
Sorry but I don’t see the difference between not attending a wedding because it would be condoning sin, but visiting the sinning couple who are in admittedly ongoing sin, because that is loving the sinner.??? I agree, following Christ’s teaching AS YOU CONCEIVE OF THEM is the only thing that is important. Surely you recognize that many many others do not interpret Church teaching as you do. Your own interpretation of who to accept and what to accept as valid teaching is controlling. Thanks for explaining things to me.

I am not exactly sure how one hates the sin. I’ve never met anyone actively engaged in the practice of hating the sin. It’s a phrase that has little practical meaning it seems, but sounds good on its face. Again, thanks for enlightening me on your take on this issue.
 
Image_of_God said:
You are right, truth cannot be said in a rude and unfeeling way, but you also questioned his love for homosexuals, which I see nothing in there that would doubt it. Yes, he did come off too strong, but your questions seemed very extreme for comments like his.

Now to answer the bold: Your statement which is italicized (by me) makes little sense. What is my method?
Click to expand...
I do find it hard to believe that you can love a person whom you refer to in such a disgusting way. It is tantamount to the usual, calling a person a vicious name, and then smiling and saying “I’ll pray for you.” Yes, but pray what? Certainly nothing good. It comes off as hateful in the extreme and arrogant to boot. To publically say such a thing sparks of “I’m ever so much better than you.” If it was not meant in such a way, then why the vicious invective?

My point is, that when you say, I love you, but will not stand by you on this important day in your life, I think you do in fact conflate the two principles, you reject the person, and basically state that you consider them nothing more than a sexual organ improperly aligned. I can see no practical way of loving the sinner and hating the sin. You automatically compromise the first when you enunciate the second to the listener.
 
estesbob said:
Earlier in this thread EXALT claimed Jeses would join in a celebration affirming sinful behavior should I send you some mustard?
Click to expand...
Save the mustard, your example is not correct. It is YOUR interpretation that attending the wedding is affirming sinful behavior. That is of course what we are debating.
 
SpiritMeadow said:
Save the mustard, your example is not correct. It is YOUR interpretation that attending the wedding is affirming sinful behavior. That is of course what we are debating.
Click to expand...
So you think he would be going there to dance with the grooms?
 
SpiritMeadow said:
I do find it hard to believe that you can love a person whom you refer to in such a disgusting way. It is tantamount to the usual, calling a person a vicious name, and then smiling and saying “I’ll pray for you.” Yes, but pray what? Certainly nothing good. It comes off as hateful in the extreme and arrogant to boot. To publically say such a thing sparks of “I’m ever so much better than you.” If it was not meant in such a way, then why the vicious invective?

My point is, that when you say, I love you, but will not stand by you on this important day in your life, I think you do in fact conflate the two principles, you reject the person, and basically state that you consider them nothing more than a sexual organ improperly aligned. I can see no practical way of loving the sinner and hating the sin. You automatically compromise the first when you enunciate the second to the listener.
Click to expand...
The great philosopher Augustine found it possible to love the sinner and hate the sin and you find it impractical? Augustine said very practical things and that is one of the most practical.

If you say you love someone and you cannot strongly disapprove of acts that would hurt them (in other words you wouldn’t care to protect them) you don’t love them. You can’t love someone and stand by and confirm their evil. The Catechism written and ribboned in love says that and I believe it. If you are Catholic, which I believe you are, why do you disagree?
 
Jesus came here to save sinners, not to rejoice and celebrate in their sinning. Yes dined with sinners, and showed them how to repent and how to be saved. Jesus never sat back and watched sin, Jesus brought the sin to their attention, and wiped away their sins. But he also said SIN NO MORE.
 
Is two men professing love a sin? Or is the act of them having intercourse the sin? I think to attending the later maybe a sin, but I’m not sure if attending a wedding is in and of itself, sinful.
 
