I
Incomplete
Guest
When you talk about changing Catholic teaching, is this what you are talking about changing?
- Status
L
LVCIVS_DEI
Guest
No, and that is not a teaching, that is just the opinion of a senior member of this forum.
I
Incomplete
Guest
I know that this is not a teaching, but wasn’t sure you knew that (because I don’t know you.) So I’m still unclear what teaching(s) you think needs to be changed.
L
LVCIVS_DEI
Guest
Ah, i understand, well if it where up to me, and i know it isn’t, i would change the doctrine on sexuality, so relationships between two adults based on love are no longer considered a sin.
I just think there has been an error translation of scripture from its original greek.
D
Dakota_Roberts
Guest
I am not sure if this applies to what you want to do, but you are aware that sex outside of marriage has, is and will always be sinful plus marriage can only ever be contracted between a man and a woman.
M
Monkey1976
Guest
And that “error” was missed by everyone - including everyone who spoke Greek as their native tongue - for 2000 years?
L
LVCIVS_DEI
Guest
The Bible was not written down at that time yet…And that “error” was missed by everyone - including everyone who spoke Greek as their native tongue - for 2000 years?
I
Incomplete
Guest
I assume you mean it wasn’t written immediately, because obviously it was written before 2000 years.
The Old Testament was written before Jesus walked on earth. The New Testament was being written even shortly after Jesus ascended to heaven…it just took a bit for the Holy Spirit to lead the Church to deciding which books were Scripture. But before the canon was decided, look to the early Christian fathers. They were also preaching against homosexual behavior. That was before anybody was worrying about translation.
F
fix
Guest
The Holy Spirit got it wrong?
L
LVCIVS_DEI
Guest
But the idea that Sodomy is Homosexuality did not come until much later.
I
Incomplete
Guest
Can you show me the evidence for that? And how much later is “later?”
L
LVCIVS_DEI
Guest
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy#Josephus
Also.
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2020:9&version=RSVCE
We don,t do that, now do we?
I
Incomplete
Guest
I unfortunately need to be gone for awhile and hoping someone comes back to this who can explain better than I can, but if not, I do have comments to make. I just want you to know I will be back.
F
fix
Guest
L
LVCIVS_DEI
Guest
So we should kill our children when they disobey?
I mean tradition for the sake of tradition is not an argument now is it, nor a reason.
F
fix
Guest
The Mosaic law was imperfect, but the moral law can never change.
C
cargau
Guest
The Church does not take a moral stance on a whim… She takes a stand based on the Gospel message of Christ and a realization that life is better lived when we follow these teachings.
I am always amazed that many issues today often seem to revolve around the self. What’s in it for ME! I want to live an unnatural, deviant lifestyle and I insist that you like and support it. Otherwise you are a bigot. Oh, and what about the children? Do you think that a child might sense that the sexual preferences of the pseudo-parents is more important than the kids are? After all, they were never conceived in love.
I had dinner with a couple of social workers last night. The subject of adolescent mental illness came up. I asked if kids suffering from emotional and mental stress was on the rise. They said yes but it was because it was just more suppressed in years past. Still I wonder about a society that promotes abortion, BC, gay marriage, etc may be having an effect on our young people.
When do they ever become the priority?
I
Incomplete
Guest
I’m going to explain this part first because it takes less time; it will be awhile before I can get to everything. Good questions, and deserving of thorough explanations.
The part you quoted, no, we don’t do that, and I’m not sure there’s any evidence that anybody did that.
First, this is not a commandment to the rest of us to kill them.
Second, “curses” wasn’t just, say, swearing, or our popular useage of “curse” today. It was more than that. It was about denigrating someone.
So what you are doing here is going against the fifth commandment, meaning it is a sin…and the wages of sin is death. You will not see any examples in Leviticus that people actually killed for this, nor (as I said) are we commanded to kill those who go against the Fifth Commandment. Think of this more as God’s judgement.
In fact, if you look at Chapter 20 as a whole, you will see the 10 commandments, some of it just worded a little differently.
What this is doing is saying that to not keep the fifth commandment is serious. And regarding your comment to somebody else about killing our children, the Ten Commandments were given to adults.
But then what? There are lots of verses in Leviticus that we do not keep, so what of those?
Jews in the Old Testament had a lot of laws that they followed that were a call to keep them different from the pagans; to protect them from paganism and keep them belonging to God. Some of this was designed for priests, and for things like sacrifices they offered.
But some was moral laws. (We do still keep the 10 commandments…we don’t just throw them out because they are in Leviticus.) We keep the moral laws, but don’t worry much about those designed just for Jews or, more specifically, just for Jewish priests…because we are neither.
Regarding homosexuality, even if Leviticus wasn’t in Scripture, it isn’t the only place in Scripture that talks against homosexuality.
(If anybody can explain better, please do! I’m not certain I’m being clear.)
I
Incomplete
Guest
I’m not young anymore…and I’ve heard that same excuse over and over and over again during my lifetime. I don’t buy it anymore, either. Like you, I believe that immorality in general, and the tendency to promote selfishness, causes unhappiness.
God gave us laws for a reason. When we go against them, we find we are acting against our own best interest.
I
Incomplete
Guest
Interesting. So this site is saying Josephus goes beyond the Biblical data…is that the point you’re making? Because it seems to me that this is an early example of, indeed, using the term Sodomy. But the comment about Josephus going beyond Biblical date is an assessment only made in recent years by people who are much further away from it, or at least, that’s the impression the link you provided gives me. In fact, I don’t see any citations for the statement that Josephus does this, so it looks like just the opinion of the person writing the Wikipedia page.
You did, in fact, give proof that Sodomy has been considered a sin of same-sex relations…unless I’m missing something in what you linked me to. (And it wouldn’t be my first time I’ve misunderstood!)
I initially glanced at the page and missed that this is what you sent me to…that’s why I expected to write more.
But keep looking at that page. I didn’t read it all because it seems to agree that early Christians preached against same-sex relationships. For example, from the source you linked me to:
Christians earlier than Justinian are also seen to denounce same-sex relations. St. John Chrysostom in the 4th century regarded such as worse than murder in his fourth homily on Romans 1:26-27 [4], while Paul the Apostle in the Epistle to the Romans referred to same sex relations as “shameful lust” and which acts were contrary to nature, with men suffering a “due penalty” in their bodies. Just like the Jews, early Christians prior to Justinian I are not known to have used the word sodomia for the carnal sin they abhorred, though Philo of Alexandria (20 BC - 50 AD)[20] and Methodius of Olympus (AD 260-312)[21] attributed homosexual relations to Sodom, as may have Josephus, (AD 37 – c. 100)[22][23] Augustine of Hippo, (AD 354-430)[24] and certain pseudepigraphacal texts.[25][26][27]
You can argue that this states that early Christians prior to Justinian 1 are not known to have used the word “sodomia”, but that is irrelevant on a couple of accounts. First, this is still pretty early. Second, this indicates that, whatever term they used, they denounced same-sex relations.
- Status