Homosexuality in geneology?

[jcrichton]

Fone Bone, I believe you were accusing me of “drawing a false dichotomy”. My point was that the Roman Catholic Church tells me that I, as an Anglican, am not Christian just because I do not belong to what is commonly referred to by other Christians as the RCC. The catholic church (lower case c deliberate) is the universal church which includes all Christians. Where the Roman church differs in its teaching from the others there is a clear difference. There is, therefore, nothing false about my statement.

All I ask is for some respect for the opinions of your non-RC brothers and sisters.

Steven

…since my early childhood I’ve never heard a single Priest or Nun claim that only Catholics are Christians (could you be referring to the full Communion with the Body of Christ?); conversely, I’ve heard many non-Catholics claim that Catholics are not Christians; I’ve even have had pseudo-Christians claim that Yahweh God will punish the Catholic Church and that all Catholics are headed for damnation…

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Not true in the slightest. What I’m asking people to do is recognise that when the scriptures were written people didn’t have the scientifice knowledge and understanding that we do now. Try explaining how an aircraft flies without resorting to a knowledge of aerodynamics and engines and you only go back a century. Then think back 2000 years and put your ideas into a Deuteronomic context of blessings for doing right and curse for doing wrong and you might begin, only begin, to imagine why the explanation of homosexuality for Biblical people doesn’t adequately respresent what we now know. Much the same principle as led Biblical people to believe the earth was flat and the centre of the universe - something we’ve long accepted as not being true.

…so in other words: the Bible is full of antiquated and scientific-backwards teachings that are not morally binding in today’s backed-by-science enlightened era?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[SilentKnight]

Dear SK,
I will try to be humble.
Science does not know when it is seeing a correctly designed system, or even if it is coirrectly seeing a system at all.
It is religion which says that the system is correctly designed, as it is the product of G_d who is perfect, hence the products of G_d are perfect, in as much as they are as designed.

Not to put too fine a point, , yes.
Remember the bit on evolution?
Evolution requires evolutionary pressure.
That is, nasty things are required to be overcome, in order to improve the ability to overcome nasty things.
If there were no wars, famines, diseases, or crime, we would still be happy bonobos fornicating in the forest.

But Man is part of G_d’s creation, so the messing up by Man is part of the design.

So mother Church’s take on Natural Law is fallible?
No, that is not fair.
I was only positing that the logic used by Mother Church could be applied to modern scientific knowledge, to get a better idea at the purpose of G_d’s design.
So what is divine revelation, but the perception of Man, all be it inspired, recorded by Man, and interpreted by Man.
“Through a glass darkly” hardly describes it.
It is an article of faith, and has no place in science.
Science chooses to look for knowledge directly, by analysing the creation, to find behind it, the mind of the creator.
Science does not deny the creator, except in its most ignorant form.
The start position of assuming that there is no god, is part of the logic of ‘reducto ad absurdum’.
Just like Special Relativity found the luminiferous ether un-necessary, yet General Relativity seems to requie something very like the luminiferous ether.
The deeper science digs, the closer it seems to come to theology.
Ask a physicist about what was the state of the universe before the big bang, and…
I am inclined to compare faith and science with the concepts of postulate and proof.
A postulate may be valid, even if there is no proof.
Mathematics still has some unproven postulates.

If that were possible, there would be no place for faith, for it would be universally replaced by knowledge, or science.
No, I was saying that the writers of Genesis were trying to make sense of creation based on their limited understanding of physics.I just repeated myself.
I meant both.
To the mind of those men, the two ideas were not different.
This is a confusing subject, and many of the ideas that arrise can be take in more than one way.
We differ here. In principle, G_d is unknowable, therefore there can be no science of G_d.
I accept that scientific methods can be used to investigate the concepts of G_d, but the use of scientific methods does not make a science.
If the revelation is knowledge, then it is science.

Voco,

In my younger and “less restrained” days, I would have probably taken this post and insisted on providing a line by line rebuttal over and over again until we got to the very “bottom” of everything, getting even more and more behind on my homework in the process and taking this thread way far away from its original track.

Having aged and (I would like to think) wisened up a bit, I am content to simply state the obvious: That we have two very different opinions and approaches to this subject…end discussion at this time.



Peace,

SK

 

[bobsharp]

Apostasy from truth begins as soon as we start making our religion fit our lifestyle. Whether you having feelings for women or men, the Lord has set guidelines on what he expects in these situations. Though the road in this mortal probation can be difficult, sticking within the guidelines is what will determine our happiness in the eternities.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Voco,

In my younger and “less restrained” days, I would have probably taken this post and insisted on providing a line by line rebuttal over and over again until we got to the very “bottom” of everything, getting even more and more behind on my homework in the process and taking this thread way far away from its original track.

Having aged and (I would like to think) wisened up a bit, I am content to simply state the obvious: That we have two very different opinions and approaches to this subject…end discussion at this time.