Wollie said:
Is two men professing love a sin? Or is the act of them having intercourse the sin? I think to attending the later maybe a sin, but I’m not sure if attending a wedding is in and of itself, sinful.
Click to expand...
The gay ‘wedding’ ceremony is a mockery of the sacrament of marriage, which God ordained to be man and woman. A bit (but not nearly as extreme) like a satanic Black Mass is a mockery of the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.

To attend such is likely to be sinful, as it affirms and condones this mockery.

Notice the scripture never says ‘so a man shall leave mother and father and cleave to his husband and the two shall become one flesh’, but wife. No exceptions.
 
SpiritMeadow said:
Sorry but I don’t see the difference between not attending a wedding because it would be condoning sin, but visiting the sinning couple who are in admittedly ongoing sin, because that is loving the sinner.???
Click to expand...
The whole purpose of going to a wedding ceremony, as a guest, is to celebrate, affirm, and bless the union of the couple. Since I cannot in good conscience celebrate, affirm, and bless the invalid marriage of my father, I didn’t go to his wedding.

The whole purpose of going to someone’s home for dinner, as a guest, is to share food and spend time with friends/family in a social setting. Since I can in good conscience share food and spend time with my father, regardless of what sins he (and I) commit on a daily basis, I have no problem going to his home for dinner.

Don’t you see the difference?
I agree, following Christ’s teaching AS YOU CONCEIVE OF THEM is the only thing that is important. Surely you recognize that many many others do not interpret Church teaching as you do. Your own interpretation of who to accept and what to accept as valid teaching is controlling. Thanks for explaining things to me.
Click to expand...
So if someone interprets Christ’s teachings to say that it’s acceptable to have sex with children, you would say that it’s perfectly acceptable, since they are following Christ’s teachings as they conceive of them?

Truth is not determined by majority vote. There is not subjective truth, only objective truth.

Jesus also didn’t say, “Follow my teachings as you interpret them.” Just the opposite, in fact. He established a Church to guide the people in His Truth, and I obey the teachings of that Church to the best of my ability.
I am not exactly sure how one hates the sin. I’ve never met anyone actively engaged in the practice of hating the sin. It’s a phrase that has little practical meaning it seems, but sounds good on its face. Again, thanks for enlightening me on your take on this issue.
Click to expand...
So to continue my example above… you don’t hate pedophilia? That’s a sin, but if you don’t hate it, one can only assume you either approve of it or don’t care one way or the other.
 
LilyM said:
The gay ‘wedding’ ceremony is a mockery of the sacrament of marriage, which God ordained to be man and woman. A bit (but not nearly as extreme) like a satanic Black Mass is a mockery of the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.

To attend such is likely to be sinful, as it affirms and condones this mockery.

Notice the scripture never says ‘so a man shall leave mother and father and cleave to his husband and the two shall become one flesh’, but wife. No exceptions.
Click to expand...
I’m married. I don’t feel mocked. It’s not a catholic ceremony anyway I guess. So you are just **choosing **to be offended.
 
Wollie said:
Is two men professing love a sin? Or is the act of them having intercourse the sin? I think to attending the later maybe a sin, but I’m not sure if attending a wedding is in and of itself, sinful.
Click to expand...
That’s a pretty good point Wollie.
 
wanner47 said:
So if someone interprets Christ’s teachings to say that it’s acceptable to have sex with children, you would say that it’s perfectly acceptable, since they are following Christ’s teachings as they conceive of them?

Truth is not determined by majority vote. There is not subjective truth, only objective truth.

Jesus also didn’t say, “Follow my teachings as you interpret them.” Just the opposite, in fact. He established a Church to guide the people in His Truth, and I obey the teachings of that Church to the best of my ability.

So to continue my example above… you don’t hate pedophilia? That’s a sin, but if you don’t hate it, one can only assume you either approve of it or don’t care one way or the other.
Click to expand...
I think the point, is that everbody hates “sin” as they see it. It’s a given. Therefore it makes no sense. It’s like saying “I’m addicted to air”.

