Homosexuality in geneology?

[SilentKnight]

Sorry, busy, busy right now. I may be on the hook until as late as tomorrow night. At some point, I shall return…

SK

 

[truagape]

If you disagree with the Catholic Church about homosexuality, it ultimately will come down to authority and the source and root of the teaching, just as it does for any other issue. Some homosexuals think it’s wrong and some heterosexuals think it’s right, and vice versa. There are multiple interpretations, just like other issues, but only one is correct. Catholics believe the Church can never teach error. So, rather than debate the teaching itself, the debate should center around authority, at least when the Catholic Church is involved.

Buddy here’s what you’re missing. I’m not arguing aginst the authority of the church in regards to scripture and homosexuality. The Catholic Church can believe it has the authority to intrepret and teach what ever it wants. If the Church wants to intrepret scripture to condemn same-sex unions, it’s well within its authority to do so. If, however, the Church wants to use the actual language of scripture to support its intrepretation, then that’s where the biblical facts themselves halt the process. If you’ve noticed, I have nowwhere provided any intrepretation whatsoever in speaking truthfully about scripture and homosexuality. The influx of intrepretation throughout this topic has been provided from the other side.

 

[truagape]

Except it happens in reality all the time. I am living proof. Whether or not God willed it, or it happened because of the fallen state of our world, people are born without a sex, or with both. God could have stopped that from happening to me, but he let it happen. Why? He chose to let these birth defects happen, and they have happened in all recorded history. I have been brutalized, assaulted, mocked, spat on, fired, shamed, shunned, asked to leave church, and even had someone attempted rape. All were done by Christians in a twisted view of their faith.

I would have a perfectly normal life if it wasn’t for the Christians!

Swettie, just keep in mind that Jesus said you would recognize his followers based on those who had love amongst themselves. Those that did that to you were not Christians. They may think that they are but with actions like the ones you described, it’s clear they’re not. Those that fit that category along with ones that choose to supress the truth, I refer to them as “Christians” in quotes.
Take care love!

 

[jcrichton]

Quote:
Originally Posted by peduzzi89 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Yeah but what if it’s wrong?

Not possible.

 	Quote:
 	 		 			 				 It wouldn't be the first time.

Yes, it would.

So when the Roman Catholic Church told Galileo that the world was the centre of the universe and was flat the church wasn’t wrong?

No church can ever claim that it hasn’t been wrong on a number of issues. It is, after all, made up of humans.

As we’ve gained more knowledge about a variety of subjects the church has modified its stance, recognising that better information and acknowledging the scriptural desciptions as being the best ones for that time and level of understanding. Some church authorities are still in the denial phase at the beginning of The Enlightenment.

Steven

Hi, Steven!

…I have to admit I am not a learned person… where did you get that information? I know something has been cirulating around for quite a while but there never seems to be a source that quotes the Church stating such facts… (I am truly interested in knowing the sources.)

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

My apinion is that it dos’nt realy mater if they are homosexual or not.PLEASE CEEP REEDING I’M GOING SOMEWERE WITH THIS. A preist by the name of Father John Corapi has said many times:"That as a priest, he is alot like homosexuals, he’s called to chastity, and so are they.

…the difference being that a Priest must be faithful to his oath while homosexuals relish in being sexually active.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[warriorofpeace]

self sacrifce for the vaticans problem with rape isnt going to take you to heaven mabby global 1 billion computers being all protested against and in internal flames is a structured solution for you

 

[jcrichton]

I think many use the whole church doctrine thing as a fall back when they can no longer provide any good argument against something even when an excellent one is presented for it. I mean we all know what the church has to say about this issue, so what then is the point of this anyway? The church is run by humans and it is possible for them to be wrong, they still have free will. And about the Bible, the words itself are not ambiguous, anyone can see that - I have read it dozens of times. They are ambiguous because of the context in which they were written and the questionable translation - we are not reading God’s original words. And even if you do believe that the church is never wrong, I really maintain that the Bible is not referring to committed, loving, monogamous, same sex couples because that particular idea of homosexuality did not exist when it was written. And say that is true - then the church would be wrong.

…so you claim that Jesus did not address the homosexual issue because it did not exist back when?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Well I’m not saying the Bible is incorrect - just that it is inaccurate to read it at face value. And I didn’t say it was not inspired by God, but what we read today is not the unfiltered word of God letter by letter. And that is the argument I use in saying that it does not condemn all homosexuality. Jesus also said “Love God with all your heart mind and soul, and love your neighbor as you love yourself”. The church did not always allow annulments of marriages, but they do now. That IS an example of church doctrine changing. The Catholic church puts a fog between its people and God. All most Catholics know about Him is what the church tells them. I would love to know how many read the Bible daily or even weekly. I’ll bet not many. Most just do what they’re told, and don’t take the time to really think about things. And this is definitely not a drive-by post.

…you are contradicting yourself… you cannot have it both ways! So either the Church is wrong or the Bible is wrong but you fault both the Church for keeping the Faithful blinded and the Bible for not being the original Word or for not meaning what it says and the Church again for not teaching what the Bible does not include or do not mean… there’s an old song that speaks on this… somehting about “going around in circle…”

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[SCALCO]

Buddy here’s what you’re missing. I’m not arguing aginst the authority of the church in regards to scripture and homosexuality. The Catholic Church can believe it has the authority to intrepret and teach what ever it wants. If the Church wants to intrepret scripture to condemn same-sex unions, it’s well within its authority to do so. If, however, the Church wants to use the actual language of scripture to support its intrepretation, then that’s where the biblical facts themselves halt the process. If you’ve noticed, I have nowwhere provided any intrepretation whatsoever in speaking truthfully about scripture and homosexuality. The influx of intrepretation throughout this topic has been provided from the other side.