Peace,

SK

And peace also be unto you.
My view point is difficult.
I should not belabour others with it.
All I really ask is for a little doubt on ‘absolutes’.
Absolute truth may be out there somewhere, but I have not found it yet, neither have I met anyone who has.

 

[8eofilos]

Is that all you think marriage is?

What else can it be? God said go and multiply…why? Continue…continue…why people try to complicate things some much? Why instead of saying one word they write 5 pages to show us their PhD skills or to make us think we are stupid? The Apostles were simple men and fishermen and they wrote things on paper and said things that any professor would have to study and write and re-write a speech for his lifetime…

 

[8eofilos]

The problem I have with his position is that he seems to say there is a God, but we canot know what His will is regarding man and women. We have to rely on science to determine what gender is, whether homosexual inclination is “natural” and so on.

The problem is he starts from a premise that says truth is out there some place and we can only find it through materialistic means. No one denies the importance of science, what I deny is that science provides moral truth.

No amount of scientific investigation can show God intended there to be three sexes, or four, or more. No investigation will prove homosexual inclination, or inclination to steal, or anger, or lust is part of God’s ordaining will.

Do you even read the posts? How could homosexuality be natural? Can a homosexual relationship reproduce??? For Christ’s sake, close this thread. What is there to discuss about? It is very clear that homosexuality is against the will of God as written in the Bible not one time!!! Why are we trying to justify the gay community? If you justify even for a second this idea of being gay is natural, you are going against Him, our Father who is the Wisest, the Holiest and knows better than you and me everything. If you don’t believe in Him than what are you doing in this forum? No matter what you say it will not change my mind and I do know He exists. I have seen Him!!!

 

[8eofilos]

…so as long as I have sex with one woman at a time, keep from exploiting them sexually (no drugs, alcohol, money or other material “gifts,” no sex for favors and no forced sex) its OK?

Maran atha!

Angel

No it is not OK. Only marriage in wedding union by God is allowed in Jesus or else He calls it prostitution

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Do you even read the posts? How could homosexuality be natural? Can a homosexual relationship reproduce??? For Christ’s sake, close this thread. What is there to discuss about? It is very clear that homosexuality is against the will of God as written in the Bible not one time!!! Why are we trying to justify the gay community? If you justify even for a second this idea of being gay is natural, you are going against Him, our Father who is the Wisest, the Holiest and knows better than you and me everything. If you don’t believe in Him than what are you doing in this forum? No matter what you say it will not change my mind and I do know He exists. I have seen Him!!!

Dear Theofilos,
Nowhere did I say homosexuality is natural.
At least I hope I did not.
At least not in the sense you object to.
My intent was to say that, due to random cases of undefined gender, commonly called ‘intersex’, sexual immaturity is natural.
Now we ALL accept that sexual immaturity is natural among pre-pubescent children.
In cases of undefined gender, puberty never occurs, so sexual immaturity continues into adulthood.
Note, I am not here, and I hope I was never understood to be describing the cases where sexually mature adults choose, against nature, to sexually associate with members of their own gender.
Neither am I talking about unfortunate persons whose brains are incorrectly initialized into the wrong gender mode.
I am talking about adult neuters, natural eunuchs if you like.
How do you expect them to behave ‘naturally’?

 

[Mea_Culpa]

And peace also be unto you.
All I really ask is for a little doubt on ‘absolutes’.

This could be a quote from the father of lies himself. The devil’s favorite color is gray. Don’t forget who said “What is truth?” It was Pontius Pilate. Jesus died for the Truth. Pilate would say or do anything to appease the mob. We know the truth about homosexuality - it is wrong. Most other churches have caved in to the “gay community” and, even though they know it is wrong in the eyes of the Lord, have accepted it. Same with contraception, abortion, divorce. The Catholic Church is still holding to the faith taught by Jesus.

Close this thread, please! It’s all been said. There are no gray areas, there is no doubt!

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

2357 Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

 

[truagape]

This could be a quote from the father of lies himself. The devil’s favorite color is gray. Don’t forget who said “What is truth?” It was Pontius Pilate. Jesus died for the Truth. Pilate would say or do anything to appease the mob. ***We know the truth about homosexuality - it is wrong. *** Most other churches have caved in to the “gay community” and, even though they know it is wrong in the eyes of the Lord, have accepted it. Same with contraception, abortion, divorce. The Catholic Church is still holding to the faith taught by Jesus.

Close this thread, please! It’s all been said. There are no gray areas, there is no doubt!

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

2357 Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

Because you are well aware of the TRUTH as witnessed and preserved within the content, context, and language that encompasses the scriptures, you should also be well aware of just how dishonest and colored your general, simplifed statement is (above in italics, large font). Unfortunately for you and any institution you represent, such statements no longer have to go unchallenged and shielded from the biblical and scriptural facts that expose your words for what they really are. The days of false biblical weaponary against gays and lesbians are numbered. And fortunately because of the power of TRUTH there isn’t a thing that you or anyone else can do to stop it!