By the way, why is it that every time homosexuality is discussed on these forums somebody brings up pedophilia “just as an example”. Never murder, rape or anything else. Only pedophilia…

Oh yeah. That’s right. It’s because by “subtley” associating SSA with pedophilia; time, and time, and time again, they can keep the ball of homophobia rolling. I tell you: This board really can make one depressed sometimes.
 
thomfra said:
I’m married. I don’t feel mocked. It’s not a catholic ceremony anyway I guess. So you are just **choosing **to be offended.
Click to expand...
You do understand that all the sacraments, including the sacrament of marriage, come from God and are about His love and grace above all else, right? So you do understand that any abuse of them is both abuse and mockery of Him who instituted them all. And that He is certainly offended by such mockery regardless of whether you feel mocked or not?

In what parallel universe are your feelings on the matter, or mine, in any way relevant to whether God is offended or not? Did I even say I felt mocked or offended? I did not. But HE is.
 
LilyM said:
You do understand that all the sacraments, including the sacrament of marriage, come from God and are about His love and grace above all else, right? So you do understand that any abuse of them is both abuse and mockery of Him who instituted them all. And that He is certainly offended by such mockery regardless of whether you feel mocked or not?

In what parallel universe are your feelings on the matter, or mine, in any way relevant to whether God is offended or not? Did I even say I felt mocked or offended? I did not. But HE is.
Click to expand...
I don’t think god “gets offended”. How do you know he’s offended? Nobody can know this.
 
thomfra said:
I don’t think god “gets offended”. How do you know he’s offended? Nobody can know this.
Click to expand...
He sent a flood to destroy the whole world, except Noah and his family, for its sinfulness, and fire to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah for their sins, Jesus promises that His coming will be exactly the same as the days of Noah (Matt 24:37) and you think He never gets offended by sin?

HE personally says in scripture that the reason He did these things was because He was offended by sin, and the Bible is His word is it not? If He says in His inerrant and inspired word that He did it because He was offended by sin we can believe Him, can we not? Or do you not even believe that the Bible IS His inerrant and inspired word and true?
 
LilyM said:
He sent a flood to destroy the whole world, except Noah and his family, for its sinfulness, and fire to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah for their sins, Jesus promises that His coming will be exactly the same as the days of Noah (Matt 24:37) and you think He never gets offended by sin?

HE personally says in scripture that the reason He did these things was because He was offended by sin, and the Bible is His word is it not? If He says in His inerrant and inspired word that He did it because He was offended by sin we can believe Him, can we not? Or do you not even believe that the Bible IS His inerrant and inspired word and true?
Click to expand...
I don’t “believe” in the story of Noah and his Ark - no. If you are one of those people who takes things in the Bible **literally **- then you are probably on the wrong board.

He **may **punish. But “get offended”. No.
 
thomfra said:
He **may **punish. But “get offended”. No.
Click to expand...
Are you getting at the point that God cannot get offended because He is outside of time and is unchanging and that instead a better way of phrasing it is that we do things that are offensive to God? Or are you getting at something completly different?🤷 🙂
 
thomfra said:
I think the point, is that everbody hates “sin” as they see it. It’s a given. Therefore it makes no sense. It’s like saying “I’m addicted to air”.

By the way, why is it that every time homosexuality is discussed on these forums somebody brings up pedophilia “just as an example”. Never murder, rape or anything else. Only pedophilia…

Oh yeah. That’s right. It’s because by “subtley” associating SSA with pedophilia; time, and time, and time again, they can keep the ball of homophobia rolling. I tell you: This board really can make one depressed sometimes.
Click to expand...
No, it’s because pedophilia is still universally condemned, although we’re quickly heading down that slippery slope.

But if you wish, we can use rape or murder.

So, if someone interpreted Jesus’ teachings to mean that it’s okay to murder homosexuals, a la Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church, would they be perfectly morally justified in doing so, given that they would just be “following Jesus’ teachings as they conceive of them”?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top