Are you saying that we cannot know one way or the other from scripture or that you can conclude that same-sex unions are acceptable and the Church is simply wrong?

 

[truagape]

Are you saying that we cannot know one way or the other from scripture or that you can conclude that same-sex unions are acceptable and the Church is simply wrong?

I’m saying, as I’ve been saying for quite some time, that there is a clear distinction between “church teaching and homosexuality”, and “scripture and homosexuality”.

 

[SCALCO]

I’m saying, as I’ve been saying for quite some time, that there is a clear distinction between “church teaching and homosexuality”, and “scripture and homosexuality”.

I’m still not sure what that means. I’m a little slow, please
bare with me. Does that mean you believe scripture is ambiguous? IOW, we can’t conclude anything about homosexuality from scripture?

 

[jcrichton]

There’s no need to take such a strong stance of dislike for someone just because of orientation. Chemicals and many other things produce estrogens in the body which may change the orientation of individuals before they are born. They have, in fact, been proven to change the orientation of animals.

At one time, years ago, I too was extremely harsh at judging people and you know what? God is a grand teacher. He often gives people a gift (which they may consider a curse) just to teach them a lesson for being so arrogant, condemning of others, and overly “righteous.”

If you take such a strong stance, one day you will be granted a challenge from God when you discover that a close friend or relative is homosexual – or maybe even one of your own children may turn out that way.

You will then be left with the option to (1) place your high and mighty self above that child and neglect and ignore him or her, or (2) to accept the child as he was created and leave the judging to God alone, as has been suggested in the bible. Which option do you think Jesus would’ve chosen?

A good dose of humility is far better for the soul than condemnation of others who have never personally harmed you. The bible states often that you will be judged as harshly as you have judged others (especially those who have done no personal harm to you).

Hi, Tracy!

…so you’re saying something akin to “I do not believe in God, but all I have to do is say I believe in God to be saved?” Is Jesus Loving enough to allow me to reject Salvation?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

NOthe CHRISTIAN church was founded on the teachings of Jesus, who died as a JEW. No church was founded by Him. The Roman Catholic Church claims to be built on Peter, the rock, a married man who denied Christ three times.

If you consider “the Church” to be the body of Christ, the people who are Christians (of any denomination) then I would suggest only a small few would find God except through the Church, and, of that few, some would find God DESPITE the Church.

If the Church’s teaching on ANY subject is founded on ancient science which has been shown to be inaccurate because the people of the time didn’t have the where withall to make the necessary discoveries then not taking on board recent discoveries would invalidate the teaching in that subject. Some people still believe that God created the world in six days about 6000 years ago. I don’t know anyone who takes that claim seriously these days - the scientific evidence is far too strong. One day we might realise the truth about homosexuality and have to admit we were wrong on that issue too.

Sorry, I wanted to leave this subject alone now, but I couldn’t let the claim about Jesus founding the Catholic Church go uncorrected.

Steven

Hi, Steven!

…so you are the authority on Christ and the only Church He founded?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

So many errors here but I was wondering how can science ever prove what is moral or immoral?

…ever heard of quantum physics and quantum mechanics?.. just put "quantum in front of morality and violá science has deemed nothing immoral and everything amoral!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[truagape]

I’m still not sure what that means. I’m a little slow, please
bare with me. Does that mean you believe scripture is ambiguous? IOW, we can’t conclude anything about homosexuality from scripture?

Not at all! The scriptures are not ambiguous. But I must address your last statement. The very problem that exist regarding “church teaching and homosexuality”, is that many have done just that. They’ve approached the scriptures in efforts to draw a conclusion on “homosexuality”, instead of approching scripture in efforts of trying to draw the message that’s being communicated within the content of its passages. And there are many dishonest teachings and conclusions that have resulted from that approach.

 

[warriorofpeace]

why do most on this site greet their neibouring gays with so many open arms while going against churchs gloabblly

 

[peduzzi89]

jcrichton, perhaps what I am saying is unclear. What I am saying is that the conclusion the church teaching is drawing about homosexuality from the scripture is incorrect because they are assuming the Bible is making a blanket statement about all people attracted to the same sex, when in fact it talks about more specific acts of homosexuality, a conclusion that can be drawn once one analyzes the context and the origin of our translation. How is that contradicting myself? And also, I’m not sure what you’re getting at with your other comment, about Jesus, or how it relates to the passage you quoted above it. Could you explain a little further? Warriorofpeace, I’m sorry to say I don’t understand any of the posts you are posting or the meaning of the word gloabblly.

 

[jcrichton]

I never understood this, you do realize that Rome started to COLLAPSE right at the time as Christianity became a major part within it? How is that supposed to prove anything?

Hi, pathia!

…what it proves is that the mechanisms that were in place that served to destroy the Roman Empire (wanton decadence and abuse of power) is the fertile grounds for self-destruction–which coincidentally still plagues us today!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[SCALCO]

Not at all! The scriptures are not ambiguous. But I must address your last statement. The very problem that exist regarding “church teaching and homosexuality”, is that many have done just that. They’ve approached the scriptures in efforts to draw a conclusion on “homosexuality”. Instead of approching scripture in efforts of trying to draw the message that’s being communicated within the content of its passages. And there are many dishonest teachings and conclusions that have resulted from that approach.

I may have to go back and read what you’ve said so you don’t have to repeat yourself before I ask anything else.

If I get, you are saying that scripture does not really say anything on “homosexuality” as we know it today, so, we cannot draw a conclusion.

I will be signing off for the day. Goodnight to all.

 

[warriorofpeace]

thats because your febal attempt a few days ago to try to support the deal with rain that intergrating is aload by everything material or alive is kicking YOU ALL RIGHT IN THE BUT